DANIEL S. writes:

The establishment liberal media never seems to miss a beat when it comes to attacking the Catholic Church as anti-woman and is forever insinuating that the Church is responsible for “institutional” discrimination against women simply for refusing, for traditional doctrinal reasons, women priests. These same feminists and liberals that are full of ressentiment toward the Church on the other hand will defend the the Muslim hijab and support the continued Muslim immigration into Western nations, despite religiously-endorsed violence against women by Muslim men (and women!).

In Denmark, Imam Shahid Mehdi gained some notoriety for declaring that women who fail to wear the hijab are inviting rape. Now if the imam had been a white Republican (think Todd Akin or Rush Limbaugh) he would have been excommunicated from polite society and spent weeks being demonized by the media as waging a war on women and other such shrill rhetoric. But the good Imam Mehdi went a step further and tried sexually assaulting a Swedish woman. Such an occurrence is hardly an isolated event, and yet we see no endless stream of liberal media editorials, no cries of a war against women, no slut walks, and no FEMEN nude protests. What exactly does this tell us about the true aims and intentions of the feminist movement?

Laura writes:

One would think that resisting Muslim immigration into this country and Europe would be a priority of any ideologically consistent feminist. Why isn’t it? Because feminists are hostile to the West and want to see it destroyed. Muslim immigration therefore is good.

That said, I don’t think women in the West should campaign against maltreatment of women in the Muslim world. For one, while women in Muslim countries face violence and polygamy (something which is perhaps even more harmful for men), Westerners tend to simplify the cultural picture and disregard the extent to which women themselves support Muslim traditions. Secondly, it’s none of our business. All this is for Muslims themselves to consider. As James Kalb has written:

We in the West have our own problems, and we’re in no position to straighten other people out. Let the Muslims have a go at it where they run things and let’s leave each other alone. Each should mind his own business, barring extraordinary circumstances, and maintain boundaries for the sake of peace.

—- Comments —-

Daniel S. writes:

You wrote:

That said, I don’t think women in the West should campaign against maltreatment of women in the Muslim world. For one, while women in Muslim countries face violence and polygamy (something which is perhaps even more harmful for men), Westerners tend to simplify the cultural picture and disregard the extent to which women themselves support Muslim traditions. Secondly, it’s none of our business. All this is for Muslims themselves to consider.

I agree entirely! My point was to show the bad faith from which liberals and feminists operate from. Liberals have spent the past several weeks savaging Benedict in every article and editorial, and yet they continue to ignore or apologize for Muslim traditions that one could reasonably argue genuinely oppress women.

I have no interest in reforming or modernizing the Muslim world, I would rather just keep them out of the West. The enemy ideologies I am exposing here as bankrupt are feminism and liberalism.

Laura writes:

Thank you, as always, for your insightful contributions to this site.

Please follow and like us: