It's a step in the right direction as Afghan President Hamid Karzai calls for a change in the marital rape law that his country adopted, which gives husbands the right to rape their wives if their wives do not submit to their husbands' sexual needs.
Yet, this particular report falls short by omitting a key piece of information about yesterday's demonstrations in Kabul. The women who demonstrated against the law were stoned by misogynistic thugs who want to see this law maintained and who see women as little more than chattel.
A blog for all seasons; A blog for one; A blog for all. As the 11th most informative blog on the planet, I have a seared memory of throwing my Time 2006 Man of the Year Award over the railing at Time Warner Center. Justice. Only Justice Shall Thou Pursue
Showing posts with label women's rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label women's rights. Show all posts
Friday, April 17, 2009
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Misogyny Alert: Thugs Throw Stones At Women Protesting Afghan Marital Rape Law
The misogynists in Afghanistan are nothing if not persistent. They come in many flavors, but are usually Taliban and Islamist. They do not want to give women rights that men take for granted and they certainly do not have the same view on human rights in general - rights that people in the West take for granted.
So, while people in the US are debating the idea of gay marriage, Afghan women are getting stoned by Islamists who want to retain the right to rape their wives as a matter of law.
So, while people in the US are debating the idea of gay marriage, Afghan women are getting stoned by Islamists who want to retain the right to rape their wives as a matter of law.
Women protesting in Kabul against a controversial new law were pelted with stones, jostled and spat on today as they held what is believed to be the first public demonstration calling for equal rights for women in recent Afghan history.Stoning and interrupting the peaceful demonstrations are actually a sign of restraint by the Islamists. They usually resort to high explosives, acid, and torching those who resist their demands for the imposition of Sharia. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that such attacks came in short order.
The protest by about 200 women called for amendment of the controversial Shia Family Law, passed last month by the Afghan Parliament, and enforcement of article 22 of the Afghan constitution, which gives equal rights to men and women.
It provoked a furious reaction from local men and a mob quickly surrounded the protesters amid violent scenes close to the Parliament building.
The new law, which applies to the 15 per cent of the population who are Shia Muslim, has drawn widespread international condemnation since it was passed in March. President Obama called it abhorrent after leaked drafts of the law showed it apparently legalised marital rape and child marriage and reintroduced restrictions on women that were notorious under the Taleban period of rule.
Friday, January 11, 2008
The Ad Ms. Magazine Doesn't Want You To See
Here's the ad. Seems pretty plain and incapable of causing controversy. It shows three of the most prominent women in Israeli politics and law today - holding some of the highest ranking positions along with the words, This Is Israel.
Apparently, Ms. magazine didn't like the content. That's their right, but something is horribly wrong about that decision. What exactly did they find harmful or offensive in the message? It's not like they're showing underweight and/or anoerxic women who suffer from eating disorders parading around on the catwalk that give impressionable women and girls the wrong ideas about self-image.
The Magazine's response seems downright lame, claiming that they "...would love to have an ad from you on women's empowerment, or reproductive freedom, but not on this"
No word on what that actually means.

Would this pass muster?
Apparently, Ms. magazine didn't like the content. That's their right, but something is horribly wrong about that decision. What exactly did they find harmful or offensive in the message? It's not like they're showing underweight and/or anoerxic women who suffer from eating disorders parading around on the catwalk that give impressionable women and girls the wrong ideas about self-image.
The Magazine's response seems downright lame, claiming that they "...would love to have an ad from you on women's empowerment, or reproductive freedom, but not on this"
No word on what that actually means.

Would this pass muster?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)