36
The silence on Gaza from countries with feminist foreign policies ‘is deafening and deeply troubling’
(www.middleeastmonitor.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2024
36 points (70.9% liked)
News
23413 readers
1675 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Makes sense.
Islam is discriminating towards women, and is a problem in large parts of the world.
Israel is "only" a problem in a small local area.
That said, I do not condone Israels actions in Palestine, as I see it, Israel has violated the international trust that was the basis for allowing the state to be formed, and Israel as a whole is basically an illegal state.
Oh look the result of the one sided media coverage and brainwashing this post is talking about.
Be gone historically-unread beast.
Just an example from today.
https://lemmy.world/post/18585784?scrollToComments=true
There is no doubt Muslims discriminate against women more than other cultures based on their faith. Saying otherwise is moronic.
Of course there are good Muslims too, but they are not because of their religion, but despite of it.
Reading this comment in the thread proves my point.
https://lemmy.world/comment/11739726
Everyone would ve really upset if you replaced the word Muslim with Jew in your comment.
But it is okay because Americans have been brainwashed into believing they need to free all women wearing a hijab by bombing their country to rubble.
Replacing the word Muslim (Islam) with Jew in my original comment would make it false.
And just because there's a weird comment to the story I linked, doesn't make the situation the story describes less discriminating against women, which is typical for Muslim countries.
I have met Muslims that pride themselves for putting women "in their place", for speaking while they were talking with their husband.
It's disgusting when muslim men behave like that, and that were muslims living in a country where women have equal rights by law, and it's illegal to discriminate against them.
So they are traitors to their new country, which is an all to common thing among Muslims.
If they love the oppression of their home country so much, they should stay there.
And in your infinite racism you have classified the actions of those men as what Islam prescribes without ever having done any research.
Most of them fled because America destroyed their country. A culture of death and oppression glorifying its military at every step.
"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do."
Ah yes Americans made the Muslims discriminate against women. Several Muslim countries have not been in conflict with the west for decades, and they've had no progress in that time. Iran got clearly worse when they introduced their own sovereign rule. Turkey has gone backwards the past decade, Saudi Arabia and UAE are decidedly hellholes, clearly by their own choice. Absolutely zero to do with influence from the west.
Islam sucks, I've never met people more discriminating against women than Muslims. And I've met a lot of them. Also this is not anecdotal, we can see it by the regulations of Muslim countries.
So stop whining and accept reality.
There's far more folks who claim to be Jewish going to a foreign country to kill brown people and colonize their land.You must have never seen them.
Oh wait. When it comes to them you suddenly are able to differentiate. For Muslims you can't. Because you're simply a racist brainwashed by American media into believing the people that have been mass murdered for the past 50 years are actually the aggressors.
If you were Chinese you'd be advocating to throw Uyghurs in concentration camps.
I've known Muslims from Iraq, Marocco, Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, and a few I don't now which country are from. I can differentiate between them just fine.
I never mentioned anything about them being the aggressors, that doesn't change that muslims discriminate against women more than mostly anybody else.
Also I'm not from USA, so it seems like the one here who is prejudiced without reason is you more than me.
It is amazing you know so many Muslims and still cannot differentiate between a generic American propaganda image and what Islam actually prescribes.
Here's a video of one of those terrifying Muslamic Imams spreading his extremist terror in the UK a few days ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23FuOgGZqkM
I never in any way condoned terrorism against mosques or Muslims, or claimed Muslims can't be good people.
Yes absolutely the Muslims are often the victims as we see in Palestine and UK.
But why do you continue to argue a straw man, that has zero to do with what I claimed?
You haven't even denied that discrimination against women is widespread among Muslims.
And obviously any feminist will have some problems defending an Islamic regime. How is that strange to you?
Telling women to "shut up because the man is speaking" has nothing to do with Islam and is prescribed nowhere. You saw some Muslims acting bad against women. That's bad. It is not relevant to Islam
What you are conflating is tribalism and Islam. The Taliban is a perfect example of this. Islam clearly states women are allowed to go to school. The worlds first university was created by an Islamic woman. Yet the Taliban refuses to let girls to go to school. Why? Because they don't follow the rules of Islam. Yet media paints the Taliban as "implementing the Sharia" while it is clearly not the case.
Currently there is no Islamic regime in the entire world. Islam has a form of governance called Sharia and the only people who claim to implement it are those who pick parts they like and ignore parts they don't like such as the Taliban.
It's hard to generalize but Islam mostly falls under second wave feminism. The third and fourth wave feminism were more about sexuality than female autonomy.
The hijab has intentionally been painted as a symbol of oppression since the American "war on terror" where dehumanization of Muslims was necessary to create an excuse to "free them from oppression". This is extremely similar to 1970 where America needed to "free the oppressed Vietnamese from Communism" by firebombing their villages.
Muslims do not discriminate against women this is a narrative painted by media. There certainly are tribalists, especially in poorer regions of the world. However they discriminate against women despite Islam not because of it. It is very similar to American Christians who abandoned about the "help thy neighbor and feed the poor" part and have transformed into a cult of guns and racism.
No, I didn't see it, they bragged about it, explaining that a woman has no place speaking when the men are talking, unless her man allows it.
Also there are now reports from UN that Afghanistan is the most dangerous country for a woman to live in.
I linked the story earlier about how women were shot for not stopping because they didn't cover their hair properly.
In Saudi Arabia, women were not allowed to drive cars until recently. Like at all!!
The evidence is so overwhelming about discrimination of women in Muslim countries you can't possibly honestly deny it.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/regime
Regime is any system of governance, the word is neither positive or negative, every country under Sharia law is an Islamic/Muslim regime.
How can you claim it's not oppression when women are being punished for not wearing it?
I'm sorry, but you make so little sense, and you are so dense to debate, that I'm simply going to have to block you now.
She did not get shot for not wearing a Hijab you clearly did not read what you linked.
When at risk of the propaganda getting debunked you choose to ignore facts, repeat the propagands and run away.
So why are the men so happily putting women in trash bags
Women like wearing that so creepy atheist dudes stop talking about how big their ass is when they walk outside.
Good thing the we never overthrow the government in any country to install a dictatorship which oppresses women in favor of a more moderate government. All the fault of those brown people not wanting to be enlightened like us Westerners.
Please do tell us about the dictatorship Luxembourg installed. Since this is about "us Westerners."
Are you sad you can't ban me from this community for posting about Yemeni kids being slaughtered with American weapons?
Also a quick google search reveals how amazing Luxembourgh exported their enlightenment of civilization
So no dictatorships installed by Luxembourg? I guess your claim was a lie.
And you were banned for defending the recruitment of child soldiers, which is a war crime. I'm not sure why you're lying about that either. People can check the modlogs.
You lying in the mod logs about things that never happened does not make it true.
I edited my previous comment with a link for you about Luxembourg have fun reading.
It absolutely happened. This is such a silly lie. You were also warned multiple times that you would be banned if you didn't stop defending the Houthis from recruiting child soldiers.
And now you're lying that you never defended them? You can't even be consistent in your political beliefs?
Can you quote the part where I defended the Houthis using child soldiers? Oh wait you can't because that never happened you just make things up.
According to this logic if someone says they like Joe Biden forgiving student loans that means they are supporting the Genocide in Gaza.
But of course it doesn't, because you only separate the action from the actor when the actor is a white liberal. Suddenly you discover nuance and all colors of gray.
Tell you what, you agree with this factual statement and I'll unban you:
The Houthis are child-killing war criminals.
That comment is factually correct.
But I still support the Houthi's blockading the Red Sea.
If you had only said that before, you would not have been banned in the first place. You were given multiple chances to say that. I will, however, unban you.
I expect your next thing will be to insult me for doing that too, so go for it.
I literally said they were using drone boats not suicide bombers for their attacks in the red sea. Your imagination must have taken a wild turn.
Let me help you clarify how the hard to accept reality works.
The Houthis are child-killing war criminals.
Iran are child-killing war criminals.
Joe Biden is a child-killing war criminal.
Donald Trump is a child-killing war criminal.
Saudi Arabia are child-killing war criminals.
Luxembourg are child-killing war criminals.
Russia are child-killing war criminals.
China are child-killing war criminals.
Hamas are child-killing war criminals.
America are child-killing war criminals.
Hezbollah are child-killing war criminals.
And we can keep going. Judging any group for their past actions is a fools errand.
Insults. As I predicted.
You could have at least acknowledged that I unbanned you.
If you provide me with the comment where I defended the Houthi's using child soldiers I'll acknowledge you unbanning me.
If you're going to pretend you weren't unbanned, I can go ahead and ban you again... No point unbanning someone who won't acknowledge that they are no longer banned.
Up to you.
Edit: I'll give you an hour. If you don't want to admit you're unbanned by then, I guess you didn't want to be in the first place.
So just to be clear you admit that there was no evidence for banning me and you lied about the reason?
The hour is running out. All you have to do is acknowledge you are no longer banned.
I can only acknowledge being unbanned if I can acknowledge being justly banned in the first place.
Surely you can prove your claims.
40 minutes until you’re re-banned unless you admit you were unbanned. This is not negotiable.
I see no reason to appease someone who tacks on conditions to his previous comment.
23 minutes.
Well... you made your choice. You could have literally said something like, "It's about time you fucking unbanned me you complete and utter asshole," but you clearly would prefer to complain about being banned than being unbanned. No point unbanning someone who doesn't want to be unbanned.
Hah, I kinda can't believe I read through this drama, but I did.
Squid, as an outside observer, I saw this:
You are both offended. Considering that aspect alone, this is a hard position to find a resolution from.
This ban seems to have been the result of a single comment thread where you assert that he was lying about facts. He asserts that he was not. I'm sure there's more nuance, but there was a disagreement, I think that's the gist of it.
You made a peace offering of sorts, offering to unban him if he jumped through a hoop and admitted a fact you thought he was denying. He had no problem jumping through that hoop and he clarified his position. Though he also claimed there was no wrongdoing in the first place and challenged you to specify the wrongdoing that occurred. That's him going on the offense, implying that you did something wrong. In response you ignored his question and moved the goal post. And then the combination of his stubbornness and your defensiveness resulted in him being banned again.
So, I get that he's being stubborn, but he is also being honest. You are not really being honest. Continuing to argue your point while holding the ban over him and requiring him to make more concessions or else... That's not really fair.
He decided to pretend he was still banned. I decided to make that fantasy a reality.
We could have talked about his problems with me after he abandoned that fantasy. He decided not to.
Well I guess to spell it out more bluntly, I think you're being unreasonable.
I also think it's obvious that he wasn't pretending he was still banned, he simply wasn't moving on because he didn't feel he should have had to essentially apologize for something he didn't do. What he wanted was recognition that the claimed reasoning for the ban was wrong.
Unbanning him at that point was great, but he still wanted more. Perhaps expecting more was unrealistic for him, but he wanted more, that's why he was still arguing.
So I don't know, probably just dropping it at that point may have been the right thing, but banning him again was petty.
And, again, I would have talked to him about his recognition the moment he acknowledged he was unbanned.
And if you want to talk about pettiness- https://lemmy.world/post/18628323
(The idea that I'm a Zionist is hilarious though.)
Well, I've said what I thought I should say. So I'm happy to butt out of your conversation now.
Also, that link didn't work for me, not sure why.
That would be because it was so petty and stupidly vindictive that not only did it get deleted, the whole community got deleted for lack of moderation.
So he reposted it here and started attacking other mods too: https://lemmy.world/post/18634532
I think you should join them, so you can block the red sea together. I am pretty sure you would enjoy life in Yemen.