The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Some Stereotypes Are True

Posted on | November 29, 2016 | 6 Comments

One of the favorite pastimes of liberals is lecturing the rest of us about how ignorant we are. Every common-sense belief about human nature is a “myth,” liberals say, and any generalization about various human traits and patterns of behaviors is a prejudicial “stereotype.” These accusations of ignorance and prejudice are, in fact, a form of character assassination — a way of discrediting anyone who refuses to go along with whatever agenda liberals are currently pursuing. We ought to resent these insults more than we do, but that might just be my inner redneck talking, because you know how Southern men are about being insulted, right?

Oh, but that’s just a stereotype. Rednecks are not prone to fighting, Asians are not good at math, women never gossip — all stereotypes are false, liberals insist, except when negative stereotypes can be used to demonize Republicans as intolerant bigots. If you voted for Donald Trump, liberals condemn you as a neo-Nazi who wants to kill all Jews and homosexuals. Why? Because you’re ignorant and prejudiced. Otherwise you would vote Democrat, like all the Smart People™ do.

Having majored in drama in college, and having once been the only heterosexual employee in the menswear department of a major retail outlet, I’m tempted to laugh when liberals accuse me of being ignorant about gay behavior. As for “homophobia,” what does that word mean? This is one of those slurs that liberals invent for political purposes which, on closer examination, doesn’t really mean anything.

If you’re my age, you may recall that the word “homophobia” suddenly burst forth into journalistic usage in the mid-1980s. This was not a coincidence, as it was during the 1980s that Democrats blamed Christian conservatives for the success of Ronald Reagan’s presidency and, also not coincidentally, it was during the 1980s that the AIDS pandemic aroused entirely rational fears about homosexuality:

Permit me here to recommend “The Origins of a Political Epidemic,” in the book Destructive Generation by Peter Collier and David Horowitz. This article was first published in 1983, when the AIDS epidemic was first making headlines, and when gay activists blocked the public-health measures which might have saved many thousands of lives. . . .
There is no such thing as “safe sex.” That phrase was born during the 1980s as a result of the gay community’s belated recognition that the AIDS epidemic had been spread by, uh, specific types of sexual behavior that resulted in the transmission of a virus through the exchange of bodily fluids, to explain this problem in the most polite way possible. . . .
In 1982, the CDC reported that that the “median number of lifetime male sexual partners” for gay men diagnosed with AIDS was 1,160.
Repeat: One thousand one hundred sixty.
To comprehend what that means, if a man was diagnosed with AIDS at age 30, after having 1,160 partners since becoming sexually active at age 18, he would have had 97 different partners in an average year, i.e., nearly two new partners every week, or eight new partners per month. This was the “at-risk” population among whom the epidemic was incubated in the late 1970s and early 1980s (a story told in Randy Shilts’s book And the Band Played On). Extreme promiscuity under conditions of almost complete anonymity (i.e., bathhouses, “glory holes,” nightclub pickups, etc.) had become so widely accepted in gay culture in the 1970s that when public-health officials first urged gay men to use condoms during the, uh, specific types of sexual behavior by which the virus was spread, these official recommendations were suppressed.

To say that the actual facts about the AIDS epidemic confirmed certain “stereotypes” about gay male behavior would be an understatement. The accusation of “homophobia” was used to intimidate anyone who expressed common sense on this subject, at a time when people were quite literally dying because they had ignored common sense. By the 1990s, the definition of “homophobe” had been stretched to the point that it meant anyone who disapproves of homosexuality. Well, as someone who disapproves of a great many things — modern art, the designated hitter rule, yoga pants and Auburn University, to name a few — I don’t see why I should be forbidden to express disapproval of sexual behavior, merely because this might hurt someone’s feelings. However, since the Democrat Party decided that gay people are victims of social injustice (and thus in need of assistance and protection by the federal government), we are now required to be enthusiastic cheerleaders for all things LGBTQ, or else we’re “homophobes.” On this, as on so many other subjects, liberalism means that you have the right to whatever opinion the Smart People™ tell you to have. But I digress . . .

All stereotypes are false, liberals tell us, and so you’re not allowed to call attention to certain facts. If you notice, for example, that women’s athletics is dominated by lesbians, don’t mention it too loudly, lest you be accused of ignorance, prejudice, misogyny and homophobia.

Jackie Simpson was an All-American volleyball player at the University of Wisconsin and, after graduation, was an assistant coach at Winona State, East Carolina, Marquette and Iowa before being named head coach at George Mason University in February 2015. Jordyn Kirr was a first team high school All-American in lacrosse before joining the team at Georgetown University, where she led the team in assists her freshman and sophomore seasons, and was second in scoring her junior year, helping lead the Hoyas to the Big East title with 4 points in the championship game against Syracuse. Ms. Kirr was the only player in Hoya history to record over 100 goals and 100 assists in a career, and later got her master’s degree at Marquette, where she was assistant coach of the women’s lacrosse team and met Ms. Simpson:

They were working in Milwaukee, Wisconsin at the time, so they met up at a Green Bay Packers game where both were eager to get to know the other better. By the end of the third quarter, they’d shared their first kiss, and an official first date over a home cooked breakfast later followed.

That’s from a story about the ceremony in which the couple tied the knot this past summer. Ms. Kirr is now assistant athletic director at an elite private school for girls where tuition is nearly $30,000 a year.

The five founders of Bryn Mawr School.

This school, not coincidentally, was co-founded in 1885 by M. Carey Thomas, an early radical feminist who condemned marriage as “a personal subjection for which I see absolutely no compensation.” Among Thomas’s co-founders were her “devoted companion” Mamie Gwinn and a wealthy heiress named Mary Garrett. Shockingly, in 1904, Gwinn ran off with a man. Thomas then became the partner of Garrett until the latter died in 1915, leaving a will which bequeathed to Thomas a sum that would now be worth more than $15 million. But, yeah, it’s a stereotype to say that radical feminists are lesbians, just like it’s a stereotype to say that women’s sports coaches are lesbians, and I’m sure there must be lots of heterosexual women playing varsity sports in college. Wait a minute, my eyes just rolled out of my head . . .

One of the consequences of political correctness is that it requires a hypocritical dishonesty, forbidding us to mention certain facts that everybody knows, but which no one can say aloud without being denounced as a bigot. Everybody who actually knew anything about gay male behavior circa 1980 understood that an astonishing level of promiscuity was commonplace, but there was an embargo on criticism of this promiscuity, especially in terms of specific types of sexual behavior that involved the exchange of bodily fluids, IYKWIMAITYD. The only people who were speaking out in the 1970s against the behaviors that led to the AIDS pandemic were those who spoke of “the wrath of God,” etc. Gay activists and their liberal friends vilified Anita Bryant for her 1977 “Save Our Children” campaign, and what a weird coincidence that so many of Anita Bryant’s critics died of AIDS in the ensuing decade.

Brushing inconvenient facts under the rug, while intimidating people into silence by the use of slurs like “homophobe,” is oddly reminiscent of the Victorian concern for propriety that forbade anyone from speaking aloud what should have been obvious about women like M. Carey Thomas, whose personal aversion to heterosexuality was plainly evident and yet off-limits to critical scrutiny. In recent decades, lesbian feminists have fought hard to illuminate the truth that Victorian prudery obscured, claiming M. Carey Thomas (and Jane Addams, Mary Woolley, et al.) as members of their tribe. Whatever the unknown details of these early feminist’s lives might be, we cannot deny that the dots form a pattern, one to which most opponents of Victorian-era feminism were reluctant to allude even indirectly. One finds critics of the suffrage movement denouncing the “mannish” attitudes of feminists, without daring to go so far as to state clearly what was insinuated by such criticism.

We are in a more . . . enlightened era now, and the winds of progress have blown away the obscuring fog of prudery, so that we need no longer pretend that the truth is concealed from our observation. In 1971, lesbian feminists Sidney Abbott and Barbara Love wrote:

Those threatened by or irritated with women’s liberation often dismiss the movement by saying, “Oh, they’re just a bunch of dykes.” The response of the women’s liberation movement to this charge is vital to the feminists, the lesbians, the many who accept both identities, as well as to the life and the meaning of the movement itself.
The words “dyke” and “lesbian,” especially when used by men, are charged words calculated to send shivers of horror up the spines of women who want a more independent life style. Men who pride themselves on their capacity for rational responses cannot keep a cool head on this subject. . . . “Let’s face the truth,” says one feminist, “the greatest threat to men is solidarity among women and lesbianism epitomizes that solidarity.”

Notice here the accusation of male irrationality, attributing fear to men who allegedly feel “threatened” by feminist “liberation.” Yet at the same time the authors of this essay, entitled “Is Women’s Liberation a Lesbian Plot?” must be understood as answering this question in the affirmative. It does not strain anyone’s “capacity for rational responses” to examine the facts and say, “See? We told you so.” In 1993, lesbian feminists Celia Kitzinger and Rachel Perkins wrote:

The word ‘homophobia’ defines fear of lesbians as irrational. . . . This is completely at odds with radical lesbian politics. We cannot think of lesbianism as a challenge to heteropatriarchal structures and values and simultaneously claim that there are no reasonable grounds for men (or heterosexually identified women) to fear us. . . If lesbianism is a blow against the patriarchy, the bonding of women against male supremacy, then it is entirely rational for men to fear it. Contemporary psychology evades these political implications of lesbianism and presents us as essentially harmless.

Anyone who takes feminism seriously understands that the movement is anti-male, anti-marriage, anti-motherhood, and anti-Christian. This is what “solidarity among women” is all about and, as Professor Kitzinger and Professor Sue Wilkinson wrote, it is “hard for heterosexual feminists to reconcile their political analyses with their chosen lifestyles,” because of “the perceived negative consequences of heterosexuality for women.” (See “Feminism and the Psychology of Fear,” Sept. 26.) My point is that we ought not tolerate the dishonest evasions by which some feminists seek to conceal what Professor Kitzinger readily admitted. The truth is obvious to anyone who is willing to pursue feminist arguments to their logical conclusion. Feminism “condemns heterosexuality as an oppressive ‘institution’ forcibly imposed on women by the social system of male domination known as patriarchy,” as I explained in April, summarizing the work of several authors:

Heterosexuality is “an institution of male domination,” as Sheila Jeffreys and her colleagues declared in 1981, and it is an “illusion that heterosexuality is the norm,” as Professor Shaw and Professor Lee more recently declared in their popular Women’s Studies textbook. The penis is a “weapon against women,” as Professor Graham explained, women are victimized by “the coercive power of compulsory heterosexuality,” according to Professor Jackson, and masculinity causes “sexual violence . . . a physical reaffirmation of patriarchal power,” according to Ms. Wooten.

If these eminent feminist professors say this, certainly we are not trafficking in stereotypes to say that feminists are “just a bunch of dykes,” because it is impossible to imagine that women who express such complete contempt for men could ever consent to any heterosexual relationship. And why would any man be interested in such women?

So pay $30,000 a year to send your daughter to an elite school founded by a woman who condemned marriage as “subjection,” and encourage your daughter to become a varsity college athlete, but do not accuse me of ignorance when I tell you where this pursuit of feminist “equality” is likely to lead. Some stereotypes are true, after all, and if you accuse a Southern man of ignorance, he’s apt to take your accusation as an insult. If you then add injury to this insult by imputing to him a cowardly fear, you have forfeited any consideration of courtesy by which he may otherwise have been constrained.

“One stereotype is that everyone at Bryn Mawr is a lesbian.”

Gosh, ma’am, I wonder why anyone would think so? The motto of Bryn Mawr is Veritatem dilexi, “I delight in the truth,” yet the school’s founder was less than truthful about her purposes. M. Carey Thomas despised men and marriage, but she expressed this disdain only in private, except for one occasion when, during a chapel lecture, she declared of Bryn Mawr’s students: “Only our failures marry.” This caused something of a scandal, and Thomas claimed she had been misquoted, but it is evident she did consider marriage incompatible with feminist “success,” even if she concealed this attitude from the parents of the girls she recruited to Bryn Mawr College. She established Bryn Mawr School in Baltimore as “one of the first college-preparatory schools for girls in the country,” and would no doubt heartily approve of Coach Kirr’s return to her alma mater as assistant athletic director. Mission accomplished.

Certainly we ought to congratulate Bryn Mawr School on their success in achieving the feminist goals toward which M. Carey Thomas aimed, teaching girls to avoid the “failure” and “subjection” of marriage to men.

Veritatem dilexi — “I delight in the truth,” and as for the truth about feminism, why pay $30,000 a year for your daughter to learn it? But maybe they still teach Latin at those elite schools. IYKWIMAITYD.



 

Category: Education, Gays, Sex Trouble

In The Mailbox: 11.28.16

Posted on | November 28, 2016 | Comments Off on In The Mailbox: 11.28.16

— compiled by Wombat-socho


OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: Geraldo Rivera, Asshat Of The Day
Michelle Malkin: Flashback Monday – A Reminder of The RefuJihadis Who’ve Waged War On American Soil
Twitchy: Sorry, Jill Stein And Friends – David Axelrod Rains On Recount Parade
Louder With Crowder: KARMA – Pro-Castro Kaepernick Gets Booed, Slaughtered By Miami Dolphins
According To Hoyt: Their Beards Grew Longer Overnight


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: The Murdering Tyrant Castro Is Dead
American Power: Harry Stein – No Matter What…They’ll Call This Book Racist
American Thinker: After Trump University, Why Not Sue All Colleges?, also, Let California Go
Animal Magnetism: Goodbye, Blue Monday
BLACKFIVE: True Faith And Allegiance – A Jack Ryan Novel by Mark Greaney
Da Tech Guy: Pat Austin – Mass Shooting In New Orleans While Landrieu Fiddles
Don Surber: Media Mourns Castro’s Death While Americans Cheer, also, Jill Stein Raised More For The Recount Than For Her Election
Dustbury: Strange Search Engine Queries, also, As The Fakers Go Rolling Along
Jammie Wearing Fools: The Left’s Lunatic “Hate” Hysteria
Joe For America: Texas Governor Abbott to Sign Law Banning Sanctuary Cities
JustOneMinute: An Unexpectedly Positive Appraisal Of Steve Bannon
Pamela Geller: Tennessee Muslim Students Call For Annihilation Of “Jewish, Zionist Dogs”
Power Line: Recount Freakout, also, A Selection Of #TrudeauEulogies
Shark Tank: Miami Reacts To Fidel Castro’s Death
Shot In The Dark: Holiday Season Open Letter to Minnesota/National Public Radio
STUMP: Lazy Sunday – Elections, Math Thoughts, And Pension Adds Invade My Thoughts
The Jawa Report: Jawa Lame Duck Thanksgiving Dinner That Can’t Be Beat, also, Sandcrawler PSA – Save Bigfoot!
The Political Hat: Psychological Warfare – Subversion And Control Of Western Society
This Ain’t Hell: Obama’s Veteran Healthcare Zombie, also, Veterans Protest Hampshire College Protest
Weasel Zippers: Mexico Fights Trump Deportation Plans, Helps Illegals Stay In U.S., also, Trump Threatens To “Terminate” Obama’s Lovefest With Cuba
Megan McArdle: The Enrollees Who Actually Didn’t Even Need Obamacare
Mark Steyn: A Monster And His Suck-Ups


Today’s Digital Deals
Cyber Monday Deals
Amazon Warehouse Deals

Category: Linkagery

Herbert Kornfeld Was Certainly Smarter Than Krugman, My Basset Hound. Also, The NYT Economist Dude. #TrudeauEulogies

Posted on | November 28, 2016 | Comments Off on Herbert Kornfeld Was Certainly Smarter Than Krugman, My Basset Hound. Also, The NYT Economist Dude. #TrudeauEulogies

by Smitty

Those who’ve been on the net for a while may remember Herbert Kornfeld, tragically felled by a politically correct scythe right around the time Barack Obama rose from useless to famously useless, back in 2007.

Apparently, the Northern Lightbulb is a little less dim for having been pilloried by pretty much the entire Western Hemisphere, modulo Cuba.

Lambasting this knob has been the most fun I’ve had on Twitter in too long. Here are a few more eulogies:

Category: humor

Late Night With Rule 5 Sunday

Posted on | November 28, 2016 | 3 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Post was delayed by a futile search for sexy but non-pornographic pics of the late Florence Henderson. The management regrets any inconvenience caused by the delay, but it’s still not our fault if you click on the following links at the wrong time or in the wrong place.

Leading off this week is Ninety Miles from Tyranny with Hot Pick of the Late Night, Morning Mistress, and Girls With Guns, followed by Goodstuff with Dana Delaney and Sexy Cyborgs, Animal Magnetism with Rule 5 Darwin Award Friday and the Saturday Gingermageddon, and The Last Tradition with Bella Thorne and Kate Upton.

EBL’s herd of heifers this week includes Diane Sykes, Inga Arvad, Ivanka and Why Trump Won, UFOs, Donkey Milk, Betsy DeVos, Emmy Rossum, and Florence Henderson.

A View from the Beach serves up I Blame Donald Trump for Olivia Culpo, Time For an Adjustment?, What Are You Grateful For?, Happy Thanksgiving!, Who Let the Dog Out?, When Is Bullying Based on National Origin Appropriate?, Porn Star Apologizes for Helping Trump, JLaw Castigated for Saying Something Sensible, and Redheads Get Into Blue on Blue Dispute.

At Soylent Siberia, it’s a Whole Lotta Rosie for your coffee creamer, an Auburn Awesome Monday Motivationer, Tuesday Titillation Poster Girl, Humpday Hawtness Slip N’ Slide, Latent Lingerie, and Weekender Viola.

Proof Positive’s Friday Night Babe is Alexis Bledel; for Vintage Babes,it’s the Thanksgiving Edition, and Sex in Advertising is covered by Scarlett Johansen. Also, a non-obligatory 49ers cheerleader! At Dustbury, it’s Sela Ward and Chrissy Teigen.

Thanks to everyone for their linkagery!


Visit Amazon’s Intimate Apparel Shop
Amazon Fashion – Jewelry For Women

Category: Rule 5

‘Little Old Liberal White Ladies’

Posted on | November 27, 2016 | 3 Comments

Kevin Williamson hits it brutally hard:

The Democratic party is an odd apparatus in which most of the power is held by sanctimonious little old liberal white ladies with graduate degrees and very high incomes — Hillary Rodham Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, Randi Weingarten — while the manpower, the vote-power, and the money-power (often in the form of union dues) comes from a disproportionately young and non-white base made up of people who, if they are doing well, might earn one-tenth of the half-million dollars a year Weingarten was paid as the boss of the teachers’ union. . . .
The Democratic base is not made up of little old liberal white ladies with seven-, eight-, and nine-figure bank balances, but the party’s leadership is.

(Via Memeorandum.)

 

Category: Democrats

FMJRA 2.0: After Black Friday

Posted on | November 26, 2016 | 4 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Rule 5 Sunday: Getting Ready for Thanksgiving
Animal Magnetism
Ninety Miles from Tyranny
A View from the Beach
Proof Positive
EBL@RedState

Gay Marxists Hate Donald Trump
ThoughtOffense
EBL@RedState

FMJRA 2.0: The Stars And Stripes Forever
The Pirate’s Cove
A View from the Beach
EBL@RedState

Step One: FAIL
Inconceivable!
EBL@RedState

You Did It! Thank You!
EBL@RedState

In The Mailbox: 11.21.16
A View from the Beach
Proof Positive
EBL@RedState

In The Mailbox: 11.22.16
Regular Right Guy
Proof Positive
EBL@RedState

Politico ‘Journalist’ Resigns After Doxing Trump Supporter Richard Spencer
Regular Right Guy
EBL@RedState

‘F–k Your Fascist Beauty Standards’
EBL@RedState

Women’s Studies Professor Accuses Trump Supporters of ‘Terrorism’
EBL@RedState

In The Mailbox: 11.23.16
Proof Positive
EBL@RedState

Welcome to Trump Territory
EBL@RedState

It was a short week, and perhaps inevitably, a lot of people came up short of the cutoff for the Top Linkers post. EBL would have led the list as usual,  with twelve. Still, thanks to everyone for their linkagery!


Today’s Digital Deals
Cyber Monday Deals

Category: FMJRA Award

Personal Or Ethnic, Slobodan Miloševic Clearly Understood Hygeine #TrudeauEulogies

Posted on | November 26, 2016 | 2 Comments

by Smitty

Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau beclowned himself today, and the Twitterati afforded him all the mercy that Fidel did Cuba:

Trudeau acknowledged the late president was a “controversial figure,” but remembered him as a “larger-than-life leader,” who made significant improvements to Cuba’s education and health-care systems.

“A legendary revolutionary and orator, Mr. Castro made significant improvements to the education and health care of his island nation,” Trudeau said.

“I know my father was very proud to call him a friend,” he added.

Category: Uncategorized

‘Girl Power’ and Honor in Pakistan: The Unsurprising Death of Qandeel Baloch

Posted on | November 26, 2016 | 2 Comments

“I am a social media sensation, I am a fashion icon. . . . I’m a girl power. So many girls tell me I’m a girl power, and yes, I am.”
— Qandeel Baloch, July 14, 2016

Fame is a dangerous commodity, and shockingly cheap in the Internet age of DIY social media, where young people can become minor “celebrities” on the basis of YouTube videos and Instagram accounts.

Qandeel Baloch (neé Fouzia Azeem) became known as “Pakistan’s Kim Kardashian.” She “shot to fame for her provocative selfies and videos in the conservative Muslim country,” as the Guardian reported in July after the 26-year-old was murdered by her own brother, Muhammad Waseem. Her mother said that Waseem “killed my daughter after being taunted by his friends. They would infuriate him and tell him she is bringing you dishonour.” Qandeel was from a poor family, and claimed her family forced her into an unwanted marriage to “an uneducated man” at 17:

I said, ‘No, I don’t want to spend my life this way’. I was not made for this. It was my wish since I was a child to become something, to be able to stand on my own two feet, to do something for myself.
But then they married me off when I was 17, 18. I was not happy and never accepted him as my husband.
What do you think will happen in a forced marriage? With an uneducated man, an animal. . . .
I never accepted him as my husband in my heart or mind.
How I spent a year and a half with him, only I know. And I only did it because of the child. Otherwise I wouldn’t have spent even one month with him. . . .
The kind of torture he has inflicted on me, you can’t even imagine. Why? Because I was cute, I was young. He was older than me. He didn’t trust me. I don’t know why. I couldn’t connect with him on an intellectual level. Our ideas were very different.
Then I had a child, so I sacrificed. I spent a year and a half with him. After the child, I told him I want to study. I want to complete my education, I want to get a job, I want to stand on my own two feet. But he never agreed. . . .
My family never supported me. I would say I don’t want to live with him, but they didn’t support me.
That man tried to throw acid on me. He said ‘I’ll burn your face because you’re so beautiful’. And today the media isn’t giving me any credit for speaking about empowerment of women, girl power.

The brutal violence suffered by women in Pakistan includes attacks where women are disfigured by having acid thrown on their faces:

According to New York Times reporter Nicholas D. Kristof, acid attacks are at an all-time high in Pakistan and increasing every year. The Pakistani attacks he describes are typically the work of husbands against their wives who have “dishonored them.” . . . According to a New York Times article, in 2011 there were 150 acid attacks in Pakistan, up from 65 in 2010. However, estimates by the Human Rights Watch and the HRCP cite the number of acid attack victims to be as high 400-750 per year.

“Muslims commit 91 percent of honor killings worldwide,” Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch says, noting that Islamic law sanctions such murders: “Until the encouragement Islamic law gives to honor killing is acknowledged and confronted, more women will suffer.” In a 2010 article for Middle East Quarterly, Phyllis Chesler reported that 58 percent of honor-killing victims were murdered for being “too Western” — an accusation that can mean “being seen as too independent, not subservient enough, refusing to wear varieties of Islamic clothing,” dating a non-Muslim or “wanting to choose one’s own husband.” In the West, female celebrities engage in provocative behavior and men are accused of “misogyny” for criticizing them, but any woman in an Islamic nation who attempts to emulate such behavior risks consequences far more serious than sexist jokes. Qandeel Baloch had 43,000 Twitter followers and more than 700,000 on Facebook, the BBC reported, and used her social-media presence to spark outrage. In June, she posted selfies posing with an Islamic cleric, Mufti Abdul Qavi, and told Pakistan Today the conservative Muslim scholar was “hopelessly in love” with her. That publicity stunt may have led to her murder three weeks later:

Waseem said he killed his sister due to her social media activities, which included a series of risque video posts with the prominent cleric, Mufti Qavi.
Qavi was suspended from the Ruet-e-Hilal Committee in the controversy following the video posts.
Speaking to Geo News today, Qandeel’s mother accused Mufti Qavi, her daughter’s former husband Ashiq Hussain, and a man name Shahid of being involved in the murder.
She claimed her son Waseem carried out the murder on the advice of Mufti Qavi, and that the cleric “provoked” him into killing Qandeel. She claimed Waseem was also in contact with Qandeel’s former husband Ashiq Hussain.

Pakistani blogger Ahmed Ali reacted to her death:

Rebellious. Irreverent. She was a jester figure in the court of public approval and approbation, staking out a claim in territory not meant for respectable, shareef women. . . .
Hers will be spun by our conservative media into a cautionary tale of risk/risque assessment: a prudential, risk-averse guide listing things not to do if you want to stay alive as a (Muslim) woman. So we return to a caricature of that age old weighty question of the trade off between liberty and security. Apologists will say she was her own biggest security risk, conveniently ignoring that nothing she did, and no sort of expression anyone undertakes, should ever warrant concern for one’s fundamental safety. It is the year 2016. . . .
Always that askance aslant consideration of the woman’s background; tacit suggestions of her own complicity in inviting death by asphyxiation. Many in our press are obituarizing Qandeel as a woman who shouldn’t have been killed despite her ways. Aw. Thanks. That’s kind. Charitable. Just what her brutalized body and soul need right now. . . .
The news is on right now and they’re constantly saying: ‘Ghairat ke naam qatal kur diya’ (‘they killed her in the name of honour’). It’s being repeated over and over. . . . By constantly repeating the motive of notional honour, you’re reinforcing that honour and ratifying it; you are ceding it further ideological ground. This is the net reverberative effect, at least. It has become a national soundbite. . . .

You can read the whole thing. The kind of violent terrorism by which Islamic law is enforced — and especially what that violence means for women in  Islamic countries — is something Western feminists do not want to recognize as a legitimate concern in politics and policy. You are an “Islamophobe,” feminists screech, if you call attention to the honor killings, clitoridectomies and other methods by which Islam oppresses women, not accidentally, but deliberately and with at least tacit sanction of Muslim religious leaders. That this brutality can and does come to the West via immigration is attested by the Pakistani “rape gangs” in England, as well as the sexual attacks that have terrorized women in Germany.

Being a critic of both feminism and Islam, and certainly not a fan of the narcissistic “selfie culture” that Qandeel Baloch represented, I perceive an irrepressible conflict between these contending forces. The Christian, the conservative and the libertarian — we each have different perspectives on the challenge to the West presented by Islamic culture and sharia law. The Christian, like the Muslim, deplores the gratuitous exploitation of sexuality that Qandeel Baloch symbolized. The conservative views “girl power” as a decadent expression of egotistical selfishness. The libertarian defends the exercise of free expression, including the right to criticize expression we do not like. It is our liberty, more than anything else, which radical Islam threatens. And women have a greater reason to fear Islam, for it is their liberty which Islam would most curtail.

We cannot defend our liberty by silencing critics of Islam — or by silencing critics of feminism, or by silencing criticism of celebrities. As I keep saying, however, Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It, and by trying to limit freedom of expression feminists are the unwitting allies of radical Islam. The “progressive” allies of feminism are not going to protect American women from radical Islam. One reason so many women voted for Donald Trump is because they understood that Hillary Clinton — who left four Americans to die in Benghazi — was not the kind of leader who was determined to defend our nation against the terrorist menace that is growing ever more deadly:

Two Pakistani men have been accused of cutting their 40-year-old sister’s eyes out “with a sharp knife” and chopping off her feet, marking the latest high-profile “honor” killing in the Muslim-majority country where such murders are on the rise and many go unreported. . . .
Pakistan’s independent Human Rights Commission has revealed that “honor” killings of women have increased by nearly 20 percent in the last few years, from 869 in 2013 to 1,096 last year, adding that most of the victims were shot but also attacked with acid.

In a country where this kind of violence is routine, the murder of Qandeel Baloch may have been shocking, but it wasn’t really surprising.



 

Category: Islam, Pakistan, Sex Trouble
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin