Why don't American Feminists get more exercised by the atrocities against women that are still all too common in some Muslim states, India, Africa, Latin America and elsewhere? Could it be that they are more interested in their own domestic political success than they are in the welfare of the world's women?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 13, 2001

Answers

"Honor Killings"

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 13, 2001.

I don't know what you mean by "more exercised", Lars, but it seems that NOW [for instance] has a global section on their website. As far as trying to actually DO something about atrocities in other countries, international organizations [like Amnesty International] get very involved. A friend of mine volunteered with AI for a number of years. I guess one might call her a feminist, as she has taken an active role in women's issues all her adult life. She showed me the AI "book" of Human Rights violations and the U.S. had quite an extensive list.

My guess is that there's quite a bit of funding and networking going on throughout the world by various groups. It's not like one can live in Indiana and vote out an unfair law in Texas.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 14, 2001.

Ooops. Here's the link to the global stuff on the NOW site. The "Honor Killings" are mentioned on that site, but the story involves a Turkish woman who escaped Turkey and is trying to obtain asylum in the U.S. Since NOW is an American national organization, it makes sense that their efforts would be in encouraging the new administration to retain domestic violence as a reason for asylum. Efforts to change the laws in Turkey would be done by chapters of international organizations in Turkey.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 14, 2001.

Anita--

Glad to hear that American Feminists are addressing these issues. I don't closely follow the American Feminist activities but, from what I do see in the popular press, they are not consistent in their vocal outrage.

They have their American issues like glass-ceilings and milion-mom marches but IMO don't exclaim loud enough over the ancient barbarisms that persist elsewhere---female circumcision, slavery, honor kiliings, suttee, chadors and more.

Sure, NOW and friends can't actually do anything is these other countries. But thru their spokes-people here, they could militate much more vigorously than they do. They should be on the web, on TV, in print, in the UN, speaking-out vigorously and continuously.

I can't help but feel cynical about their priorities. As I view it, their highest priority is political power in the US. Sheesh they could not even bring themselves to criticize the harasser-in Chief, Clinton.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 14, 2001.

Lars: I don't follow the activities, either. In fact, I'd be hard- pressed to even DEFINE a "feminist" organization. It seems to me, though, that political power is the most important goal for ANY group that wants to change things in their own country.

If I may ask, what, exactly, did the Million Mom March have to do with feminism? I thought that one had to do with guns. Do you see Phyllis Schafly [is that how one spells her name?] as a feminist because SHE wants certain things for women and their families? Regarding Clinton's "activities", *I* would think that feminists would be more concerned with the bills he passed/vetoed that provided more rights for millions of women than his activities with a few consenting partners.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 14, 2001.

Maybe I have my terms wrong. Wasn't the "Million Mom March" an anti-gun event? If so, I'm sure that NOW was a supporter.

Is Schafly a woman's advocate? I would say she is a feminist but not a Feminist?

You actually don't see Clinton as an sexual harasser? I think he is a Neanderthal, albeit a charming one.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 14, 2001.

Lars, you are trying to impugn others for doing the same as yourself. Why is this the job of "American Feminists" and not yours?

If getting exercised is the correct moral position according to you, then you only have one choice: you should be leading by example and getting exercised yourself. Instead, you speak as if you care about these atrocities, but you don't act as if you care. That is the stance of the hypocrite.

-- Little Nipper (canis@minor.net), May 14, 2001.

LN, how do you know how I act? Besides, unlike NOW, I make no claims to speak for women.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 14, 2001.

The link that you provide Anita is fine as far as it goes. I just think that an organization that that advocates women's rights on a global scale (the link is from NOW's "Global" page) should spend proportionally more energy on these drastic issues than on abortion rights in the US.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 14, 2001.

Picture this, Lars...women from another country hold meetings in this country calling for all American women to keep themselves covered head to toe, or calling for all American women to stay at home and have as many babies as possible, or calling for all American girls to marry at 13 and never leave their husbands' homes again.

I doubt it would have much affect on our society.

-- helen (cc@d.ee), May 14, 2001.

"LN, how do you know how I act?"

I know only what you tell me, intentionally or unintentionally. What your post told me was that you were concerned about what "American Feminists" were doing or not doing. But there wasn't one word in your post that was the least bit exercised about the atrocities. That is an accurate description of all the actions I have seen from you so far.

"Besides, unlike NOW, I make no claims to speak for women."

First, I don't buy that NOW claims to speak for women. And in making that claim for NOW, you seem to be speaking for them. Ironic?

Second, as far as I am concerned NOW is purely irrelevant to the point I was making. Let me repeat, in case you missed it. If atrocities are being committed and you believe they merit getting exercised about, then JUST DO IT. Get exercised. That is the straightforward path. Instead, all I saw you do was start that fox then immediately go chasing after a hare, trying to blame American Feminists for some misdemeanor that is trivial compared to the crimes you started talking about and dropped.

You can disagree, but it looks to me like you were just using the victims of these atrocities to score points against NOW. And how would I know any differently unless you set me straight?

Instead, you come back and imply you are doing plenty to help these victims and I simply am unaware of all your efforts. May I suggest that you can simultaneously gain vast credit for yourself and put me back in my place by explicitly listing what you are doing for those victims. Such information would greatly bolster your position when you to criticize American Feminists for their presumed shortcomings in this area.

And you know what else? Even if you can prove that you are harboring 400 foreign women victims in your home and providing them with free medical care and all the ice cream they can eat, and you can prove that NOW has not lifted a finger to help the victims of these crimes, your accusation still wouldn't swing much weight with me, and I would still figure you dead wrong on this one. Because in my book the only fair way to judge NOW or American Feminists is by what they do, not what they don't do.

Sh*t! Imagine yourself in front of St. Peter and he pulls out your Book of Life and he starts bashing you because while you were caring for your sick parents, you failed to be sufficiently exercised about the innocent victims of torture in Sudan.

You try to tell St. Peter you were busy doing the best you could succoring your ill parents and he says, "It doesn't matter. Here in 1972, you publically expressed the opinion that torture was evil and you intended to do all you could to stop it. But you didn't do a f*cking thing about this Sudanese torture! Bad! Bad! Bad! Lars, you're going to hell for this."

I mean to say, Lars, I think your accusation in this thread was bogus and stupid, ungenerous and unchristian, wrongheaded and unbecoming. But that doesn't necessarily reflect on you as a person. We all make mistakes.

-- Little Nipper (canis@minor.net), May 14, 2001.

LN, thank you for your generosity.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 14, 2001.

Maybe I have my terms wrong. Wasn't the "Million Mom March" an anti-gun event? If so, I'm sure that NOW was a supporter.

As far as I can tell, the Million Mom March and NOW have nothing to do with one another. I couldn't even find a reference to the Million Mom March or vice versa. As for NOW being against guns, I was able to find only 17 articles that even contained the word "guns", five of which were about women in the military, two about WalMart's decision to sell guns but not certain contraceptives and ten about the ban on gun permits for those convicted of domestic violence. It seems the only people NOW wants to not have handguns are those who are likely to use them in an act of domestic violence.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 14, 2001.

If NOW advocates that women (who so desire) own firearms for self-protection, I stand corrected.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 14, 2001.

Advocating only one group of people not be allowed hand guns does not necessarily equate to advocating handguns for other groups of people. NOW seems silent on the issue except for the domestic violence angle. They don't seem to have a position on guns in general.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 14, 2001.

Lars: It looks to me like you want people to be enraged with the same things that enrage YOU. I'm reminded of the day when the grandmother of an infant posted on one of the fora soliciting a home. I remember that day, because that very same day a newborn infant girl was found in a dumpster very near to the town I call home. I remember posters saying things like, "Why aren't you enraged that someone would solicit parents through the internet?" I thought, "I CAN'T be enraged, as I've used up ALL my rage on someone who threw a newborn infant into a dumpster near my home. Maybe that newborn girl wouldn't have died had she been offered a home via the internet."

There are DEGREES to our rage, it seems, Lars. Mileage seems to vary based on distance from home and players involved.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 14, 2001.

Anita, as a woman aren't you enraged by the treatment of women by certain traditional societies? Don't you think NOW should take a world-wide leadership role in bringing light to these benighted places?

As Tip O'Neill said "all politics is local", but that is a cynical view for the idealistic among us.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 14, 2001.

Lars-

NOW stands for the National Organization for Women. Their focus is and always has been on the condition of women in the United States. Some organizations, like Amnesty International, are designed for an international focus, others, like NOW, are designed for a more narrow, national focus. That's not to say that national groups can't work in concert with international groups, and vice versa, but no group could possibly be all things to all people. This particular group clearly feels that they are most effective on the national, rather than international, scale. Like anyone else, however, you are free to either start your own organization to serve women world wide or to convince the leadership of NOW to change the focus of their entire organization.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 14, 2001.

NOW does have a "global" link on their Homepage. That is where Anita's link came from.

If NOW wants to identify primarily with American women, that is their choice. I think it's a wrong choice, given what's going on.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 14, 2001.

LOL Lars, what would you have American Feminists do? Send in the marines? Yes, they are VERY 'exercised' by the atrocities against ALL women and yes, they are interested in domestic political success. With that success comes the decision making power in government. Who knows, maybe one day, American Feminists WILL send in the marines!

Don't sell your American Feminist sisters short. Do some real research on the web. Find out just what women are doing. Find out about the national issues of feminism from equal pay to reproductive rights to domestic violence to enviromental and political concerns. See how many, many organizations are working together. Then go on to international feminist issues which include many of the worst atrocities against women. Everyone is working together to help bring about real change. When you've done this it will be very hard not to have respect for the women in this fight. You will have a difficult time taking seriously any 'religious' claim that things are as they should be.

One of the sites I visit everyday is the FEMINIST MAJORITY FOUNDATION. Once there I check up on the Global Feminist Daily News. Check out the GENDER APARTHEID page. (one would have to wonder why the marines have NOT been sent in.) The GLOBAL LINKS page is very interesting. Check it out. Look how women the world over are networking. Each organization has a piece of the whole and all are working together for change. Your American sisters have a responsibility to women the world over. Political success is VERY important.

Finally, take a look at the United Nations World Conference on Women. THEN do some research on how the VATICAN is actively fighting American feminists and feminists the world over.

I think it's great that you're asking questions.

:)

-- Debra (Thisis@it.com), May 14, 2001.

Corrected link -

United Nations Conference on Women

-- Debra (Thisis@it.com), May 14, 2001.

I hate when that happens -

From the Global Links page hit the Beijing links to the left for the United Nations World Conference on Women.

-- Debra (Thisis@it.com), May 14, 2001.

"you are free to either start your own organization to serve women world wide or to convince the leadership of NOW to change the focus of their entire organization."

I have done my level best to serve women with my one man campaign,but when I asked NOW to send me more they stingily replied NO,go figger ; )

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), May 14, 2001.

Anita, as a woman aren't you enraged by the treatment of women by certain traditional societies?

Yes, Lars, I am, as you might have noticed in another thread wherein I discussed the rape/abuse that still goes on right under our noses HERE. MY rage in such things pales in comparison to the folks who consider this "normal" behavior, just as YOUR rage about the treatment of women in other countries pales in comparison to the folks in THEIR homeland who consider this "normal" behavior. The atrocities of which you speak are ALSO occurring in THIS country at an alarming rate due to immigration.

I think what you're really asking, however, is WHAT [as a woman] I'm willing to do about all this. Right now, I'm pretty tied up locating a new Assisted Living facility for my #1 woman [my mom]. This whole experience could result in my being an advocate or ombudsmen for the elderly, as some of these places didn't like my coming unannounced, wouldn't allow me to talk to the other residents, etc. I visit the last place on the list tomorrow, but I had a great discussion with the administrator on the phone today, and we see eye-to-eye and I really enjoyed her.

I don't think I could do the rape/abuse hot-line work again. It's truly mind-warping to listen to what some American men see as "normal" behavior, and heart-breaking to think some women accept these fates.

As one person, Lars, I can only spread myself SO thin. My choice is to advocate in the country in which I live, and the state and the town if there's a need [which there ALWAYS is]. If I ever move to Turkey, I'll advocate there, as well [only if my advocacy is desired by parties who feel they can benefit from it.]

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 14, 2001.

Debra--

Thanks for the links. Here is one more--Afghan Women.

Anita-- I have a preference for local help too, starting with family and friends. I prefer directly helping someone I know, or an organization that I know. I serve on the Boards of two non-profits so I contribute to them. One is for Seniors. I don't trust sending a donation to a big charity in NYC or wherever.

I am helping someone look at Assisted Living options right now. A friend, not a Senior. Not much fun.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 14, 2001.