Chesler Chronicles

March 2nd, 2009 4:04 pm

A Civilized Dialogue About Islam and Honor Killing. When Feminist Heroes Disagree.

Part One.

It has been my privilege to know and to work with Dorchen Leithold who is a fearless, tireless, driven, and heroic champion of womens’ rights. I remember Dorchen back in the days when we were both anti-pornography activists. She then became an anti-trafficking activist which she still is. We have participated in many important demonstrations, conferences, and memorial services over the last forty-plus years. Dorchen went on to become a lawyer. She is now the director of legal services for battered women in New York City (Sanctuary for Families) and has, Sojourner Truth style, literally rescued and saved the lives of many a woman.

We now have a genuine disagreement about whether or not Islam plays a role in domestic violence and honor killings, including in the recent horrific beheading of Aasiya Z. Hassan in Buffalo. Dorchen thinks not, I think there is a profound relationship that we deny at our own peril and to the detriment of Muslim girls and women.

With Dorchen’s permission, I am now publishing our recent correspondence. This is how people, including feminists, might consider sounding when they disagree with someone. Instead of cutting each other off, or writing each other off, here is one example of how a civilized disagreement might sound.

Our exchange is rather long. Dorchen said I could publish it as long as I did not change or edit anything she wrote. I have now added some material of my own in order to frame this dialogue and to respond to her last letter. I will run this in two parts. Stay tuned tomorrow for our second and final exchange.

On February 14, 2009, I published my first piece about the Buffalo beheading. On February 16, 2009, Middle East Quarterly (MEQ) published my study “Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence?” Thereafter, between February 17th and February 27th, I published an additional five articles on the subject. Dorchen is on my mailing list and so she received every article. Late on the evening of February 28th, Dorchen, in a carefully composed letter, responded to me at length. She is a very busy women and the fact that she sat down and did this speaks volumes.

Dorchen has been nothing if not kind and respectful towards me and yet–I could not help but note that she only wrote to me after I had praised New York State NOW President, Marcia Pappas, for her dissident stand on the Buffalo beheading and had challenged National NOW President Kim Gandy’s party line position on the subject. Perhaps Dorchen kept hoping that I would stop writing on this subject or perhaps that I’d change my point of view. When that did not happen, she clearly felt obliged to write. Obviously, I feared that Dorchen had been asked, even urged, to write on behalf of others. I asked her about this. She said she was speaking for herself. Ultimately, it does not matter. What matters is the exchange of these ideas and how we are modeling a civilized way of communicating.

In my MEQ study, I recommend that we work with those mullahs, Islamic organizations, and individuals who are genuinely pro-woman, anti-domestic violence, and anti-honor killings–but that we must differentiate between such Muslims and those who will say the “right” thing on these subjects, (usually after an honor killing has taken place), but who have no intention of doing any of the hard and serious work against violence against Muslim women.

From her first letter, dated February 28, 2009, it is not clear whether Dorchen read my study or is aware that I mention one of her own cases in it. Without quoting her name, I wrote: “A number of feminist lawyers who work with battered women have credited pro-women sheikhs with helping them enormously. Sheikhs (mullahs, imams), should publicly identify, condemn, and shame honor killers. Those who resist doing so should be challenged.”
________________________________________

From: Dorchen Leidholdt
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 9:39 PM
To: Phyllis Chesler

Dear Phyllis,

I cannot in good conscience not respond to the article that appeared on your blog, “The Left and a Woman’s Severed Head.” While I have had much respect for you and for the very important work you have produced over decades of writing, thinking, and activism, I believe that statements like this statement of yours–“Why the sudden respect for Islam, a religion which is, in reality, not a religion at all but is rather, a totalitarian political ideology which has undergone no evolution for 1400 years and which is dangerous to women and other living beings?” are misguided, divisive, and false.

Page 1 of 2 Next ->

Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:

1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.

2. Stay on topic.

3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.

4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.

5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.

The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.

These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.

55 Comments

1. Alfredo:

What will happen to Ms. Dorchen if that peaceful religion called Islam advances in the US till Sharia law is the law of the land? Sean Penn visits with, and admires, murderer Fidel Castro, but of course he could not live in Cuba. Here now we have the psychological connection between liberals in the US, many of them feminists, and the ply of the Muslims.

Let it be known: there is nothing whatsoever peaceful about Islam, but totally the contrary. If you have any doubts, research the history of India, and you will learn about another holocaust that is rarely mentioned (bigger than the Shoa by the way).

Besides honor killings, what about the stoning of women as prescribed in Sharia law? Yes, old testament mentions stoning, but we have evolved out of that, the problem with Islam, as Ms. Chesler wisely points out, is its rigidity (and cruelty). Taliban preventing girls from attending school, acid thrown in their faces. Yes, we can always argue that these are exceptions, but surely as the many exception agglutinate together and become larger than the whole, there is less of an argument for the whole and more for the exceptions.

Geert Wilder is totally right, and I hope he will become a guide for Europe and the whole world before it is too late. As for me, and many others, I would die fighting than under Sharia law, anywhere, anyplace.

Mar 2, 2009 - 6:19 pm 2. Sylvie7:

I got tired of reading you friend’s comments. Anyone who has lived in the Middle East knows that “honor killings” happen all the time. They are accepted, expected and result in death. All acts of domestic violence in other cultures are not as generally accepted and/or expected. The victim has no chance to defend herself or be judged in a neutral court.

The origin of this “custom” may or may not be derived from the Koran,but it is accepted and understood in Muslim countries. It is an ever present threat. It often involves members of the immediate family, as supporters of punishment meted out by a spouse.
Every religion has customs which have become sacrosanct over time, but are not written into their holy books.Other such customs have become lost over time because they no longer reflect the standards of a changing world.

Honor killings persist and THAT’S the point.

It needn’t be “on the books.” There are many courageous Muslim woman who stand up against the kind of customs that are so anti woman. Those women are extraordinary because they stand up against deep seated taboos and speak their minds, even though the danger is clear, understood, and the social repercussions can be severe.

This is not ordinary domestic violence. Those who speak out against honor killings, male or female, are risking their lives.

Mar 2, 2009 - 7:13 pm 3. David Levavi:

…Judaism, Christianity, and Islam share many of the same roots…I am struck over and over by the similarities of the three major monotheistic world religions…all three in text, interpretation, and practice are pervaded with misogyny…

Ms. Leidholdt’s suggestion that the “three monotheistic religions” are morally equivalent insults both Judaism and Christianity.

St. Paul is the only source she offers for Biblically prescribed misogyny and St. Paul is speaking philosophically not specifying brutal punishments for women in horrific detail. Nor is there a record of St. Paul mistreating women. Neither did Jesus, Moses or Abraham. Judaism and Christianity do not make a virtue of severely restricting females. Nor, unlike Islam, of treachery, kidnap, torture and murder in general.

The great Prophet of the Arabs was illiterate, moreover, and comparing his oral rehash of Christian and Jewish ideas transcribed and edited by others to the towering poetry of the Bible insults literature.

Strict and brutal subjugation of women is the foundation upon which the Muslim household hence Muslim society rests. It is not the foundation of Christian society nor of Jewish society.

Ms. Leidholdt is civil and polite toward Islam at the expense of millions of shackled and defenseless Muslim women.

Mar 3, 2009 - 12:46 am 4. joeblough:

No time to really jump in.

But at a cursory glance, it seems to me that Leithold is reciting the standard Tu Quoque argument which mohammedan apologists generally offer up when some unpleasant aspect of mohammedan culture cannot any longer be plausibly denied.

To point out that other societies have been “dominated” by men is trivial, and scarcely even relevant. Of course men have everywhere been dominant. They are generally bigger and stronger than women. Where force rules, men rule. Big deal.

What is ignored in the flight to refuge in meaningless generalities is what is particular and specific to mohammedan societies.

It won’t do to point out that the Bible says that men rule over women, the Bible doesn’t contain instructions for the beating of women. The mohammedan canon does.

Moreover, there is no such material in Buddhism at all.

I’m not sufficiently versed in Hinduism to speak to the subject. And yes, I know the business about immolating widows, I just don’t know what the relation, if any, to Hinduism is.

The formalization of beating women in the religious literature is specific to mohammedanism. And carrying the practice and formal conventions forward into modern times is also specific to mohammedanism.

The subjective feelings of Leithold’s clientele are irrelevant to the truth of the matter. Offering them up as proof is a standard evasion used by rapists, abusers and their defenders everywhere … Oh, but see how she loves him. If he were really so evil she wouldn’t love him!

And now we are treated to a feminist protesting “Oh, see how they love their islam”.

Please!

Given P. Chesler’s respect for this character, I suppose I really should come back and give it all a proper reading.

But I don’t know if I have the stomach for it.

Mar 3, 2009 - 4:11 am 5. Pajamas Media » Feminist vs. Feminist: On Honor Killings and Islam:

[...] Read the entire piece here. [...]

Mar 3, 2009 - 6:22 am 6. Canuck:

I would have great trouble being polite to such a nitwit. I’ll give you kudos for that.

Mar 3, 2009 - 6:56 am 7. Mary Jackson:

Phyllis Chesler is my kind of feminist. If this word, often used derogatively, is to mean anything, it means that all mistreatment of women is condemned, and that when it comes from a “third world” religion/ideology it is not given a free pass.

Honour killing is essentially a tribal phenomenon. It is not unique to Islam – in the UK it happens among Hindus and Sikhs too. However, Islam enshrines tribal values, including misogyny, and gives them divine sanction, which is why honour killings are more intractable among Muslims, even those living in the West.

Ms Chesler’s correspondent does Muslim women no favours by glossing over this fact.

It is worth noting that Muslim women often aid and abet honour killings. (There is little or no sisterhood in Islam, as I argue here.) This female collusion – what could be more repulsive than a mother participating in the ritual rape and murder of her own daughter? – distinguishes them completely from Western crime passionale,, where the woman is killed by the husband or boyfriend.

Mar 3, 2009 - 7:12 am 8. lucy:

What’s the upside for people to ignore the truth about islam? What are they getting psychologically out of this cluelessness? Were they abused as children? This denial is pathological. And why are there so many people so deeply screwed up?

Mar 3, 2009 - 8:05 am 9. Chip:

Honor killings — and many other types of what we’d call murder — are protected by Islamic law, recorded in the Islamic version of a hornbook, Reliance of the Traveller.

Finally available online:

http://www.nku.edu/~kenneyr/Islam/Reliance.html

Section O tells us some murders are committed with “right” — in addition to who can be taken as a slave in war booty, inter alia. Honor killings are considered lawful retaliation or with “right”. “Human rights in Islam” you can hear the army of moronic apologists screeching.

Of course it’s de rigeur in PC leftist legal circles to suggest sharia in “family law”. But murder, and everything else, is family law in Islam. A medieval legal code based entirely on the Quran and Sunnah, allowing sex slaves captured in war, child brides, explaining ritual uncleanliness, proscribing prayer, ablutions, and giving special and unequal rights to Muslims in every case, unsurprisingly, doesn’t track modern trends in jurisprudence. But most modern legal ’scholars’ can’t be bothered to learn even the most basic concepts about Islam or sharia as they are too busy surrendering to it.

Mar 3, 2009 - 8:28 am 10. Chip:

Moreover, many statutory legal codes (not sharia which is always based in Quran and Sunnah, never man-made legislation)* in places like Saudi, Jordan, Pakistan, etc., specifically exclude honor killings, allowing it as a sort of affirmative defense.

For example:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3088828.stm

Why does Jordan and nearly every other so-called Muslim nation reject further punishments for ‘honor’ murder?

Sharia, the path leading to water, or “God’s law” as they call it. In Islam there is no separation of mosque and state – “deen/din wa dawla”:

“…the founding fathers of Islam stated “Al islam deen wa dawla” meaning ‘Islam is a religion and a state.’”

http://encyclopedia.stateuniversity.com/pages/11549/jihad.html

An entire army of academics claiming to be feminists, thousands of so-called human rights activists, but only a handful of people with any insight or interest in a misogynistic and profoundly draconian medieval legal code soon to be implemented globally. Where Muslims go sharia comes along, without exception.

Good luck Ms. Chesler. You need it.

*Of course sharia is man-made in reality, by the exemplar of a Seventh Century caravan raider and warlord. I’m reporting the Islamic view.

Mar 3, 2009 - 8:48 am 11. Michael Canzano:

I recently read of a Muslim woman who is staging rapes of innocent Muslim women in order to convert them to “Suicide Bombers”.
Just when one thinks Islam has reached its most despicable show and tell , it proves one wrong .
American Christian Infidel
Michael Canzano

Mar 3, 2009 - 8:51 am 12. Omar:

I am constantly amazed by the self-deception employed by people such as Ms. Leithold when it comes to islam.

All I can say is this . . .

The truth is not elusive, Ms. Leithold. There is no great mystery here.

You can search the world over grasping at whatever heterodox thread of islamic mercy you can find, but in the end you’re left with the brutal truth: the world is currently home to several viciously misogynistic theocratic islamic states. They are eager for export and are encountering great success, most recently in Pakistan and Somalia which have just this week given over large swathes of their territory (and the women and girls living in them) to Allah’s enforcers on earth. And the same doctrine that governs these lands has found a willing home in Birmingham, Paris and Amsterdam as well. They practice gender apartied and they accomplish this by, quite literally, terrorising and policing the dress, speech, movement and associations of WOMEN every minute of every hour of every day. They enforce these rules within the home and in the larger society with physically violence as they are commanded to do under the Quran 4:34, and believe me, the violence necessary to maintain (and ultimately extend) the “islamic nature” of a place is not remote or far fetched, but an ever present reality for the women who are forced to live in Submission to its law. (See, “There Must Be Violence Against Women,” Yemeni Times, archived, http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/2008/01/019431print.html)

I wonder if Ms. Leithold will do the unthinkable and deign to read an unvarnished (read, “truthful”) exegesis of islamic law so that she can ACTUALLY understand the theological foundations of these theofascist states? There is a risk, of course, as people who take the time to learn these things typically develop a pernicious habit of mind – a “phobia” if you will – that makes them unacceptable in polite company. . . .

Mar 3, 2009 - 9:15 am 13. Blackwater:

Political correctness > objective truth it seems. If I was a muslim I would feel a lot more justified in beating my wife knowing that God said it was the right thing to do. It would give me that extra motivation to resort to my most barbaric impulses. Especially if you grew up in an islamic culture where this practice was common place. Denying that is denying reality. Christians would also feel a lot more justified in using religious violence to spread their religion as well if it was justified and supported in the Bible. Hiding from these ugly politically incorrect truths just prolongs and worsens the problems facing our world and society.

Mar 3, 2009 - 9:15 am 14. Tom Jones:

Islam is largely to blame, has been since Mo (pbuh) consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was 9 years old.

Mar 3, 2009 - 9:17 am 15. Paul:

One interesting question is whether this is a Muslim characteristic or an Arab one. I highly recommend “The Arab Mind” by Raphael Patai, a scholarly book which explores and tries to explain the Arab mentality to westerners. While Islam and the Arabs are highly intertwined, they are not exactly the same and some things that are attributed to one are actually due to the other. Honor killings are an integral part of the Arab culture – although the explaination for why takes a good part of the book; yes, an Arab would rather kill his own wife and children than lose face and “honor”. (Note: the Arab definition of “honor” is different from that of a Westerner, which is part of the problem).

Mar 3, 2009 - 9:22 am 16. Mary:

It always annoys me when I see people quoting two verses and then saying that’s proof that the Bible is misogynic. In Ephesians 5, Paul writes about wives and husbands, and the order of the household. Specifically, Christ first, then the husband, then wife. Wives are given advise, which is followed directly with advise for the husbands, which is never quoted. They are to love their wife as Christ loved the church (gave His life for it), to love them as their own bodies – “for no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it”. The point of all this is that Paul does not at all condone abusing one’s wife in any way. And we all remember when Jesus was confronted with a woman taken in adultery, he said “neither do I condem thee, go and sin no more” The position Christ takes is hardly comparable to beatings and stonings, or even verbal abuse.

Mar 3, 2009 - 9:25 am 17. Mary:

I just realized I wrote “advise” instead of “advice” Sorry, I hate spelling errors.

Mar 3, 2009 - 9:26 am 18. Paul -Indiana:

From Dorchen; I’m not as familiar with the Torah as the Bible, but both contain passages like this one in Ephesians: “Be subject to your husbands as to the Lord: for the man is the head of the woman, just as Christ also is the head of the church… [women must be subject] “to their husbands in everything (Eph. 5:21-24).”
=================
How do you transition from ’subject’ to ‘murder victim’?

Mar 3, 2009 - 9:34 am 19. Self-hating Boomer:

As a feminist lawyer representing Muslim women victimized by male violence…

And who precisely is engaging in broad-brush stereotyping?

Mar 3, 2009 - 9:49 am 20. Islam and Honor Killing of women « The Terror Journal:

[...] Source: Pajama Media [...]

Mar 3, 2009 - 10:01 am 21. Chip:

Right on cue:

Sharia: Coming soon to a neighborhood near you.
Not Swat, though that’s true as well, but Italy, France, and the US. The groundwork is already in place. Search “cultural defense(s)” in legal periodicals. They’re always one step ahead it seems.

This defense means sharia now, not at some speculative time in the future:

Cultural differences: New defense tactic?
– CA Bar J

Mar 3, 2009 - 10:06 am 22. deguello:

Honor killings and Islam? Like flies and excrement, economic catastrophe& Obama;and the NYTimes and mendacity.What’s the difficulty?

Mar 3, 2009 - 10:52 am 23. Heather Cook:

Dorchen Leidholdt misinterprets the bible.

Men are to be spiritual head of the household, this is true … but they are also called to LOVE their wives first and they are not to be the head of the household spiritually or otherwise without LOVE. Women are not called to submit in any fashion to a man who does not love her or treat her with respect.

I’m always saddened when someone who is not a Christian and not familiar with the intricacies of the bible and the depth of interpretations quotes the bible. The bible never “says” anything. We say. We speak. The words in the bible can only be interpreted in conjunction with prayer and applied to our own lives the same way.

Many feminists do not believe what is written in the bible because of this one verse that they misinterpret over and over again.

Mar 3, 2009 - 10:58 am 24. andrew nitzberg:

Ms. Dorcher seems unfamiliar with anything about Judaism.

“I’m not as familiar with the Torah as the Bible.”

The Christian Bible IS the Torah with additions (the Gospels, Epistles, etc.)

Is it possible that Ms. Dorcher lives in NYC, functions as an attorney and knows this little about Judaism?

I suggest that she has no interest in organized religion and buffers herself from any information on religion generally.

Wacky stuff.

Mar 3, 2009 - 11:39 am 25. NSMC:

I understand where Dorchen is coming from in some cases, but it seems that she’s misinterpreting intolerance of Muslim violence for racism. Which it is not. It is just intolerance of Muslim violence. We have the same intolerance for Jewish violence and Christian violence as well – both of which, when they occur, are even more widely condemned by the mainstream media.

Mar 3, 2009 - 11:51 am 26. Rodger Harris:

Dorchen – I like your statement –“Why the sudden respect for Islam, a religion which is, in reality, not a religion at all but is rather, a totalitarian political ideology which has undergone no evolution for 1400 years and which is dangerous to women and other living beings?”
This is no religion in any way shape or form. Just like any other kind of fascism, Mussolini Italy, Hitler’s German or Japan during WWII it must be wiped off the face of the earth. Sooner or later the USA and its left wing liberal’ are going to understand what an evil it really is. We will then and only then come to the realization that there is no hope or honor with these people. They and it must be stopped and we as a world community will outlaw such tyrants along with their so called religion. Over the next 25-50 years hopefully it will be ended for the goodness of all humans on this earth.

Mar 3, 2009 - 12:57 pm 27. Mavra:

I agree with most of the comments made above. However, what is important to me is the tone with which the discussion is being conducted.It is hurtful to the cause of feminism when suspicion, rancor and even hatred develops among women who have the very same goals, who need each others support against the unfair realities of our lives. Here we have an exchange between feminists who’s opinions are at odds, but who deal with their conflicting views with respect. This is certainly a step in the right direction.

Mar 3, 2009 - 3:16 pm 28. DavidN:

The phenomenon of “Honor Killings” is something that I’ve thought about a great deal, and read a bit about. I don’t want to put myself forward as an expert, but I do think that the two sides have diametrically opposite opinions as to what’s going on, and that while both sides have merit in their arguments, they both have flaws. To take the issue of Islam out of the equation, let’s create a hypothetical scenario, and then discuss the portions of it to see if they tell us anything.

Mr. and Mrs. Smith live somewhere in the conservative, more religious part of the country. They are in their 60s, pillars of the community, active in civic and community activities, and regular church goers. They aren’t particularly devout, but they do attend every week, neither one is heard to swear except when something especially bad happens, and except for an attractive secretary Mr. Smith had at his work some years ago, there hasn’t ever been a hint of scandal. They have several children, all adults who have moved away from home, and all of whom are successful. That’s the start of our scenario.

Now suppose that one of the Smith’s sons, a young man just out of college, announces he’s gay. He hasn’t lived at home for years, and he’s not intending on coming back to town, but he will want to visit at the holidays, perhaps eventually bringing a partner. The Smiths, in reaction, ostracize him, letting him know that’s he’s not welcome until he renounces his homosexuality. What is their motivation for doing this? Is it purely religious?

Obviously, given that I’ve concocted this whole narrative out of nothing, we don’t know the specifics. I would suggest, however, that the Smiths are reacting to social pressures in addition to religion, and that those social pressures *may* be the key factor here, though they may not. Perhaps Mr. Smith is worried what his friends at the Rotary Club, Shriners, or Chamber of Commerce will say if he announces his gay son and partner will be coming home for Christmas. Maybe Mrs. Smith is worried what her friend will say, the one whose daughter dated the now gay Smith boy. Of course the girlfriend is the one in town likeliest to know that the Smith’s son is gay, but that won’t occur to her. What will the pastor at church say to them if they accept their gay son? What will they say to each other, and to their other children and extended family? Much easier to just ostracize him and be done with it.

Same thing with Honor Killings in the Middle East. They tend to occur in mostly primitive Muslim societies where the honor of the family is paramount, because everyone is so poor that individuals have nothing else to cling to. Frankly, in some ways the case in New York doesn’t fit the actual definition of an Honor Killing by Middle Eastern, or Arab, standards. As far as I have been made aware, the perpetrator in this case acted alone. Usually, in an actual honor killing, the whole family decides that “something must be done to protect the family honor”. Sometimes even the victim’s mother is involved, and agrees that her daughter needs to be killed.

Does this mean that religion isn’t involved in what happened? Of course not. I suspect when we read the transcripts of the interrogation the killer will try and use religion as a justification of what he did. I suspect he’ll also attempt to portray his victim as irreligious, and smear her as much as possible as someone who deserved to be killed in this way because she ignored her duties as a Muslim wife.

None of this, per se, makes Islam guilty of anything. What is more troubling to me is the lack of compassion in the Muslim community, and the almost blase attitude that most Muslims, especially community and religious leaders, have towards incidents like this. We had about a month of Muslim condemnation of Islamist extremism, here in the west. Since then we’ve had seven and a half years of whining about anti-Muslim discrimination, as if nothing had happened to prompt it, justified or not. When something like the incident in upstate New York occurs, you hear murmurs of unhappiness from Muslim community leaders, and not much else. In the past, prior to 9/11, we sometimes heard out here (in California) that the problem was that our laws allowed adultery. In a Muslim country, where things are superior to the West, a woman can’t leave her husband, so such killings (where the wife leaves her husband) are rare–except of course if she’s been corrupted by Western society.

I think what I’m saying here is that in Islam, religion is, to a considerable extent, culture, and vice versa. The two things are so intertwined that it’s almost impossible to separate the one from the other, and blame one for something like the killing in upstate New York, without blaming the other too. One interesting side note: in Islam, the separation of church and state is officially anathema. The whole point to having a civic organization like a government is to force everyone who lives under its jurisdiction to comply with Sharia. The idea of a government that doesn’t enforce Sharia is repulsive to most Muslims, especially those in the Middle East.

Mar 3, 2009 - 3:37 pm 29. Noah David Simon:

it gets very hard to take feminism seriously when it appears to be anything that is convenient to justify a power structure that is not friendly to men. I respect women. I love women… I honor women and also encourage them in their leadership capacity… but I do not see them as men. The Gloria Steinem tyranny is tiresome. I hereby denounce feminism till it figures out what it is. In the mean time I will treat you better then men and I’m not going to take part in any mental masturbation any further. I am proud to love women more then feminism. As for Islam it knows what is… and I will never submit to it.

Mar 3, 2009 - 3:51 pm 30. Self-hating Boomer:

I hereby denounce feminism till it figures out what it is.

Well said.

- However -

There is no “it”. There is an establishment that has the chutzpah to presume to speak for half of humanity; verily half of the animal kingdom. Obviously no clique can do that. It’s absurd to even talking about feminism figuring out what it is, because that presumes that women are robots; all identical, all mindless. Real women, like real men, are individuals, and not troops in some movement.

This simply confirms this. This shows that a clique that presumes to speak for that broad a segment of society must necessarily end up speaking for something else entirely. That’s why we have “feminists” whitewashing benighted savagery. It’s because the crowd went chasing a completely different goal.

Hoping that feminism will be about women is unrealistic.

Mar 3, 2009 - 4:35 pm 31. massaraksh:

A lot of well-educated and intelligent Westerners refuse to accept the fact that misogyny is a foundation of Islam – in fact, the opportunity to lord over a herd of females and do as one pleases with them is a sacred male prerogative sanctified by Shariah. It’s interesting that the Islamic Paradise is basically a sick psycho-sexual male fantasy, and the Sunna (Muhammad’s lifestory) is also full of sexuality. This is why it requires a psychologist to explain the attraction of Islam.

The honor killing is just a way to maintain this control, and it’s absolutely no accident that it’s widespread in every Muslim country and even in the West among Muslim communities.

Mar 3, 2009 - 7:07 pm 32. momof3:

WHen I read the exchange, I did not read mutual respect. I read the thinly veiled contempt written in the way women often hide from open confrontation. “DEAR this” and SISTER that”, getting icky-sweeter as the discussion grew more opposed. I prefer men, who will tell even a friend that they’re full of shit, if that’s their opinion at the time.

Dorchen is an idiot with her head in the sand.

Mar 3, 2009 - 8:14 pm 33. Oscar the Grump:

Please turn your attention to this, it says it all..

http://www.terrorismawareness.org/videos/108/the-violent-oppression-of-women-in-islam/

Mar 3, 2009 - 8:19 pm 34. Oscar the Grump:

I also recommend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4XmBRi8EQo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqvskXCz-kk

Mar 3, 2009 - 8:22 pm 35. Oscar the Grump:

#32
Dorchen is an idiot with her head in the sand

I think that you will find many of us agree.

Mar 3, 2009 - 8:27 pm 36. aramkr:

Orwell: Some ideas are so prepostrous only and intellectual could believe them. I’m guessing Leidholdt is an intellectual?

Mar 3, 2009 - 8:42 pm 37. Marian Kechlibar:

36: I think that Orwell was a secular prophet of sorts. Some of his citations should hang on home walls.

31: Your nickname reminds me of a word used in a SF novel by Strugackiy brethren. Am I right?

Mar 4, 2009 - 2:52 am 38. D. Grant Chee----:

Feminist,or unfeminine women, who participate
in and support NOW, NARAL, Planned UnParents
in the Hood and et al are the last segment of
our society I would listen to about is’lamic
terrorist! U.S. fem org’s are terrorist’s,
divider’s and unborn citizen murderer’s! Hysterical fems have lobbied for laws against men that persecute men across the USA daily!
Females of the fem persuasion are communist
prostitutes of our justice system, schools and the home. Islamics who have come to the USA with mischief in mind have come to their graveyard. Our fem run congress and state department have insured an internal threat! America now has six-million islamics and 3,000-mosques–these insane ideologues are snakes in our grass and outnumber USA Jews. I invite men to join my organization (MAFIA);
Men Against Feminist In America! Islam and unfeminine feminist are a threat, fems have now murdered 50,000,000 unborn citizens; and islam seeks to kill all of us while fems discuss the merits and demerits of islamics?

Mar 4, 2009 - 9:43 am 39. D. Grant Chee----:

Kafirs, dhimmitude and islamic apologist’s are a threat to each of us. America must become the nation that stopped, dead, the threatening spread of insane islam. Do not expect feminist to participate in a battle against islamic fundamentalist’s intent on their destruction; expect them to marry islamic men!

Mar 4, 2009 - 10:06 am 40. D. Grant Chee----:

Miss, Mrs.–Ms–Miss-us—Mrmiss Mrmrs? What will we call a feminist?

Men must start a men only org. We must lobby the congress and employers for special laws and special treatment, at the expense of women of course—in the name of equality we must punish someone else….Women, please, keep your advice about islam in America to your own fem orgs. for internal consumption.

Mar 4, 2009 - 10:18 am 41. Omar:

Back to the topic at hand:

“Norway: Muslim girls beaten for not wearing the hijab”

” . . . says Gerd Fleischer, of Self-Help for Immigrants and Refugees (Seif). . . .

” . . . The women’s movement of the left in Norway doesn’t care about non-western women . . .”

http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2009/03/norway-muslim-girls-beaten-for-not.html

Mar 4, 2009 - 11:13 am 42. AKHTER:

4 women a week are killed ,by their husbands,/ boyfriends when they discover them having an affair, YOU CAN SAY WHAT YOU LIKE,BUT THESE ARE ALSO HANOUR KILLINGS!!!

Mar 4, 2009 - 1:54 pm 43. Paul -Indiana:

#42. Akhter please provide links.

Mar 4, 2009 - 2:48 pm 44. tanstaafl:

A Civilized Dialogue About Islam and Honor Killing

I don’t see where a dialogue is necessary.

Islam gives a rationale to a father, husband, boyfriend beathing/killing a daughter, wife…female.

And so, the tenets of a paternalistic, male centered “religion” (it so happens that the Sura of the Koran were very convenient for Mohammed’s household management problems) give brain dead and abusive men some kind of justification or rationale for their own barbarity.

Honor killing is, effectively, dishonor killing. However, when the surrounding society doesn’t judge it accurately, the wife beater and the wife killer get a pass.

Mar 4, 2009 - 8:39 pm 45. Tom Applesburg:

To equate Judaism, Christianity, and Radicalized Islam? Yup, sounds like your typical feminist to me. Next thing you know they’ll be equating man to monkey and woman to God.

Mar 5, 2009 - 12:02 am 46. Western Values:

In our Western value system, there is never a reason to physically abuse one’s spouse. If certain people following religious texts believe otherwise, then they should not even be allowed entry into the USA. If such abuses are committed, then they must be tried and prosecuted immediately. Any rationale is unacceptable. Why do we not hear the yell from the feminists who clamor for equal rights? Women are first class citizens in the USA and not deserving of beheadings or honor killings. I would suggest thar such a husband be publicly beheaded by women and the tape circulated.

Mar 5, 2009 - 8:55 am 47. deguello:

#46 All true,yet, it’s perfectly acceptable in the West, to engage in infanticide(late term abortions),evidently the feminists are more interested in killing babies, than they are in preventing female beheadings.

Mar 5, 2009 - 9:47 am 48. Friday Links — March 6, 2009 « Muslimah Media Watch:

[...] Chesler and Dorchen Leidholdt hold a dialogue about Islam and Women in parts one and two. (Full disclosure: I do not hold Ms. Chesler as an authority on Islam, nor do I believe her [...]

Mar 6, 2009 - 1:05 am 49. aramkr:

Achter #42:
They are not being killed by their fathers, brothers and cousins and the killers are going to jail for a long time.

Mar 6, 2009 - 7:23 am 50. CrusaderPatriot:

Are you kidding me? How often when there are cases of domestic violence where the woman’s head is cut off? It’s directly related to Islam! When that father, who has yet to be caught, killed his two daughters in Texas because they were becoming “too westernized” and dating “non-muslims”, it’s directly related to Islam. When women in Pakistan (or name your muslim country) are gang raped and then the women are the ones punished for being gang raped! It’s directly related to Islam! If their faces are too exposed in some muslim countries, some radical muslims are throwing acid on them. It’s directly related to Islam! Women should be the ones most upset about the march of Islam, but they vote for a Dhimini party (Obama & the Democrats) sympathetic to Islam. It’s pure ignorance and it’s a damn shame! Visit thereligionofpeace.com to learn more!

Mar 6, 2009 - 12:58 pm 51. ked5:

#41

” . . . The women’s movement of the left in Norway doesn’t care about non-western women . . .”

~~~~

Is it that they don’t care, or, like PETA and leather clad Hell’s Angels, have a supreme lack of the courage of their convictions? (re: are afraid to confront someone who won’t back down – and may beat them to a bloody pulp, if not outright kill them.)

Mar 7, 2009 - 12:04 am 52. scott g:

‘Islamic Feminism’ is an oxymoron. Islam has never undergone a Reformation, as Christianity has. The Koran is considered the absolute and final word. The Bible is not. Those who oppose the Koran are subject to MURDER as apostates.

Westernized Muslims do not have the power to change anything…………if they dare oppose the powers that be….especially the Wahabist barbarians, they are subject to death.

Dorchen’s mind is so intellectually isolated from reality she refuses to accept that murder is an accepted practice under Islam.

Mar 8, 2009 - 2:35 am 53. deguello:

#52 Scott: True, but infanticide(late-term abortions),is an accepted practice in the feminazified west.

Mar 10, 2009 - 5:48 pm 54. Dismas:

#52 Scott: True, but infanticide(late-term abortions),is an accepted practice in the feminazified west.

Late term abortions, or for that matter any abortion is murder. Even if it is the very, very late term abortion of a female old enough to be the wife of an adherent of Islam “the religion of peace”.

Maybe the feminazis don’t get it, but life begins at conception. Dismembering a fetus is every bit as evil as beheading a wife.

And, the Christianity I believe in, tells a man to love and support his wife in every way possible. . . but, he’s still the head of his family, just like Jesus loves everyone of his followers (he died for our sins), and Jesus is the head of the church. I don’t know one (devout) Christian husband that mistreats his wife. Mistreating your wife is tantamount to slapping Jesus across the mouth. A Christian is supposed to protect and support his wife, or, be considered worse than an heretic.

Mar 13, 2009 - 5:16 pm 55. Muslimah Media Watch » The Fight of the Century: Chesler vs. Wolf:

[...] Funny, considering Chesler picks fights all the time, and no one seemed to be interested in an actual debate she had with Dorchen Leidholdt a few months ago about Islam and women that was actually [...]

Sep 14, 2009 - 12:02 am