« Barack Bingo | Main | State Of The Union: The Drinking Game! »

How much safer would the world be if the feminist movement stood up for women?

It's a serious question:

The trajectory to extreme violence of this gentle, pious young man who wanted so much to be good and consequential, and yet was consumed with guilt about sex, fits with much of what is known about other Islamist suicide bombers.

Perhaps the best psychological explanation comes from United in Hate: The Left's Romance with Tyranny and Terror, the recent book by Jamie Glazov, the managing editor of FrontPage Magazine.

In a chapter entitled "To Hate a Woman", he describes in chilling detail the oppression of women in parts of the Muslim world and the "theological justification" for violence against females "from the very moment of their birth".

Islamist hatred of women has "fertilised the soil in which ... terrorism and the new death cult have grown".

He claims there is an "Islamist war on private love [which] derives most of its energy from a deep-seated misogyny. Women's empowerment, independence and self-determination, especially the sexual variety, pose a threat to Islamism's very existence."

Islamist misogyny, he claims, comes from Islam itself. "The notion that women are by their very nature inferior to men is the underpinning of the entire structure and derives its legitimacy from numerous traditional teachings."

It is no coincidence that the Arabic word "fitna" has two meanings - beautiful woman and social chaos.

Glazov writes that in many Islamic societies, "women are supposed to dehumanise themselves in order to be tolerated ... Women are considered to be the incarnation of shahwa [desire] which comes from the devil. In this environment the pathological notion arises that a man and a woman cannot be alone without the ominous threat of evil in their midst.

"The men denigrate the object of their lust so as to diminish their own shame. In this dynamic of sexual repression and misogyny, love is reduced to violent domination which becomes directly intertwined with terrorism against societies that allow women freedom, especially sexual freedom."

Practices such as polygamy and repudiation - in which a man can divorce his wife by pronouncing certain words - conspire to "minimise the possibility of private love even among married couples".

"Islam teaches that the sexual act is dirty and consequently surrounds it with rituals. The objective is to build a wall between the lovers themselves."

Polygamy, Glazov writes, has a disastrous effect on Muslim boys who grow up with "all kinds of siblings born of different women which gives them the idea that none of these women, including their own mother, was good enough to be cherished alone. The boys internalise this misogyny which leads in turn to self hate."

Their psychological abandonment of their mothers is "directly connected to their urge for terror and suicide".

Female genital mutilation, in which a woman's clitoris - or entire external genital organs - is removed is an attempt to "deny women even the possibility of personal happiness and sexual satisfaction".

Glazov writes of Saudi instructional TV programs about wife-beating and cites a report from the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences which estimated 90 per cent of Pakistani wives had been beaten or sexually abused for offences such as cooking an unsatisfactory meal.

Where is the National Organization for Women?  Seriously?

Oh wait... they're actually the National Organization for Abortion Advancement... I forgot.



TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (11)

Watch it Rick, NOW will com... (Below threshold)

Watch it Rick, NOW will come after you with a rusty pair of shears. And it won't be to give you a haircut.

Never gonna happen...... (Below threshold)

Never gonna happen...

Feminists showed their true... (Below threshold)

Feminists showed their true colors during the Clinton Presidency.

They pretty much been irrelevant ever since.

I remember my girlfriend of... (Below threshold)

I remember my girlfriend of the time (very 'progressive' sort) complaining bitterly during the Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas dustup about how no woman would ever lie about rape or sexual harrasment.

Then there were all the bimbo eruptions leading up to Clinton's election. I kept waiting for the same level of outrage against Clinton - but it never happened. The bimbos? They lied about Clinton's 'attentions'.

At that point I started realizing that there were some things in the leftist theology that wouldn't bear logical examination - and that the ideological contortions involved in avoiding even thinking about their existance were pretty extreme. Ethical standards being conditional on political orientation just didn't cut it.

At American Thinker yesterd... (Below threshold)

At American Thinker yesterday there was a brilliant article written by Pamela Geller about the feminist movement and the harm done to women and girls since the 60's. (sorry I don't know how to do a link)


"Where is the National O... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:

"Where is the National Organization for Women? "


They are the "National" Organization of Women" - not the "International" Organization of Women. They focus on issues of women in the US, not Islam, etc.

From the <a href="http://ww... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:

From the NOW FAQ:

5. What are NOW's official priorities?

NOW's official priorities are pressing for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that will guarantee equal rights for women; achieving economic equality for women; championing abortion rights, reproductive freedom and other women's health issues; supporting civil rights for all and opposing racism; opposing bigotry against lesbians and gays; and ending violence against women.

Not even a mention of international issues.

Do you have all women or just liberal women?

typo'd - should have been "... (Below threshold)
Steve Green:

typo'd - should have been "Do you hate all women or just liberal women?"

Steve, do you still beat yo... (Below threshold)

Steve, do you still beat your wife

They are the "National" ... (Below threshold)

They are the "National" Organization of Women" - not the "International" Organization of Women. They focus on issues of women in the US, not Islam, etc.
~Steve Green

So your contention is that there are no Muslim females in the U.S. that are the targets of cultural abuse such as: arranged marriages, clitorectomies, beatings, lower status, honour killings, being forced to wear burkhas/black raincoats on hot sunny days etc.?


Ah, Steve - the 'disagreeme... (Below threshold)

Ah, Steve - the 'disagreement=hate' thing's getting pretty old. I'm surprised you didn't get the memo prohibiting it - after all, at one time it was the height of patriotism to disagree. With what happened last week it's no longer seen as the automatic shutdown it once was. It's utility is gone - don't use it any more.

You really ought to check your email more often.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy