Posted by Tina
A father in Dubai blocked the rescue for his drowning daughter for her “honor.” Say what?
The father’s daughter began to drown a short distance from shore when lifeguards began the attempt to rescue her. But the father — who is apparently very strong — restrained the lifeguards from doing their job because “he prefers his daughter being dead than being touched by a strange man.”
Crazy people!
What a disgusting excuse for a father.
From the PJ Media article:
“That there isn’t a worldwide outcry against this outmoded code of “honor” by feminists and human rights groups is understandable when you realize they are far more enamored of bending the knee to multiculturalism than they are in saving lives of women.”
There absolutely IS a worldwide outcry against this code of “honor” by feminists and human rights groups, so this is an unnecessary strawman argument. This writer clearly has an axe to grind with feminists and human rights groups, but isn’t willing to find out what their actual positions are on this issue. Claiming that feminists don’t speak out against honor killings out of fear of offending Muslims is a common anti-feminist tactic, but it isn’t true. Here are several feminist and human rights groups speaking out about honor killings:
http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/women-s-rights/violence-against-women/violence-against-women-information
http://www.stopvaw.org/honor_killings
https://www.hrw.org/report/2004/04/19/honoring-killers/justice-denied-honor-crimes-jordan
It’s a shame this writer felt the need to use this story to drive a wedge between different political groups. Nearly all Americans of any political stripe would recognize that this man’s actions were insane and evil. Instead of uniting with feminists and human rights groups in opposition to honor killings, this writer decided to mislead his audience into believing that they are a-OK with such disgusting practices. Shame.
Chris: “There absolutely IS a worldwide outcry against this code of “honor” by feminists and human rights groups”
If there is it isn’t as visible as environmental protests or the protests in Ferguson. The sense of outrage is not evident, not in any significant way. The PJ Media author has a point.
“… Instead of uniting with feminists and human rights groups in opposition to honor killings, this writer decided to mislead his audience into believing that they are a-OK with such disgusting practices.”
Poor babies…and they have been so willing to “unite” with others over issues such as religious groups wanting to opt out of Obama birth control rules. They have been willing to be at least suspicious of Planned Parenthood in calling for investigations. The number of groups seeking an exception to Obamacare is miniscule and these groups still would not give an inch!
These groups would not unite to condemn Bill Clinton as they did Clarence Thomas. With Thomas it was “the seriousness of the charge.” Evidence didn’t matter. Please stop trying to preach. You support groups that have a terrible record of noncooperation and resistance to unity.
Your leadership continues to associate with and give consideration and support to terrorists and their supporters. These are the most radical offenders of all. Feminists and human rights groups continue their loyalty to these leaders…shame on them…where is the visible outrage?
The outrage against honor killings by feminist and human rights groups may not be visible to you, but it certainly is to anyone who actually follows feminist and human rights groups–and not just second hand through right-wing media sources.
I’ve seen you show a lot more outrage against Obamacare than you have about, say, Bill Cosby’s multiple sexual assaults. It would be unfair to imply that this means you are OK with rape. People are allowed to have different priorities. Ferguson is an American issue–of course you are going to hear more about it than honor killings, which are very rare in America. Environmental issues affect everyone. Of course you are going to see more protests about that than issues which mostly affect the Middle East.
Stop acting like your media exposure is the end all be all of what happens in the world. I’m sick of people who’ve never so much as read a feminist blog “Where is the feminist outrage?” or people who don’t know a single Muslim IRL asking “Where is the Muslim outrage?” Google is not that hard. Find it.
Chris: “Of course you are going to see more protests about that than issues which mostly affect the Middle East.”
Why? Huge outrage was expressed in America over Apartheid in South Africa. Nelson Mandela became an American hero. Left activist Harry Belafonte organized the creation of an American benefit single for African famine relief, “We Are the World.”
It’s nonsense to think problems in other nations don’t grab the attention of Americans and cause them to protest. It’s perfectly reasonable to notice that feminists, who supposedly stand up for women, have not taken this on as a loud, in your face cause.
Of course it could be that it’s political correctness. No one wants to fall victim to the Muslim radical’s threats of death for criticism of the religion.
Feminists have a duplicitous record through the decades. We’ve pointed out the hypocrisy many times.
I don’t blame you for being “sick of criticism. But my criticism isn’t based on what I read but what I don’t see, outrage and public protest.
So even though I showed you evidence that feminists have protested honor killings, now you’re complaining that they aren’t protesting “loudly” enough, whatever that means. There is no winning with you.
A. I’m not complaining. Complaining is low level expression.
B. Chatting on a blog does not rise to the same level as protest in terms of exposure. The protest organized against Wall Street and the 1% was ongoing and visible for months, for example. Even you can recognize that a protest of that size is more visible or “loud.”
C. I had activist feminists in mind and could have said so.
D. My purpose is to expose the fact that it isn’t principle but politics that drive activists feminists.
If you wanted to win with me, which I doubt, you would have to notice that what I said is true whether it’s emotionally comfortable for you or not. Feminists were willing to destroy Clarence Thomas just for being conservative. They didn’t just write letters to the editor but went so far as to drum up false charges of sexual harassment brought before the American people in a phony congressional hearing. That was back when the media had absolute control of the narrative. They were outraged that a conservative might serve in the SC and they were determined to take him out. They made sure the protest was VISIBLE!