Lying for Mo

Mar 15th, 2013 11:18 am | By

The Guardian had a bit more yesterday on UCL’s decision not to be besties with iERA any more. Most of it we already know, in fact some of it could have come from here, but it tells us some new things.

Saleem Chagtai, head of PR at iERA, expressed disappointment at the ban and denied that the group had tried to enforce segregation at the event.

The group has put a time-lapse video of the audience taking their seats before the event on YouTube. But as there is no sound, it does not reveal whether or not men and women were asked to sit separately when they came into the lecture theatre.

It is also unclear whether the video ends when the whole audience had arrived and taken their seats.

The time-lapse video is totally unhelpful, and it’s laughable that they pointed to that to back up their claim of no enforced segregation. Mostly what the video shows is that there were very few women visible.

Chagtai claimed that the group had offered audience members separate seating, with mixed-sex seating at the front of the lecture theatre with rows only for men and women who wished to adhere to their religious beliefs further back.

He said: “I would classify segregation as people saying, ‘you’re a man you sit there, you’re a woman you sit there’. We understood that we could not enforce separate seating but we could facilitate it.”

Uh huh. Try that with other terms.

Chagtai claimed that the group had offered audience members separate seating, with mixed-race seating at the front of the lecture theatre with rows only for whites and blacks who wished to adhere to their religious beliefs further back.

He said: “I would classify segregation as people saying, ‘you’re a white you sit there, you’re a black you sit there’. We understood that we could not enforce separate seating but we could facilitate it.”

It’s not a thing that should be “facilitated.” The world doesn’t need people “facilitating” inequality and domination/subordination.

UCL spokesman Dominique Fourniol said representatives of iERA met the university’s senior administrative officer, vice provost Rex Knight, and a diversity officer on Tuesday when the issue of segregation was thoroughly examined. He added that the event was not originally booked by iERA but an individual.

Oh yes? That grad student in the chemistry department perhaps? That sounds like more trickery and deception and bait-and-switch.

Speaking of trickery…Christopher Roche – the guy the iERA tried to eject from the debate for sitting in the “women’s” section, you remember – told me about this piece in the Standard and especially the comments on it.

chris

Salahuddinlives20 hours ago

This debacle is unbelievable. UCL would not exist as an academic university without the Muslims. In fact UCL should apologise to the the Muslims and be thankful to them. WHY? Because the institution that we know today as university a centre of academic excellence only came into existence because of Islam. The Oldest University in the world University of Al-Karaouine: Located in Fes, Morocco, this university originally was a mosque founded in 859 by Fatima al-Fihri, A WOMAN. It developed into one of the leading universities for natural sciences.

ChrisRoche1 day ago

In fairness, we only made a complaint against the fact that they didn’t let us sit between the women. Why should anyone be offended if I sit besides them??

MichelleSuzu1 day ago

Because you are a PERVERT Chris. We CHOSE to sit separately from the men, but you FORCED yourself on us.

That “ChrisRoche” who commented? That’s not Christopher Roche. The deceptive trickster shits impersonated him.

Notice “Salahuddinlives” – perhaps the same commenter who commented here as both “Adam Stanford” and “Salahuddin” on Monday. And I doubt that “MichelleSuzu” is a woman at all – the same person probably did all three comments.

What sleazy people they are, these people who want to take away our rights.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



The Muslim Brotherhood says NO to equality for women

Mar 15th, 2013 9:43 am | By

The Muslim Brotherhood has issued a statement denouncing a proposed statement by the UN Commission on the Status of Women because it “contradicts principles of Islam and destroys family life and entire society.”

The 57th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), taking place from March 4 to 15 at UN headquarters, seeks to ratify a declaration euphemistically entitled ‘End Violence against Women’.

That title, however, is misleading and deceptive. The document includes articles that contradict established principles of Islam, undermine Islamic ethics and destroy the family, the basic building block of society, according to the Egyptian Constitution.

This declaration, if ratified, would lead to complete disintegration of society, and would certainly be the final step in the intellectual and cultural invasion of Muslim countries, eliminating the moral specificity that helps preserve cohesion of Islamic societies.

Ah yes good old “moral specificity” that makes it ok to pretend women are inferior and subordinate, along with good old pseudo-anti-imperialism used to shore up theocratic imperialism. It’s a cute trick, pretending that rights for women amount to “intellectual and cultural invasion of Muslim countries.”

A closer look at these articles reveals what decadence awaits our world, if we sign this document:

3. Granting equal rights to adulterous wives and illegitimate sons resulting from adulterous relationships.

4. Granting equal rights to homosexuals, and providing protection and respect for prostitutes.

5. Giving wives full rights to file legal complaints against husbands accusing them of rape or sexual harassment, obliging competent authorities to deal husbands punishments similar to those prescribed for raping or sexually harassing a stranger.

6. Equal inheritance (between men and women).

That’s decadence, is it? Not treating women who have non-marital sex as having no rights – that’s decadence? Not treating marital rape as perfectly fine is decadence?

7. Replacing guardianship with partnership, and full sharing of roles within the family between men and women such as: spending, child care and home chores.

Jesus god – it’s decadent to treat women and men as equals as opposed to making men the guardians of their wives, as if women were children?

8. Full equality in marriage legislation such as: allowing Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men, and abolition of polygamy, dowry, men taking charge of family spending, etc.

9. Removing the authority of divorce from husbands and placing it in the hands of judges, and sharing all property after divorce.

10. Cancelling the need for a husband’s consent in matters like: travel, work, or use of contraception.

These are destructive tools meant to undermine the family as an important institution; they would subvert the entire society, and drag it to pre-Islamic ignorance.

The Muslim Brotherhood urges the leaders of Muslim countries and their UN representatives to reject and condemn this document, and to call upon this organization to rise to the high morals and principles of family relations prescribed by Islam.

And these are the people who are in power in Egypt, along with the Salafists, who are even worse.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



“We have no money to escape.”

Mar 15th, 2013 9:12 am | By

There were two other girls shot along with Malala that day. One of them is trapped at home in Swat, unable to go back to school.

Due to complications, her home recovery lasted several months. To this day, she endures severe nerve pain and still does not have full function of her hand.

“I want go to school even if the Taliban comes for me again. I will never give up,” Kainat said. It was a gentle resolve, the kind of fortitude that cannot be taught, only earned. When I told her I was a doctor, she beamed. “I want to be a doctor too, so I can help people.”

The “I” in the story is Seema Jilani,

a physician who worked extensively on medical evacuation flights for critically ill children. She specializes in pediatrics and has done humanitarian aid work in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Israel, Lebanon, Egypt and Bosnia.  Reporting for this piece was done during a trip to Pakistan in November 2012.

Kainat is much worse off than Malala.

Since the shooting, neighbors have repeatedly told Kainat to stop going to school. Some have even accused her of inviting the Taliban’s wrath onto the community. When I asked her why she kept the shawl from the shooting, she responded: “It is the only emblem of my life, with the stain of my blood, my struggle.”

Weeks later, I woke to the shrill jingle of my mobile phone. Kainat was scrambling for breath and anxious. There had been an explosion at the house next door to hers. “Maybe it was a natural gas explosion, but maybe it was the Taliban. They blame me. I wake up with nightmares. The neighbors all tell me to leave.” Her voice splintered, “We have no money to escape. I am scared for my life.”

Despite her valiant efforts, Kainat has only been able to attend school twice since last December. All modes of transportation — buses, taxis, and private cars — refuse to drive her to school. She studies from home now. The Pakistani Army has cautioned the family that their safety cannot be guaranteed outside their home, so they remain under house arrest after dark. Kainat has not left her home in over three weeks.

There is no physical therapy available for her wound recovery, nor is there any mental counseling for her PTSD. For this brave 15-year-old girl, there are no visits to friends’ homes, no trips to the market. She cannot even walk outside her home.

Jilani has been trying to get help for Kainat, and getting nowhere.

Shazia Ali has set up an Indiegogo fundraiser for Kainat. It’s at $920, aiming for $5000.

Please spread the word.

Thanks to Avicenna for spreading the word.

 

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



I can apostasize if I want to, and so can you

Mar 14th, 2013 6:11 pm | By

Sign up to Maryam’s call for action to defend apostates and blasphemers, if you haven’t already.

More than two hundred individuals and organisations have already signed up to the call for action to defend apostates and blasphemers. Individuals include Iranian Campaigner Mina Ahadi, Lebanese writer and actress Darina al Joundi, Algerian author Djemila Benhabib, Scientist Richard Dawkins, Moroccan atheist Imad Iddine Habib, Algerian Secularist Marieme Helie Lucas, Iraqi Kurd women’s rights activist Houzan Mahmoud, Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasrin, Iranian/German author Siba Shakib and writer Ibn Warraq amongst others. Supporting organisations include Atheist Alliance International, Atheist Foundation of Australia, Equal Rights Now – Organisation against Women’s Discrimination in Iran, Organisation of Women’s Freedom in Iraq, Polish Rationalist Society, and The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science. The updated list of signatories can be found here.

Strength in numbers!

 

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



iERA Investigates

Mar 14th, 2013 5:01 pm | By

iERA has issued a press release with the heading

iERA Investigates Complaints about Seating Arrangements at the debate, “Islam or Atheism: Which Makes More Sense?”

It reports that UCL doesn’t want iERA doing any more talks at UCL, because of the gender segregation.

UCL’s reasoning is that they do not allow enforced segregation on any grounds at meetings held on campus and their assertion is that “attempts were made to enforce segregation at the meeting (sic).” iERA complied with the request from the University to cater for all preferences by having seating that was open for all attendees, male or female, and two sections to accommodate those that wished to adhere to their deeply held religious beliefs.

Ahhhhhh look how they word that, the tricksy buggers. They make it look as if the university requested two sections to accommodate those that wished to adhere to their deeply held religious beliefs. I don’t think the university did request that – although according to what Fiona McCallum told Chris Moos, they did say that would be “fine” – which was a big mistake.

We also adhered to UCL’s request to make sure that the respective areas were clearly marked and ushers were employed in order to facilitate the seating.

Did the university request that? How interesting if so. Reminiscent of signs saying “white entrance” and “colored entrance.”

iERA is an inclusive organisation and its lecturers are the most popular on UK campuses.

The most popular on UK campuses? I don’t believe that for a second.

iERA aims to bring different people together and with this goal seeks to accommodate varying needs. It is a common practice amongst Muslim communities across the UK, based across different schools of thought, to have separate seating arrangements for men and women out of modesty.

So everywhere they go in the UK, Muslim women demand that men evacuate the premises out of modesty? I don’t believe that for a second either.

In light of this iERA accommodated various preferences on the matter, whether religious or non-religious, by having areas to suit everyone. iERA has a responsibility under the Equalities Act 2010 to accommodate any reasonable adjustment to enable all members of society fair access of opportunity including those of religious orthodoxy.

Bullshit. iERA does not have a responsibility under the Equalities Act 2010 to force its own horrible theocratic rules about shoving women to the back on everyone else. On the contrary. It has a responsibility not to.

UCL claims to have received some complaints from attendees who say they were asked to sit in a different section to what they chose. In a formal meeting we asked UCL to furnish us with details of those attendees and they were not forthcoming. We then offered UCL our entire guest list to check the email addresses to that of the complainants, they declined this also.

Ah. iERA tried to get UCL to identify the people who complained. Oddly enough, UCL didn’t feel obliged to help iERA bully the people who objected to gender segregation on university property. Good for UCL.

iERA is an organisation committed to constructive dialogue between people of all faiths and none, people of all colours, creeds or sexual orientation so it takes any complaints very seriously. In the absence of co-operation from UCL (although we are hoping that this will no longer will be the case), iERA is conducting an internal investigation with immediate effect. If we find there were any failures on implementing the agreed guidelines on the day, we will be the first to admit this and we will apologise for not honouring our word to UCL, our attendees as well as the general public. This is in accordance with the ordinance from Almighty God who states in the Quran, the final testament to mankind:

“You who believe, uphold justice and bear witness to God, even if it is against yourselves, your parents, or your close relatives. Whether the person is rich or poor, God can best take care of both. Refrain from following your own desire, so that you can act justly– if you distort or neglect justice, God is fully aware of what you do.” [Surah An-Nisa, Verse 135]

Oh fuck off.

 

 

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Tzortzis is on the schedule

Mar 14th, 2013 1:16 pm | By

Chris Moos updated us a couple of days ago, and I missed it until now.

I would like to inform you that UCL has banned the iERA, Hamza Tzortzis
organisation, from holding further events on campus:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/0313/11032013-meeting?utm_source
=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

We are now informing all universities that Hamza Tzortzis is set to
speak at, according to his website (
http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/events-media/events/islamic-awareness-tour-
2013/
) on the issue.

Next are:
11 Mar: Kings College London – “The Existence of God”
12 Mar: Salford University – “Muhammad: Liar, Truthful or Deluded?”
Chapman Building, 5PM.
13 Mar: Medway University – “Has Evolution Been Misunderstood?”
18 Mar: Aston University – “Atheism or Theism?”
21 Mar: Brunel University – TBA
King’s College London has not responded yet.
Salford University told us that “this event is no longer taking place at
the University tomorrow.”

Well done Salford University. Now for Aston and Brunel…

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Personnel

Mar 14th, 2013 1:02 pm | By

Wait there’s more. Abishek Phadnis found a conference a year ago called The Seeds of Change.

seeds

Lauren Booth – sister of Cherie Booth.

Then there’s the Deen Institute, with its “who we are” page.

deen

 You’ll have to click the link to get the full effect. I’ll just say it’s not an accident that you see men first and then women. Last of all is the brazen slut with no hijab.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Meet our speakers

Mar 14th, 2013 11:29 am | By

Allen Esterson alerted me to a real gem – iERA’s page “Meet our speakers”

allensent

Classic, isn’t it?

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Told that security would remove him from the premises

Mar 14th, 2013 11:21 am | By

The UCL student paper reports on Saturday’s exciting events.

The event, held as part of Hamza Tzortzis ‘Islamic Awareness Tour’, featured the public speaker Tzortzis debating against cosmologist and professor of Physics, Lawrence Krauss on the topic of ‘Islam or Atheism: Which Makes More Sense?’ However, attendees soon began to question the organisation of the event when an email sent by the Islamic Education and Research Academy (IERA) and the organisers of the event, informed attendees that seating allocation would be decided by “when the ticket was booked and gender”. However, when concerned students contacted UCL, they were assured by Fiona McClement, the university’s Equalities and Diversities Adviser, that all attendees were “free to sit wherever they feel comfortable”, and that this had been made clear to IERA.

And yet when the time came, this turned out not to be the case. Separate entrances, and seating separated into men’s, women’s, and a “mixed” area for couples…

…which is not what Fiona McClement told Chris Moos.

We have been in contact with the event organisers and made it clear that UCL will not permit enforced gender segregated seating.  All attendees are free to sit wherever they feel comfortable. If some female and male attendees choose to sit in separate areas, that is of course fine, however it is expected that there will be a large mixed area where anyone can sit.

A large mixed area where anyone can sit. Not couples; anyone. (But, as I pointed out at the time, the first two items aren’t entirely compatible. If “wherever they feel comfortable” for some people means “where there are no women/men” then all attendees are not free to sit wherever they feel comfortable. The two hopes can’t be combined in one space. A choice has to be made. Fiona McClement unfortunately punted the choice.)

Back to the student paper.

Christopher Roche, who had taken a seat in the same aisle as female attendees, said that he was “immediately instructed by security to exit the theatre”. He was then told that the seating policy had been given to IERA by UCL, an issue which was raised after Dr Aisha Rahman, who identified herself as a member of UCL’s Chemistry Department, suggested that the university had agreed to the segregation. After asking to return to his seat, Mr Roche was told that security would remove him from the premises for “refusing to comply with the gender segregation”. The organisers’ security staff then attempted to physically remove both Mr Roche and his friend, Adam Barnett, from the theatre, before Professor Krauss threatened to leave if the two men were removed. The organisers allowed Mr Roche and Mr Barnett to sit near the women’s section at the back of the room following the Professor’s intervention, who himself stated that he had been told in advance that there would be no segregation.

But apparently “Dr Aisha Rahman” isn’t Dr Aisha Rahman but grad student Aisha Rahman.

Mr Barnett described the situation as “a scandal”, stating that “for a London university to allow forced segregation by sex in 2013 is disgraceful”. His belief that the segregation was a violation of UCL policy was also held by Chris Moos, president of LSE’s Atheist, Secular and Humanist Society who had made enquiries to UCL about the nature of the seating before the event. Mr Moos stated that many students were “shocked” to see that although concerns as to the seating arrangements had been raised with UCL beforehand, the organisers still created “a  threatening and divisive atmosphere that was not inclusive to all attendees”.

A little bit of Talibanism in our own dear Bloomsbury.

UCL’s Provost, Malcolm Grant, released a statement addressing the event, stating that IERA’s intention to segregate the audience was “directly contrary to UCL policy”, and that it had been made clear that the event would be cancelled if the organisers attempted to enforce any such segregation. Professor Grant then went on to say IERA’s intentions were “contrary to UCL’s ethos”, and that any further events involving them on UCL’s premises would not be allowed.

Closing his statement by reiterating UCL’s policy of equality, Professor Grant maintains that segregation should not have been enforced, and that this kind of behaviour was not acceptable at UCL which prides itself on its equality.

Good. All other UK universities please note.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



The prospects for Francis

Mar 14th, 2013 10:36 am | By

CFI issued a press release on the prospects for a better future with a new pope.

Ron Lindsay’s hopes are not stratospherically high.

As with anyone taking on a position of substantial responsibility, in which decisions can affect the lives of millions, we sincerely hope for the best for Pope Francis. However, even leaving aside the fact that the institution he oversees is based on a fundamentally false understanding of reality, at this stage one cannot be too optimistic about the prospects of Francis bringing the Church into the 21st century. Indeed, even the Church’s dipping a toe into the 20th century seems unrealistic.

Like much of the Church’s hierarchy, his views stem from beliefs and myths formed in previous millennia. For example, his prior hateful statements about same-sex marriage, calling it a ‘move by the father of lies to confuse and deceive the children of God,’ indicate a mindset that gives priority to dogma over basic human compassion. His labeling of the adoption of children by gay parents as ‘discrimination against children’ shows a backward and almost flippant view of the plight of those who suffer from genuine discrimination.

We can only hope that Pope Francis proves our pessimism wrong, but all evidence suggests a continuation of a most unfortunate status quo for a deeply troubled, and troubling, institution.

A mindset that gives priority to dogma over basic human compassion – that’s it in a nutshell. It’s a bad, wrong, backward way to do things, and everybody everywhere needs to learn that.

The foundation of the dogma and the preference for dogma is “God’s law over human law.” The irony is that what they call “God’s law” is of course human law, but human law made rigid and resistant to reform and improvement by being labeled “God’s law.” They say it’s “God’s law over human law” but really it’s “dogmatic coercive unaccountable law over reformable reasons-based accountable law.”

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Con du jour

Mar 13th, 2013 5:57 pm | By

Earlier this afternoon Twitter – always helpful, always tugging on the elbow – told me to follow Cunt of the Day. Huh. No, Twitter, I’m not going to do that.

The current winners.

cuntoftheday

Cunt of the Day@cuntoftheday

A new pope as Cunt of the Day goes to the Archdiocese of Los Angeles as it pays out $10m to victims of sexual abuse. http://bit.ly/cFK35R

Cunt of the Day@cuntoftheday

North Korea’s tiny twat tinpot dictator Kim Jong Un is Cunt of the Day for making tiny dick threats of imminent war. http://bit.ly/cFK35R

Cunt of the Day@cuntoftheday

Cunt of the Day goes to officials in Fiji, condemned by the UN, who were filmed brutally torturing 2 prison escapees. http://bit.ly/cFK35R

Cunt of the Week@cuntoftheweek

Claiming to have murdered seven hostages, Cunt of the Week goes to Nigerian Islamist asshole terrorist outfit Ansaru. http://bit.ly/cFK35R

No, Twitter, I’m not going to follow Cunt of the Day.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Pick a country with a military junta in its recent past

Mar 13th, 2013 5:12 pm | By

Chris Clarke at Pharyngula quotes a comment:

As an Argentinian I can confirm your “rumours” and add that this guy was a collaborator with the military during the last coup d’etat during the 70′s : Among many things, he informed to the military that two monks that were working in a low income neighbourhood were no longer protected by the catholic church, facilitating their detention and posterior disappearance.

Mind you, to “dissapear” at that time meant to be detained by the military, held without rights or trial, possibly (and often) tortured under suspicions of being a Marxist/ “terrorist”, being completely incomunicated with your family and finally be killed and buried on an unmarked grave, or thrown form a plane into the river.

Thrown.

From a fucking plane.

Into the river. (Known as “deathflights”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_flights )

Argentina maybe not such a great choice after all, eh?

 

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Oh gee the cardinals made a booboo

Mar 13th, 2013 4:51 pm | By

Ok here we go. Stewart posted the link to a piece from January 2011 in the Guardian, on what the high-ups in the Catholic church in Argentina did to help the miliatary dictatorship get away with crimes against humanity. Is the new pope there? Does a bear shit in the woods?

The extent of the church’s complicity in the dark deeds was excellently set out by Horacio Verbitsky, one of Argentina’s most notable journalists, in his book El Silencio (Silence). He recounts how the Argentinian navy with the connivance of Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, now the Jesuit archbishop of Buenos Aires, hid from a visiting delegation of the Inter-American Human Rights Commission the dictatorship’s political prisoners. Bergoglio was hiding them in nothing less than his holiday home in an island called El Silencio in the River Plate.  The most shaming thing for the church is that in such circumstances Bergoglio’s name was  allowed  to go forward in the ballot to chose the successor of John Paul II. What scandal would not have ensued if the first pope ever to be elected from the continent of America had been revealed as an accessory to murder and false imprisonment.

Oh.

Oops!

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



“We’ll follow whatever the church says”

Mar 13th, 2013 4:16 pm | By

So maybe the new pope will be a little less ruthlessly murderous about condoms. Or maybe he won’t; at any rate we know he won’t be any less convinced that he gets to tell everyone what to do.

While the new pope is reportedly orthodox on matters of sexual morality, “he takes a slightly more pragmatic view on contraception, believing that it can be permissible to prevent the spread of disease,” according to a report in The Guardian.

What that might mean for groups like Catholic Relief Services, a humanitarian organization based in Baltimore that works to stem the spread of communicable diseases, isn’t clear. But the pope has an enormous power to shape the doctrine followed by millions of Catholics around the world.

“We’ll follow whatever the church says,” said John Rivera, director of communications for the organization, which works in 10 countries around the globe and has reached 300,000 people.

What an appalling thing to say. What an appalling institution the church is, to have that kind of power. How terrible it is that an institution like that is allowed to meddle in humanitarian work.

When it comes to stopping the spread of HIV/AIDS, the group follows an improvised version of what is known as the ABC approach. They endorse abstinence (“A”) and being faithful (“B”), but they don’t support the “C” part of prevention — condoms.

“We’ve found that this AB approach has been effective,” said Rivera.

They might as well support staying home (“A”) and washing hands often (“B”) but not support vaccination to prevent measles.

Murderous bastards.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Plus ça change

Mar 13th, 2013 2:50 pm | By

So, it’s a guy from Argentina, and he’s calling himself Francis 1.

It’s still the Catholic church though. Still the Vatican. Still a ridiculous archaic intrusive institution.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Jesus and Mo on trying to explain

Mar 13th, 2013 11:46 am | By

Atheists lack a sensus divinitatus, you see.

green

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Yemisi Ilesanmi on “other grounds”

Mar 13th, 2013 11:12 am | By

Yemisi Ilesanmi commented on Peter Tatchell’s Huffington Post article yesterday about the inadequacy of the queen’s putative “support” for LGBT rights in the Commonwealth. Her comment is a valuable short article in itself.

There is a reason many government officials especially politicians prefer the ‘other grounds’ clause to a more specific mention of sexual orientation, it gives them a leeway to squeeze out of any obligation not to discriminate, jail or kill on the grounds of sexual orientation.

Speaking as a Lawyer, Advocate and solicitor, I know from experience that  ‘Other grounds’ clause could be held to mean so many things and also held to exclude so many things by government not willing to respect the rights of others. New International human right treaties now explicitly mentioning sexual orientation, this new Commonwealth charter should not be an exception.

As someone who was part of the team that made an input into the draft Commonwealth charter, our suggestion of including sexual orientation as an explicitly mentioned ground was ignored because it made commonwealth members that want to keep discriminating and persecuting LGBTs in their countries, uncomfortable. This also means if we ever decided to use the charter as a defense of LGBT rights, we have to waste precious time proving that ‘Other grounds’ includes sexual orientation; this could have been avoided if it was explicitly mentioned.

Needless to say, in many African countries that already signed on to international treaties with the ‘Other grounds’ clause, affirming that sexual orientation is included in the ‘other grounds’ clause has been tedious for LGBT advocates. This new charter has not in any way simplified the burden borne by many LGBTs in many African Commonwealth nations.

It is good to have knowledgeable people on the case.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Leo in London

Mar 13th, 2013 10:02 am | By

You people in and near London are in luck – you have a chance to go to a talk by Leo Igwe. Grab it!

Breaking the Taboo of Atheism in Black Communities

Monday, March 25, 2013 6:30 PM to

The Hackney Picture House  

270 Mare Street, E8 1HE London, London

Leo Igwe, Nigeria’s most prominent humanist, and a human rights activist, will be giving a ground-breaking talk on ‘Breaking the Taboo of Atheism in Black Communities’ during a short visit to London to attend the NSS Secularist of the Year Award event before returning to Africa to continue his research into witchcraft.

People ‘of all hues’ who are sceptical of religion are encouraged to show their interest and support for this event as black non-believers, in London and elsewhere, start to become more confident and active in openly challenging the over-bearing presence of religion within their families and communities and its negative social, financial and educational consequences.

This talk is part of increasing efforts to encourage black non-believers to ‘come out’, to find a supportive environment when dealing with family and social reactions, to voice their opinions and be more proactive in the humanist, secularist and atheist movements. To paraphrase the African saying “It takes a village to raise a child. It takes all of us to change this religious BS”.
It is organised by London Black Atheists (http://www.meetup.com/London-Black-Atheists/ and https://twitter.com/LdnBlkAtheists) and supported by Central London Humanists (http://www.meetup.com/Central-London-Humanists/).

You are so lucky!

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Backward and in high heels

Mar 12th, 2013 5:46 pm | By

My friend Mary Ellen Foley – who blogs at M E Foley’s Anglo-American Experience Blog - shared a story with me.

So I went to a Tai Chi class today, taught by an Englishwoman who has studied Tai Chi for years, including various stints in China (one as long as 6 months), and she told some stories, including the one about how she went over there to study with a particular master and found that he didn’t like her, didn’t like women, probably didn’t like foreigners — he clearly could teach her a lot of stuff, but she wasn’t welcome and he made sure she knew it.  But she was determined to win him over, so one day she came early, picked up a bamboo broom (bundle of bamboo sticks tied together with the leaves left on at one end of the stalks), and started to sweep the leaves from the courtyard where they were going to be practicing.  The master came up, clearly unhappy with this, said something in Chinese that she didn’t understand, and took away the broom.  Hmmm.  Then here he came with a different broom, with a very short handle, and indicated that she should sweep the courtyard with that, which was a lot harder, because you had to bend over so far to do the work, but she did it.

When the translator showed up, he told her that the problem was that the long-handled broom was only for men; the short-handled one was a woman’s broom.

Wo.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



I agree with this sentiment

Mar 12th, 2013 3:20 pm | By

Oh hai, I found that photoshop of me – the one that Michael Nugent reported on last week in his post Slymepit members struggle with the ethics of removing photoshopped naked image. I wasn’t looking for it, I was looking for something else, but the location of the something else was the location of the photoshop. I had vaguely thought it was gone, but no, it’s just that it’s not embedded there any more. That was clear from Michael’s post, but I had read it somewhat hastily.

Members of the Slymepit website have spent the last few hours struggling with the ethics of whether to remove a photograph, newly posted, of an identifiable person’s face photoshopped onto the body of a naked woman.

The Site Administrator’s decision: “I have deleted the tags which embed the image, but left the link. Note: this is a picture of a naked old lady’s body onto which the head of [named person] was photoshopped. Feel free to visit the link and see for yourself, but there is nothing useful to be gained by doing so.”

Oh, sure there is. There’s the pleasure of feeling contempt and loathing for a woman you hate. Totally useful!

What I was looking for was the origin of a cryptically quoted phrase in a tweet.

blackford2Now that’s what I call feminism. Also guts. Find somebody calling me despicable, then quote it without attribution on Twitter. Free speech at its finest. Philosophy on the front lines.

So I was curious, so I googled the phrase, and it went to a page at the slime pit where they were discussing the photoshop, so I found the photoshop.

Trigger warning, if the body of an old women is the most disgusting thing you can think of. The photoshop.

I apologize to whoever the woman is in that picture. I don’t actually find her body disgusting, believe it or not. What I find disgusting is this kind of shaming.

[Note: don't run to the tip jar. You've been doing that lately as it is, so treat this one as off the record, or something.]

 

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)