Author: Ophelia Benson

  • Feminism at the Saudi Conference

    Okay this is a joke.

    Clerics need to “restore the dignity of women,” Juan Jose Tamayo, director of theology at Madrid’s Juan Carlos III university, told a roundtable on Thursday, July 17…”Women have been forgotten and marginalized in religions,” Tamayo said as reported by the AFP news agency. “They are organized hierarchically and patriarchically, excluding women in all fields of knowledge and religious matters.”

    Yes indeed – and Juan José Tamayo is urging the Vatican to reverse its position on women in the church and allow them to become priests and bishops and popes, is he? He’s urging Muslim clerics to do the same? I don’t know, maybe he is, but since this conference was organized by the World Muslim League, it seems unlikely.

    Ahmad Ibn Saifuddin, a Saudi professor of theology, agreed that women’s role had been misunderstood and that it was time to re-examine the issue. “Eve was born from Adam, so women and men are the same,” he said.

    Um…no. Eve was born from Adam, so women are inferior to men – that’s how that goes. Jeez, you’d think a Saudi professor of theology would know that. Don’t the Saudis teach their professors of theology anything any more?

  • Saudi ‘Interfaith Forum’ Seen as Joke by Some

    Women, for instance, since no women were present.

  • Saudis Threw Such a Lovely Conference

    Mind you, Saudi Arabia bans all non-Islamic religious practices, but it’s terrifically tolerant.

  • Lovely, Lovely Conference

    Critics said the Saudis were the last people who should host a meeting on religious dialogue. But – uh.

  • Theologians Tell Clerics to Respect Women

    Women are not holding their breath.

  • Saudi Conference Ends on Sour Note

    Some participants irritated by late changes to draft statement without consent of all members.

  • Three decades of incitement against women

    The Egyptian Centre for Women’s Rights did a study on sexual harassment.

    Sexual harassment of women in Egypt is on the increase and observing Islamic dress code is no deterrent, according to a survey published this week…ECWR head Nihad Abu El-Qoumsan said that even veiled women who were victims of harassment blamed themselves. Western women who took part in the study demonstrated a strong belief in their entitlement to personal safety and freedom of movement, she says, but this was totally absent among Egyptian respondents. No-one spoke about freedom of choice, freedom of movement or the right to legal protection. No-one showed any awareness that the harasser was a criminal, regardless of what clothes the victim was wearing.

    So…’Western’ women believe strongly that they ought to be able to walk around outside without being pestered by men, and Egyptian women don’t believe that. Well I guess I’m one of the first kind then, because I certainly believe I ought to be able to walk around outside with no pestering or opposition or impertinent interruption of any kind. I think I was almost born with that belief. I’m serious – I had a habit of bolting when I was a child. I did it once when I was about three – we lived in the country and one evening I was playing innocently outside among the apple trees and then simply turned that into a long walk up Bedensbrook Road and along the Great Road. I was brought home by a stranger, which must have been exciting for everyone. I did it again when I was about five, we lived in town then and were walking up Mercer Street and I just turned around and rushed off for a more private walk of my own. I’ve been like that ever since. The idea that women are in some way public property, subject to interference from strangers, as soon as they go outside, has always been anathema to me. We’re not children, we’re not broken, we’re not feeble in our intellects, we’re not ill, we’re not weak, we’re not damage, we don’t need help or supervision or attention or moral instruction, and we don’t need men just helping themselves to us. Women of Egypt: tell them all to piss off.

    After Noha’s story was published in the Badeel daily, editor-in-chief Muhammad El Sayyed Said wrote that the behaviour of the crowd was characteristic of oppressed societies, where the majority identified with the oppressor. He blamed the increase in sexual harassment on what he said were “three decades of incitement against women” from the pulpits of some of Egypt’s mosques. “This verbal incitement is based on the extremely sordid and impudent allegation that our women are not modestly dressed. This was, and still is, a flagrant lie, used to justify violence against women in the name of religion.”

    Women of Egypt: push back.

  • Sexual Harassment of Women in Egypt

    No one spoke about freedom of choice, freedom of movement or the right to legal protection.

  • 46% of Egyptian Women Harassed Daily

    83% of Egyptian women and 98% of foreign women said they had been harassed at some point.

  • Two Thirds of Egyptian Men Harass Women

    Egyptian and foreign women frequently complain of persistent sexual harassment on Egyptian streets.

  • Church Has Faith in People’s Ability to Avoid HIV

    Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier said he had long been opposed to the use of condoms to prevent HIV.

  • Church Cancels Gun-giveaway for Teenagers

    Windsor Hills Baptist had planned to give away a semiautomatic assault rifle, but shot itself in foot instead.

  • A correspondence

    I got a surprise email from a stranger yesterday. It read, in its entirety, so:

    How appropriate that a smug, shitty, rightwing publication like “Butterflies and Wheels” shares the name of a sentence in a book that is key to the plot of an idiotic movie like “Shattered”. Both the ‘zine and the movie are worthless.

    No greeting or signature or anything stuffy like that, just that rather random observation. It made me laugh a good deal, I must say. I also forwarded it to Jeremy, knowing it would cause him to grin sharkishly with delight. He’s always wanted abusive mail about B&W. In fact it’s really very sad: he thought there would be abusive email, he thought it would pour in and keep on pouring, he thought B&W would attract hostility and contempt as soon as anyone noticed it. He was looking forward to it. A month or so before he started creating B&W ex nihilo he had a nice little exchange about something at TPM Online with some guy in Prague, full of rough and tumble and raillery; he told me that soon I would be luxuriating in that sort of thing too. But…that was six years ago, and it never really happened. There haven’t been any really furious emails. Some mild dissents and criticisms, yes, but nothing like what Jeremy was expecting. Six years of waiting – so you can imagine how pleased I was to be able to forward him a genuine example at last.

    Jeremy asked if he could reply, and I (being a byword for generosity, and besides I hadn’t been planning to reply) said sure. You’ll be wondering who sent the abrupt little note. It was the Unrepentant Marxist himself, Louis Proyect. Jeremy’s affable reply went as follows:

    Dear Louis

    It’s always lovely to receive fan mail from sophisticated and erudite readers such as yourself.

    I’ve seen it said many times of you that you should stick to film reviewing. But I say no, Louis, no! I can see a role for you after the revolution – don’t worry, it’s just around the corner! – as a kind of ambassador of goodwill; a communist love machine, if you like, fostering a common humanity wherever you go, bringing joy to the masses, that sort of thing.

    I know what you’re thinking. Nobody takes you seriously, right (except maybe that strange fella with the odd surname at Lenin’s Tomb – though come to think of it that might be you)? Don’t despair, I’m sure that will change! A bit of collective ownership, and you’ll be right up there in the pantheon of communist greats: Trofim Lysenko, Nadia Comaneci, Falco… and Louis Proyect.

    Hey, it’s even possible that someday somebody will read your blog. Okay maybe that’s pushing it, but hope, Louis, hope!

    Anyway, my friend – comrade even – please keep in touch; it has been a joy.

    Love

    Jerry (fraternal, of course – though, if I may say so, you look damned sexy in that picture of yours – xxx)

    The unrepentant one replied, as elegantly as before:

    Neocon scumbag, your “philosophical” credentials are one rung beneath those of Dennis Miller and Michelle Malkin. I once told Alan Sokal that there are a lot of creepy, crawly things drawn to his writings, you included.

    Impressive, isn’t it. Substantive; well-reasoned; cogent; rigorous but civil; erudite. How could either of us not be persuaded? Jeremy admitted defeat:

    Dear Louis, You Old Goat

    You seem troubled, my friend. This is not good!

    Has your life not turned out as you hoped? I imagine as you rage against the dying of the light that you look back and wonder whether you should have taken an alternative course. Perhaps you wish that you’d chosen charkhas rather than dialectics, Himalayan goat-herding rather than… what is it you do exactly?

    But I say again, Louis, despair not! There’s still time. There are projects to complete. Indigenous peoples to patronize. Small archives to create. Your life has meaning, Louis, you must believe it. Do not fear the existential void, my friend, for you are… <--- dramatic pause - an unrepentant Marxist! This is lovely, isn’t it – that we get to talk like this. I’ve lunched with Alan (Sokal) a couple of times. He never mentioned you. Odd that… Love Jerry, xxx

    The UM shot back:

    How are you spending the riches accumulated from sales of “Little Book of Big Ideas”, by the way?

    Amazon.com Sales Rank: #756,628 in Books

    I love how you are obsessed with how many people read or don’t read my blog. This kind of Norman Podhoretz desire to “make it” is an odd obsession of snot-nosed ambitious neocons like yourself. Too bad you don’t have Podhoretz’s dubious talents otherwise you too might get invited to pontificate like your hero Hitchens.

    And there the matter will rest, because Jeremy is content to let him have the last word. But it’s interesting that people feel free to do this kind of thing, and it’s also interesting when people on the left, who presumably think they are working for a better world with more peace and harmony and solidarity, think the road to utopia is paved with vituperation. Proyect is very reminiscent of Bill Donohue of the ‘Catholic League,’ a guy so full of Christian compassion and mercy and agape that he tries hard to get students expelled and professors fired or perhaps kicked out of Minnesota, for trivial and invalid reasons. That’s why we thought the exchange worth publishing. It’s interesting that supposedly idealistic types give themselves permission to engage in various kinds of unprovoked bullying.

    (I should add that I don’t feel the smallest compunction about publishing Proyect’s emails, because I never requested them.)

  • Mandela Turns 90

    Calls for the rich to do more for the poor.

  • UK Govt to Fund Board of Islamic Theologians

    Sheikh Mogra said ‘This board has to be something owned by us, driven by us but supported by government.’

  • Midwives Train as Surgeons in Mozambique

    Is on track to achieve UN Millennium Development goal to reduce maternal death rate by 75% by 2015

  • Without the Data, There’s Only Someone Saying

    Journalists don’t always understand what it means for there to be evidence for an assertion.

  • Mo Practices Transubstantiation

    Jesus asks for Celine Dion.

  • This Is An Annoyance-Free Zone (but tacky souvenirs welcome)

    It’s probably too much to hope the Parliament of New South Wales is hanging its head after a righteous scolding by the Federal Court of Australia[1]. After all, the government was bold enough to outlaw “annoying” the Catholic throngs descending on Sydney for a five-day Pope-a-Rama. Attempting to shame the Catholic Church is likewise futile; given its irony-free staging of the world’s biggest adolescent/clergy mixer, we must presume it innocent of that emotion.

    But let’s try anyway.

    Previously, on “World Youth Day. . .”

    The Vatican picked Sydney for its latest “pilgrimage of faith, where young people from diverse backgrounds meet and experience the love of God.” Events from July 15-20, 2008, will include spiritual favorites: multiple catechisms, on-site confession, the requisite snuff Passion Play; as well as more mundane diversions: “original high energy Christian praise” (read: Christian Rock on a lawn), coffee klatches, and the procession of the Popemobile. Like any responsible government preparing for an influx of thousands, the NSW Parliament enacted regulations to keep things tidy — ordinary matters such as street closures, police presence, and the like.

    But in its zeal to have the Best World Youth Day Ever, Parliament also enacted the extraordinary:

    7 Control of conduct within World Youth Day declared areas

    (1) An authorised person may direct a person within a World Youth
    Day declared area to cease engaging in conduct that:
    (a) is a risk to the safety of the person or others, or
    (b) causes annoyance or inconvenience to participants in a
    World Youth Day event. . .

    Reasonable people dedicated to the (sacred?) principle of free speech were shocked. Would they be arrested for noting that the Pope’s hat didn’t match his shoes? Would a whispered warning during mass — “Psst! Father – your purse is on fire!” — land one in the clink? And while we’re on fashion, could the police charge Amber Pike and Rachel Evans with criminal inconvenience for wearing T-shirts that forced the faithful to confront the Catholic Church’s vile obstruction of birth control and safe sex measures? After all, at least one of the faithful would surely find “The Pope is Wrong. Put on a Condom,” vexing.

    And now, the exciting conclusion. . . .

    As the NoToPope Coalition, Pike and Evans challenged provisions of the regulations that barred “caus[ing] annoyance or inconvenience to participants in a World Youth Day event,”[2] and that barred the sale or distribution (this is key) of items and merchandise. The Court agreed that annoying people, however annoying that might be, was protected speech. But it said the city could regulate the sale and distribution of articles and merchandise throughout the event. Apparently, Pike and Evans were concerned they wouldn’t be allowed to distribute stickers, badges, leaflets, and condoms with slogans including:

    • • I know condoms save lives – Is that annoying?
    • • I am not a Catholic! – Is that annoying?
    • • I know Gays are great – Is that annoying?
    • • I had premarital sex! Is that annoying?
    • • I don’t believe Mary was a virgin! Is that annoying?
    • • I don’t believe the Pope is infallible! Is that annoying?
    • • I have a condom on me! Is that annoying?
    • • I am gay! Is that annoying?

    Who could blame Pike and Evans for finding it unlikely that their items would pass muster? The WYD Regulation of 2008 required vendors to submit an application, a fee, and a sample of the items to the state seven days before distributing or selling “prescribed articles.”[3] So they challenged that provision of the law. And the court rejected that challenge.

    But wait — there’s a shock twist ending!

    The Court ruled that the state could limit the distribution (not just the sale) of “prescribed articles,” during WYD, but Pike and Evans needn’t worry, because the stuff they wanted to give out didn’t constitute stuff the state would prohibit. Not to be accused of parsimonious reasoning, the court teased out the subtle differences among various dry goods:

    In our view none of the classes of prescribed articles would include condoms . . .Similarly, symbolic coat-hangers such as the applicants propose to distribute do not fall within any of the classes prescribed. We are also of the opinion that leaflets and flyers which the applicants intend to distribute do not fall within any class of prescribed article. The applicants submitted that they might be regarded as “stationery” and therefore come within category (h). We do not accept this submission. Paper on which the leaflets and flyers are printed may have been “stationery”, but once printed it does not fall within that category. The position is more complex in relation to stickers and button badges [?], both of which are specifically mentioned as examples of “giftware”. Interestingly, the term “giftware” is not defined in either the Oxford English Dictionary or the Macquarie Dictionary. . .

    Enough of that.

    And what do we find on the approved list of merchandise and “prescribed articles” for sale during World Youth Day? A mercantile burlesque:

    Shoppers will be able to buy World Youth Day (WYD) souvenirs such as special WYD rosary beads, Pope Benedict XVI baseball caps, rugby jerseys and even teaspoons featuring a photograph of the pontiff. Sydney Archbishop Cardinal George Pell opened one of at least four merchandise stores to be erected in Sydney for the six-day WYDay event.[4]

    No one familiar with the aesthetics of the Catholic Church would be surprised, of course. The Pope has ever been Catholicism’s Liberace, bearing gold scepters and precious accessories in the worlds’ most expensive drag pageant. But one would think the New South Wales clergy might throw a scrap to those questioning this mash-up of the sacred and the profane (not to mention tawdry). No:

    “There’s nothing immoral with a little commercialism,” Cardinal Pell told reporters. “Our way of life is built on commercialism, on trade, on industry, on finance and people have got a right to make a living out of doing a good thing, which is spreading Christ’s message in a modern way.”

    God — deliver us from your merchandisers.

    Notes

    (1)The Federal Court of Australia’s judgment in Evans v. State of New South Wales

    (2) The World Youth Day Regulation of 2008

    (3) The NSW government’s application to sell or distribute merchandise.

    (4). “There’s nothing immoral with a little commercialism,” Cardinal Pell told reporters

  • Saudi King ‘Appeals for Tolerance’!

    ‘Has called on followers of the world’s main religions to turn away from extremism’! Yes, really.