A picture Dil Nawaz shared on Facebook.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
A guest post by Reap Paden
Oct 11th, 2012 5:28 pm | By Ophelia BensonBecause it’s far too good to blush unseen in the comments.
Allow me to add “FUCK YEA!” and “Fuck you” just try and do something about me and my freedom to say any damn thing I want. You loons sit here at your circle jerk and think you effect the real world? People like me who take on people face to face will be making change while you sputter amongst yourselves. Look at how much you’ve changed my behavior so far…pfft. Ophelia Benson are you needy for attention or just like to blab blab blab? No matter do not fret you will have your wish I’m happy to speak out about you to as part of the disease called A+. Poor A+ a group of idiots too dumb to know how limited their reach. You do make for great fodder I give you that much. Nothing anything any of you can or will say will harm or hurt me I am the wall you were bound to hit sooner or later. Funny thing is I am not alone we just don’t talk to hear ourselves speak, people actually listen. Now back to the banter……
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Doin it rong
Oct 11th, 2012 5:07 pm | By Ophelia BensonA guy from Greater Manchester, Barry Thew, wore a horrible T shirt right after two police constables, Fiona Bone and Nicola Hughes, were killed. The T shirt said “one less pig perfect justice.” Nasty.
He was sentenced to four months in jail today. He “admitted a public order offence.”
A police spokesman said Thew, of Worsley Street, Radcliffe, had been arrested after being seen wearing the T-shirt in Radcliffe town centre “just hours” after the constables died in a gun and grenade attack in Mottram on 18 September.
Mr Williams said: “While officers on the ground were just learning of and trying to come to terms with the devastating news that two colleagues had been killed, Thew thought nothing of going out in public with a shirt daubed with appalling handwritten comments on.”
That’s very very unkind and unfeeling and rude. Barry Thew shouldn’t be like that. But – being unkind isn’t a crime. All his friends should give him a good talking-to, but he shouldn’t be convicted of a crime or sent to jail.
It’s a T shirt. With a handwritten slogan on it.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Just kidding!
Oct 11th, 2012 4:35 pm | By Ophelia BensonWell that’s funny. All that martyrdom stuff about stepping down was apparently just performance art. I hear that Justin Vacula hasn’t stepped down as chapter co-chair of the Pennsylvania SCA after all. Certainly he’s still listed as such.
Update October 13: now he’s not listed.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
From what clay?
Oct 11th, 2012 4:23 pm | By Ophelia BensonKamila Shamsie had a great piece on Malala in the Guardian yesterday.
Today, as Malala Yousafzai remains critical but stable in hospital following an assassination attempt by the Taliban, I watched the laughing, wise, determined 11-year-old in that video and thought of the Urdu phrase, “kis mitti kay banee ho” – “from what clay were you fashioned?”
It’s an expression that changes meaning according to context. Sometimes, as when applied to Malala Yousafzai, it’s a compliment, alluding to a person’s exceptional qualities. At other times it indicates some element of humanity that’s missing. From what clay were you fashioned, I’d like to say to the TTP (the Pakistan Taliban), in a tone quite different to that in which I’d direct it to the 14-year-old girl they shot “because of her pioneering role in preaching secularism and so-called enlightened moderation” and who, according to their spokesman, they intend to target again.
That’s a good phrase; I like it. And it does sum up what I’ve been thinking and feeling (along with countless others, I should think). What a polarity: the exceptional qualities of a Malala and the horrible qualities of the men who want her dead.
Because the state of Pakistan allowed the Taliban to exist, and to grow in strength, Malala Yousafzai couldn’t simply be a schoolgirl who displayed courage in facing down school bullies but one who, instead, appeared on talk shows in Pakistan less than a year ago to discuss the possibility of her own death at the hands of the Taliban.
“Sometimes I imagine I’m going along and the Taliban stop me. I take my sandal and hit them on the face and say what you’re doing is wrong. Education is our right, don’t take it from us. There is this quality in me – I’m ready for all situations. So even if (God let this not happen) they kill me, I’ll first say to them, what you’re doing is wrong.”
Well she did say it, but she didn’t have time to say it to the ones who stopped the school van and shot her and two other girls, so the rest of us have to say it for her. What the Taliban are doing is wrong.
For political differences, seek political solutions. But what do you do in the face of an enemy with a pathological hatred of woman? What is it that you’re saying if you say (and I do, in this case) there can be no starting point for negotiations? I believe in due process of law; I know violence begets violence. But as I keep clicking my Twitter feed for updates on Malala Yousafzai’s condition, and find instead one statement after another from the government, political parties, and the army (writing in capital letters) condemning the attack, I find myself thinking, do any of you know the way forward? Today, I’m unable to see it. But Malala, I’m sure, would tell me I’m wrong. Let her wake up, and do that.
I’ve been doing that too. Her condition is still critical. She’s been moved to Rawalpindi for more treatment.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Metamorphoses
Oct 11th, 2012 12:35 pm | By Ophelia BensonNever a dull moment, eh? Al Stefanelli has left FTB, and on his way out he did a podcast with his friend Reap Paden.
I listened to as much as I could stand, which wasn’t much. I transcribed a few high points.
Reap Paden: I guess I pissed some people off with my last. I guess the main thing – I called Stephanie Zvan a bitch. She was being a bitch.
They both agree it’s a good word. “I use it all the time,” says Al. ”So does my wife. I can understand that it’s controversial, but everyone’s entitled to their opinion.”
They say swearing is great, they like swearing. Hooray for swearing. “If it’s a word that offends you don’t use it,” one of them adds. They compare “bitch” to “fuck” and Al talks about offending people by saying fuck, and being obliging enough not to use it if he knows someone dislikes it, then they say it’s a great word and they like it.
(Commentary: yes, I like it too, and I use it quite a lot in blogging [and certainly in conversation]. I notice it doesn’t work all that well on a podcast (or radio) though, at least not the way Al and RP say it. I could explain why, but I don’t feel like it right now.
But anyway the whole discussion misses the point. “Swearing” isn’t the issue. The issue is epithets. It’s a different thing. “Bitch” doesn’t go in the box with “fucking,” it goes with “nigger” and “faggot” and “kike.” And of course “cunt.”)
RP explains why it’s fine to call Stephanie a fucking bitch repeatedly. He said “She’s a bitch and here’s why”; he didn’t just say “she’s a bitch”; he explained why she’s a bitch, so that’s totally ok.
But those stupid people got all in a lather. “Everybody’s running around with their arms over their heads screaming.” All angry and upset.
Because Stephanie’s such a fucking queen of the shit? Give me a break. Get over yourself.
Al says people aren’t familiar with your podcast. If they were, they would know what to expect. It’s like someone who tunes into Howard Stern. Nothing is sacred, there are no sacred cows, and people would get they if they listened to more of RP’s podcast. That’s how shock radio works.
That’s you, that’s how you are.
I listened to a couple of minutes more but then I couldn’t stomach any more of the shock radio schtick. I never have liked shock radio.
Meanwhile, we have new people joining FTB very soon. You will be thrilled! I promise.
Update: I forgot to add Al’s farewell post (although he apparently didn’t think of it as such when he wrote it).
Update 2: Al’s actual farewell post, which he wrote after I wrote this one. Note first two sentences:
Yes, I’ve decided to leave Freethought Blogs. Now, before you go assuming there were pitchforks and torches involved, this was my decision.
His decision.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
What’s the matter with you? Are you a lesbian or something?
Oct 11th, 2012 8:50 am | By Maureen BrianI woke up the other morning, as one does, and found myself reading, at a free speech outlet not a million miles from here, a joke. At least I think it was a joke.
Hell! I hope it was a joke. The notion was that women being systematically shoved from ‘always wear a head covering when you go out’ (which could almost have applied to my late mother) to ‘abaya at all times and a male escort if you ever go out’ should take advantage of their anonymity to create mischief. Mischief?
Where dress codes are enforced they are, in the final analysis, enforced on pain of death though the death rate may stay low. And as you read that, dear Westerner, think not of faraway places with deserts. Think trans people.
Meanwhile, in another part of the forest, a cover story is unravelling in a very untidy manner. One TV company did a story on, I think, 4 women who had been sexually assaulted, when teenagers, by a not-long-dead pop super-star. First response, in chorus, was I don’t believe this because he was a good bloke. End of story, as they thought.
As more women came forward that changed to but why didn’t they tell anyone at the time? Within minutes the news came back - they had reported, not all of them but enough to establish a pattern, had anyone been interested. Cases had been dropped, journalists had backed off, one distressed teen had been punished for telling lies about that great and good man. And so forth.
There is, at last, to be a full police inquiry and two very successful women have come out and said that their success was bought - bought at the price of having uninvited hands shoved inside their clothing when they were live on mic and broadcasting to the nation, a culture enforced by managers to whom they complained asking, “What’s the matter with you? Are you a lesbian or something?”
Should we be shocked? Yes, but only if we can be as shocked about denial of the right to a personality, to full citizenship, as we are about sexual impropriety tipping into the criminal. Anything less than this is prurience.
We are still together, right? Now, what about freedom of the mind? What about the right - which the teenage girls above were denied - to say, ‘This is what happened to me and this is the effect it had.’ And be believed!
Doing anything necessary to shut up a crying teenager may seem at 40 years distance to be a failure of empathy. Yes, but we can’t leave it at that, can we? At the time it was an abuse of power and - didn’t they tell you? - the effect of abuses of power is cumulative. It acts against the social good as it damages individuals.
So the people who have done real damage to whatever it was - we can discuss that - in the 16 months since a woman of our acquaintance put up four words of advice to the lovelorn on YouTube are not the repetitive trolls. Nor are they the idiots who have argued, inter alia, that women’s brains are entirely different in every way from men’s brains or that terms I learned in the social sciences 50 years ago are neologisms and should not be used, that the definition of a word given in a dictionary - even if that’s Dr Johnson’s original - is the only sense in which a word may ever be used, especially by a woman. No, such people are merely incredibly boring.
The destroyers have been that small handful of men who, either all the time or just when drunk, believe that they are Genghis Khan and destined to be the ancestor of just about everyone a thousand years from now. They have supporters, of course, and at two levels. First line of defence - the powerful people of all genders who address bad behaviour with a sort of gamesmanship. You know, I can get away with ignoring this, we can circulate our own version to key opinion formers, by next year no-one will remember exactly what happened and so forth. And then there is the Greek chorus, very numerous, always masked of course, who make a lot of noise but seem always to be acting from fear and have no real part in the drama.
And now, because I am not a philosopher, I can sum this up in a sentence. You do not get to barrack, harass, humiliate, exclude, disbelieve and disregard another group of your fellow humans and then call them the splitters.
Lessons of history and all that.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Is harassment just so over?
Oct 10th, 2012 5:26 pm | By Ophelia BensonHey remember sexual harassment? Those were fun times, weren’t they?
The implication is that a combination of awareness, women’s growing economic power and legislation that began with the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act and has been updated repeatedly, has stamped out the problem.
Laura Bates, who set up the website Everyday Sexism earlier this year, isn’t so sure. Like those 1970s speak-outs, her site allows women to share their experiences, and over the course of six months 7,500 entries have poured in, “thousands of which pertain specifically to workplace harassment, workplace sexism and sadly, in many cases, workplace sexual assault and even rape”. “What I don’t know is whether the prevalence has diminished or not [since the 70s],” she says. “But I do know that an Equal Opportunities Commission report in 2000 said that 50% of women still experience sexual harassment in the workplace.”
Problem not so stamped out then.
So why is there this idea that workplaces are so much better now? Part of it, perhaps, is that sexual harassment affects women at different times in their lives. Endean says it is a particular problem, for instance, for young female apprentices in male-dominated workplaces and, anecdotally, many of us are affected by the issue when we start work in our late teens and early 20s. It’s an issue of power. As individual women get older and more personally powerful, sexual harassment often has less effect on them, and so they believe it has been left behind in another era.
Paula Kirby please note. Not all women are treated the way Paula Kirby is treated, therefore what Paula Kirby knows from her own experience is of limited utility for understanding what women in general experience.
Not only is classic workplace sexual harassment still going on, says Bates, but technology has created new forms; in the space of six months, she has seen several thousand abusive emails, including rape threats and death threats. As those 1975 feminists knew, what’s important is to stop the silence around the issue. “I think there’s an idea that women have to put up and shut up,” says Bates. “They’re told they’re whining, being uptight, frigid, sometimes even blamed for causing it in the first place.”
Oh surely not! Surely that never happens.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Heeeeere’s Rebecca
Oct 10th, 2012 4:25 pm | By Ophelia BensonHere’s Rebecca at the Humanists of Florida conference last weekend, with EllenBeth introducing her. Two of my favorite women!
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Cover art
Oct 10th, 2012 3:23 pm | By Ophelia BensonThe Women in Secularism issue of Free Inquiry will be out in late November. Here is what it will look like on the front.
Via Melody Hensley
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Everyday misogyny
Oct 10th, 2012 11:44 am | By Ophelia BensonIt’s good to see Julia Gillard setting the leader of the opposition, Tony Abbott, straight about sexism and misogyny. It’s good to see her listing the sexist and misogynist things he’s said and done – such as standing in front of the houses of Parliament next to a sign saying “ditch the witch” and one describing her as “a man’s bitch.”
“The leader of the opposition says that people who hold sexist views and are misogynists are not appropriate for high office,” she continued. “Well, I hope the leader of the opposition is writing out his resignation because if he wants to know what misogyny looks like in modern Australia, he needs a mirror.”
…
“I was offended too by the sexism, by the misogyny, of the leader of the opposition catcalling across this table … [such as] ‘If the prime minister wants to, politically speaking, make an honest woman of herself’ – something that would never have been said to any man sitting in this chair.
“I was offended by those things. Misogyny. Sexism. Every day from the leader of the opposition,” she said.
The anger in parliament follows a fortnight of debate about the tone of politics in Australia after the country’s best known radio talkshow host said Gillard’s recently deceased father had “died of shame” because his daughter stood in parliament and told lies.
Alan Jones’s comments during a Sydney University Liberal Club dinner triggered outrage. A number of companies which sponsored or advertised on his show withdrew their support. On Monday, the station suspended all advertising on his show.
In calling for Slipper to be sacked, Abbott echoed Jones’s remarks, saying Gillard should be ashamed of herself. “Every day the prime minister stands in this parliament to defend this speaker will be another day of shame for … a government that should already have died of shame,” said the opposition leader.
A furious Gillard hit back again, saying: “The government is not dying of shame. My father did not die of shame. What the leader of the opposition should be ashamed of is his performance in this parliament and the sexism he brings with it.”
It’s good to see her hitting back, but it’s pathetic that she has to. It’s pathetic.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Then why?
Oct 10th, 2012 11:24 am | By Ophelia BensonLike army chief Ashfaq Parvez Kayani for instance, who visited Malala in the hospital and took the occasion to talk comfortable pious bullshit. He
said Malala has “become a symbol for the values that the army, with the nation behind it, is fighting to preserve for our future generations.
“These are the intrinsic values of an Islamic society, based on the principles of liberty, justice and equality of man.”
Oh really. Is that a fact. Then why is Pakistan such a shit-hole? Why are all “Islamic societies” such shit-holes? If an Islamic society is based on the principles of liberty, justice and equality of man [sic] then why do so many people think it’s based on the principles of coercion, brutality and inequality of women and men? Why is there no Islamic society on earth that looks to outsiders like one that’s based on the principles of liberty, justice and equality?
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Oh thank you so much Allah, you’re so kind
Oct 10th, 2012 11:13 am | By Ophelia BensonOkay maybe I’m being a big mean atheist poopy head, but honestly, I do wish people would stop thanking Allah for saving Malala’s life. Say what? If Allah saved her life, why the fuck didn’t Allah prevent her (and her schoolmates) from being shot in the first place? Why didn’t Allah cause the shooters to have four flat tires on a very isolated mountain road? Why didn’t Allah give them all a bad intestinal upset that day?
Same old same old. Theodicy. If God this, then why that. Well think about it, people. Use your heads. Don’t just mindlessly thank Allah for stepping in hours after a girl of 14 was shot in the head by a man who thinks he’s acting on Allah’s behalf.
If Allah saved Malala’s life, why didn’t Allah simply set the Taliban straight years ago? Why didn’t Allah sit them all down and say look here, you shits, I don’t want you bullying women and whipping them for not wearing a burqa and keeping them from getting an education. What a stupid vicious idea; stop it this minute. ?
If Allah gets credit for the apparent failure to kill Malala, Allah gets blame for the attempt to kill Malala. It’s both or neither. You don’t get to choose only the nice bits.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
A new contestant
Oct 9th, 2012 4:27 pm | By Ophelia BensonStephanie has some thoughts on Reap Paden. Who? I don’t know, really, except that he’s a friend of Justin Vacula’s. I saw a comment by him, or a mention of his podcast, or something, during the short period in which I was attempting to get Vacula to correct his misrepresentation of me on his podcast. (So many guys, so many podcasts.) That was all. I had no opinion on him until last Saturday, when someone pointed out a shouty podcast he’d just done and I listened to a bit of it. Man, it was shouty all right. He spent the first several minutes shouting at Stephanie louder and louder and louder and LOUDER. Calling her a fucking bitch over and over again. Not much substance, just louder and louder fucking bitch.
I skipped ahead and listend to a bit more – some more guys had joined him and they were talking about Rebecca (why? I have no idea) by pretending to be talking in her voice, saying, “I’m a stupid cunt” and “I’m a dumb cunt” and laughing a lot. Oh, so that’s who that is, I thought. Another one to avoid.
I see people saying it’s good they talk like this, because that way people can realize what they’re like. Huh. I don’t think so at all. It would be much better if they weren’t like it. Talking like this is what makes them like it, so if they stopped talking like this, they wouldn’t be like it, and that would be better. If people talk to me and don’t call me a fucking bitch or a cunting cunt, then that’s better than if they do and so I find out what they’re like. I don’t want to find out what they’re like if they’re like that, I want them to hide it.
So anyway this Reap Paden commented on Stephanie’s post. He showed us what he’s like again.
You already lost Stephanie. You are just too damn dumb to figure it out.
Listen to this well-
I don’t give a fuck what you say I don’t give a fuck what you do. There is nothing you can do to stop me from doing/saying what I feel needs to be said.
I’m one of those people you won’t make quiet. You can’t win
It doesn’t matter what simpletons like you say about me. Intelligent people will figure it out while you spin your wheels trying to make yourself look good.
Anytime you open that hole under your nose about me and I hear about it, I will have a reply to it.
In the future if you don’t want to be called a bitch I would suggest you refrain from being one, seems simple enough to me.
That last bit is especially interesting. He will call us bitches because we are bitches, and it’s our own damn fault that he calls us bitches, because we’re too bitchy to refrain from being bitches.
I have my doubts.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Malala
Oct 9th, 2012 3:01 pm | By Ophelia BensonI heard a long report on BBC World about Malala Yusufzai a couple of hours ago, including a big chunk of an interview with her. On top of everything else, she’s fluent in English. I looked for it via Google and thought I’d found it but was surprised at how cheery the reporter sounded – then I belatedly looked at the date: it was last January. She starts reading from the diary she wrote for the BBC at 1:25 in.
The report I heard today interviewed the New York Times reporter Adam Ellick, who got to know her in 2009. He posted a photo to Twitter. The other guy is her father.
Nighat Dad tweeted pictures of herself with Malala.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Don’t execute the rebellious child lightly
Oct 9th, 2012 11:27 am | By Ophelia BensonCharlie Fuqua, a Republican candidate for the Arkansas House of Representatives, wrote a book called (frighteningly) God’s Law. It’s not a satire; he really thinks there is such a thing and that he knows about it. One item of god’s law is that rebellious children should be subject to the death penalty.
The Huffington Post quotes from the book via The Arkansas Times.
The maintenance of civil order in society rests on the foundation of family discipline. Therefore, a child who disrespects his parents must be permanently removed from society in a way that gives an example to all other children of the importance of respect for parents. The death penalty for rebellious children is not something to be taken lightly. The guidelines for administering the death penalty to rebellious children are given in Deut 21:18-21:
This passage does not give parents blanket authority to kill their children. They must follow the proper procedure in order to have the death penalty executed against their children. I cannot think of one instance in the Scripture where parents had their child put to death. Why is this so? Other than the love Christ has for us, there is no greater love then [sic] that of a parent for their child. The last people who would want to see a child put to death would be the parents of the child. Even so, the Scrpture [sic] provides a safe guard to protect children from parents who would wrongly exercise the death penalty against them. Parents are required to bring their children to the gate of the city. The gate of the city was the place where the elders of the city met and made judicial pronouncements. In other words, the parents were required to take their children to a court of law and lay out their case before the proper judicial authority, and let the judicial authority determine if the child should be put to death. I know of many cases of rebellious children, however, I cannot think of one case where I believe that a parent had given up on their child to the point that they would have taken their child to a court of law and asked the court to rule that the child be put to death. Even though this procedure would rarely be used, if it were the law of land, it would give parents authority. Children would know that their parents had authority and it would be a tremendous incentive for children to give proper respect to their parents.
See he’s not really urging that children should be executed. He’s just saying there should be a law on the books that would allow them to be executed for not giving proper respect to their parents. Moderation itself.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
The bullet missed her brain
Oct 9th, 2012 10:21 am | By Ophelia BensonI’m finding a lot of commentary and some (possible) news about Malala Yousafzai on Twitter (via #Malala).
The important item is a new update on her condition.
Doctors at the Saidu Sharif Medical Complex said that Malala was out of danger after the bullet penetrated her skull but missed her brain.
“A bullet struck her head, but the brain is safe,” said Dr Taj Mohammed.
“She is out of danger,” he added.
Dr Laal Noor, from the same hospital, confirmed that the bullet broke her skull but missed her brain.
“The bullet struck her skull and came out on the other side and hit her shoulder,” he told AFP.
The same item includes more evil shit from the Taliban.
SWAT: The Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) which attacked National Award Peace winner Malala Yousafzai on Tuesday have said that they will target her again if she survives because she was a “secular-minded lady”.
A TTP spokesperson told The Express Tribune that this was a warning for all youngsters who were involved in similar activites and added that they will be targeted if they do not stop.
…
Taliban spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan said his group was behind the shooting.
“She was pro-West, she was speaking against Taliban and she was calling President Obama her idol,” Ehsan said by telephone from an undisclosed location.
“She was young but she was promoting Western culture in Pashtun areas,” he said.
One item claims that Imran Khan says it’s about the drones.
According to Imran Khan, Pakistani Taliban’s violence is a reaction to drone attacks. Was
#Malala a drone pilot?
God hates women and schoolgirls.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Because she was secular
Oct 9th, 2012 9:25 am | By Ophelia BensonA 14-year-old schoolgirl in the Swat valley in Pakistan has been shot in the head. The Taliban says it did it. Malala Yousafzai is also a campaigner for girls’ education. She was attacked on her way home from school in Mingora. She’s reported to be out of danger.
Ehsanullah Ehsan told BBC Urdu that they attacked her because she was anti-Taliban and secular, adding that she would not be spared.
Clear and to the point.
She kept a diary for BBC Urdu starting at age 11.
Correspondents say she earned the admiration of many across Pakistan for her courage in speaking out about life under the brutal rule of Taliban militants.
One poignant entry reflects on the Taliban decree banning girls’ education: “Since today was the last day of our school, we decided to play in the playground a bit longer. I am of the view that the school will one day reopen but while leaving I looked at the building as if I would not come here again.”
She has since said that she wants to study law and enter politics when she grows up. “I dreamt of a country where education would prevail,” she said.
The Beeb has some of it translated into English.
Saturday 3 January 2009
I had a terrible dream yesterday with military helicopters and the Taleban. I have had such dreams since the launch of the military operation in Swat. My mother made me breakfast and I went off to school. I was afraid going to school because the Taleban had issued an edict banning all girls from attending schools.
Only 11 students attended the class out of 27. The number decreased because of Taleban’s edict. My three friends have shifted to Peshawar, Lahore and Rawalpindi with their families after this edict.
On my way from school to home I heard a man saying ‘I will kill you’. I hastened my pace and after a while I looked back if the man was still coming behind me. But to my utter relief he was talking on his mobile and must have been threatening someone else over the phone.
A schoolgirl. 14. She wanted to go to school, and she wanted other girls to be able to go to school. Bang.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Salman speaks
Oct 8th, 2012 4:24 pm | By Ophelia BensonHey look, Salman Rushdie is on C-Span live right now. Well actually not right now, the woman who co-owns Politics and Prose is on right now, introducing him. Melody was on before that.
Now Robert Siegel is talking.
So watch and listen!
I’ll live-blog it, that’s what.
Paraphrase: It’s very difficult to write about duration. It was like the pampas, as Borges described it. You can’t take a picture of it, because it looks like a field. You can only get a sense of it by traveling in it, and then it just goes on and on, and it’s always the same, and it goes on and on, and it’s always the same, and it goes on and on.
The fatwa was like that.
One of the greatest things about the history of literature is that writers have always taken on ogres. When Mandelstam wrote about Stalin he knew who he was. When Lorca wrote about Franco he knew who he was. Writers have always stood up to tyrants.
The Satanic Verses wasn’t primarily a novel about Islam. It was primarily about migration.
I have less religion than you could inscribe on a chewed-off fingernail. [applause]
After he signed the absurd statement of religious faith, he felt like throwing up. “At that point, I just thought the hell with it. No more appeasement, no more apology. Fuck it.”
Out of that moment – it was an awful moment – he became the person he is, the person who could say what he says.
It was Christmas Eve 1990. Weirdly enough, I remember it. I was horrified that he’d made a “statement of faith.”
We can’t live in a world where what we can say is determined by violence.
[On the bounty] No one’s ever taken this old gentleman seriously, even in Iran, because he doesn’t have the money.
That’s one of the problems with Iran is that even the liberals are assholes.
What you need when you write for children: you need lots of jump.
It’s strange coming to Washington with Christopher not here.
We invented this game of titles that didn’t quite make it. A Farewell to Weapons. Toby Dick. aka Moby Prick. Blueberry Finn.
They weren’t close friends until the fatwa. They became close friends because he wanted it that way.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
