Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Give Me That Old-Time Feminism

By Barbara Ehrenreich, Huffington Post. Posted July 10, 2006.


While Muslim women are being stuffed into burkas, American post-feminists are trying to stuff their feet into stilettos.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Barbara Ehrenreich

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Feminism, as you've probably been reading for the last 20 years, is dead. Most women today want to smash through the glass ceiling, run for the Senate, and buy contraceptives at will (not to mention abortions, at least if the fetus they're carrying turns out to be "defective.") But feminism? It's just a bunch of hairy-legged, man-hating harridans screaming slogans that were already obsolete in the era of Charlie's Angels.

The latest nail in the coffin comes from Ana Marie Cox, the famed blogger known as "wonkette," in her snarky review of Katha Pollitt's new book Virginity or Death! And Other Social and Political Issues of Our Times (New York Times Book Review, July 2).

All right, I have a personal stake in this: I wrote a blurb for the book, I'm a friend of Pollitt, and I'm a little on the strident side myself. In her review, Cox is irritated, among other things, by Pollitt's criticism of women who have their little toes amputated so they can squeeze into stilettos. Cox confesses that her own first thought -- "OK, maybe not the first" -- on reading about "pink-ectomy" surgery was, "Does it really work?"

Cox is not the first post-feminist to denounce paleo-feminists as sexless prudes. Ever since Andrea Dworkin -- a truly puritanical feminist -- waged war on pornography, there've been plenty of feisty women ready to defend Victoria's Secret as a beachhead of liberation. Something similar happened in the 1920s, when newly enfranchised young women blew off those frumpy old suffragists and declared their right to smoke cigarettes, wear short skirts and dance the Charleston all night.

Maybe there's a cycle at work here: militant feminism followed by lipstick and cocktails, followed, in a generation or two, by another gust of militancy. But this time around the circumstances are vastly different. In the 1920s, women were seeing their collective fortunes advance. The Western nations were granting them suffrage; contraceptives were moving beyond the status of contraband. Contrast those happy developments to today's steadily advancing war against women's reproductive choice: the banning of abortion in South Dakota, fundamentalist pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control.

Worldwide, the situation is far grimmer, as fundamentalist Islam swallows one nation after another. Iraq, once a secular and fairly woman-friendly place by Middle Eastern standards (although Saddam had no use for actual feminists), is degenerating into a contest between misogynist factions of various sectarian stripes. Somalia, which had been reasonably secular, just fell to the Islamists, who have taken to attacking insufficiently covered women in the streets. Then there's Indonesia, where, in some regions, women lacking head scarves or sporting cosmetics now face arrests for "prostitution," and women found in public with unrelated men can be publicly whipped.

I've always liked to think that feminism is the West's secret weapon against Islamism. How can an ideology that aims to push half the human race into purdah hope to claim the moral high ground? Islamic feminists would fight Islamism, and we Western feminists would offer our sisterhood in the struggle. But while Muslim women are being stuffed into burkas, American post-feminists are trying to stuff their feet into stilettos. Who are you going to call when the morals police attack you for wearing eye shadow in Kabul or flashing some ankle in Tehran -- a wonkette?

Cox seems to have missed the irony of Pollitt's title "Virginity or Death!" This isn't Pollitt's choice, but the kind of choice being imposed on a growing number of women throughout the world. The deeper irony is that women's right to wear lipstick, show skin, and consort with men in public go hand in hand with their rights to vote, own property, and purchase contraception. Outside of brothels, you don't get the stilettos without suffrage. So, yes, maybe the paleo-feminists who chanted and marched for equal rights get a little tiresome at times. But you can thank them for your belly button jewelry and your right to display it in public.

Digg!

Barbara Ehrenreich is the author of 13 books, most recently "Bait and Switch: The (Futile) Pursuit of the American Dream."

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
It's important to remember: it's 70s style feminists that are wrong
Posted by: Bobsays on Jul 10, 2006 1:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is 70s style femiists who are soft on islamic fundamentalism. We have been at war with a menacing islamic fundamentalism officially for 5 years now, and yet you will never find any 70s style feminists making it a critical issue for them to debate, let along supporting the military who are right now trying to keep this plague at bay.

Modern women like to enjoy their freedoms. Modern women find it both pathetic and offensive that 70s style feminists spend their time attacking Ayan Hirsi Ali (the brave muslim woman who calls islam's bluff), and tell us all to have a healing circle with the ladies in Burkhas. I see everyday more and more women wearing Burkhas. This is not progress; and we should be saying so.

There needs to be a hardline on our freedoms and to say clearly that we don't support this community's oppression of women.

If academic feminists stopped naval gazing and actually a) engaged with real issues out there, b) get some courage and actually support the instruments we have that are there to protect us from encrouching islamo-fascism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What's a "70s style feminist"? Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: What's a "70s style feminist"? Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: What's a "70s style feminist"? Posted by: ChristopherLL
» Yes, but...... Posted by: morticia
Men are scared of women, and women are scared of themselves
Posted by: bttl on Jul 10, 2006 3:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think men are scared of women- and by keeping them "down" they are able to neutralize their power, keeping it for themselves. It is no different here than in burkaland. In both cases, the women join in. If women truly wanted the power, they would resist at all costs. But they don't. I think women, in general, are afraid deep down of being a powerful woman. There is no other reason to go along with the right-wing fundamentalist crap that is slowly eroding women's rights here in the US. But if women defer to men, they can step back from being truly responsible for themselves, financially and otherwise. It's too easy for far too many women to just step back and let the men do it.

I for one am disgusted with what I see happening here on this level in the US. If I see one more article on how women are leaving the workforce to stay home and bake cookies I will puke. The real issue should be about creating a worklife that works for families- period. Both men and women should be able to spend real time, not "quality" time with their families, communities and other interests.we'd all be better off for it.

As for stilettos and toe amputation- only a woman would even consider wearing such elements of torture. Lets bring back foot binding! Men, if you've noticed, wear flat comfortable shoes. The only torture they submit themselves to is ties, and those are phallic symbols anyway.....

A good first step would be for women to dress comfortably and safely- not with the pleasure of men in mind. Men don't go shoe shopping wondering how their legs will look in that pair, nor would they consider having their toes amputated, nor would they ever get a "Brazilian". As much as I appreciate some of what has been accomplished by the feminist movement, I do wonder about this backlash trend. Seventies feminists would have descended upon the hapless pharmacist who refused to fill a prescription for the "morning-after"pill for sure-

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» A knotty problem Posted by: knocko
» Right on, sister. Posted by: sln70
» RE: ight on, sister. Posted by: knocko
» RE: ight on, sister. Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: ight on, sister. Posted by: Aussie Kim
» RE: ight on, sister. Posted by: kittynboi
» stop hallucinating Posted by: Burton
Here We Go Again
Posted by: ChristopherLL on Jul 10, 2006 3:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here we go again. Now those "women" in Islamic states have become the new war cry from feminists who can find a female victim anywhere. It is their culture, not yours. If a woman who actually lived within that social and political environment for any reasonable length of time wrote about conditions and persecution then I would listen. Otherwise stick to your own society and culture. You haven't even got that right yet as I perceive from the resentment, torment and confusion of what I have read.

Finding the right balance between body and mind is not only a challenge to women but to many men as well. Focusing on the intellectual and denying the body, or visa versa, will always result in frustration. As for power you keep talking as if political power is most important. I disagree. The power to be a mature adult and raise healthy children, in my view, is most important. I say this about women and men. Regardless of the position you attain in life financially, socially or politically if you have not been true to yourself and taken care of life around you (beginning with the life you bring into this world) then you will leave behind empty legacies. At least that is my personal experience.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Here We Go Again Posted by: Samantha Vimes
» RE: Here We Go Again Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: Here We Go Again Posted by: Overlord
» RE: Here We Go Again Posted by: MatthewSavage
» RE: Here We Go Again Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: Here We Go Again Posted by: CollD
» RE: Here We Go Again Posted by: resistance8
» RE: Yeah, Here We Go Again Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: Yeah, Here We Go Again Posted by: Shehova
» RE: Yeah, Here We Go Again Posted by: ChristopherLL
» Reading for ChristopherLL Posted by: tcunning
» RE: eading for ChristopherLL Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: eading for ChristopherLL Posted by: tcunning
» RE: Here We Go Again Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: Here We Go Again Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: Here We Go Again Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: Here We Go Again Posted by: CollD
one thing
Posted by: rsaxto on Jul 10, 2006 4:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We need a weapon that will kill only one thing: stilettos.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: one thing Posted by: Aussie Kim
It's all the same
Posted by: anothername on Jul 10, 2006 4:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If a person craves political power, he will rise to that power regardless of the type of nation or political structure. Similarly, women who dress in mini skirts or in burkas do so for the same reason, i.e., conformity to the standards of their time and place.

When I read the Cairo Triology by Nobel Prize winner Naguib Mahfouz, I was struck by how women and men read meaning into how the women's coverings were wrapped or how much of the body was shown "accidentally."

The Amish seem to be the only group that has some equality of clothing. That is not to say that the men and women wear the same outfits, but that there are specific outfits to be worn by each gender.

As for stilettos, they can be used to inflict pain when attacked. That, to me, makes chopping off a toe to fit into the shoe slightly more logical than binding feet so they remain ultra small and useless, putting silicone or saline implants into one's body to have bigger breasts, or letting someone take a knife to one's face just to look a few years younger for a short time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's all the same Posted by: HeroesAll
» RE: It's all the same Posted by: rrecroc
luzmejor
Posted by: luzmejor on Jul 10, 2006 5:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seems everyone is still focused on treating women as a group, rather than as individuals within a group.

People who base their social philosophies on such a strategy are always going to miss the truth. At worst, they are actually straying into prejudice based on physical characteristics alone.

The rights of citizenship are guaranteed by the US Constitution in America.

So the arguments that women (or men) must look or act a certain way to claim ordinary respect are always going to be false.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: luzmejor Posted by: sln70
the Taliban versus neowar?
Posted by: mwildfire on Jul 10, 2006 5:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So "70's style feminists" have it wrong because we won't support the women sinking beneath the waves of fundamentalist Islam--by supporting a new Crusade against a religion with a billion adherents? Maybe it's because, not having been born yesterday, we realize that attacking Islam militarily will strengthen, not eliminate, the fundamentalism within Islam. If people still believe that the way to deal with an ideology you don't like is to kill its adherents, there isn't much hope for the human race.
And the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq is certainly NOT being untertaken on behalf of the women there--the motives are much more CRUDE (pun intended) than that. Do you notice the perfect correlation between support for those wars, and support for Christian fundamentalism, which is attacking women's freedoms in America exactly the same way the fundies are attacking it in the Middle East?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Off the Islamostuds Posted by: knocko
» RE: Off the Islamostuds Posted by: Aussie Kim
» RE: All your assertions are wrong Posted by: churchofone
» very funny Posted by: Burton
Who Cares about Islamic Women???
Posted by: sirossisofliver on Jul 10, 2006 7:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even as a male feminist, I don't give a tuppenney vomit about women in Islamic cultures....so long as they stay there, and I don't have to see them walking around dressed like an un-made bed in my neighbourhood!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Who Cares about Islamic Women??? Posted by: demidesigrrl
because as long as some of us are in chains
Posted by: okcamp on Jul 10, 2006 8:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
none of us are free

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes, women's condition worldwide is the issue. No, it's not about clothes.
Posted by: Sojourner on Jul 10, 2006 8:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As yet, there's not a lot we can do about the oppression of women in other cultures. The Shrub's influence on population control is dastardly. Someday, however, the women elsewhere may have a lot to teach us. And, yes, that includes enjoying the power that women have to attract men.

In the US. I do not expect the struggle to preserve and extend the rights and protections of women and children to ever get easier. Yes, we have a long way to go. Yes, we've also come a long way. (If the worst of the "rollback" is illustrated by SD and needing to shop elsewhere for contraceptives, I think we'll survive.)

I also am an admirer of Katha Pollit, and using the critical review as an excuse to promote her book is a familiar commercial strategy. BFD. Yawn.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It's partly about clothes Posted by: hagwind
» Read amatullah below Posted by: Sojourner
» Huh? Posted by: hagwind
» Manipuable Men Posted by: BlueTigress
» Least of their worries Posted by: nonwhiteperson
» RE: Least of their worries Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: Least of their worries Posted by: nonwhiteperson
» RE: Least of their worries Posted by: kittynboi
» Right on Posted by: nonwhiteperson
Pink-ectomy, wtf????!!!!
Posted by: demidesigrrl on Jul 10, 2006 8:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are women actually having this done? Crikey.

I do not consider "post-feminists" feminists. From what I have seen, it's just REAL Women reinvented (google Phyllis Schafly). At the same time, I'm surprised that the author of "Nickel and Dimed" would not talk about the class issue when it comes to fundie Islamist oppression of women. Feminism in the Middle East is often a luxury of the privileged classes, just as it is becoming here. That is not to say that poorer women are not struggling bravely - just that most of their struggles go unattended to while ivory tower academics debate 'Sex in the City'.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We don't want your brand of feminism
Posted by: amatullah on Jul 10, 2006 9:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks once again for telling Muslim women what we should want.

Most of us have little desire to gad about half naked. To wear hijab is a decision made by each individual Muslimah (Saudia, Afghanistan and Iran notwithstanding). Contrary to popular belief our hijab (headcovering worn by Muslimahs) liberates, rather than oppresses us.

This condescending, even imperialistic attitude is how the progressive movement constantly pushes away Muslims (and religious people in general) especially Muslim feminists.
"Western" feminists (as an American, I like to think that includes me) should be aware that, for over 1000 years, Muslim women have enjoyed rights not given to American women until the 20th Century, i.e., the rights of inheritance, the rights to work and control one's own money, the right of redress through courts, etc, etc.

I am thoroughly sick of the patronizing attitude of so-called feminists, who act as though a woman's brain falls out the moment she dons hijab. "Feminists" will rush to defend the rights of a woman harrassed for wearing a mini-skirt, but turn a blind eye to a woman harrassed for wearing hijab. If you were truly concerned about equality for women, you would acknowledge that one of the most basic of those rights is freedom of religious expression.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» THANK you Posted by: Crazy H
» And yet... Posted by: Blue Heron
» good going guys Posted by: Blue Heron
» RE: THANK you Posted by: socgrrrl
» Hmm Posted by: Blue Heron
» RE: Hmm Posted by: ezilla
» Absolutely not Posted by: HeroesAll
» RE: THANK you Posted by: redjenny
» redjenny you're right! Posted by: resistance8
» RE: THANK you Posted by: Kym525
» RE: THANK you Posted by: amatullah
» RE: THANK you Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: THANK you Posted by: AmyB
» "YOUR" brand of feminism Posted by: Kym525
» RE: "YOUR" brand of feminism Posted by: amatullah
» That's not true Posted by: resistance8
» RE: That's not true Posted by: fork
» RE: "YOUR" brand of feminism Posted by: Aussie Kim
» RE: We don't want your brand of feminism Posted by: famouspipeliner
» Burkas at the beach Posted by: famouspipeliner
» RE: Burkas at the beach Posted by: amatullah
» RE: Burkas at the beach Posted by: Kym525
» Right on! Posted by: resistance8
» RE: Burkas at the beach Posted by: redjenny
» RE: Burkas at the beach Posted by: nonwhiteperson
» Topless at the beach Posted by: famouspipeliner
» RE: Burkas at the beach Posted by: Aussie Kim
» You are missing the point Posted by: Bobsays
» Amen Posted by: Blue Heron
Meh...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Jul 10, 2006 11:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Feminism, as you've probably been reading for the last 20 years, is dead.

Not dead, just irrelevant.

I'd like to think we've moved on to humanism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Meh... Posted by: sirossisofliver
» RE: Meh... Posted by: Aussie Kim
Trivial Responses to an important issue
Posted by: outsidea on Jul 10, 2006 12:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Barbara E. and for that matter Katha have long been in the forefront of the fight for women's emancipation from what was a male dominated western European culture. Our Declaration of Independence and the subsequent Contstitution of the United States were written by white male property owners (many of them slave holders) and were not meant to emancipate women in any way and discounted Native Americans out of hand while consigning the captives from Africa to that of chattel property.

I wish Barbara had spent more time talking about working class women especially rather than ignoring for the most part the whole class issue. Choice and the ready access to women's health clinics that provide access both to effective contraception and abortion are crucial to working class women.

The responses to her essay here were surprising in both their apparent ignorance and the trivial content. The trolls were busily at it as usual and as usual made fools of themselves. Too bad actually, the subject is extremely important.

Joseph

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Why is this wrong? Posted by: Burton
» RE: Why is this wrong? Posted by: Aussie Kim
» Question for Joseph Posted by: Burton
Feminism, old fashioned?
Posted by: saywhat? on Jul 10, 2006 7:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
well, unfortunately i was unable to read 'wonkette's" review...maybe i am just behind the computer bell curve, which is probably a big contribution, however, stilletos, and break a toe to get in them??? personally nah uh...do you know how valuable your toes are in walking? i'd rather implant a third breast! Then, I'd be somebody!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Geographical and historical clothing
Posted by: suprmark on Jul 11, 2006 1:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As I understand, the hajib was originally worn by rich Muslim women to show others that they were respectable; they were copied until only prostitutes didn't wear it. Those wearing it were praised in the Koran leading others to infer that it should be mandatory. But to most Muslims they choose to wear it, just as other religious people choose to wear their religious symbols. Telling someone they don't have to wear something gets dangerously close to telling them they shouldn't wear it and can lead to unfair pressure on those who choose to do things the old way (after all we've done to let you have a choice you're going to wear it/not work/have the baby anyway!?!).

You know what I don't understand? Why people in the desert wear so much clothing. When I'm hot I take off clothing; it is so hot there I would think that they'd be wearing nothing at all! Or I turn on the fan; just to let you know, there is a lot of wind blowing all over the place in the desert. Women all over the world should be liberated now from their shackles of overprotective clothing. No need for stupid cloth to protect anyone from the sun's rays or the sand blown by the wind. What works for us works for you - come on FREEDOM!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Like a fart in a Burkha Posted by: Bobsays
» RE: Like a fart in a Burkha Posted by: Aussie Kim
» RE: Like a fart in a Burkha Posted by: redjenny
» RE: Like a fart in a Burkha Posted by: Aussie Kim
» desert wear Posted by: Burton
Ignorance
Posted by: Aussie Kim on Jul 11, 2006 6:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Somalia, which had been reasonably secular, just fell to the Islamists"

Are feminists meant to be so ignorant and openly bigotted? Somalia has not had a government for 14 years, which must be some sort of world record.

If the "Islamists" have taken over, I wonder who they've taken over FROM? The trees that have started growing back into the cities and towns because there are no services set up to cut them back?

There are almost NO services available in Somalia. The new leaders might be those dirty Muslims you hate so much, and maybe they do require women to cover up a bit, but I bet you anything they will be helping to set up government services to the best of their ability, trying to end war and violence in their country and maybe even trying to get Somalia back on its feet again.

Woe is me - what terrible aims to have!

Does Somalia have oil? Why do you CARE what flavour of leaders they have?

Wanna call yourself a feminist? try seeing outside of your candy-coloured, stiletto-filled, shoe box...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» good point Posted by: resistance8
» RE: Ignorance Posted by: Burton
» RE: Ignorance Posted by: Burton
Toes and ribs
Posted by: BlueTigress on Jul 11, 2006 7:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think anyone who would amputate her toes to fit into a particular shoe is a fool. I thought women in the 1800's who had ribs removed to be able to cinch down to a smaller waist were fools (this was an extremely limited practice BTW).

I wear stilettoes when I feel like it. When I'm at work I wear flats or low heels because I need to move freely. And usually pants, so I don't have to worry about "showing" anything.

The hijab thing DID start as a fashion statement: look at me, I can afford all this cloth, then it did become standard attire.

It's a nuisance that women have to worry about how much skin they're showing.

Get a grip, guys. You're supposed to be civilized. If you can't look at a woman without thinking about sex, you shouldn't be allowed out in public except on a leash. If all you can think about is sex, you need a hobby.

Golda Mier had the right idea when there was a rash of rapes; don't put women under a curfew, put the men under a curfew.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» BlueTigress is a bigot Posted by: Burton
So why don't women fight for freedom?
Posted by: Burton on Jul 14, 2006 10:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's a solution. Why don't we [or the Pentagon] organize feminists into volunteer units which will go fight against Islamicists who are oppressing women? With proper training and arming, women make just as good soldiers as men (and I speak with some experience from the Army). We can then send these units to Afghanistan and such in order to liberate women.

I mean this quite seriously.

Comments?

And any women on this topic who would volunteer?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

no feminists in islam?
Posted by: chomsky on Jul 21, 2006 11:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You just met one.
Stop being prejudiced and it will do all women a favor.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

NEWSFLASH
Posted by: chomsky on Jul 21, 2006 11:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wear hijab. and i'm PROUD. No man tells me to. I don't live in a Muslim country, and yet I still do it.
would you call that being chained?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]