quote:

---

Domestic violence, and all violence against women, is treated the same on this board, in the context of a feminist analysis.

---

[ 13 December 2007: Message edited by: remind ]

If you check out, you will realize that I am new to this forum. I am a progressive activist. I wanted to do -as in being active- things based on facts, evidence.

But I am afraid slogans are not evidence.

(FEAR=HATE), Reminder wrote.

"Fear Allah wherever you are; if you follow an evil deed with a good one you will obliterate it; and deal with people with a good disposition."

One of the cornerstones of Islam is to fear God.

quote:

---

Originally posted by adam stratton:
Well, it must be my mistake.

---

quote:

---

If you check out, you will realize that I am new to this forum. I am a progressive activist.

---

As for all the rest of your nonsense, I will ask you only once, to stop putting words in my mouth that were never there and ascribing things to me that were not said, nor even implied, alluded to, or anything along such lines.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
What exactly IS the topic of this thread, anyhow? It doesn't look like it's about the teen killed by her father.

---

quote:

---

how many times does it have to be said, violence against women, though some want to justify as something else, is a hatred of women.

---

Is it not worth asking what causes this hatred of women? That's what I'm struggling with here: the idea that hatred of women is some form of original sin without any cause, something that just happens.

[ 13 December 2007: Message edited by: Black Dog ]

What gives anyone the right to dictate what this story is "really about"?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Black Dog:
Is it not worth asking what causes this hatred of women? That's what I'm struggling with here: the idea that hatred of women is some form of original sin without any cause, something that just happens.

---

I think the reason so many Babblers are quick to point out that this is about hatred of women and/or a patriarchal society and and/or misogyny (no need to get bogged down in semantics, pls), is that when ppl blame it on religious beliefs, it is very easy to dismiss the incident as something most of us do not need to worry about.

Violence against women happens every day. Usually the perpertrators are men. I'm honestly not sure how or even if their abusers justify their actions to themselves. Certainly some men use religion as a justification, but there are probably a multitude of other reasons men can use to justify the abuse. But the bottom line is that abuse is about power, fear, disrespect and hatred.

I linked to this article in the last thread, but I'll link again here because it's a good one!

It's all about violence against women - Sheema Khan

quote:

---

All these cases should give us pause. All these vulnerable women, were killed by men committing the ultimate abuse of power. We do not know the details of Mr. Pickton's relationship with his victims. However, we do know that both Ms. Dupont and Ms. Parvez were struggling to break away from situations each considered suffocating. It is not easy to do so, especially in a relationship based on an imbalance of power. The courage mustered to break free is seen as a mortal threat by those who refuse to let go. In the last decade alone, more than 200 Canadian women have been murdered as a result of domestic abuse. Violence against women knows no particular ethnicity, religion or class.

---

So by all means, let's acknowledge that it seems that this particular girl was killed in what was probably in a fit of passion by a man who had one set of beliefs that he may feel come out of the Koran. But let's not tell ourselves that this is a muslim problem or an immigrant problem etc. This is an everybody problem and the sooner we acknowledge it, the better.

Edited becase I posted before I was done!

[ 13 December 2007: Message edited by: Summer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
There is nothing wrong with black_dog's question. It's not off topic and it's not anti-feminist, and it fits just fine in this thread.

---

I never said there was a thing wrong with it. I welcomed him, in fact, to have a look around the feminist forum to find the answers he sought. I felt I was respectfully declining to do his research for him, in this manner, as opposed to a harsher tone, that would be derived from too many years of men asking the same thing, over and over, and of their having received the answers, over and over, but yet still refusing to get it, or at least saying they don't get it.

You know, I liken this failure to get it, to my never learning to fold my partners socks and tee shirts, the way he does, and has to have them, in 28 years. It is reasonable to expect that had I wanted to, I could've mastered the problem in the ensuing decades, no? Well, I haven't. The key to my failure to do so, is in my lack of caring about: them, or indeed about whether or not I was expected to learn how, also by the fact I was never askled/required/expected to do it and I never have. It is of no benefit to me, and thus truly a waste of MY time.

Now this is but a trivial activity, not on par of course with inequality, and thus need not be actioned by me, unless I just wanna be nice sometimes, and I am sure I could knock off a resonable facimile of the prefered folding, if a nice moment came along. However, blowing off the ramifactions and consequences of patriarchy is killing women, and much much more.

So, one could say, that men who do not get how violence against women is misogyny, are really stupid, or one could realize, that they do not care to action the fact that patriarchy = inequality = abuse.

Women have been people for 90 years, you think they would have gotten it by now had they wanted to, or cared to.

It is inexcusable.

And that is not even getting into the fact that we women, like the many others who are not white males, had to fight to actually be recognized as people and we still are NOT equal, though we are the vast majority!

So, actually, I felt I was responding reasonably to blackdog's request. I want him to understand, I just am not going to attempt to be the vehicle he wants to use to further his understanding.

And yes summer, I concur when you say:

quote:

---

when ppl blame it on religious beliefs, it is very easy to dismiss the incident as something most of us do not need to worry about.

---

Religion being used by men as a justification that it is; them, those men over there, being violent against women, is in excusable. It is many men everywhere around the world. The reason why it lasts/continues is misogyny, it is not stupidity.

[ 13 December 2007: Message edited by: remind ]

quote:

---

So, one could say, that men who do not get how violence against women is misogyny, are really stupid, or one could realize, that they do not care to action the fact that patriarchy = inequality = abuse.

---

It seems clear this is directed at my inquiry, so I feel compelled to respond. I never said violence against women isn't misogyiny. Please do feel free to take a look around my previous posts on this subject before breaking out your strawmen.

My question derives from the mantra that, in cases like this one, "religion is just an excuse" for women-hate. But it's not, is it? So I don't see how its possible to seperate the two as cleanly as so many are attempting to do in this case, when it's a simple fact that patriarchal religious beliefs are the mechanisms by which attitudes like those allegedly held by Aqsa Parvez 's father.

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Anyone capable of explaining what happened - before they find out exactly what happened - should I think question their belief system.

---

But in the meantime, many of us would like to discuss this along with the broader issues of violence and prejudice against women. If you would prefer to wait until after the trial to discuss this stuff, then by all means, please do so. But your constant refrain of 'how do you know? Let’s wait and see' is getting tiresome.

[ 14 December 2007: Message edited by: Summer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Summer:
But in the meantime, many of us would like to discuss this along with the broader issues of violence and prejudice against women.

---

Yes, I concur, as there are many dynamics that actions like this against women bring out, or illuminate.

1. ALL men benefit from violent acts against women.

2. Violent acts against women are envariably diminished, as domestic disputes, attack on a sex trade worker, or any other such commentary, instead of being recognized for what they are, hate crimes.

3. Diminishing the violent acts against women give tacit approval of many more such acts.

4. Male responses illuminate just how far they will, or will not go, to halt discussions, actions or awareness from being disemminated. Ridicule, meta debate about something other pertained in the situation, or continuous interruption are used as a silencer.

[ 14 December 2007: Message edited by: remind ]

quote:

---

My question derives from the mantra that, in cases like this one, "religion is just an excuse" for women-hate. But it's not, is it? So I don't see how its possible to seperate the two as cleanly as so many are attempting to do in this case, when it's a simple fact that patriarchal religious beliefs are the mechanisms by which attitudes like those allegedly held by Aqsa Parvez 's father.

---

The 'women-hate' originates from many sources... In this event it was religious passion that triggered it. There are all sorts of sources for this behaviour, blaming it entirely on religious views is to ignore the greater link.

quote:

---

I'm quite surprised by the lengths to which people on this board have been willing to go to downplay the religious angle. The father was "mentally disturbed;" he was an "obsessive control freak". But these labels go unexamined.

---

By over examining the 'obsessive control freak' we ignore the larger picture. You'll see a similar tactic used in demonizing or labelling as 'monsters' that simply cannot be one of us used quite frequently (school shootings come to mind) that are used to distance ourselves from responsibility. By focussing on this aspect, we ignore the larger underlying fundamentals that allow this to happen.

If the patriarchy we prop up (intentionally or unintentionally) was torn down, would this still have happened? Yes, there is a religious component, but it is solely the patriarchy that allows the religious component to manifest in this manner.

Moreover... Have you thought that the Patriarchy itself is what allows the fathers in these scenarios to become an "obsessive control freak"? The statement alone is to blame a symptom while happily ignoring the root cause.

Sorry if it's come off like I'm attacking your stance, I'm only trying to present for you a different angle to see this in

remind:

quote:

---

1. ALL men benefit from violent acts against women

---

I really don't like that statement... Though I don't think I can dispute it rationally.

[ 14 December 2007: Message edited by: Noise ]

quote:

---

When one father kills one daughter for abandoning cultural traditions (and I assume this one daughter is representative of hundreds of young Islamic women in Canada and thousands in the West who go on to live healthy lives free of family violence), the focus is not on the crime and societal attitudes toward women but on Islam.

In the same week, a London, Ontario teacher was shot dead in yet another murder suicide by her boyfriend, and a young man went on yet another shooting rampage in an American school.

But we treat these as isolated incidents even though they happen all the time. We don't decry the backwardness of our culture and we don't criticize the way we glorify and even fetishize violence.

We don't examine how we value our own sense of being wronged and our right to vengeance as of higher value than the lives of others.

But when it is one case involving one tragedy where the victim and perpetrator both happen to be Islamic, well ... then we have all sorts of judgements and critiques of a culture most us only know through the stereotypes and grotesque caricatures presented by Western media and bigots.

---

My thoughts on this topic are myriad. What happened to Perez was horrifying and tremendously sad, completely preventable and deeply upsetting to me.

How this story has been taken up in the MSM has been predictable. How it's been taken up on babble, well, it's not good.

First of all, and this is no news flash (or it shouldn't be), but the MSM has an agenda. That is to contextualize ANY story in which a person or persons are Muslim, whereever they live, to become a story that FITS IN to the Islamophobic stereotypes that we all know so well.

Resist the urge to agree with the MSM. Please.

This father was an abusive fuckwad asshole. He may very well get the legal justice he deserves, but perhaps for the wrong reasons. The legal system has demonstrated over and over that violence against women is not important. Period. This is borne out in stats of conviction rates vs arrest rates, lengths of sentences, who gets convicted and who doesn't (hint: class and race play a role) and how often women are killed with restraining orders in their pockets.

Stealing cars and other property crimes are more important crimes than violence against women, if we judge by conviction rates, etc. It's deplorable. And, hey, that's the Canadian justice system I'm talking about.

If this man is brought to justice it will sadly be systemic Islamophobia that brings him there, not a truly deep understanding of the horror that is violence against women in Canada.

As to the hatred of women question, Black Dog and others, it's a fairly deep question and I don't blame remind for not wanting to get into it.

Hatred isn't simply "I hate you!" like when you had a fight with your best friend in grade 3. Or like the "I hate Stephen Harper" kind of hate. Our culture, that is, Canadian secular Christian culture, deeply hates and fears and wants to control women.

Examples? Walk down the street. How many ads of naked women do you see on buses, the sides of buildings, etc? (Sorry I live in the city so this is everywhere to me). How do you respond if ads of naked men are up there?

Are women's struggles and issues valued? Working for crap wages and being sexually harassed and racially harassed on the way to, and at work, are these stories we hear and know? Which happen all the time? Are we conditioned to hear such stories and immediately sympathize? Are the skills of figuring out how to support a family, maybe complementing with items from the food bank, negotiating with friends and family, given the high level of recognition they deserve?

No.

What we hear is the cutting back of social assistance rates, the penalizing of single moms for getting part time jobs, introducing moronic bills to name the fetus a person, limiting options for women, supporting men controlling women and nothing opposing them.

Read "The Story of Jane Doe: A Book About Rape".

Read the newspaper, any newspaper, and that will tell you what's important by the MSM standards: The latest political grandstanding from the official rightwing and the not-so-official rightwing; sports; business and stocks; a father who killed his daughter because she (allegedly) defied him, refused to be controlled by him: a tragedy that is simultaneously individualized AND used for maximum political leverage to support the anti-Muslim sentiment that is getting whipped up in anticipation of getting popular approval in the U.S. to attack Iran.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
...how often women are killed with restraining orders in their pockets.

---

Or conversly, if their lives are not taken literally by abusive assholes, they are destroyed, by destroying the woman's character, stalking whereby the woman loses her job, or has to move continually, or by the withholding of money/assets that are the woman's right as well.

quote:

---

Hatred isn't simply "I hate you!" like when you had a fight with your best friend in grade 3. Or like the "I hate Stephen Harper" kind of hate. Our culture, that is, Canadian secular Christian culture, deeply hates and fears and wants to control women.

---

Yes, and I in fact take the creation of the new NDP party spiritual commission as an act of hate against women!

quote:

---

....Are women's struggles and issues valued?

---

quote:

---

What we hear is the cutting back of social assistance rates, the penalizing of single moms for getting part time jobs, introducing moronic bills to name the fetus a person, limiting options for women, supporting men controlling women and nothing opposing them.

I know we're all smarter than that. At least, I sincerely hope we are.

---

Apparently we are not!

ETD, to take out an inappropriate word.

[ 15 December 2007: Message edited by: remind ]

quote:

---

Yes, and I in fact take the creation of the new NDP party spiritual commission as an act of hate against women!

---

The NDP must surely hate women !!

quote:

---

I'm quite surprised by the lengths to which people on this board have been willing to go to downplay the religious angle.

---

It isn't a matter of "downplaying" the religious angle. It is reinforcing the concept that the religious angle is not central to the premise that all acts of violence against women are misogynistic.

Whether it is a woman abused for disobeying a Muslim dress code ordered by a controlling Muslim male or a teen forced into a polygamous marriage to a much older male by a controlling Christian cultist male, the abuse is the result of misogynist males controlling women with violence.

quote:

---

Hatred isn't simply "I hate you!" like when you had a fight with your best friend in grade 3. Or like the "I hate Stephen Harper" kind of hate. Our culture, that is, Canadian secular Christian culture, deeply hates and fears and wants to control women.

---

Hatred is an overused word that,to me, has lost its meaning.

I was seriously pissed off over the aftermath of the WP conviction.The relish with which all the suits concerned discussed their and "society's" tribulations during the trial ordeal while simultaniously ignoring the sad demise of the victims and the ongoing effects of the marginalisation of vulnerable women was nauseating.

quote:

---

Our Collective Dreams: Muslim Women in Conversation about Violence against Women. Dec 17th & 19th

Discussion Groups Locations and Dates:

December 17th Malvern Family Resource Centre (1371 Neilson Rd, Suite 219) 5-7pm

December 19th The Centre for Women and Trans people ( 563 Spadina Ave. Room 100 North Borden Building) 5-7 pm

Join us in discussion groups on violence against women across the GTA organized by Muslim women for Muslim women.You are invited to come yell, grieve, cry, mourn, shout, resist, talk, about violence against women.

We are deeply saddened and angered by the murder of Aqsa Parvez. At these discussion groups we hope to begin a dialogue about violence against women. We want the chance to talk about how we feel and what we want to do about it in a safe, supportive environment.

We hope that these discussion groups will happen across the city and will be opportunities for us to collectively address our concerns and hopes for safety. Contact us if you plan to organize a discussion group in your community so we can help spread the word. We also would be happy to support you in putting one together in your area.

---

quote:

---

Religion has nothing to do with abuse. It is merely an excuse to control women.

---

Little bit of a blanket statement that we should clarify... Not all religion fits this excuse, just the relgions that originate in Agrarian times (ya, thats pretty much all dominent religion of today so the point is moot). We can find religion that is not tied to this pattern (I think it's important to differentiate religion and patriarchy rather than entirely blame religion for patriarchy).

That said, Patriarchy is propped up by the majority of todays religion, But I'm won't persue this line of thought any further and go back to listening as per Remind's exceedingly true statement:

quote:

---

4. Male responses illuminate just how far they will, or will not go, to halt discussions, actions or awareness from being disemminated. Ridicule, meta debate about something other pertained in the situation, or continuous interruption are used as a silencer.

---

I'd encourage a few others to do the same

[ 14 December 2007: Message edited by: Noise ]

quote:

---

The 'women-hate' originates from many sources... In this event it was religious passion that triggered it. There are all sorts of sources for this behaviour, blaming it entirely on [religious views is to ignore the greater link.

---

No but ignoring or downplaying the role religion plays in reinforcing these attitudes is, IMV, impractical. I'll expand below:

quote:

---

If the patriarchy we prop up (intentionally or unintentionally) was torn down, would this still have happened? Yes, there is a religious component, but it is solely the patriarchy that allows the religious component to manifest in this manner.

---

The patriarchy is all encompassing and nebulous: you can't tear it down without knocking down the pillars that prop it up., ie. religious beliefs that mandate the oppression of women.

Jester:

quote:

---

It isn't a matter of "downplaying" the religious angle. It is reinforcing the concept that the religious angle is not central to the premise that all acts of violence against women are misogynistic.

---

And that premise, while useful from an analytical standpoint, does little to provide a way forward. And again, it divorces the concept of the patriarchy from those institutions that reinforce it. The patriarchy and religious beliefs that mandate violent punishment of religion are the same thing.

quote:

---

Religion has nothing to do with abuse. It is merely an excuse to control women.

---

Religion, even if it is "just an excuse," has plenty to do with abuse.

[ 14 December 2007: Message edited by: Black Dog ]

[ 14 December 2007: Message edited by: Black Dog ]

quote:

---

Little bit of a blanket statement that we should clarify... Not all religion fits this excuse, just the relgions that originate in Agrarian times (ya, thats pretty much all dominent religion of today so the point is moot). We can find religion that is not tied to this pattern (I think it's important to differentiate religion and patriarchy rather than entirely blame religion for patriarchy).

---

quote:

---

The patriarchy is all encompassing and nebulous: you can't tear it down without knocking down the pillars that prop it up., ie. religious beliefs that mandate the oppression of women.

---

The trouble is, as I tried to explain above, that so often, people identify the problem as religion and so ends the analysis. I don’t think anyone here is denying that religion was likely a factor in the abuse in this particular case, but so is a deep-seated belief that women are not equal, that women are dangerous, than women are temptresses, that women are supposed to be subservient and if they aren’t they deserve to be punished, that women need to be controlled and that it is a man’s right (or even responsibility) to do so. One or more of these latter beliefs are probably present in every case of assault against women. More often than not, the belief probably has nothing to do with religion.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Summer:
...but so is a deep-seated belief that women are not equal, that women are dangerous, than women are temptresses, that women are supposed to be subservient and if they aren’t they deserve to be punished, that women need to be controlled and that it is a man’s right (or even responsibility) to do so. One or more of these latter beliefs are probably present in every case of assault against women. More often than not, the belief probably has nothing to do with religion.

---

We also need to move discussion into the area of control = power, and addictions to power, or what is perceived as personal empowerment of the male controlling the woman and that somehow this loss of power mens to some men, perhaps all, a loss of their personal empowerment.

quote:

---

So let me say it again, the trouble with chalking this up to religion is that it becomes so easy to dismiss it as an isolated problem,

---

Jester:

quote:

---

I would like to clarify that while I have great respect for an individual's spiritual beliefs and their religion, that respect does not extend to the various predators, pedophiles and misogynists that utilise religion to hide from prosecution while they prey upon and control others.

---

Oh of course... I think this goes without saying really. I don't think religion and patriarchy are intrinsically linked, it's just most mainstream religion (along with most the rest of our society) operates entirely within the patriarchal setup.

Summer:

quote:

---

The trouble is, as I tried to explain above, that so often, people identify the problem as religion and so ends the analysis.

---

And just to expand... There is also the urge to demonize the person, distancing that person from us to the point where it's obviously something that was unique, a 'demon' within our society that had nothing to do with us ("mentally disturbed" or "obsessive control freak" fall into that category). Same trap that ends analysis and needs to be avoided.

Remind:

quote:

---

We also need to move discussion into the area of control = power, and addictions to power, or what is perceived as personal empowerment of the male controlling the woman and that somehow this loss of power mens to some men, perhaps all, a loss of their personal empowerment.

---

Can we apply that view pint to this topic? Would the loss of control to the father of being able to dictate his daughters behaviour fit this?

[ 14 December 2007: Message edited by: Noise ]

[ 14 December 2007: Message edited by: Noise ]

quote:

---

So let me say it again, the trouble with chalking this up to religion is that it becomes so easy to dismiss it as an isolated problem, just as people dismissed Pickton’s victims because they were prostitutes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Black Dog:
is there harm in identifying problems within specific communities?

---

quote:

---

1. ALL men benefit from violent acts against women.

---

Does a disabled man benefit when his nurse is beaten so badly by her husband or lover or father that she can't go into work?

Does a gay man benefit when his female best friend is killed by her lover or father or husband?
This board can be a great place, but their are times when the members(including myself) become so entranced by theories of patriarchal opression, imperialism, heterosexism etc. that we end up loosing our compassion.

[ 14 December 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 14 December 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 15 December 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

Also, we don't know that a misogynous perspective is involved. Is this assumption made because of the faith of the family? The faith of the family may or may not have been a factor, we just do not know.
We don't know the full story yet.
Was there was a history of mental illness on the part of the father? A history of past abusive and threatening behaviour does appear to be present, but what was the context?
Admittedly I do not know anything about the family of the individuals in this family, so I am speculating what may have been contributing factors.

[ 14 December 2007: Message edited by: TemporalHominid ]

quote:

---

Yes, because it is NOT in just "specific" communities, it is in EVERY community.

---

Yes it's in every community, as I've clearly stated already. However, some communities have specific problems over others. An analogy would be the issue of drug and alcohol abuse. These are social problems that transcend cultural, racial and religious backgrounds, yet some groups, many first nations communities for example, have their own specific struggles with the issue.

quote:

---

Leaders in the Muslim community held a news conference on Thursday to say the tragic death had nothing to do with Islam.

The religious figures said Islam in no way condones acts of violence, and the death shouldn't reflect badly on their faith.

"The bottom line is, it's a domestic violence issue,'' Sheik Alaa El-Sayyed, imam at Mississauga's Islamic Society of North America.

"We, as Muslims, are Canadians and we should be dealt with just like everyone else. We have rights, duties ... pros and cons just like all other human beings.''

El-Sayyed said Islam teaches that women have the right to choose whether or not they want to wear the hijab.

But the Muslim leaders admitted a child who didn't wear the hijab could bring shame to a family, and the parents could be viewed as failures in the community.

---

http://tinyurl.com/2r76ob

quote:

---

... Aqsa, it seemed, was still searching for independence.

A few days after that first meeting, over coffee in Tim Hortons, Aqsa told her father that she wanted to live on her own, she wanted to go to school in the mornings and work in the evenings. Mr. Parvez offered to let her take over the basement. Aqsa said she would think about it.

"She was satisfied, she was relaxed that somehow her parents understood that this is what she wanted to do, and they didn't push her to come home," said Ms. Tahir, who wanted to be an impartial third party to broker peace.

She pressed Aqsa many times to tell her why she had run away. The girl claimed repeatedly that she had never been abused. When one Imam suggested at a press conference this week that boy issues may have been behind Aqsa's family troubles, the Tahir women, who were in the audience, raised their voices in protest.

Aqsa did not have a boyfriend, said Ms. Tahir, who expressed dismay at the "rumours" in the press, including speculation that it was conflict over wearing the hijab that triggered the alleged murder.

The Tahirs did not know of any dispute over Aqsa wearing a hijab and said that the older Parvez sisters did not always wear the head scarf ...

---

quote:

---

At Aqsa's high school, friends gathered in groups yesterday, struggling to come to grips with what happened and lamenting how she had quarrelled with her father to the point that she recently moved out to live with a friend.

"She said she was always scared of her dad, she was always scared of her brother ... and she's not scared of nobody," said classmate Ashley Garbutt, 16.

"She didn't want to go home ... to the point where she actually wanted to go to shelters."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
I cannot say it strong enough, this is not about the Muslim faith, please refrain from trying to make it so. It is about violence against women.

---

Depends whether or not you analyze the situation from the question of cause or of effect. Certainly the end result is violence against women, but it didn't occur in a vacuum. The agents involved had specific value systems which led them to behave as they did.

In my own case, one of the things that led me away from religion were what the Talmud had written about women, specifically what happens to a woman suspected of adultery. I was 19 and interested in going back to religion, and then some "scholars" explained to me why it's wrong for a woman to be suspected of adultery, et cetera. That was the end of that experiment.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:
Depends whether or not you analyze the situation from the question of cause or of effect. Certainly the end result is violence against women, but it didn't occur in a vacuum.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noise:
Remind... Might start having to add a 1B of men also being disadvatanged by violent acts against women, but that might be a different thread.

---

1. Why do men always want to make it about them too?

quote:

---

Why do men always want to make it about them too?

---

BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT IS ABOUT US TOO!

[ 15 December 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:

BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT IS ABOUT US TOO!

[ 15 December 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:

Yelling?

---

Sorry...

[ 16 December 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

1. Why do men always want to make it about them too?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noise:
As long as it is men commiting the acts of violence towards women, it is inpart about them Remind. But I'll quit this line of thought, sorry for the intrusion.

---

If men were so concerned about violence against women, and getting rid of patriarchy, why are we not seeing endless threads about it? Started by men calling to action other men to halt the violence and misogyny? These questions are trhetorical btw, I by no means want to hear about the plight of men.

-----------------------------

Yelling is unacceptable and is implied violence against women, or a woman it is being directed at...

quote:

---

If men were so concerned about violence against women, and getting rid of patriarchy, why are we not seeing endless threads about it?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noise:

Thats exactly what I'm asking when I try to point out that this is inpart about men. It is interesting to see that it's almost soley male posters trying to pass this off on religion and not the patriarchal society.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TemporalHominid:
while I am in agreement that linking this murder to religion is wrong, I am just as concerned that this murder appears to be placed on the shoulders of the teen murdered, what with various groups stating in the media releases about "the way teenagers are today" . She had it coming because she is a teenager that challenges the authority of her parents?

---

I heard an interview with an alderperson on CBC where the alderperson was quick to blame the parents of an accused teenager because she "had raised three children who never got in trouble" so obviously lesser mortals should be condemned for not meeting her standards.

quote:

---

Father Pleads Gulity In Triple Murder Of Wife And Kids
Friday December 14, 2007
CityNews.ca Staff

A case that began on March 6, 2006 finally ended Friday with an admission of guilt in a terrible tragedy. It was back on that cold morning more than a year ago that police arrived at an address in Aurora. But what left them chilled wasn't the weather - it was a crime scene unlike any they'd ever come across.

They discovered the body of a woman and two small children lying dead in their beds in a home on a quiet street. All three had been beaten to death. The victims were 41-year-old Wendy La Fleche, her seven year old daughter Victoria and her son Jesse. His life had barely begun - he was just three years of age.

---

quote:

---

I feel saddened by the fact that islam and South Asian culture has been put on trial here rather than the actions of an abusive man/father. What is interesting to me is that in the past few days, along side Aqsa’s death have also been front page stories about Pickton’s trial. We don’t hear things like, all B.C. farmers should hang their heads in shame or that this is a great day of shame for white Canadian farmers across the nation, or that perhaps if we ban farming, these tragedies would never happen. *But we do hear that maybe if we banned the veil, this tragedy never would never have happened. In terms of inter-generational conflict and culture clash. This is not an “ethnic” phenomenon. All parents and teens clash with one another over boundaries of independence and issues of freedom. In fact it is part of a parent’s duty to tell their teens what to do and not to do, when to come home and not to come home, and many parents may argue over modes of dress and hair, tattoos, piercings, baggy pants or tight clothes. If parents had absolutely no boundaries or guidelines for their teens, that would fall under neglect. But if these allegations are true, this father seriously crossed the line in terms of parenting, and used his power as a parent, as an older person. This is not acceptable, period.

Now that we have framed the discussion, I think it is important to discuss the ways some people use culture and religion to justify and perpetuate abuse and to look at the ways violence and abuse and gender/patriarchy manifest themselves within the South Asian community. I think the fact that Aqsa was a teenager, a young woman and a child of immigrant parents in Canada has much to say about what she may have experienced. Though her experience is speculation at this point. Let’s talk about the dilemmas young women in general who may find themselves at the crossroads of their own community’s expectations and that of mainstream Canadian society....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mary123:
Meanwhile remember this story?

Had they been Muslim instead .....

---

[ 15 December 2007: Message edited by: RevolutionPlease ]

quote:

---

A day they expected to include waves of grief ebbed back into bitterness and anger for the friends and peers of Aqsa Parvez as they realized they'd been excluded from her funeral.

"They tricked us," said Konnor Williams, 16, who had known Parvez for three years. "I'm very upset and very angry right now. I feel cheated out of my friend's funeral. It's just not right."

Many of Parvez's closest friends turned up yesterday at a large mosque in Mississauga, the Islamic Centre of Canada, for Parvez's funeral. But they discovered the funeral had suddenly become "private," held at a secret location. Some speculated the family decided on the change after the intense attention the case had been given in the media and on the Internet.

Though the funeral was scheduled for 1:30 p.m., in fact it happened much earlier, a mosque official said. They also learned that, by that time, her body had already been buried for hours.

Many of the friends headed to the Meadowvale Cemetery in Brampton, some driven by their parents, only to meet another hurdle.

---

The difference here is, of course, the assumption that ALL religious Muslims would do something like this, or that all Muslims subscribe to exactly the same view of Islam - whereas you can be sure that no one would assume that about all religious Christians. Some people assume that any Muslim who is strongly religious or observant is necessarily a zealot and a bigot who is willing to die or murder for their religion.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
I think that if the motive for killing a girl in a religious Christian family was because she was refusing to fulfill some sort of religious requirement, then people probably WOULD be shining a spotlight on the religion in question. It would be kind of ridiculous NOT to try to analyze how this guy's religious beliefs inspired him to kill his daughter.

The difference here is, of course, the assumption that ALL religious Muslims would do something like this, or that all Muslims subscribe to exactly the same view of Islam - whereas you can be sure that no one would assume that about all religious Christians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
Does a disabled man benefit when his nurse is beaten so badly by her husband or lover or father that she can't go into work?

Does a gay man benefit when his female best friend is killed by her lover or father or husband?

---

I don't want to speak for remind, so I hopes she corrects me if I get this wrong, but I don't think her statement that all men benefit from violence against women necessarily means that all men benefit equally - just that to a degree they benefit.

I think it has to do with questions of privilege. So, while an individual man may lose a wife, mother, daughter, sister, friend as the result of violence against women, all men have their male privilege reconfirmed. If a man is a member of another oppressed or disadvantaged group/category he will not have the same degree of privilege than other men may have, but still privilege in relation to women.

quote:

---

Will S: I don't want to speak for remind, so I hopes she corrects me if I get this wrong, but I don't think her statement that all men benefit from violence against women necessarily means that all men benefit equally - just that to a degree they benefit.

I think it has to do with questions of privilege. So, while an individual man may lose a wife, mother, daughter, sister, friend as the result of violence against women, all men have their male privilege reconfirmed. If a man is a member of another oppressed or disadvantaged group/category he will not have the same degree of privilege than other men may have, but still privilege in relation to women.

---

[ 16 December 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Will S:
I don't want to speak for remind, so I hopes she corrects me if I get this wrong, but I don't think her statement that all men benefit from violence against women necessarily means that all men benefit equally - just that to a degree they benefit.

I think it has to do with questions of privilege. So, while an individual man may lose a wife, mother, daughter, sister, friend as the result of violence against women, all men have their male privilege reconfirmed. If a man is a member of another oppressed or disadvantaged group/category he will not have the same degree of privilege than other men may have, but still privilege in relation to women.

I'm not sure if this made any sense. Can anyone tackle this point in a manner that makes more sense?

---

quote:

---

Aqsa Parvez was probably murdered by her father because of some "cultural" battle. (the 911 tape has a man saying he had killed his daughter)

Culture? Yes. The prevailing cuture of men. The only way to change this? Is to change the prevailing culture Worldwide to a culture of humanity.

...Light a candle for Aqsa Parvez, and all the women of the world.

---

*bolding mine.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Black Dog:
The authour of the piece remind linked to above lost me when she equates horrific cultural practices like stoning and female genital mutilation with purity balls and wage disparity. Yeah, our "'free' Western society" has a ways to go, but we're centuries ahead of a lot of other societies. That's not smugness: that's a fact.

---

One of my roomie's friends was apparently a friend of her boyfriend... Not quite sure how true this claim was, but I figured I'd share the viewpoint I got from him with the board. It was NOT anti-muslim, infact the religious aspect never even came up... His viewpoint was entirely family. How could a parent possibly turn on someone he was supposed to protect at all cost? It was interesting to hear the viewpoint that it's the father failing at his duty to protect his children (ultimately from himself)... The words for the brother that is being charged for obstructing justice wasn't much better, borderline vigilante justice. He took consolidation that the guy was likely going to get severely beaten by other inmates.

I wonder how widely held that stance is?

[ 17 December 2007: Message edited by: Noise ]

quote:

---

No it is not fact actually, it is falsely based smugness.

---

Oh so female genital mutilation, death sentences for adultery and rape victims, honour killings and official and community sanction of these practices as acceptable norms is a feature of life in the west?

For all the issues women in our society face, I think the fact that we've transcended so many of the practices that are commonplace in other parts of the world to this day is worth celebrating. IMV, it's incredibly patronizing and insulting to equate the two.

Noise:

quote:

---

It is and it isn't Black Dog... Simply because it manifests in manners that you interpret to be less brutal doesn't mean it's the same thing manifesting over and over again.

---

I'm not arguing that they aren't manifestations of the same root phenomenon. I'm simply saying the form of those manifestations matters a great deal.

quote:

---

It's still Patriarchy, you're just arguing ours is more acceptable...

---

Well, given the false choice of the two, I'd say ours is the more acceptable form of patriarchy.

quote:

---

Is a physical act of violence really less brutal than emotional ones?

---

There are problems when "Islam" is blamed for what happened to her.

There are problems when "the individual" is blamed for what happened to her.

But declaring that we in the West are so much more "civilized" is simply using this horrific tragedy to promote an Islamophobic agenda. There's nothing progressive about this.

Black Dog, if the following issues are so important to you:

quote:

---

Oh so female genital mutilation, death sentences for adultery and rape victims, honour killings and official and community sanction of these practices as acceptable norms is a feature of life in the west?

---

quote:

---

For all the issues women in our society face, I think the fact that we've transcended so many of the practices that are commonplace in other parts of the world to this day is worth celebrating. IMV, it's incredibly patronizing and insulting to equate the two.

---

We've transcended in personal freedoms, standard of life (using our measures of that standard of course), and several other measures of society that dictate how this Patriarchy manifests itself. It's a flawed notion to say our Patriarchy is 'more acceptable' as it's the same Patriarchy. Not sure if I can make this any more clear... It's the same Patriarchy you are trying to celebrate, the differences you are celebrating are not differences in the patriarchy, it's differences in the society. You are incorrectly celebrating the differences in society under the false label of a more acceptalbe patriarchy. clearer?

quote:

---

Black Dog, there are huge problems when a situation like what happened to Aqsa Parvez is used to promote an agenda, in this case, that Muslim culture and Islam in general are "so much worse" than Western culture and Christianity.

---

Well, I wasn't talking about "Muslim culture and Islam in general". I'd say that any culture that accepts gender equality (even if it falls short in practice) is objectively superior to any culture that does not.

quote:

---

Black Dog, if the following issues are so important to you:
...
then you can no doubt find groups of women who are working to end these practices in their own countries and help them in ways they would deem appropriate. Google is your friend.

But you really care, don't you? You're not just throwing out those old, tired and boring stereotypes are you? I'm sure you've already educated yourself about the Muslim feminist movements that exist in many of the countries in which practices above are done. Yay! Good for you. (P.S. Big rolleye smiley for this paragraph.)

---

I don't know how the existence of groups fighting to end these practices contradicts or disproves a single thing I've written.

Noise:

quote:

---

We've transcended in personal freedoms, standard of life (using our measures of that standard of course), and several other measures of society that dictate how this Patriarchy manifests itself. It's a flawed notion to say our Patriarchy is 'more acceptable' as it's the same Patriarchy.

---

...which is why I said it was a false choice.

quote:

---

It's the same Patriarchy you are trying to celebrate, the differences you are celebrating are not differences in the patriarchy, it's differences in the society. You are incorrectly celebrating the differences in society under the false label of a more acceptalbe patriarchy. clearer?

---

Again: I did not introduce the notion of an "acceptable patriarchy." Quite the opposite. To wit:

quote:

---

I'm not arguing that they aren't manifestations of the same root phenomenon. I'm simply saying the form of those manifestations matters a great deal.

---

quote:

---

Word of caution... I think you're bordering on trivializing the experiences of women in our society with 'its better than other places in the world, so lets celebrate'.

---

But trivializing the experiences of women in other societies by equating genital mutilation to the wage gap is a-ok?

[ 17 December 2007: Message edited by: Black Dog ]

quote:

---

Well, I wasn't talking about "Muslim culture and Islam in general". I'd say that any culture that accepts gender equality (even if it falls short in practice) is objectively superior to any culture that does not.

---

But we aren't. Women still get raped beaten and humiliated on a daily basis. Regardless of how much skin our society allows women to show and inspite of the work of many activists our society is still very sexist.

[ 17 December 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

But we aren't. Women still get raped beaten and humiliated on a daily basis. Regardless of how much skin our society allows women to show and inspite of the work of many activists our society is still very sexist.

---

Again, I never claimed the absence of sexism in our society. But I don't believe we can discuss this in binary "sexist/not sexist" terms. Even in terming our society as "very sexist," you're raising the question "'very sexist' in comparison to what?" Compared to an ideal, sexism free world, we're very sexist indeed. Compared to states where extreme manifestations of sexism and misogyny are fixtures of public policy, we're not very sexist. Again, it's relative, not absolute.

I don't understand the hesitation to recognize the progress we've made in our society wrt women's rights, progress that was made almost completely because women took it upon themselves to change the institutions that held them back. And today, this same process is still underway in many of the societies that I would consider at the back of the pack in terms of women's rights. How can one support the work of organizations and individuals around the world seeking to improve the lot of women in their societies without first acknowledging the scope and unique nature of the problems they face?

[ 17 December 2007: Message edited by: Black Dog ]

[ 17 December 2007: Message edited by: Black Dog ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
Women still get raped beaten and humiliated on a daily basis.

---

And then stupid tabloid headline writers think it's cute to make light of it:

But lets talk about the growing instances of labia reduction & beautification that is now occuring in our western world as a similar action. It is in response to what? The culture of man as those vaginas must look like a centerfold!

quote:

---

Labiaplasty (labia reduction & beautification) and other female cosmetic surgical procedures including Vaginoplasty (rejuvenation or tightening of the vagina) and Clitoral Unhooding (Hoodectomy), are becoming more popular as social acceptance of these cosmetic and reconstructive procedures continues toward mainstream. Labia surgery, which usually involves labia reduction—and vaginal rejuvenation, or tightening, are becoming as common today as other cosmetic procedures, including tummy tucks and breast augmentation. New advancements and techniques in Labiaplasty and Vaginoplasty typically lessen scarring, pain, recovery time, and show excellent results in the area sometimes referred to as Vaginal Cosmetic Surgery.

---

http://www.labiaplastysurgeon.com/

So, are you going to stand on your falsely held beliefs that somehow the patriarchy that women suffer in the western world is somehow better than what they suffer elsewhere?

noise, he is not bordering on trivializing "the experiences of women in our society with 'its better than other places in the world, so lets celebrate'."

quote:

---

Again, I never claimed the absence of sexism in our society. But I don't believe we can discuss this in binary "sexist/not sexist" terms. Even in terming our society as "very sexist," you're raising the question "'very sexist' in comparison to what?" Compared to an ideal, sexism free world, we're very sexist indeed. Compared to states where extreme manifestations of sexism and misogyny are fixtures of public policy, we're not very sexist. Again, it's relative, not absolute.

---

quote:

---

I don't understand the hesitation to recognize the progress we've made in our society

---

That is a correct statement, until you add:

quote:

---

wrt women's rights

---

The progress was made in societies values of acceptable punishment and not womens rights. I think the figure is 8% of sexual assaults directed at women are reported in our society? Why is our methods of supressing worth celebrating over 'less acceptable' methods? It's not much different from seeing a soceity that jails and tortures political activists and then celebrating how much better we are because we only jail our activists.

quote:

---

So, are you going to stand on your falsely held beliefs that somehow the patriarchy that women suffer in the western world is somehow better than what they suffer elsewhere?

---

Read what I wrote:

quote:

---

I'm not arguing that they aren't manifestations of the same root phenomenon. I'm simply saying the form of those manifestations matters a great deal.

---

And I stand by the belief that women in our society by and large have it a helluva lot better than a great many women elsewhere.

Vaginal plastic surgery, fucked up as that may be, is not an analogue to forced genital mutilation IMO. maybe it's just me, but I see the distinction between a society where mostly poor women are forced to undergo the partial or total removal of their genitalia versus one where rich women chose to undergo labiaplasty. Yes, both are the result of the demands of patriarchal society, but the element of choice remains a key distinction.

CMOT

quote:

---

But even compared to other Western countries(Iceland, France, Spain) we have bad record when it comes to the welfare of women.

---

Which is why I said it's all relative. Others would seem to disagree.

Noise:

quote:

---

The progress was made in societies values of acceptable punishment and not womens rights. I think the figure is 8% of sexual assaults directed at women are reported in our society?

---

You don't think recognizing women as persons (something a great many states have yet to do), and affording at least a theoretical framework of equality isn't progress?

quote:

---

Why is our methods of supressing worth celebrating over 'less acceptable' methods?

---

Because, to use your terminology, our methods are less pervasive and less institutionalized than those of other societies.

quote:

---

It's not much different from seeing a soceity that jails and tortures political activists and then celebrating how much better we are because we only jail our activists.

---

Well, would you rather be jailed or jailed and tortured?

[ 18 December 2007: Message edited by: Black Dog ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Black Dog:
I'm not arguing that they aren't manifestations of the same root phenomenon. I'm simply saying the form of those manifestations matters a great deal.

---

No, it is you who is not listening, the form of the manifestation, apparently only matters to men, as women know the form is exactly the same. Why do you men believe this "form matters"? I will tell you why, so you can pat yourselves on the back and say, wrongly I might add, "yes, we have a patriarchial society that oppresses women unjustly, but hey, no problem they aren't as badly oppressed as other women in other countries".

quote:

---

Well, would you rather be jailed or jailed and tortured?

---

This reduces to 'would you rather be surpressed or surpressed?' and celebrate it! I don't think there is any reason to celebrate either and celebration is at best a distraction used to hide the real issue. I also dislike the implied reaction of 'backwards society should learn to supress their women like we do' that this stance carries.

I do understand your point about how one form is more acceptable than another when interpreted using the contexts of our society, but it's at best a slight distraction from the larger issue. This topic started (in my view atleast) with attempting to obscure the underlying patriarchy by blaming Islam, or demonizing the father involved as being 'not one of us', when in truth it's a manifestation of patriarchy all along. I think that is where you'll find the majority of the protest in this thread lies.

Editted to add as she deserves repeating, if you're going to take any comment as a lesson from this thread, this is it:

quote:

---

I will tell you why, so you can pat yourselves on the back and say, wrongly I might add, "yes, we have a patriarchial society that oppresses women unjustly, but hey, no problem they aren't as badly oppressed as other women in other countries".

---

[ 18 December 2007: Message edited by: Noise ]

One last comment:

quote:

---

Yes, both are the result of the demands of patriarchal society, but the element of choice remains a key distinction.

---

[ 18 December 2007: Message edited by: Noise ]

quote:

---

No, it is you who is not listening, the form of the manifestation, apparently only matters to men, as women know the form is exactly the same.

---

Y'know I'm the first to admit that women can have perspectives on women's issues that men cannot. But this sounds an awful lot like a rhetorical trick.

quote:

---

Why do you men believe this "form matters"? I will tell you why, so you can pat yourselves on the back and say, wrongly I might add, "yes, we have a patriarchial society that oppresses women unjustly, but hey, no problem they aren't as badly oppressed as other women in other countries".

---

Again, I'd like to now how far this kind of crap would get me on this forum if the tables were turned and I were lecturing you. Chances are, I'd get a face full of comments about how typical it is of males to use such tactics as a silencer, probably followed by a warning from the mods that this is the feminism forum etc. Here's a deal, I won't tell you how you feel and why if you'll offer the same courtesy.

quote:

---

And then you take that erroneous notion, and take it a step further and think you have a right to feel superior, because men in the western world, according to you, are superior to men in other countries, because you believe, again wrongly, the manifestation of the form, of the culture of men makes it better for women of the western world.

---

First: I do have the right to feel superior, just as you have the right to feel I am wrong.

Second: You seem to be saying the ways in which the patriarchy manifests itself are irrelevant, which implies the issues facing women in the west are identical to those of other societies. Thus, a western woman looking for affordable childcare or pondering plastic surgery to conform to patriarchal beauty ideals is in the same boat as a woman facing the threat of genital mutilation, honour killings, forced marriage, or judicially sanctioned rape. While I'll agree with the basic framework that the patriarchy is at work in both, I will not agree that this fact trumps the specifics of the challenges each women faces and the relative severity of the consequences.

Noise:

quote:

---

This reduces to 'would you rather be surpressed or surpressed?' and celebrate it! I don't think there is any reason to celebrate either and celebration is at best a distraction used to hide the real issue. I also dislike the implied reaction of 'backwards society should learn to supress their women like we do' that this stance carries.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Black Dog:
But this sounds an awful lot like a rhetorical trick.

---

quote:

---

Again, I'd like to now how far this kind of crap would get me on this forum if the tables were turned and I were lecturing you. Chances are, I'd get a face full of comments about how typical it is of males to use such tactics as a silencer, probably followed by a warning from the mods that this is the feminism forum etc. Here's a deal, I won't tell you how you feel and why if you'll offer the same courtesy.

---

As you go on to say this:

quote:

---

First: I do have the right to feel superior,

---

quote:

---

Here is the deal, you are telling us how we women should feel apparently you feel you have the only POV.

---

Where did I say this? Citation, please.

quote:

---

And I am telling you it is quite obvious what your view is and now I am telling you it is not a progressive one, and that I am correct in my in stating how you percieve things and why.

---

In other words: you are telling me how I should feel and apparently you feel you have the only POV?

I'm not all that interested in whether or not my opinions conform to some unwritten progressive orthodoxy as much as I am with them being first and foremost accurate and logical.

quote:

---

No actually you don't!

---

And how is this different from the horrible crime you claim I'm committing on this thread?

And perhaps you can clarify why I have no right to my opinions. I'm really, really interested in hearing that one.

oldgoat:

I'm aware I'm spinning my wheels here. But in fairness, I'm simply trying to ensure my views are being represented accurately.

[ 18 December 2007: Message edited by: Black Dog ]

quote:

---

This is turning into one of those threads that just isn't supposed to happen on the feminism forum. Black Dog stay out of it now please.

---

You mean the kind where interlopers are blitzed with ad hominem attacks? Hilarious. I started a thread in the news section on this only to be told it belongs in feminism forum.

Whatever. Fuck it.

[ 18 December 2007: Message edited by: Black Dog ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Black Dog, there are huge problems when a situation like what happened to Aqsa Parvez is used to promote an agenda, in this case, that Muslim culture and Islam in general are "so much worse" than Western culture and Christianity.

There are problems when "Islam" is blamed for what happened to her.

There are problems when "the individual" is blamed for what happened to her.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by kim2:
But it is ok when "men" are blamed for what happened to her?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:

"Men" aren't being blamed, misogyny and the culture of men are.

---

It seems that there is still a generalization here. That being the 'culture of men and their hatred of women'.