Religion trumping freedom

[LavCat]

Shoot little girls? No, this is America, we blow up little girls we disagree with.

As FIT correctly says, there is not much difference between such people and for example Talibans in Afghanistan.

Bullshit. A thousand times bullshit. These kind of gross and ridiculous exaggerations are worthy of religious zealots and idiots like FIT. If you think about it for a few seconds I think you can spot a few differences such as one of the two not shooting little girls in the head if they happen to disagree with their point of view on education for girls.

Sorry if I come of as rude, but that just pissed me off.

take care
Tarabulus

[FireIceTalon]

Oh, we like to shoot them also. For as much as ahistorical individuals like NuurAbSaal think I exaggerate, the evidence shows quite the contrary:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-aborti...ce#Murders

Doesn't look like exaggeration to me. The above incidents may not have been directed towards young girls, but it is religious violence and bigotry all the same.

Taliban and the Christian Right are same shit, different assholes. This is an indisputable fact.

[eppie]

This weeks newsweek int. features an article about murder of women in Italy.
This has to do with the fact that men can't manage the modern day equality of men and women.

[LavCat]

This weeks newsweek int. features an article about murder of women in Italy.
This has to do with the fact that men can't manage the modern day equality of men and women.

I recently finished reading a book about Afghanistan in the 19th century. There are Afghan tribes that practice gender equality.

[kandrathe]

This weeks newsweek int. features an article about murder of women in Italy. This has to do with the fact that men can't manage the modern day equality of men and women.

I think this is it. It's hard to find newsweek. The print is dead, and the online will be absorbed into "The Daily Beast".

Some of my thoughts are echoed; "Many more cases barely make the headlines because domestic violence is still considered a private matter in Italy. Increasingly, authorities blame a misogynic Italian culture, which tends to assume marital or interrelationship problems are best solved without help from the outside."

Male attitudes about themselves, their relationships, and womens roles are taught culturally. Domestic violence, first starts with a permissive attitude toward violence. This is the type of guy who would get violent with anyone if he felt like they insulted him. We perpetuate this "tough guy" image in our culture. Then, there is jealousy. It is ugly, and most people aren't taught how to deal with it. I think it has to do with power, fear of abandonment, and the loss of control.

Everything important I have learned about how to treat/relate to women I learned from my mother and sisters, and not from my father or other men in my upbringing. His advice, primarily to treat them like fragile glass idols to be worshiped, was all wrong. But really, men are like waffles, and women are like spaghetti.

[FireIceTalon]

This weeks newsweek int. features an article about murder of women in Italy.
This has to do with the fact that men can't manage the modern day equality of men and women.

Of course they can't, even the ones who desire to. You cannot reform things like male chauvinism or patriarchy out of capitalism.

[eppie]

This weeks newsweek int. features an article about murder of women in Italy.
This has to do with the fact that men can't manage the modern day equality of men and women.

Of course they can't, even the ones who desire to. You cannot reform things like male chauvinism or patriarchy out of capitalism.

I don't think this has to do with capitalism. It has to do with a very old-fashioned religiously inspired mind set. If it had to do with capitalism it would happen in Holland (we invented share trading), or Denmark....more secular but very capitalistic countries.. Instead this happens in places like Afghanistan, and yes also Italy

[FireIceTalon]

This weeks newsweek int. features an article about murder of women in Italy.
This has to do with the fact that men can't manage the modern day equality of men and women.

Of course they can't, even the ones who desire to. You cannot reform things like male chauvinism or patriarchy out of capitalism.

I don't think this has to do with capitalism. It has to do with a very old-fashioned religiously inspired mind set. If it had to do with capitalism it would happen in Holland (we invented share trading), or Denmark....more secular but very capitalistic countries.. Instead this happens in places like Afghanistan, and yes also Italy

So men and women are treated as complete equals in Holland and Denmark, in all aspects of life (politically, socially, economically, and within the family structure)? What is women's pay like compared to men in these nations, and how are they treated socially? Are there no reactionary attitudes in general towards them? These aren't rhetorical questions, btw (well, the last one sort of is ). I want to honestly know, because perhaps things are indeed different there.

Here in the USA, capitalism definitely plays a role in contributing to the gender inequalities. Women are paid only .75 cents on the dollar compared to men, less likely to be promoted, and in general have to work much harder to have the same equality of opportunity as men do - and even then there is the so-called "glass ceiling" problem for women. Sexual harassment in the work place is still fairly common too. And that is just in the job market. Culturally, women are still stereotyped and discriminated against in many ways. If a guy sleeps around a lot, he is considered "a pimp" and is phrased for it, but if a woman does it, she is viewed as being a whore and is usually scorned. Complete double standard. And even though it is getting better, women with tattoos are still viewed less favorably, while with men it isn't a huge deal at all. A lot of the reactionary attitudes towards women here have a religious origin, but they are legitimized and necessitated not by religion, but by the capitalist system, state apparatus, and its culture.

Prostitution being illegal is also an attack on working class women. Not that I think prostitution is a good thing, it isn't, but in capitalist society some women are forced to make ends meet somehow, to feed themselves and their families. It is certainly an economic issue as much as a social issue, there is a reason you don't see women from the ruling class do it: because they don't ever need to. I think prostitution is a horrible thing, and no woman should ever have to degrade herself in such a way. But making it illegal just makes it an even worse hardship for them though, for obvious reasons. I suppose there are some women who don't mind it so much, and even a few who may enjoy it, but overall I would say these individuals are in a very small minority. The solution isn't to criminalize prostitution, the solution is to eliminate the economic circumstances that force women into it to begin with.

Anyways, sexism and patriarchy did predate capitalism and there is certainly a religious element in them, but that doesn't matter so much. The fact is, gender inequality is a social development that is an intrinsic process within ANY class antagonist system - whether it is slavery, feudalism, or capitalism. The way the inequality between the sexes is administered has changed over time, yes, but it still undoubtedly exists. Capitalism is no exception to this rule - it is a class antagonist society. There is always the dominant class and there are the so-called "others" - for race it is whites and everyone else, for gender men are dominant and women subservient, rich over poor, straight over gay, etc etc. The only thing that has changed in the course of history is how these social inequalities function as a process. Women have overcome many barriers, but that isn't because capitalism is a better system than previous systems or because it improves over time (it really doesn't), but because women formed political feminist movements and struggles and fought for these gains. They still have many obstacles to face, and the gains they have made will never be guaranteed to stay in place so long as class society exists.

[kandrathe]

I don't think this has to do with capitalism. It has to do with a very old-fashioned religiously inspired mind set. If it had to do with capitalism it would happen in Holland (we invented share trading), or Denmark....more secular but very capitalistic countries.. Instead this happens in places like Afghanistan, and yes also Italy.

To some people -- everything bad is due to free market capitalism. To others -- everything bad is due to religion. I don't think the worlds problems are one dimensional.

In our recent past(anthropologically) , work was grueling, dangerous, and often deadly. Women were dominated, often owned by men, and were scarce due to their higher death rate. The advent of law in our societies, has afforded us a way of pursing equal rights for all people regardless of their "might". We've slowly moved women to their rightful place as equal human beings and not our treasures.

Traditionally, our cultures grew around women tending household and children, while men dealt with the things outside of the household. Times have changed, and most Western governments now officially endeavor to assure women equal opportunities. As I said above, male attitudes regarding women are slow to change -- especially amongst traditionalists. These are the men who desire their wife to be the replacement for the mother who waited on them hand and foot, who washed their dishes and laundry, and selflessly served him and his needs.

Are these traditionalists also religious? I think there may be a correlation, and certainly there are a subset of complementarians across various religions and sects, but certainly you need not be religious to have the traditionalist view. On the other hand, there are deeply religious cultures who have implemented gender equality. How would you explain the measured gender equality of the Philippines, or Ireland? The surveys I've seen indicate their religious beliefs are very strongly held, yet they are vying with the Scandinavian countries in equality of pay and position.

Considering your two pretty wildly different examples of Afghanistan and Italy; Why couldn't I correlate the equality of women to the education level of all people within the country?

According to OECD - Better Life Index, "In Italy, 54% of adults aged 25-64 have earned the equivalent of a high-school degree, much less than the OECD average of 74%." Doesn't it make more sense that the less educated one is the more one would cling to tribal traditions? Without a decent high-school level education (or at least travel) wouldn't you be inclined to perpetuate the only things you'd ever known? I would think an isolated Pashto child would grow up to emulate the adults in their village.

As for the free market, you need not look to far to see how far things have changed in the last 50 years. Even in the last decade. Consider Ursula M. Burns, and where the world was in the 1970's. There is still the need for vigilance lest we backslide.

But, I really think this problem with domestic violence has more to do with educating boys on what it means to grow into a man. It is about character. It's not about pushing people around (incl. women), or the size of your monster truck, or your ability to carouse(hang) with the guys.

Some factors to consider in our redefining masculinity in our time;

• How have school environments, and curriculum changed? Do they align with the developmental differences in boys? I'd suggest that we've deemphasized large motor activities in favor of more academics. Boys and girls are different, and their differences need to be recognized and embraced.
• In response to the "hyperactivity" of these boys in an increasingly academic setting, we've seen an epidemic of reported ADD/ADHD cases, which is then medicated. In a way, we are also telling more and more boys that there is something wrong with them.
• How has our changing (less agrarian) more urbanized environment changed the role of boys at home? What do they do there? How much time do they spend doing useful chores or playing (outside) as opposed to watching TV/video games?
• Finally, the usual suspect of the stereotypes of traditional gender roles in popular media. Where do boys learn about the manhood? Where are they misled or taught about gender roles?

[Taem]

I agree with most everything your saying, but I do have a few knits.

<snip> The fact is, gender inequality is a social development that is an intrinsic process within ANY class antagonist system - whether it is slavery, feudalism, or capitalism. <snip> Women have overcome many barriers, but that isn't because capitalism is a better system than previous systems or because it improves over time (it really doesn't), but because women formed political feminist movements and struggles and fought for these gains.

You inadvertently hit the nail on the head there! It's not a class issue, but the struggle. Both men and women like control, but men in-particular like to quarrel; I'd say it's in our very nature most likely due to our Testosterone. So for women to get to the top, they not only have to just fight against "the system", but their male contemporaries and husbands as well, and if most women are anything like the women I know best (my wife, my mother, my grandmother, and my wife's mother), then they don't really want to fight, but would rather placate the situation with peace. However, because men are always willing to fight tit for tat, it really does become the woman's role to be subservient unless they are willing to stand up for their freedoms; I still can't fathom for the life of me why any woman would want Romney's agenda [and his supporters] to win. I can only guess a large portion of women like being in the subservient role because that's what they've been taught in Sunday school. To bad. Even in a classless society, unless more and more women take up a masculine role, I don't expect much will change. Already in America, women have filled many male roles and many things have in fact changed, but to become fully realized, for full equality, women will have to be just as aggressive as men for men to respect them on equal ground, and that's a fact. Oh, and religions need to undergo a drastic de-womanizing and anti-sexist rewriting overhaul.

The way the inequality between the sexes is administered has changed over time, yes, but it still undoubtedly exists. Capitalism is no exception to this rule - it is a class antagonist society. There is always the dominant class and there are the so-called "others" - for race it is whites and everyone else,

I assume you mean in this day and age, because "culture" wars come and go; the Roman Empire was in power for over 400 years (300 more than our great nation) and controlled by what you might call the Mediterranean race, which is not Caucasian, btw. Every culture has it's moment in the sun; eventually even America's will set, but hopefully we can outlast the Roman empire. But back on track, I'd say that your perspective is skewed because of where you live: in Mexico, the richest people are Hispanic. In China, the richest people are Chinese. Go figure... Again picking on China, I'm pretty sure they could care less about Caucasian people trying to be leaders in their society - because that won't happen - and furthermore, scoff at the notion of countries with Caucasian leaders holding Capitalist rule when they have these countries by the balls in terms of how much debt these other countries owe China. No, I think it's more where you live. Maybe you were thinking smaller, like racism in a community or state. I suppose a bit of that can be found all over the world, in every culture no matter what your nationality, so no need to prop up Caucasians unnecessarily.

[LochnarITB]

but I do have a few knits.

I do too, but I actually prefer wovens. (I know it's nit-picking but it was low hanging fruit and I had to grab it. )

[FireIceTalon]

Well comrade Team, I wish I could have the same confidence in the system as you do, for things to change. Unfortunately, I cannot. We both want things to be better, but I think you are looking at things cosmetically, and not in the big picture. Women HAVE been more aggressive, and in some ways it has helped such as the First Wave feminist movement as well as Second Wave. Much of the issues from the latter are still issues confronting women today, and let's face it, women in most societies are still very subservient to men, socially, economically, and politically. They are treated as less than humans in many Middle Eastern nation states (religious dogma), and even in places where they have made great progress, there is still a substantial inequality between men and women. After 300+ years of capitalism in industrialized nations, and continued inequality, I am not sure how much more history we need to demonstrate that this system needs to be tossed. And whenever capitalism goes into crisis, as it recently has, women are often one of the demographics who suffer hardest. Them simply being more "aggressive" and thinking that will fix things is a gross oversimplification of the problem, and thus it cannot be a ultimate solution, because it doesn't take into account objective systematic processes.

As for your the nations you mentioned, those are very homogenous examples, so it doesn't really let whites off the hook. Yes, there is class conflict in those nations, but because they are very homogenous, there isn't a very strong element of racism in them compared to America, because there doesn't need to be. Whites in a multi-cultural/racial society have continuously used the concept of biological racism ("the superior race, and the inferior race") to justify and protect their privileged status, and this ideology was formed along with the development of American capitalism. I recently wrote a paper on this very topic in fact, I can PM it to you if you like.

[DeeBye]

300+ years of capitalism in industrialized nations

lol

[eppie]

I want to honestly know, because perhaps things are indeed different there.

Yes perhaps they are.

You should read up a bit on social issues in Holland and scandinavia.
I am at the moment 50% on parental leave, while my wife is on 50% leave while working 60 %.
We can share our leave equally......we even get a bonus when we really share it 50/50.
My neighboor was also on parental leave and while she was on leave she got a promotion.

Our sons daycare has an extensive gender equality program, where boys are supported when they want to do girls things and the other way around.

What did you think when you read my posts critizizing e.g. the US or the south of europe? That I was some racist bigot? No, we really do things different here.

[kandrathe]

My neighbor was also on parental leave and while she was on leave she got a promotion.

::boggle:: Maybe if you were *really* progressive you'd extend that into retirement as well. Perhaps then, we could all reach our corporate ladder goals, even if it might be from the death bed.

But, seriously. She likely deserved it. Here, we'd award that type of thing before if possible, or after if necessary. It is hard to coordinate staff and duty changes when someone is not available.

[FireIceTalon]

I want to honestly know, because perhaps things are indeed different there.

Yes perhaps they are.

You should read up a bit on social issues in Holland and scandinavia.
I am at the moment 50% on parental leave, while my wife is on 50% leave while working 60 %.
We can share our leave equally......we even get a bonus when we really share it 50/50.
My neighboor was also on parental leave and while she was on leave she got a promotion.

Our sons daycare has an extensive gender equality program, where boys are supported when they want to do girls things and the other way around.

What did you think when you read my posts critizizing e.g. the US or the south of europe? That I was some racist bigot? No, we really do things different here.

Glad things are so peachy for women in your neck of the woods. But we still have the issue of the other 98% of the globe.

And again, economics is far from being the only way in which women haven't achieved equality in many societies today. Even in Holland, which is still a class society no matter how large and generous of a 'welfare state' you guys have, I am willing to bet that working class women are worse off than men in the same class, and that there are segments of the population in ALL classes where women are still objectified. It may not be as bad as in America, and certainly not compared to ultra-reactionary states like Iran, but it is nevertheless there, I am sure. Even in the most democratic nations, chauvinism and patriarchy exist at some level and to some degree.

Marxists do not want to minimize inequality between men and women. We want it gone ENTIRELY (same with racial inequality). If I was ok with it existing at all, I would be a social democrat, and call it a day.

[DeeBye]

We can share our leave equally......we even get a bonus when we really share it 50/50.

In Canada we get a year's worth of parental leave too, and it can be split between father and mother however we decide. We don't get a bonus for sharing it equally though. That sounds like an amazing thing.

[eppie]

We can share our leave equally......we even get a bonus when we really share it 50/50.

In Canada we get a year's worth of parental leave too, and it can be split between father and mother however we decide. We don't get a bonus for sharing it equally though. That sounds like an amazing thing.

I personally find some things in Sweden a bit over the top.
Men and women are different, an for example the first 6 months it is probably better that the mother stays with the child.....basic biology.