open Democracy News Analysis - 50.50 - Comments

Ian Bland on "Foreigners: victims or villains?- a political debate"

Ian Bland — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 00:37:55 +0100

Interesting comments but, as always, the liberal-humanist viewpoint is that man can be educated/conditioned out of aggression because we have now achieved a level of stability. This point of view is so facile I refuse to believe that it can be taken seriously. Science seeks forever to prolong useless lives, ergo the population grows, ever more reason for conflict for resources.

How is it right for everyone to have the right to live for ever and no-one to die? It will be a damn crowded world. Liberals do not seem to recognize that each ethnic group wants its space.

The policies which you advocate from you comfortable ivory towers will cause war and suffering on a scale never before seen. But you are serene in your beliefs as theorists: like Marx, your refutation will come many years after your deaths.

johanna bartley on "Marriage, motherhood and masculinity in the global economy"

johanna bartley — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 21:02:26 +0100

The times when marriages were arranged between members of the same class are over. Now we are free to marry whoever we wish without being seen as outcasts. Even if back then marriages were arranged, it seems that only couples that love each other need marriage counseling, the other just go by the rules they established.

Not logged in on "Fear and strange arithmetics: when powerful states confront powerless immigrants"

Not logged in — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 13:47:22 +0100

They say seeing is believing! With the paper "Fear and strange arithmetics: when powerful states confront powerless immigrants", Saskia Sassen is making an immense contribution to understanding what has become a major problem of our time. UN agencies and Green Peace are not unaware of it. The problem might be reasoned comparable and relative, beyond the textures of "powerful" states. The question is: how threatening is it even for the most "informed" and the "responsible" believer in the spirit of a global world? My other question is: can we say that a problem of this kind has something to do with the way we should define the global world through the needle-eye of international relations praxis and culture of comparison? This digression is not at all absurd, especially because, even though we have 'bilateral' and 'multilateral 'ways of finding most solutions to world problems, international relations praxis dimension as the apex and failures thereupon have caused observers to begin asking "whither it is drifting? Migrants are pawns in the process. It is partly a question of the moral integrity of what nations and our global world are doing across the spectrum of politics, economy, technology, peoples and the environment. We might premise these on the quality of governance or a conceptual dichotomy, such as "democracy" and or "non-democracy", still when all is said and done, we find "poverty" in the midst of "affluence" a moral problem. A case like Nigeria is shameful in this respect considering the belief that there should be more room to perform better! That having been said, immigrants are not safe. In and out they are being harassed, blackmailed, manipulated and, for example, denied academic vacancies in host countries and institutions. Many are even afraid in the age that using radiation to kill has become a pop! What you write and say is monitored putting the sense of freedom of speech and writing in certain environments out of line with the worldwide agitation for it. Simply said "security agents" and the "police", though useful in the society, are being wrongly used to target innocent law abiding citizens.

Lawrence Efana [Finland]

Axel Ztangi on "Fear and strange arithmetics: when powerful states confront powerless immigrants"

Axel Ztangi — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:54:36 +0100

Re: "... where one-third of workplaces [in the US] are below standards." Is there a reference?

In general I agree with the sentiments and conclusions of this essay.

-az

loulou on "Men and gender justice: old debate, new perspective "

loulou — Fri, 09 May 2008 01:09:28 +0100

I fear that in responding to an era of patriarchy, the (western) feminist movement has not looked actively for the changes needed on the other side of the rights/responsibilities coin.

However I think that it is understandable that in a struggle for equality, looking at the rights of "the other side" are overlooked. I don't think it's justified, but I think it's human nature.

Now the men's rights movement are fighting back, sometimes with exaggerated or simply biased studies, and equally with unbiased and accurate information that shows up some of the biases in feminist studies. They, too understandably are prone to looking at the injustice done to them as a priority over the past injustices done to women in the patriarchy.

The only way to get fair and just legal rights for both men and women is to understand what both sides are crying out for and with unbiased studies into the nature of the issues raised.

Complete unbias is rare in human beings, and so healthy debate and cooperation between women's and men's rights groups (as seperate but cooperating bodies) is the only way justice can be achieved in a way that both men and women welcome.

I look forward to open and respectful debate about changes needed in society for equal rights for all genders. It is hard to see all aspects of life from all angles and even harder to see all aspects of life from the point of view of a gender you have never been and never will be....there has been much too much talk, and not enough listening on both sides.

simon williams on "Rwanda: the colour of hope"

simon williams — Thu, 08 May 2008 00:32:57 +0100

The problems of Rwanda came from outside interference. Please see:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/041708D.shtml

dewdrops on "India's silent tragedy"

dewdrops — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:20:20 +0100

Just want to say well done! Brilliant article. Situation in India is getting worse for women, and we all need to get together to make the govt. do something about it.

dia fnaish on "Rebuilding civil society in Sierra Leone"

dia fnaish — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:07:59 +0000

Hi there
My name is Dia Fnaish and I would like to share some information about the crimes against women. I came across this while researching statistics and thought it might be of interest.

The victimization of women is a special area of concern, and both the NCVS and the UCR contain data on gender as it relates to victimization. Statistics show that women are victimized less frequently than men in every major personal crime category other than rape,72 is The overall U.S. rate of violent victimization is about 25 per 1,000 males age 12 or older, and 18 per 1,000 female 73

When women become victims of violent crime, however, they are more likely than men to be injured (29% versus 22%, respectively).74 Moreover, a larger proportion of women than men make modifications in the way they live because of the threat of crime.75 Women, especially those living in cities, have become increasingly careful about where they travel and the time of day they leave their homes—particularly if they are unaccompanied—and in many settings are often wary
of unfamiliar males.

Date rape, familial incest, spousal abuse, stalking, and the exploitation of women through
social-order offenses such as prostitution and pornography are major issues facing American society
today. Testimony before Congress tagged domestic violence as the largest cause of injury to American women.76 Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop once identified violence against women by their partners as the number one health problem facing women in America.77 Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey (NVAWS) reveal the following78:

■ Physical assault is widespread among American women. Fifty-two percent of surveyed
women said that they had been physically assaulted as a child or as an adult.
■ Approximately 1.9 million women are physically assaulted in the United States each year.
■ Eighteen percent of women experienced a completed or attempted rape at some time in their lives.
■ Of those reporting rape, 22% were under 12 years old, and 32% were between 12 and 17 years old when they were first raped.
■ Native American and Alaska Native women were most likely to report rape and physical assault, while Asian/Pacific Islander women were least likely to report such victimization. Hispanic women were less likely to report rape than non-Hispanic women.
■ Women report significantly more partner violence than men. Twenty-five percent of surveyed women, and only 8% of surveyed men, said they had been raped or physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting partner, or date.
■ Violence against women is primarily partner violence. Seventy-six percent of the women who had been raped or physically assaulted since age 18 were assaulted by a current or former husband, cohabiting partner, or date, compared with 18% of the men.
■ Women are significantly more likely than men to be injured during an assault. Thirty-two percent of the women and 16% of the men who had been raped since age 18 were injured during their most recent rape; 39% of the women and 25% of the men who were physically assaulted since age 18 were injured during their most recent physical assault.
■ Eight percent of surveyed women and 2% of surveyed men said they had been stalked at some time in their lives. According to survey estimates, approximately 1 million women and
371,000 men are stalked annually in the United States.

sooke on "Riyadh: city of women"

sooke — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 04:35:34 +0000

Here is a more terrifying aspect of life for women in the kingdom

http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/burton022005.html

TLCTugger on "HIV/Aids: a war on women"

TLCTugger — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 06:25:31 +0000

The cut men in the 3 Africa trials contracted HIV at 6 times the US rate; and they call that a success? The HIV+ cut men also were also MORE likely to pass HIV to an HIV- female partner.

The US has 3 times the AIDS problem Europe has, even though the US is mostly cut and Europe is mostly intact. Most of the half million dead American male victims of AIDS were cut at birth.

In non-cutting Japan AIDS is as rare as it is 95%-cut Israel. In the African nations of Cameroon, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, Rwanda, and Tanzania, HIV is markedly more prevalent among the circumcised.

Circumcision does not prevent AIDS.

The WHO is quite desperate for some solution to the AIDS crisis. Unfortunately, large abstinence-only US influence is causing the WHO to look past the solution they already have: condoms, at 3 cents apiece.

human_tide on "Men and gender justice: old debate, new perspective "

human_tide — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 15:13:00 +0000

Unsurprisingly, I'm with Emily on this one. I've tried to address the claims for a parity in gender violence but I don't see any of the responses really engaging on that level of debate.

As to the wider questions, I'm still curious about the role of an explicit and political feminism in the bridging and analysis that the article suggests.

Again, why 'women's movement' rather than 'feminist movement'?

Devonavar on "Men and gender justice: old debate, new perspective "

Devonavar — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 07:01:53 +0000

I don't understand the concern with men setting themselves up as "victims". Check that — I understand the concern, but I think it is unfounded. Setting gender idealism aside, men have far less to gain from playing the victim than women — whether they are "actual" victims or not. Gender politics being what they are, a man playing the victim is a wimp: an object of derision, not an object of pity. Outside of a small subset of academia (read: gender specialists), playing the victim is not a viable means of attracting support for men.

A man who finds himself a victim (of any wrongdoing, not just violence) is expected to find redress by his own means — and he has his pride and his sense of masculinity to lose if he does not. That means he has more to gain by being aggressive than accepting his victimhood and passively waiting for / allowing someone to help him. The expectation is self-fulfilling.

As a general rule, a woman can get much more mileage out of playing the victim because, thanks to our ingrained prejudices, she's much more likely to attract pity and therefore help. As a man, it doesn't matter how aware I am of men and women being equally deserving of help — I'm still more likely to respond to the damsel in distress than the defeated knight. I suspect that most women would react in the same way: Help the women and children first; let the men help themselves.

I'd like to point out the irony that, seen through an uncharitable lens, the history of feminism can be seen as a study in women collectively playing the victim to the sympathies of the male patriarchy. Should the masculinities movement referred to by the author ever gain any real power, I would expect that power to manifest itself in a stereotypically male way: it will be aggressive, set its own rules, and, in all probability, completely ignore gender equality. It will wield its power with all the skill and corruption of a politician and it will succeed in spite of its opponents, not because of its allies. Is this fair? No. Is it right? Probably not, but this is where male power lies. This is what the author should fear the masculinities will become, not a network of male victims.

TM Lutas on "Men and gender justice: old debate, new perspective "

TM Lutas — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:15:42 +0000

What a mess this article and discussion are. Let's start with first things first. Women on men violence *is* a dirty little secret that is not handled correctly in law, police regulations, jury attitudes, or funding for men in the unfortunate situation where they have to evacuate their homes due to a battering spouse. If you can't handle the murder of men by women with justice, you don't get to come to the table to lecture about anything. You're part of the problem.

Mary Winkler gets 210 days in jail for murdering her spouse, 3 years of split confinement in total. Now reverse the sexes on the crime and watch the sentencing (and the societal outrage) rise. Heterosexual sexual crimes on minors are another area where women get off lightly in the courts (at least in the US). The disparate sentencing of men having sex with minor students versus women (especially cute women) is not something that is seriously up for discussion. It happens.

The biological fact is that men are pretty good at violence as a group. We tend to be about 10% bigger and that added mass has consequences in terms of the severity of violence inflicted. But the law and police regulations are not set up to be about comparative body mass. If it's a big guy and a small woman in a domestic dispute and somebody's getting tossed out of their home for the night to cool down, it's going to be the guy. If it's a big woman and a small man having that same dispute, it's going to be the small guy looking for a hotel room, or calling up friends, or spending the night in jail. Go talk to a cop if you have any doubt of this.

The rule of law is about equal treatment for equal acts. We don't have that when it comes to relationship violence. We don't have it when it comes to divorce. We don't have it when it comes to a whole host of things. If the desired end state is a complementary system where role specialization occurs, such a legal system can be a functional part of the larger societal setup whose disparate treatment supports complementary gender roles. What we have in the feminist West is a largely still complementary legal system with women seeking to break out of their gender roles and demand equality but in no hurry at all to change the complementary legal structure where it favors them. Recognize *that* and a useful conversation is possible about masculinity and where we go forward from our current mess.

Emilye on "Men and gender justice: old debate, new perspective "

Emilye — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 08:57:39 +0000

Depressingly, nothing could have more forcefully illustrated my point about the about lethal ease with which debates about equality can so quickly descend into single-minded efforts by a few men to prove their own victimhood. I was trying to make a call for greater solidarity between men and women, to advance our common concerns and progress towards a world of equality and justice for all people – men and women. I did not say, or I hope imply, that ‘all men are "violent ogres" or that women are always "innocent victims"’ – on the contrary, I feel very strongly that the resort to simplistic gender dichotomies is deeply problematic. Far from blaming men, I was praising the excellent work being done by men in many parts of the world to bring about greater equality, and exhorting the need for women and men to work together to challenge the structures of inequality and injustice that disadvantage us all.

So while I could respond by reeling off just some of the many horrific statistics from the hundreds upon hundreds of studies that point to the gender asymmetry of violence in terms of perpetrators and victims –which, by the way, is not only confined to acts of physical violence but is also structural and institutionalised – I think this would rather miss the point. Precisely what I didn’t want was to end up bogged down in a divisive ‘blame game’. As I said, merely counterposing women's and men's experience and perpetration of violence is not helpful; the challenge is rather to help illuminate the workings and functions of violence within the systems of oppression that organise our different societies. As such, my concern is not only with men’s violence against women (although I do believe that men should be held accountable for this violence where it occurs, just as women should be held accountable for any violence they commit). More fundamentally, however, my concern is with the violence that produces and is produced by a hierarchical gender order that is, itself, interwoven with other forms of inequality and oppression. So let’s try and get beyond this ‘men versus women’ stalemate we seem to be stuck in and start to bring all this back to the really important issues of social justice and social change.

Emilye on "Making development work for women"

Emilye — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 08:55:05 +0000

So while I could respond by reeling off just some of the many horrific statistics from the hundreds upon hundreds of studies that point to the gender asymmetry of violence in terms of perpetrators and victims –which, by the way, is not only confined to acts of physical violence but is also structural and institutionalised – I think this would rather miss the point. Precisely what I didn’t want was to end up bogged down in a divisive ‘blame game’. As I said, merely counterposing women's and men's experience and perpetration of violence is not helpful; the challenge is rather to help illuminate the workings and functions of violence within the systems of oppression that organise our different societies. As such, my concern is not only with men’s violence against women (although I do believe that men should be held accountable for this violence where it occurs, just as women should be held accountable for any violence they commit). More fundamentally, however, my concern is with the violence that produces and is produced by a hierarchical gender order that is, itself, interwoven with other forms of inequality and oppression. So let’s try and get beyond this ‘men versus women’ stalemate we seem to be stuck in and start to bring all this back to the most important issues of social justice and social change.