Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News > Global war on women
Reload this Page Reply to Thread
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Thread: Global war on women Reply to Thread
Title:
Message
Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
Oct 1st, 2005 08:04 PM
kahljorn Probably the crazed lust(that has built up over years, possibly) that brought them to raping someone in the first place? I don't know.
Oct 1st, 2005 07:49 PM
AngPur
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Papa Goat
My professor in a class called biopolitics argued that rape was about sex not violence. :O
Just stabbing in the dark here, but who says it can't be about both?
Oct 1st, 2005 06:01 PM
Chojin Yeah, really, it's much easier to cave someone's head in than to rape them.
Oct 1st, 2005 03:06 PM
Big Papa Goat My professor in a class called biopolitics argued that rape was about sex not violence. :O
Oct 1st, 2005 02:03 PM
KevinTheOmnivore
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLICK9
Actually, it was a gen ed. I'm a classical piano major. MUCH more credible, I know.
I wish i could play the piano.

It's not that idon't think there's some semblance of a valid point to what you're saying, I'd imagine men do feel intimidated by powerful women. However the general comparison to say the Middle East sounds like something only a college professor could cook up.
Oct 1st, 2005 12:52 PM
kellychaos
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLICK9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emu
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLICK9
In my Gender and Social Change class they taught us that more women are raped in "liberated, developed" countries than "traditional" ones where women still held subservient roles. I can't find any statistics to either back this up or disprove it, though.
If it is true, that's probably only because women in developed countries are more likely to report having been raped, not that they're actually raped more often.
They justified it by explaining that the threat of women having power of men drives men to rape women, so the men can exert their dominance. In countries where women have set roles they don't threaten the positions of men.
I call bullshit! In a society of women of high self-esteem, rape will be reported. Elsewhise, it will not. It's just that simple and I don't care what STATISTICS claim. :whatever
Oct 1st, 2005 12:25 PM
CLICK9 at both

Actually, it was a gen ed. I'm a classical piano major. MUCH more credible, I know.
Sep 30th, 2005 06:38 PM
ItalianStereotype
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLICK9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emu
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLICK9
In my Gender and Social Change class they taught us that more women are raped in "liberated, developed" countries than "traditional" ones where women still held subservient roles. I can't find any statistics to either back this up or disprove it, though.
If it is true, that's probably only because women in developed countries are more likely to report having been raped, not that they're actually raped more often.
They justified it by explaining that the threat of women having power of men drives men to rape women, so the men can exert their dominance. In countries where women have set roles they don't threaten the positions of men.
that reminds me of the college history class I took a few years back (that's the history of my college, not a history class in college). we had a professor who would go on rants about how all the guys in the room had an 85% chance of becoming rapists and made us write a paper on why the world would be better if men were subordinate to women.
Sep 30th, 2005 06:33 PM
KevinTheOmnivore Change your major.
Sep 30th, 2005 06:27 PM
CLICK9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emu
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLICK9
In my Gender and Social Change class they taught us that more women are raped in "liberated, developed" countries than "traditional" ones where women still held subservient roles. I can't find any statistics to either back this up or disprove it, though.
If it is true, that's probably only because women in developed countries are more likely to report having been raped, not that they're actually raped more often.
They justified it by explaining that the threat of women having power of men drives men to rape women, so the men can exert their dominance. In countries where women have set roles they don't threaten the positions of men.
Sep 29th, 2005 04:52 PM
kahljorn You know what I always found funny? Before the woman's movement thing, it was men who worked and brought home the money. Back then one man could support a family and a wife and whatever else.
Now a days, the man and the wife have to work to support just themselves, none the less a family. I think the government gave women rights on purpose, they say we "Doubled our economy" but the way I see it is that hasn't happened at all, it's gotten much much worse sense then. "We'll start letting women have rights so they can work, then not pay the men as much.. yesh.. yesh.."
Sep 29th, 2005 10:52 AM
Emu
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLICK9
In my Gender and Social Change class they taught us that more women are raped in "liberated, developed" countries than "traditional" ones where women still held subservient roles. I can't find any statistics to either back this up or disprove it, though.
If it is true, that's probably only because women in developed countries are more likely to report having been raped, not that they're actually raped more often.
Sep 29th, 2005 10:43 AM
Chojin It's the filter, max.
Sep 29th, 2005 09:51 AM
mburbank Somebody, I say, somebody editted my post. John Lennon never said no such thing.
Sep 28th, 2005 06:34 PM
kahljorn You never know, one of two things could happen. The man c ould decide she's useless, or get pissed off and have the criminal tracked down and beheaded.
Sep 28th, 2005 05:36 PM
kellychaos
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLICK9
In my Gender and Social Change class they taught us that more women are raped in "liberated, developed" countries than "traditional" ones where women still held subservient roles. I can't find any statistics to either back this up or disprove it, though.
Yeah, and we all know that those subservient women are reporting the rapes in those countries and being taken seriously.
Sep 28th, 2005 05:31 PM
Ant10708 I also doubt rape victims are treated like victims in Saudia Arabia so most stay quiet.
Sep 28th, 2005 05:26 PM
KevinTheOmnivore Yeah, I hear the data collectors on that sort of stuff in Saudi Arabia have fallen behind in their work.
Sep 28th, 2005 05:24 PM
CLICK9 In my Gender and Social Change class they taught us that more women are raped in "liberated, developed" countries than "traditional" ones where women still held subservient roles. I can't find any statistics to either back this up or disprove it, though.
Sep 27th, 2005 01:37 PM
mburbank Ribbing. Rib. Adams Rib.


John said it best. "Woman is the ****** of the world".
Sep 27th, 2005 12:58 PM
KevinTheOmnivore I know, but I'm really not being dealt into the women=amusment thing.
Sep 27th, 2005 12:53 PM
mburbank He was just ribbing you.
Sep 27th, 2005 11:36 AM
KevinTheOmnivore Then why am I not amused?
Sep 27th, 2005 11:35 AM
ziggytrix women were created by our lord Jesus Christ strictly for our amusement
Sep 27th, 2005 11:26 AM
KevinTheOmnivore
Global war on women
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion...men-edit_x.htm

Global war on women
By Ralph Peters

The greatest social revolution in history is underway all around us: The emancipation of women. Advanced in our own society, elsewhere the battle for women's rights lies at the heart of colossal struggles over the future of great religions and civilizations.
The Washington establishment would shrink from any such claim, but the Global War on Terror is a fight over the social, economic and cultural roles of women. The core issues for the terrorists are the interpretation of God's will and the continued oppression of women. Nothing so threatens Islamic extremists as the freedom Western women enjoy.

Equal partners

The sudden transition of women from men's property to men's partners in our own country unleashed dazzling creative energies. In the historical blink of an eye, we doubled our effective human capital — and made our society immeasurably more humane. Our half-century of stunning economic growth has many roots, but none goes deeper than the expansion of opportunities for women.

But such unprecedented freedom threatens traditional societies. Behavior patterns that prevailed for millennia are suddenly in doubt. Relationships that granted males the power of life and death over female relatives have disappeared from successful cultures. Defensively, the failing cultures left behind cling harder than ever to the old ways amid the tumult of global change.

The true symbols of the War on Terror are the Islamic veil and the two-piece woman's business suit.

The math is basic. No civilization that excludes half its population from full participation in society and the economy can compete with the United States and its key allies. Yet Middle Eastern societies, especially, have dug in their heels to resist change. Some, such as Turkey, Pakistan and Iran, have tumbled backward.

Islamist terrorists have formed the last, great boy's club, meeting in caves and warning girls to stay out — or, in the case of the 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta, demanding that women be kept from his grave to avoid polluting it. Their vision offers women fewer rights by far than those enjoyed by the wives of the prophet Mohammed. They are women-hating sadists for whom faith is an excuse. Their fears are primal.

The good news is that the forces of oppression can make plenty of tactical mischief but can't achieve strategic success. No society in which women are veiled and sequestered can achieve the dynamism and force of one in which women are senators, judges, CEOs, doctors and military pilots. Freedom will win, if not swiftly.

The bad news is that this is a truly global struggle involving not only Islamist thugs terrified by female sexuality, but also reactionary forces in our own society. The Global War Against Women is still being waged on the home front, too.

Without questioning the integrity of those who believe that life begins at conception, the struggle to overturn Roe v. Wade can also be viewed as an attempt to turn back the clock on women's freedom. Opposing such a reversal isn't a matter of thinking abortion admirable, but of accepting the magnificent revolutionary principle that no man has a right to tell any woman what she can or cannot do with her body.

Attempts to interfere with another citizen's liberty are worthy of Osama bin Laden, not of Americans.

Likewise, the ideologically driven reluctance of the Food and Drug Administration to approve the "morning-after pill" for general use is a vestige of patriarchal tyranny that would please Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al-Qaeda's leader in Iraq. Longing to restore the tyrannical pattern that governed social relations down the ages, our extremists demand that women's options be restricted, that their bodies be treated as chattels of the state.

Women deny rights

Nor should we be surprised that women stand among those who would deny rights to other women. Their counterparts are the African crones who demand that young girls undergo genital mutilation just as they did, or the women of the Middle East who insist that wearing a chador protects them. They are the champions of the small morality of rules over the greater morality of freedom.

The greatest moral advance has been the attainment of basic human rights by women. It's also the most threatening development to those daunted by change, who cling to a mythologized past and fear the future — whether in a Saudi-funded madrassa or protesting outside a U.S. Planned Parenthood clinic. Around the world, troubled souls continue to insist that women are the source of sin and must be kept in line for their own good. Theirs is a prescription for suffering, dreariness and stagnation.

In traveling the globe, I've witnessed far more instances of the mistreatment of women than I care to recall, but the one that always leaps to mind is local and superficially benign: In the southern heat of a Washington summer, it's common to see a male Middle Eastern tourist comfortably dressed in a polo shirt and shorts trailed by a staggering woman wrapped from head to toe in flapping black robes, eyes peering out through a mask. It offends me to meet that image in my country — or anywhere.

We do not think of our troops abroad as fighting for women's rights. But they are. This is the titanic struggle of our time, the liberation of fully half of humanity. Islamist terror is only one aspect of it. But we can be certain of two things: In the end, freedom will win. And no society that torments women will succeed in the 21st century.

Ralph Peters is the author of New Glory, Expanding America's Global Supremacy, and a member of USA TODAY's board of contributors.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:02 PM.

I-Mockery.com - Archive - Top

© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.