Mark Greene notes the horrific story of the Afghan child bride who has become the face of women’s rights in Afghanistan, and wonders how much progress we’ve really made in women’s rights.
For those who say that women now have social and political equality, I would like to offer the following story from the Associated Press. It begs the question. Which women are we talking about?
The AP reported, “KABUL, Afghanistan — The in-laws of a child bride who became the bruised and bloodied face of women’s rights in Afghanistan have been sentenced to 10 years in prison for torture, abuse and human rights violations, a judge said Saturday.
The plight of 15-year-old Sahar Gul captivated the nation and set off a storm of international condemnation when it came to light in late December. Officials said her husband’s family kept her in a basement for six months after her arranged marriage, ripping out her fingernails, breaking her fingers and torturing her with hot irons in an attempt to force her into prostitution.”
To see the story on the Huffington Post go here. WARNING: GRAPHIC PHOTOS.
Some questions:
1) How does the treatment of women worldwide inform our American conversation about women’s rights?
2) How does the multi-billion dollar prostitution black market affect women both here and abroad?
3) Is the battle for women’s rights successfully completed or only just beginning?
4) Does the discussion of women’s rights in some way detract from the battle for men’s rights?
About Mark Greene
“Who makes the most hiring decisions?”
Women. There are more women managers than men managers today. Further, over 90% of HR Direvtors and VP’s are women. So, women hold a great deal of power in hiring, firing, laying off, AND compensation. So, if companies are discriminating against women by paying them less for the same quality and quantity of work, most likely a woman made that decision.
Hey Eric.
I was wondering if you had links or books or studies you can point to about the two factoids you mentioned (women being the majority of managers and 90% of HR directors/VP’s being women).
It’s not that I doubt you, but if I were ever to mention that, I would like to have proof to substantiate the claim.
Another point to make is that, since 90% of HR directors are women, this would also put power into these women’s hands in terms of any internal discrimination/sexual harrassment investigation companies do.
It has already been proven that female teachers grade boys worse than girls. Why wouldn’t we expect the same kind of activity in other spheres?
John, the correct figure is >70% of HR Managers, per the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. I can’t get to the exact link since I’m at work but it’s based on their 2007 data.
Is Brutality Against Women Getting Worse?
I think what’s getting people all a flutter is that you are asking this question and then presenting a single story as if to say “yes it is getting worse”.
You may have been trying to go for something to the effect of showing that stuff like this happening shows how brutality against women is deeply ingrained and then say since it is deeply ingrained then yes it is?
I’ve seen a few times women’s advocates talk about how wrong it is when angry MRAs bring up a single story of female against male violence and try to claim that that one story proves that female againt male violence happens as much as male against female violence. (But oddly a lot of women’s advocates quite literally cannot talk about female against male violence without always talking about how women have it worse, which doesn’t seem to happen when talking about say, women and suicide…)
It’s quite remarkable to me how much baggage people bring to this question:
Is Brutality Against Women Getting Worse?
Some condemn the question out right. As if that question is, in itself, not to be allowed in our public discourse. If extremists in the past have hijacked the dialogue and pulled to much focus to women, then this seems like a good place to speak to that as some have done quite eloquently.
But people who seek to define what questions can or can not be posed based on unfounded suppositions regarding the writer’s motives are not contributing anything to the dialogue.
Mark,
Firstly you define what I see as *debatably* valid criticism as denial of your right to pontificate about whatever you want. It’s not.
Secondly, I think what people are responding to is that your article falls in line with a deluge of “muslim countries oppress women” (the un-spoken implication is that they oppress *ONLY* women).
This single-minded doggedness of defining the harm of extremist muslim as a narrative that involves only or primarily women’s suffering from these cultures downplays and minimizes what these cultures do to men too.
I remember 4 or 5 years ago a story that became a battle-cry of feminists in which a roving gang of 5 thugs broke into a car in which an unrelated (and unmarried) man and woman were kissing.
I don’t remember what the court did to the hoodlums, but the sharia-indoctrinated court sentenced the woman to a lashing for not wearing her veil in the presence of an unknown man not married to her.
The forgotten part of this story was that A) the man in the car was *also* raped by the thugs and that B) the man in the car was *also* sentenced to a public lashing for asking the woman to lower her veil.
The monologue coming out of western media outlets is that extreme muslim countries = oppression (only) of women, and this is totally wrong.
All good points, John.
@Danny
“I’ve seen a few times women’s advocates talk about how wrong it is when angry MRAs bring up a single story of female against male violence and try to claim that that one story proves that female againt male violence happens as much as male against female violence. ”
ht tp://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/misogyny-the-sites
The SPLC has something on their site about this:
“MensActivism
This website tracks news and information about men’s issues from around the world, with a focus on activism — and outrage. Par for the course are lurid headlines like this one: “Pakistani wife kills, cooks husband for lusting over daughter.” The site also runs stories like the one it headlined “Australia: Girl, 13, charged after taxi knife attack” that involve no abuse accusations, but are merely meant to undermine what the site claims is “the myth that women are less violent than men.” ”
@Mark G
“It’s quite remarkable to me how much baggage people bring to this question:
Is Brutality Against Women Getting Worse?”
I think it’s because “Violence against women” is such a heavily loaded term due to it’s major usage to push it up as more important than violence against men. I don’t think anyone dislikes people working on ending violence towards women, but many do dislike the proportion of coverage it gets compared to violence against men, especially considering men are the most at risk of violence (when all are summed up) worldwide. Then to have new stats showing near equal levels of violence between the genders (male to female and female to male) whilst people still talk about women suffering more it can really rile up the feathers, it’s as if there is this massive NEED to promote women as the victim more. Realize that quite a few of these commenters have probably been shamed for being male, copped criticism of their gender as being violent to the point it’s treated women as the innocent victim, men as the brute whilst many of us know that not to be true.
The white ribbon campaign for instance asks men to pledge to fight violence against women whilst women are not asked the same, and no one that I’ve seen is asked to fight violence against men in any campaign. So all of this ends up loading the topic of violence against women with a mix of anger, bitterness, even desperation for male voices to be heard.
I’m not saying this is at all justified, but I do understand why it’s so loaded and that won’t change until society itself starts to really give a damn about the men AS WELL as the women. It can be tiring to hear 90% (random number though wouldn’t be surprised if it’s legit) of the violence debate talk about how women are the victim especially if you’re a male victim of violence. Everytime I see a domestic abuse ad, poster etc showing men as the abuser and female as the victim for instance I sigh and get annoyed because I’ve NEVER seen any of the reverse in my country posted around. Seen plenty of the female-victim version, plenty of ads, even government supported I believe but the only one speaking for male victims is a website that I haven’t seen get much attention, don’t think it got government support, never seen an ad for it posted anywhere except their own website.
So it can truly be like asking the “forgotten” to care about the group that already receives the most attention, it’s a bit tiring and leaves many of us wondering if they even looked into the treatment of the men in that country for instance, did those men get ignored as well in favour of the popular careaboutwomen articles?
I know you personally didn’t do this, looks like you’re just wondering wtf is going on in Afghanistan to the women and whether the rest of the world cares so I can understand how it can be quite frustrating to see the comments here.
Here’s me the literalist again. To my mind, the “hijacking discussion” metaphor doesn’t really fit a situation like the GMP blog. Hijacking implies that there is a pilot in charge and a preset course where the plane (discussion) is supposed to go, and someone has taken over control who is not supposed to have control. Saying that someone is hijacking discussion is saying that person has taken control of discussion and taken everyone else onto the wrong heading.
In reality, though, that is not really possible, is it? If this is a hijacking, everyone on board can just ignore the hijacker and keep going to their own destinations. A discussion is not a single plane meant to me headed in only one direction at a time. Offering a question for discussion is not the same as filing a flight plan, unless there really is a conclusion that the author assumes we are supposed to reach.
No one is actually silenced by anyone else here, because there is no monopoly on the microphone. If I think someone is rambling off onto a tangent, I can just scroll down. Clearly no one really can hijack discussion, because someone can come along at any time and say the discussion is being hijacked, let’s go somewhere else.
I just think that “hijacking” is a bit of an overstatement. (Of course, in a post 9/11 world, it’s obviously a highly charged word.)
I can see now that my original plan for a pseudonym, “DB Cooper,” would not have gone over well. Good thing I chose differently.
As far as question #4:
4) Does the discussion of women’s rights in some way detract from the battle for men’s rights?
I would say that depends on technique. For instance. The middle east is a high-conflict area. Even in this area men are far more likely to be killed and tortured than are women. If the preponderance of the stories coming out of these types of repressive areas talk about exclusively women, this leads outsiders to the opinion that only women are being killed and tortured (which is untrue), and will lead to more help for women even though they are a minority of those afflicted.
There was a very great article on glenn sacks detailing the UN Global Gender Gap Report. I don’t recall the precise name. The Glenn Sacks article talked about the procedure of the report. It tracked various stats like female political candidates as part of the total, health care, violence and other issues.
The problem is that the scoring rates as “equality” any statistic that favors women (no matter how imbalanced *against* men). In other words the best a country can score is 100 (equal) which means that in all the categories the nation has equality (or rampant female advantage) in every single one.
Despite this being a report exclusively on women, and not detailing anti-male discrimination at all, talking points about this report in new outlets were displayed in a way to state that it was a GENDER report, not a woman’s report.
In other words, the report is all but useless in terms of showing male discrimination, or female advantage.
This seems to be more and more the type of technique that is being used across the world. Because harm to women = $$$$$$. Western societies seem to have their heart-strings (and purse strings) pulled when harm befalls women. Therefore charities know that they have to inflate this (look to the extreme hype of the slave-sex-trade in which it was bandied about 50,000 slave prostitutes were to be sent to Germany for the world cup, and despite many thousands of man hours, incentivization for informants etc… only two forced prostitutes were found).
Highlighting violence against women only hurts men, when these types of underhanded techniques are used. Unfortunately, the heads of orgs are extremely incentivized to use these techniques and are not called to task for using them.
Fun fact: you’re as likely to die from violent circumstances in the US as many Near East countries. I’m on my phone now or I’d link the stats. That’s not directly related, but you mentioned the Near East being a cinflict zone and I thought I’d just comment on that.
Hi Heather,
That seems like a rather astonishing figure. In layman’s terms I would say that this stat does not pass the “sniff test”, but then what the heck do I know?
I’d love to see the details on those figures.
Heather, early in the Iraq War someone ran the numbers and found that a young balck man was safer in Baghdad than in Washington DC, IEDs and all.
I don’t have those figures either, but I’ve often wondered about the whole idea that “The Middle East” is an especially violent place compared with anywhere else. If you only count some forms of violence, sure, but if you include things like the murder rate, I’m guessing that North America is technically just as “violent” a region (maybe more so) than the Middle East.
I also doubt the Middle East is inherently “unstable” compared to the rest of the world. It could be true, but I would like to see a logical explanation of that conclusion, in real comparison to the rest of the world.
Ah now that I’m at my computer: http://violentdeathproject.com/
That’s the link. Now, I’m not exactly sure how accurate it is. At the very least it’s all very transparent where the data is coming from and what data is being included. Anyway, assuming it is accurate, it’s really interesting.
Unfortunately it’s also a year old, so the stats for a couple of places could be a bit off.
How about this:
Is violence *by* women getting worse?
ht tp://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2318229/posts
A Kuwaiti ex-wife set fire to the women and girls tent at her exes new wedding killing 42 women and children. This has been totted as the most violent DV incident ever.
I don’t have agenda. I just want to post this question to have a discussion and air out people’s biases.
Is violence by women getting worse?
I seem to recall a rather deafening silence on this story. The only way a man can kill 42 people like that and the story not make headlines is if he didn’t get caught (even though I think if such a body count was known and there was a suspect I think the resulting manhunt would get more attention than this did).
But to answer your question I’d say that this one case would not be enough to say yes to it one way or another. However if you were to add it to other cases of women commiting violence.
Like the woman that killed and cooked her husband because he lusted for their daughter (yes such lust is certainly wrong but even if he did act on it, and I don’t think it was shown that he did, that wasn’t right). Oddly the only two times I recall seeing it mentioned in the States was a mention at mensactivism.org and the SLPC trying to say mensactivism.org was spreading hate for having such a “lurid” title (which was verbatim copy/paste from The Examiner).
ht tp://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/myths-of-the-manosphere-lying-about-women
I found this on it, was there another? and lol @ them stating the CDC stats when the cdc stats show in a 12 month period sexual abuse was pretty much equal numbers.
Actually John D,
Have you considered writing an article on this question? Are women getting more violent? Might be a good way to air the data on violence by women in relationships. That’s where most women commit violence. I mean why bury what would be an interesting discussion at the end of this article? If you don’t want to, can I?
I had 1 article about society’s toleration of violence on men in media as comedy turned down. I seriously doubt that one on female violence would be approved.
Also, crime data shows that violence by women is climbing at a very fast clip (especially among teen girls) at a time when boys violence is actually falling.
Show me that data on female violence. If its straightforward, I’ll post about it.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5519a3.htm
8.9% of males and 8.8% of females report IPV in the last 12 months. Data seems to fluctuate a bit, if you read stats on sexual assault keep in mind that envelopment/forced to penetrate is often left out of the definition for rape so it can heavily favour females as victims of rape since the majority of male victims suffer envelopment and aren’t included.
I’ve noticed in the statistics reported that females overall are either committing more violence towards men in all age ranges, or men are committing less so the numbers are starting to reach parity. I wanna know what is happening, but I can’t find solid year by year stats on it that is inclusive of males. Most stats I see on DV and rape generally talk about women only as victims.
Just to add to Archy’s data.
Here is a historic record of DV stats, its been known that women are violent as men since the 1970s, but the data has been suppressed.
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V75-Straus-09.pdf
Here is a paper on the methods that are used
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-gender-symmetry-with-gramham-Kevan-Method%208-.pdf
The region of the world this story emanates from has seen more invasions than just about anywhere else. And invaders have typically wanted to plant their seeds, so to speak, in the native females.Often enough, the native females have wanted them planted. It is a sensitive subject; and has been since the time of Alexander the Great.
Religion aside, the default way of thinking in those places about the appearance of un-invited outsiders is that they are there to steal or seduce their women. And surely one way they would do that is to educate girls to prefer a different sort of man than the natives are (or will quickly become). Teach them to lust after westernized men, in other words.
In other words, good luck with forcing your way into a culture like that and from the top down setting up non-traditional schools for women and girls or trying to impose western notions of female emancipation. They will see thru this shabby trick in a heart-beat.
FWIW, the main complaint about the Russian occupation there was that the Russians were mandating western style education for all the ripe young girls.
“Does the discussion of women’s rights in some way detract from the battle for men’s rights?”
It does often enough that a blog was set up specifically called “What About The Menz” in mimicry of a familiar silencing device used by feminsts on men trying to discuss men’s issues. You might ask Noah about it.
“4) Does the discussion of women’s rights in some way detract from the battle for men’s rights?”
It does when it ignores men’s rights int the same context. When we discuss the plight of women raped by tribes in Somalia and ignore the fact is is part of a campaign of terror that includes slaughtering (and raping) the men.
When we see a bus with the slogan “Stop the violence against women and children” it does. The implication that a) it is only men perpetrating the violence and b) even if it was that violence against men is therefor acceptable and thus the discussion is clearly dismissive of the importance of men’s rights as well.
When we see stories about ’1,000 killed including three women’ it does, as if the rights of 3 women to not be killed is more important then the right of 997 men.
1) How does the treatment of women worldwide inform our American conversation about women’s rights?
Mostly it does not! The racial, cultural and linguistic barriers are far too high for any rational conversation – or any form of dialogue!
1 case in Afganistan – and what is the body count in Uganda/Rwanda/Congo? DRC has a population 200% of Afganistan – Uganda has parity! Add all the the countries affected by the ongoing war in Central Africa and you have a 400% larger population to look at! What’s the issue? No CNN/FOX reporters embedded with US Military?
Is it that the Hajib is more photogenic?
2) How does the multi-billion dollar prostitution black market affect women both here and abroad?
Yes – but what does it have to do with the overall story? The question is a non sequitur.
3) Is the battle for women’s rights successfully completed or only just beginning?
Sorry? But which battle – where? … have a look at South America – Quite a few Caribbean Jurisdictions – How about Somalia – Eritrea – …. battles are not all the same, and viewing matters that way also has negative outcomes, such as retaliation! You don’t end wars by starting new battles!
4) Does the discussion of women’s rights in some way detract from the battle for men’s rights?
Nah – it’s just a mess! I don’t believe in Women’s Rights – and I have the same view of Men’s rights.
I do support Human Rights – which catches all the issues – age – disability – sexuality – and quite a few other groups too!
You do know that the largest minority on the planet are disabled people?
I wonder if there would be so much debate if the Young lady being used as a Poster Child came with a wheelchair? P^)
“2) How does the multi-billion dollar prostitution black market affect women both here and abroad?
Yes – but what does it have to do with the overall story? The question is a non sequitur.”
The girl’s inlaws we’re trying to force her into prostitution.
Thanks for some great comments, by the way.
Hmmmmm! – How many children are forced into prostitution and sexual slavery each year in Afghanistan ?
Ever heard of the Bacha bazi?
Afghanistan sees rise in ‘dancing boys’ exploitation – By Ernesto Londoño, Published: April 5 Washington Post.
It’s an odd thing about Afghanistan – if you are female the culture may keep you uneducated, illiterate, housebound and oppressed – but the risk of sexual exploitation is low.
On the other hand if you are male – young – illiterate – poverty struck – and you are unprotected, culturally you are at a massive risk of being used as a dancing boy and then subjected to paedophile rape – traded as a slave – trafficked across borders to Pakistan, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgtstan – and onto China, Russia and even globally.
You asked “2) How does the multi-billion dollar prostitution black market affect women both here and abroad?”
I responded “2) Yes – but what does it have to do with the overall story? The question is a non sequitur.”
That multi-billion dollar prostitution black market is gender neutral – and in Afghanistan it is biased a very different way!
It’s easy to ask questions! It’s harder to ask the RIGHT Questions! P^)
Poster kids are like that – they are USED to tell a story – but it’s not always an honest one – or anywhere near accurate.
Media Hound.
“It’s easy to ask questions! It’s harder to ask the RIGHT Questions! P^)”
Asking about women and prostitution can not possibly be, in and of itself, a wrong question. Its only one of the questions. P^)
How do we broaden the discussion to include boys and men without first dismissing the story of girls and women as “hyped up”? All we do is argue about the primacy of one gender or another. It’s weirdly binary, when, if we took gender out of the equation, we would all agree that the hardships of poverty, prostitution, etc. should end.
How do we broaden the discussion to include boys and men without first dismissing the story of girls and women as “hyped up”?
The first obstacle to broadening the discission is the very fact that the stories of men and boys have been dismissed in large part because the stories of women and girls has indeed been hyped up. Quote marks or not it is true. When it came to helping girls and women in education people had no problem talking about how a part of the reason they needed help in the first place was because a lot of girls and women were getting snubbed by a educational system to hyped up boys and men in certain ways.
But now that those people are noticing that men and boys are getting the short end of the stick on something all of a sudden priority one is to reassure girls and women that they are not being left hanging?
It’s weirdly binary, when, if we took gender out of the equation, we would all agree that the hardships of poverty, prostitution, etc. should end.
I agree but when your efforts to be gender inclusive (thus taking it out of the equation) are contantly met with gendered arguments it gets ugly. I agree DV is wrong but when you have an industry that is built almost entirely around the idea that DV is “something that men do to women” (in fact one of the heavily hyped arguments against Amendment One here in NC was that “WOMEN would be at risk of losing protections from partner violence” not ‘victims’ or ‘people’ but women specifically) its hard to make leeway for male victims.
I see a lot in the phrase “hyped up” that implies purposeful ill will toward men. I agree that in some quarters it was that. But on the whole, I think our cultural history, the steps we took to get here, made ignoring boys and men as victims a likely outcome. And only now are we able to view this other and equal half of the equation as of equal importance.
This living generation of men, from the 1920s on, spent decades strutting around expressing our experiences as some version of angry or macho, there was absolutely no space to discuss ourselves as victims. If things were bad you were expected to just punch back harder. “If you are too weak to avoid being a victim then its your own fault” seemed to be the mantra.
“Shake it off, crybaby.”
Women were culturally allowed to weep. To show weakness. To be victims who needed protection. (Even as they were, in some cases, victimizing men.) But ultimately, owning victimhood, although a necessary step, is the equivalent of drinking poison. It is a toxic state and one has to move past it or you end up being drained and weakened by the very forces you are in opposition to. And so, if we as men are empowered to define how we are being victimized, we should be wary of staying in that place only. Or for too long.
At least, that’s how I view it.
But we are now able to publicly claim how we have been damaged by either men or women, by either the system, or the expectations that system puts on us. And that is a crucial to moving into a state of genuine empowerment for all boys and men.
I see a lot in the phrase “hyped up” that implies purposeful ill will toward men. I agree that in some quarters it was that. But on the whole, I think our cultural history, the steps we took to get here, made ignoring boys and men as victims a likely outcome.
While that is the case that does not explain how so called progressives, who are supposedly beyond this, still manage to engage in this behavior, many while claiming to be against it.
But we are now able to publicly claim how we have been damaged by either men or women, by either the system, or the expectations that system puts on us.
I don’t think we are at that point yet.
Depending on who did the damage to you and depending on where you (culturally) there is still quite a big difference between what is allowed to be spoken of and what is not allowed to be spoken of. I mean even now when stories of female against male violence come about there are already a lot of people who have decided that such talk is an exaggeration and it detracts away from female victims (like the people who looked at the Sandusky issue and said, “I bet if those victims were girls instead of boys….”).
We are still at the point where serious attention to female against violence is on the recieving end of backlash over simply talking about it (like how the SPLC used a “lurid headline” at mensactivism.org as was proof that it was an anti-woman hate site, despite the fact that said healine was a direct copy/paste from The Examiner).
And that is a crucial to moving into a state of genuine empowerment for all boys and men.
Yes its a crucial step and once we get there it will be a big step to empowering men and boys. I just don’t honestly think we are there yet.
There are still a lot of people that don’t want to talk about male victimization. And while its great that the “come on man up!” mentality is being challenged I think we’ve now got a new mentality that needs to be challenged. The mentality of “but what about the women!” will have to be challenged as well if the empowerment of men and boys is going to really happen.
Mark.
Asking the right questions comes from acknowledging that 1) the questions exist 2) has a reason to be asked 3) has validity.
I wonder what reaction comes if you change just one word – “Asking about men and prostitution can not possibly be, in and of itself, a wrong question. Its only one of the questions.”
Now how does that read? Is it men as prostitutes – or men as clients/users of prostitutes? I jut changed one word and preserved the sense of what you communicated – but does it survive the change of just one word and carry the same meaning?
Your original question was “How does the multi-billion dollar prostitution black market affect women both here and abroad?”
Sorry – when you ask about affecting Women, is that as users or used? As I said The question is a non sequitur. The story addresses the experience of one person. How does that get Conflated into a Global issue? Where did all the hot air and gas come from?
There is an issue of Asymmetry around the word Prostitute which makes people always see it as meaning only one thing – and affecting women only one way, and men affecting others. That is why the term “Sex Worker” is used – it is gender neutral – leaves a whole load of baggage behind – and if people wish to throw baggage about it gets picked up ever so quick and they are told to stop!
I do wonder how some are affected by the multi-billion dollar prostitution black market, and just how much more it would cost them for a night of passion if the people they pay for came at a full market rate! P^)
I know too many women – with means, motive, opportunity and ready cash who are only too happy to Tip the Cabbana Boy and have such a wonderful time. I have even had to deal with women who had fantasies of bedding a virgin boy (12-13), and having to report them to the relevant authorities when they went from Fantasy to delivering a personal reality. But then again, I know oh so many women who like some muff! It’s odd how when a woman pays another woman for sex that big P word never seems to get trotted out!
I’m no prude and neither are the people I know and work with! I just find it fascinating how some words have an automatic Asymmetry of gender – and as such carry loaded implications that have to be handled with great care.
I still wonder when there will be action to deal with the “Sandusky’s” of Afghanistan?
Maybe when the reconstruction and nation building has progressed to the point that the schools have shower blocks so the kids get abused there … well then it may get noticed. Odd thing though – The showers are unlikely to ever get used due to Moslem Religious Practice and the covering ‘awrah
Maybe if it turns out that a whole Gym Class in down town Kabul is a cover for Bacha bazi trading?
Maybe a poster of one of the boys dead and mutilated bodies would do the trick?
It’s odd how Custom and Practice get twisted to allow abuse to be committed.
Such a pity that they are seen as feminine boys and not made to wear a Burk-ha or Ha-jib. But then if they were, I’m sure that some would see it as some off gender related activity and just miss the issues that some see as irrelevant.
Being sodomised in a culture where to be sodomised it a criminal matter, and you face execution – well it does tend to make the Bacha bazi have to be complicit in their own abuse – because if they speak out death is a bit of a poor solution and outcome. One of the issues around the Bacha bazi is how a whole culture is silent – because if one person says the truth it runs the risk of the victims death.
Which is worse – being made to marry your rapist, or being executed for being raped? There is quite a difference, and it’s the boys who face death.
So maybe some need to get over both their gender and racial biases and even worse, so that reality can be a factor and not just Propaganda and Political Abuse of the victims.
I don’t do “hyped up” – I do reality. Not the reality of people living in suburbs with 2.4 kids and cable etc – I deal with the reality of people, just as they are, where they are and who they are. Only when you do that can the right questions be asked!
Reality has three factors -The Time – The Person – The Place. If a question deals with THE Person’s Time and Place it may have validity. When it only addresses what other people “Think” that reality is, it is not a question. … and all too often it’s just misuse and abuse of the person’s reality.
Oh and for the record; DynCorp International – We Serve Today For a Better Tomorrow
Bold Added.
Link Added.
Odd aint it how it was a supposed Tribal Dance – and then concerns as to Pedastry came out – and the political fallout – big money – Politics all about … and the matter that did not get discussed was?
Maybe the victims? Why would it matter – they were only boys.
Now if it had been girls ……. one has to wonder if there would not have been Banging and Bible Thumping from the pulpit of every TV Evangelist? … but no, just silence and Politics abounding.
Oh how some wish that video had come out! It would have gone viral – and you never know one of the kids may have been photogenic enough to become the poster child!
And it’s not just Afghanistan! Odd how that does not get mentioned – and how if affects a number of countries – all with oil reserves – and Contractors on the ground – Drilling – Exploring – Keeping everyone happy ….. Sorry my geopolitical knowledge around Oil and the worlds largest untapped oil reserves is showing …. but a picture is easierLink … and you also have to know what is flowing from where and to who.
Huff post has some fascinating comments about the dancing that went on in Afghanistan.
1) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-isenberg/its-dj-vu-for-dyncorp-all_b_792394.html
2) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/08/wikileaks-reveals-that-mi_n_793816.html
WOW, my response was not only moderated but eliminated. I guess I’m the only one that will know why because I am the only one that knows it’s content. Glad I cut and paste so I have the word document. All I can say is to the moderators that I am shocked and you know why. Please moderators, please contact me and let me know what was so offensive? Thank you.
My apologies to the moderators … my post regarding the elimination of my previous response was inaccurate …. Sorry for my jumping to conclusions
I’m glad that’s the case. Not moderating this week and so was clueless.
Hello Everyone,
Just letting everyone know that we’re a couple moderators short this week. If your comment ends up in moderation for an extended period chances are that’s the reason. Please have patience. Thanks.