The Sanity Squad: women as meat, and elections again
The Squad’s latest podcast is now available at Pajamas Media.
Dr. Sanity, Shrink, Siggy, and I discuss the Mufti of Australia’s remarks likening immodest women to uncovered meat left out in the street (oh, what a charmer that Mufti is!), as well as the logistics of the election and why voting reform is so difficult.
And please wish Dr. Sanity well with her upcoming knee replacement surgery.
I saw that in her Blog and wished her well. It’s a common procedure these days, quite routine with positive outcomes.
NPR’s “Talk of the Nation” program addressed the whole veiling women issue this afternoon. They had a Muslim (woman) professor from Ithaca College giving the full Bart Simpson excuse litany: it isn’t really in the Koran, it’s just part of their culture, and other religions have oppressed women, too. It made me sick. The barbarians are going to destroy us while we’re still trying not to offend them.
This is why Jacksonians say and believe that “some people just need killing”.
I don’t care whether it is your culture or religion, you are still going to get killed for it.
Btw, don’t riot in the South or you might get purged de facto as well as de jure.
The Middle East uses their power over women to dominate, because it fullfills their ego. A bunch of men that could get slapped down by a few Marine light infantry units, have only their women to beat upon in order to feel superior. They sure as heck aren’t worth anything, those shiftless waste of genetic material.
The fact that the fake liberals on the Left get more joy out of attacking Bush than the Islamic Jihad, tells much about how few, if any, classical liberals are on the Left. The Left are the worst of reactionary forces, specializing in revolutionary methods.
It is about power, their power, their ego, and their ability to dominate for a thousand years. And I’m not talking about the Islamic JIhad only, btw.
Some of these left wing frackers come to this blog, and accuse true liberals of being supporters of mass murderers… what gall, what ego, and what absolute certainty they must have for their own god given divinity and righteousness.
As with Kerry, they cannot be mistaken, because how can god and the world ever be mistaken?
I hear you talking about how the Mufti talks about women being more powerful than men.
I see it as Islam putting women on a pedestal, not because they fear women sexuality, but so that by putting women on a pedestal, they no longer become human. And if they are not human, anything goes against them, right? Jews are animals, anything goes right? Americans are capitalistic pigs, anything goes against them.
Women are meat, an object, something inanimate. It doesn’t talk, it doesn’t have a mind, and it doesn’t move without being moved by someone else.
Islam is not saying that women have power, Islam is saying that women are evil and inhuman. That way, Islam creates a fake strawman threat, and that is a great method in order to acquire and sustain Dominance.
This propaganda line is not consistent with reality. Which is not a surprise. The Middle East also blames America for being the greatest threat to humanity, in order to divert attention from their own problems.
The Palestinians talk about the Israelis as if they are hardcore Spartan war fighters, fighting a war to the knife with the Palis. But that’s not true. The Israelis aren’t using more than 50% of their total power, at the most radical estimate.
You know, Neo, back in Greek times, they had this same thing. Meaning, they really thought of women as the source of the greatest evil. Because of how they tempt men into starting wars and etc. Hera, Aphrodite, Troy, you know what I’m talking about.
And of course, Christian fundamentalists and Mormons also have this vestigial strain of reactionary anti-women tendencies. But we got rid of those kinds of people, predominantly.
Either we executed the crazies like McVeigh or we hunted down the Rudy character and Mormon polygamist preachers. The Islamic world has the above kinds of people, In Power and respected. That is the difference.
About the mirror comment. Why do ordinary people support these kind of people? Cause they feel hopeless and the first charismatic guy that comes into their life and tells them that they can feel better by beheading or raping a Westerner, gets their loyalty. Humans are fickle, we follow the path of least resistance. And for us, that means whatever feels good. If you know that people in America are going to hang you, if you start the sexual assaults here, then that won’t exactly make you feel good, now would it.
In Europe, why do middle easteners have to fear? The French police? Australians armed with assault rifles and lethal martial arts skills? Come on, we all know of Europe’s and Australia’s anti-gun laws. And they thought America was cuckoo and insane for backing our gun philosophy.
I haven’t listened to the podcast lately, Ymarsakar, but I believe what I said is that the Mufti was giving women the responsibility, not the power–which in a way was treating them more as adults than he was treating the men. I agree that they’re considered the root of evil and temptation, as traps to lure men.
This Mufti is a real real Fquit and the one in Melbourne is even worse, if possible, really delusional, both are typical imams, no education except that ‘Koran’, (imagine been brought up only on the bible? even)
And worst of all many if not most ‘Muzzies’ in Aust support them tacitly.
And now they are saying (the lebanese) that they will march in protest in Sydney and bring about the same conditions as the riots last year. But the Gov says there will be huge police presence.
Ymarsakar – Yeah brilliant…So you can only despise one type of Fquit? is that right? Or should we try better ourselves and get real leaders not Morons like Bush? Also guns should be freely available….?
Jesus.
Or is that not possible now to get real leaders? Has American politics got SO dirty that any decent ppl will not seek that career? Is that why we have only a choice of charalatans?
The neo cons started out as bleeding heart lefties too…maybe you are right! They are charlatans!!!!
Also Greeks had greek godesses, so they weren’t women haters, Athena was probably the main Greek God(ess) most powerful most respected and most helpful, Ares now he was mean…Poseidon spiteful, and the giants the God’s replaced were very mean and lived in ‘Chaos’ so…don’t know where you are getting you little simplistic spins from…
Greek Gods were reflections of peoples desires, hates, envy, jealousy, goodness etc.
What is Fquit and irrational about Islam is that God supercedes all rationality, all humanity, that’s how they can justify any garbage, that and the fact that their education standards are non existent.
You should see a fantastic interview with Martin Amis
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1779157.htm
– all here is mentioned, Islam women, power and hate.
Mmmm…meat! ~( 8(|)
FWIW, I had my A.C.L. replaced in mid-April; I’m getting around pretty well now…
Perhaps it is a mistake to allocate to Islam a depth that it simply does not have, and is not capable of understanding.
Islam is a thuggish, 8th century military cult.
Why did the Nazis kill so many Poles, it was fun and they could steal lots of stuff.
The Mufti enjoys beating up women because its enjoyable, he gets his dinner on the table and clothes washed, and if the ol’ woman gives him any lip he can whack her in the name of Islam. Who knows, he may have raped a few gals in his time.
I see in Engalnd an appauling intelectualisation of events that are rather simple. As George Orwell said of the Left in the 1930’s ‘Only intellectuals could be that stupid’.
Bigman so are there no rightist intellectuals?
Equally as apalling was the almost complete lack of Western feminist response. Said feminists perhaps like to be on a pedestal themselves because one conclusion over their utter lack of resistance to such an atrocious statement is that they need men to defend them, realize it and accept it. Pitiful resignation or is feminism mostly a vehicle to be used for the pursuit of political power? The sad depths to which some ‘feminine’ intellects have sunk is demonstrated in the oft heard assertion that all men do such things and think as such. Odd isn’t it that Right leaning women and some Centrists are the only ones that really spoke out against the blatant and sinister statements issued by that islamofacist?
Goesh.. how true.. I was appauled at the reaction to the Mufti by the British Left/Feminists.
Almost no coverage on the BBC and to my shock barely mentioned in the Guardian, (Leftist, Feminist, pro-Islamist).
How can it be that even I could still be shocked by the Left’s bizzare alliance with Islamo-fascism. Surely, I keep thinking, surely someone’s going to say something. Perhaps Islamism is like the Mob, once you’re in with them, its hard to get out.
Of British feminists, not one uttered a word about support for the Mufti in Britain.
However, there are several multi-million sex-discrimination cases in court now, against banks due to a woman not getting promotion.
Goeney certainly there are Conservative intellectuals, but they are bound by the ugly and uncomfortable restraints of reality. I do not believe the Left sees reality (the failure of Socialism) as cause to doubt Socialist principals i.e. the supremacy of the state on the individual.
– it seems the Eid festival in Cairo ended with a number of women sexually assaulted in public and the police did nothing but we must not lose hope – in Jordan a man can get up to 6 months in prison for an honor killing these days – there is talk too that in some of the more modern islamic nations a fine will be levied for any clitorectomy done without anesthesia – they can still be forcibly held down by their aunts, mothers and older sisters during the religious ceremony however…..I have heard nothing about any reform in those areas where young girls have their vaginas sewn shut….one step at a time, baby, keep your eye on the prize, change comes slowly, some day there will a fine for this too, don’t give up hope, the world is after all just one big village….
Lordy, lordy does hope ever float! check this out: http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/gwinnett/stories/2006/11/02/1102gwxademsub.html Dad gets 10 yrs. in the joint for snipping clit with scissors in the heart of old Dixie!! Revel in that my 900,000,000 cloistured, veiled, chattel property, beasts of breeding and burden-carrying muslim women all over the umah! Only in America, baby!
FATWA
Rewarding disobedient wives
Siamack Baniameri
October 31, 2006
Iranian Grand Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi has issued a fatwa that it is legitimate for men to beat their disobedient wives. Shirazi wrote on his website: “The Koran first recommends a man to try and convince his wife to obey him in a polite way and through advice, and then by refusing to have sexual relations with her. Finally, if all these fail to make her come to her senses, proceed with physical punishment.”
Did I hear the Grand Ayatollah suggesting that as a form of punishment a man should refuse to have sexual relations with his wife? Are you kidding me? That’s not a punishment, that’s a reward. How many wives do you know that actually enjoy having sexual relations with their husbands? When was the last time you saw a wife crying her heart out because her 250-lbs hairy husband refused to have sex with her? So, you’re telling me that a wife who will not have to fondle her husband’s sweaty balls is being punished? I think not.
Another thing I’m confused about is at what point do I stop refusing sexual relations with the wife and move on to knocking the crap out of her? Is it two weeks? Two months? Two years? Additionally, am I allowed to have sexual relations with other men’s wives while punishing my own by refusing her the Tower of Power? (Or is it the Thunder Down Under? I forget.) Can’t I just skip the part about refusing sexual relations and move directly to the beating? Just a thought. Furthermore, does a quickie count?
Well, I gotta go before my wife catches me writing this stuff and beats the shit out of me.
http://www.iranian.com/Shorts/2006/oct2006.html#31
Profound blindness
Male domination and the gazing Narcissist
(…)
As we observe in any patriarchal society, including the Iranian diaspora, we can always feel this air of perturbed unreality, the self-mortification of the Narcissus, the unrealized disease of many of our male counterparts. So you think you need to reclaim your generational throne because you are an Iranian male? Let’s talk about the natural disasters of this sinister dynasty. What is really the true cost of patriarchal chauvinism?
See Husband-killing on the rise in Iran. Also read the stories of some of these women here on the Amnesty International site.
(…)
“From her interviews, Moazami found a clear and common pattern in the stories of the female killers. The women married young, often 12-14 years old, and they had from 5 to 7 children. At the time of the murder their average age was 29 years old.
(…)
Moazami thinks that the women were too young to understand marriage when they married at 12-14 years old, and it was difficult for them make their own demands.” Source: Norwegian Information and Documentation Centre for Women’s Studies and Gender Research.
Let’s tackle the first issue: marrying young. Who decides for a girl to marry young in the first place? Every one knows in traditionally male-dominated households, nothing takes place without the Father’s permission. So, the answer is a “Male”.
Who decides for women’s divorce? A male judge based on religious and patriarchal interpretations of family laws.
In 67% of the cases, who carries out the murder? A male lover.
Since illiteracy is indicated as one of the cultural triggers to spousal killing, in a traditionally male-dominated society, who decides when and why and how a young girl should go to school or if she needs to go to school at all? The Father; or any other empowered Male figure.
Isn’t it crucially striking that the Father, the Judge, the Killer, and the Murder Victim are all Males?
Of course, this is not to condone any form of killing! (as some of the opponents may love to conclude by reading this article); this is only to delineate the fact that male-domination is the first and foremost enemy of itself; patriarchy is its own foe. An insightful male effortlessly knows that holding an ax above a woman’s head ought to be a suicidal act; a will to self-mutilation.
So before you intend to get blinded by the false ideology of reenacting your forefathers’ mistakes; understand that the male psyche can not subsist without its female half-core; a stifled female Always means a Defeated Male. A Defeated Male means the endangered world we live in now.
P.S. One of the first laws Khomeini changed after establishing the Medieval Republic of Tazis was to bring down the age of marriage from 18 to 9 years old.
As George Orwell said of the Left in the 1930’s ‘Only intellectuals could be that stupid’.
Just to be picky, Orwell wrote to that effect in 1945 in Notes on Nationalism, an essay worth reading. If you haven’t seen the correct quote, here is the paragraph in which it appears (emphasis mine).
All of these facts are grossly obvious if one’s emotions do not happen to be involved: but to the kind of person named in each case they are also intolerable, and so they have to be denied, and false theories constructed upon their denial. I come back to the astonishing failure of military prediction in the present war. It is, I think, true to say that the intelligentsia have been more wrong about the progress of the war than the common people, and that they were more swayed by partisan feelings. The average intellectual of the Left believed, for instance, that the war was lost in 1940, that the Germans were bound to overrun Egypt in 1942, that the Japanese would never be driven out of the lands they had conquered, and that the Anglo-American bombing offensive was making no impression on Germany. He could believe these things because his hatred for the British ruling class forbade him to admit that British plans could succeed. There is no limit to the follies that can be swallowed if one is under the influence of feelings of this kind. I have heard it confidently stated, for instance, that the American troops had been brought to Europe not to fight the Germans but to crush an English revolution. One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool. When Hitler invaded Russia, the officials of the MOI issued ‘as background’ a warning that Russia might be expected to collapse in six weeks. On the other hand the Communists regarded every phase of the war as a Russian victory, even when the Russians were driven back almost to the Caspian Sea and had lost several million prisoners. There is no need to multiply instances. The point is that as soon as fear, hatred, jealousy and power worship are involved, the sense of reality becomes unhinged. And, as I have pointed out already, the sense of right and wrong becomes unhinged also. There is no crime, absolutely none, that cannot be condoned when ‘our’ side commits it. Even if one does not deny that the crime has happened, even if one knows that it is exactly the same crime as one has condemned in some other case, even if one admits in an intellectual sense that it is unjustified — still one cannot feel that it is wrong. Loyalty is involved, and so pity ceases to function.
– things are looking up, a bit – I just read where in certain parts of the islamic world when a young girl is to have her vagina sewn shut, thus insuring virginity and the prevention of lustful acts, it can no longer be done in public but must be done within a home or goat stall. Not to worry, Left-leaning readers and supporters of multicultural values, relativity and moral equivalence, islam is a religion of peace and compassion, so know ye that sharp needles are used for the sewing. I apologize for not citing the reference, I am tracking it down…..
* In Germany, in August 1997, an 18-year-old woman was burnt to death by her father for refusing to marry the man he had chosen. A German court gave him a reduced sentence, saying he was practicing his culture and religion.
[…]
Cultural relativism serves these crimes. It legitimizes and maintains savagery. It says that people’s rights are dependent on their nationality, religion, and culture. It says that the human rights of someone born in Iran, Iraq, or Afghanistan are different from those of someone born in the United States, Canada or Sweden.
Cultural relativists say Iranian society is Muslim, implying that people choose to live the way they are forced to. It’s as if there are no differences in beliefs in Iran, no struggles, no communists, no socialists, and no freedom-lovers. If so, why have 150,000 people been executed for opposing the Islamic Republic of Iran? If it’s the entire society’s culture and religion, why does the Islamic regime need such extensive tools for repression? If it’s people’s beliefs, why does the regime control their private lives – from their sexual activities, to what video they watch, to what music they listen to? If the entire society is Muslim, why did Zoleykhah Kadkhoda enter a voluntary sexual relationship for which she was buried in a ditch and stoned? If it is people’s culture, why did the residents of Bukan revolt against the stoning and save her life? Why are thousands of women rounded up in the streets for “improper” veiling if its their culture and religion? How come, after two decades of terror and brutality, the universities are still not Islamic, according to an official of the regime? Though it’s untrue, even if every person living in Iran had reactionary beliefs, it still wouldn’t be acceptable. If everyone believes in the superiority of their race, does that make it okay?
[…]
Cultural relativists go further to say that universal human rights are a western concept. How come when it comes to using the telephone,car,or building centrifuges to enrich uranium to build nuclear weapons (a 60-year old Western Technology) the mullah does not say it is western and incompatible with an Islamist society? But when it comes to universal human rights, they become western. Even if rights are western, it is absurd to say that others’ are not worthy of them. In fact, though, rights are gains forcibly taken by the working class and progressive social movements. Therefore, any gain or right obtained anywhere is a gain and a right for all humanity…
[…]
The defeat of Nazism and its biological theory of difference largely discredited racial superiority. The racism behind it, however, found another more acceptable form of expression for this era. Instead of expression in racial terms, difference is now portrayed in cultural terms. Cultural relativism is this era’s fascism. Cultural relativists are defenders of this era’s holocausts…
And of course, Christian fundamentalists and Mormons also have this vestigial strain of reactionary anti-women tendencies. But we got rid of those kinds of people, predominantly.
Um, please don’t accuse Mormons of “reactionary anti-woman tendencies.” Polygamy was instituted by Mormons to take care of unmarried women, many of whom had been widowed or abandoned by their husbands. Women in polygamous relationships were allowed to initiate divorces, but the men almost never were. These same women were also sent back East to medical school because we needed doctors. My great-great grandmothers had the vote long before yours did, and in fact, when Utah joined the union, the vote was taken away from women because the US was behind Utah with regard to women’s rights. My ancestors were suffragettes.
Mormonism teaches that Eve is the hero of the creation story because she understood that we had to pass through sorrow to grow. Women are not despised as temptresses but admired as those who “get it” with regard to religion much more readily than men do.
If, on the other hand, you’re talking about those loonies in Colorado City/Hilldale, those are a breakoff group that has nothing to do with mainstream Mormonism. Those people refuse to educate women past eighth grade, marry them off as young teens, and tell them that their only function in life is to provide posterity for their husbands. That’s nothing like what mainstream Mormonism teaches or practices.
I’m a single Mormon woman with a Cornell education. Nobody in the church has ever so much as insinuated that I ought to get married for the sake of providing some random, mouth-breathing idiot with posterity or that I shouldn’t go to school. On the contrary, we’re encouraged to get as much education as humanly possible, and if marriage doesn’t happen in this life, well, maybe in the next.
I may be ex-Mormon, but dicentra has it spot on regarding Mormons. I had to deal with the, to paraphrase, “Mormons want their women to dress in clothes that hide them like Islam does” stupidity from another poster. They can’t tell Mormons from the Arizona Strip loonies who are not Mormons.
They also mistake the nominal patriarchy of Christians and Mormons (I usually do not make that distinction) for the overarching misogynist patriarchy of Islam.
This makes me tired.
I haven’t listened to the podcast lately, Ymarsakar, but I believe what I said is that the Mufti was giving women the responsibility, not the power–which in a way was treating them more as adults than he was treating the men. I agree that they’re considered the root of evil and temptation, as traps to lure men.
neo-neocon | Homepage | 11.01.06 – 11:30 pm | #
It may not have been you, but someone else that said something to the effect that “if women were so powerful, why don’t they, etc”. I can’t recognize the voice tones, so that was why I thought it was you.
I was more or less reframing the issue with that phrase in mind.
How can it be that even I could still be shocked by the Left’s bizzare alliance with Islamo-fascism. Surely, I keep thinking, surely someone’s going to say something. Perhaps Islamism is like the Mob, once you’re in with them, its hard to get out.
Humans are predictable, Bigman. We all follow the path of least resistance.
However, there are several multi-million sex-discrimination cases in court now, against banks due to a woman not getting promotion.
Since the path to million dollar rewards is a lot easier than the path to getting your head chopped off, women go for the path of least resistance. Predictable. Not admirable, but predictable at least.
There is no crime, absolutely none, that cannot be condoned when ‘our’ side commits it. Even if one does not deny that the crime has happened, even if one knows that it is exactly the same crime as one has condemned in some other case, even if one admits in an intellectual sense that it is unjustified — still one cannot feel that it is wrong. Loyalty is involved, and so pity ceases to function.
Ramsey Clark and the Vietnam guys, must have been following Orwell like a prophet and messiah.
Speaking about prophets, I wasn’t accusing Mormons of anything.
Unless you are claiming that Mormons never had any anti-women tendencies in the first place to expurgate, then you can’t be right.
Link
While John advanced women’s suffrage in order to produce more political power, it still is a valid point, but not all that relevant.
Link
Here’s a link that talks about young and his wives. I found it pretty funny, given the historical ageness. But it is important, because it is about polygamy. I could say that this is what he gets for having so many wives, but I won’t.
“I want all the people to say what they will do, and I know that God wishes all His servants, all His faithful sons and daughters, the men and the women that inhabit this city, to repent of their wickedness, or we will cut them off. …
“There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see
“There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world.
“I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from the earth, that you consider it is strong doctrine; but is to save them, not to destroy them. …
“I do know that there are sins committed, of such a nature that if the people did understand the doctrine of salvation, they would tremble because of their situation. And furthermore, I know that there are transgressors, who, if they knew themselves, and the only condition upon which they can obtain forgiveness, would beg of their brethren to shed their blood, that the smoke thereof might ascend to God as an offering to appease the wrath that is kindled against them, and that the law might have its course. I will say further; I have had men come to me and offer their lives to atone for their sins.
“It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit. As it was in ancient days, so it is in our day;…There are sins that can be atoned for…by the blood of the man. That is the reason why men talk to you as they do from this stand; they understand the doctrine and throw out a few words about it. You have been taught that doctrine, but you do not understand it. …
“Now for my proposition; it is more particularly for my sisters, as it is frequently happening that women say they are unhappy. Men will say, ‘My wife, though a most excellent woman, has not seen a happy day since I took my second wife;’ ‘No, not a happy day for a year,’ says one; and another has not seen a happy day for five years. It is said that women are tied down and abused: that they are misused and have not the liberty they Ought to have; that many of them are wading through a perfect flood of tears, because of the conduct of some men, together with their own folly.
“I wish my own women to understand that what I am going to say is for them as well as others, and I want those who are here to tell their sisters, yes, all the women of this community, and then write it back to the States, and do as you please with it. I am going to give you from this time to the 6th day of October next, for reflection, that you may determine whether you wish to stay with your husbands or not, and then I am going to set every woman at liberty and say to them, Now go your way, my women with the rest, go your way. And my wives have got to do one of two things; either round up their shoulders to endure the affliction