This Is Your Vagina On Islam
Afshan Azad, 22, the Harry Potter actress, had her Muslim father and brother threaten to kill her for dating a Hindu man. The brother was also charged with assaulting her and causing her "actual bodily harm." Phyllis Chesler blogs at NRO:
Yes, this alone is a capital crime in Islam.My 2009 and 2010 studies in Middle East Quarterly have shown that "honor killings" are all too real and on the rise. Women have been honor-killed for refusing to veil themselves, marry their first cousins, or remain in dangerously abusive marriages, for wanting to choose their own husbands, and for behaving in "western" ways.
While Hindus and Sikhs do, to a much lesser extent, honor-kill their women, in Europe 96 percent of honor killings in the last 20 years were Muslim-on-Muslim. The average age of European women who were honor-murdered was 21; 66 percent were honor-murdered by their family of origin; 44 percent were murdered by multiple perpetrators; 68 percent were gruesomely tortured. Nearly half of thesewomen lived in England.
While the British police are exceptionally sensitive to this problem and have helped potential honor-killing victims, the problem is vast and growing. Afshan Azad now needs to be in hiding and protected, on a permanent basis, from her own family. Perhaps she and her actor friends could lead a campaign against honor killings. I would be honored to join them.
Carolyn Black writes at CBSNews of something the girl's brother said:
"We are going to get trouble from the community now. It is bad news for our safety, her safety."
Few in the media are informed enough to understand what the guy means by that. There's a passage in Ayaan Hirsi Ali's Nomad: From Islam to America: A Personal Journey Through the Clash of Civilizations, that explains -- how women, under Islam, are:
"the breeders of men, and women's honor lies in their purity, their submission, their obedience. Their shame is to be sexually impure, and it is the worst shame of all, because a woman's sexual disobedience defiles herself, her sisters, and her mother, as well as the male relatives whose duty it is to control her.No Muslim man has any standing in society if he does not have honor. And no matter how much honor he builds up through wise decisions and good deeds, it is destroyed if his daughter or his sister is sexually defiled. This can happen if she loses her virginity before she's married, or if she engages in sexual intercourse outside of the marriage -- and that includes rape. Even the rumor that she may have had sex is reason enough to label her "defiled" and lead to loss of honor for her whole family. A father who cannot control his daughters, a brother who cannot control his sisters, is disgraced. He is bankrupt socially and even economically. His family is ruined. The girl will not fetch a bride-price, and neither will her sisters or her cousins, because the mere suspicion of independent feeling and female action in their family taints them too.
And yet, feminist groups will be notoriously silent. They only speak out against perceived threats to their political beliefs that present absolutely no risk to their safety ("threats" like George W. Bush or conservative Christian men).
Those who would stone them for being raped scare them into silence.
Trust at July 4, 2010 5:30 AM
"We are going to get trouble from the community now. It is bad news for our safety, her safety."
I find it a bit weird that HE would say that, as the brother who supposedly attacked her!
lenona at July 4, 2010 5:46 AM
The girl will not fetch a bride-price, and neither will her sisters or her cousins, because the mere suspicion of independent feeling and female action in their family taints them too.
The reason for that is to get the other women/girls in the family to make sure all the women stay in line.
Jim P. at July 4, 2010 5:49 AM
The first step is to stop referring to these murders as honour killings. There is nothing honourable about killing your child for having what are normal relationships in our society. This is murder, plain and simple.
Steamer at July 4, 2010 7:44 AM
I would think that a death penalty, enforced in a substantial % of these cases, would soon lead to a drastic reduction in their occurrence.
david foster at July 4, 2010 8:03 AM
Best response ever to the "it's-just-their-custom" kind of multicultural excuse:
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
--General Sir Charles Napier
david foster at July 4, 2010 8:06 AM
Afshan and her family are , to all appearances, thoroughly modernized, westernized Muslims. This demonstrates that the mentality behind honor killing is not confined to a fanatical fringe.
Martin at July 4, 2010 9:15 AM
"Few in the media are informed enough to understand what the guy means by that."
Few in the media CARE anything AT ALL about Muslim women to EVER bring up any issue that might, possibly, just maybe offend Islam.
Robert W. (Vancouver) at July 4, 2010 10:43 AM
David said "I would think that a death penalty, enforced in a substantial % of these cases, would soon lead to a drastic reduction in their occurrence."
Even better, though I know it will never fly, is to kill ALL the males in the family. If the Muslims can use tactics to ensure conformity, we should too.
William (wbhicks@hotmail.com) at July 4, 2010 10:48 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/07/04/translating_med.html#comment-1729422">comment from William (wbhicks@hotmail.com)Even better, though I know it will never fly, is to kill ALL the males in the family. If the Muslims can use tactics to ensure conformity, we should too.
You don't fight barbarism by becoming a barbarian.
Amy Alkon at July 4, 2010 11:05 AM
Indish representative to British occupation.
"You are interfering with our culture and traditions, we must be able to perform the seti." (The public burning of women whose husbands died)
British occupation to Indish one in answer:
"Alright, you are free to practice your culture, and we shall practice ours, wherein we hang men who burn women alive. We will put the gallows next to the pyre, so that you may practice your culture, and then we may practice ours, in perfect harmony."
Barbarism can be fought in many ways Miss Alkon. The barbarian eager to kill, is rather less so when he himself may die, at least some of them, and that is a start. The refusal to do violence to the violent is what precedes the victory of the violent.
Robert at July 4, 2010 11:23 AM
Heh, did not see Fosters reply, johnny come lately am I. *L*
Robert at July 4, 2010 11:24 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/07/04/translating_med.html#comment-1729433">comment from Robert"Kill all the males in the family" is not a solution of civilized people.
Amy Alkon at July 4, 2010 11:58 AM
Granted. But barbarism is not beaten by pretty words.
Robert at July 4, 2010 3:15 PM
It leaves us with the problem of just what to do?
I don't care a great deal about what goes on in Muslim countries, MY country has enough issues for me to be concerned with.
It bugs me when these things make their way INTO MY country.
Robert at July 4, 2010 3:18 PM
guess she didn't realize she would continue to be owned after she became an adult.
I just can't imagine a parent thinking this, accepting it. but then I wasn't raised in such a way. I would think the best possible thing [that will never happen] is for someone in authority to give the father and bro a choice. either become true English citizens, who will uphold the laws, or to return to wherever they were from, and accept that their child is free to chose her own way. Perhaps they would even have to renounce her...
I don't think the death penalty helps as a threat in such situations. They might accept that if their concept of "honor" is intact.
Perhaps this event is high enough profile to help expose the issue to a broader audience.
SwissArmyD at July 4, 2010 3:25 PM
"Kill all the males in the family" is not a solution of civilized people.
Problem is, the younger brother (the one in college, who, from what I can gather was not involved in trying to kill his sister) has probably been so thoroughly poisoned by his father's teachings that he, too, will likely try to 'honor kill' his sister' like his dad and older brother. However, we can't punish people for what we think they might do in the future unless - that's putting the cart before the horse. Its one thing to lock up criminals for life in order to keep them from repeating a crime, its another to take a law-abiding citizen and punish them based upon your suspicions of their future actions when there is no basis for you to view them as a threat based upon their own actions (we can't be held accountable for what our relatives do - barring parents being held responsible for the actions of their underage children, of course). There's a very fine line that has to be tread here, and as much as I too suspect that all the men (and a good share of the women) in the family probably support the actions of the few men involved in this horrific plot, the standards of Western society dictate that we do not punish a whole family for the actions of a few members. Going on that logic, you could be locked up in prison for several years if one of your relatives is stupid enough to get drunk one night and get into a fatal car crash (is it just in my part of the country or does it seem like incidents of single-car drunk-driving accidents among high-school and college students are on the rise?). Not a pleasant thought. Also, its this kind of thinking - one family member's actions prove the whole family is rotten - that lead to honor killings in the first place: this twisted ideology has convinced people who should know better (the brother, at least, having grown up in a Western society, should understand right from wrong and that killing is wrong - hell, the U.K. doesn't even have the death penalty even more!) that the way to clear their family's name is to kill some poor girl simply for living her own life.
This whole honor killing thing makes even less sense in Western societies than in the Middle East. Honor killings are done because the girl has tainted her family, meaning the other women in her family will not fetch as much money when getting married. The idea of some bloke in the U.K. plopping down a fistful of £100s for the right to marry some man's daughter against her will (okay, so she technically has to agree to be wed under British law, but she probably only does so after being told she will bring dishonor on the family is she refuses, and she knows what Muslims do to the girls who bring dishonor on their families) is just sickening. This practice needs to be punished as the buying-and-selling of sex-slaves, since that's what these women are: nothing more than property for fucking, for maintaining a home, and for popping out more little fucked-up Muslims.
Lauren at July 4, 2010 3:43 PM
either become true English citizens, who will uphold the laws, or to return to wherever they were from
Both father and son were born in England. So much for Muslim integration.
kishke at July 4, 2010 3:50 PM
There is too much problem, ie, too much greed, too much manipulativeness, too much deception, too much selfishness, too much killing(of freedom and individuality), etc in the asian backward mentality and the equally backward islamic society that it is better not to have anything to do with any of their kind, be it female or male.
WLIL at July 4, 2010 7:53 PM
Both father and son were born in England. So much for Muslim integration.
From what I've seen, Muslim integration regresses with generations.
Many Muslims who immigrate to Western countries do assimilate because they've come from a life of hell out in the desert of the Middle East or Africa, and they realize how lucky they are to be living in Western society now so they are willing to follow the laws of their new country even though such laws conflict with the Quran. These are the so-called moderate or progressive Muslim.
It is the children of these immigrant Muslims and their children's children (grandchildren of immigrant Muslims) who regress back into so-called radical Muslims who follow the Quran to the letter. Because they have grown up in a Western society, they do not realize how bad life in these backward societies that their ancestors escaped from really is. They're a generation who has grown up believing the world revolves around them (this being the era of MySpace/FaceBook/YouTube/etc... has made this age group the "look at me" generation) so of course they believe that they are sooooooo super duper special that Allah will give them 72 virgins when they blow themselves up. This is a time where the government has increasing control, where boys have no outlet for their aggression ("I caught little Johnny playing with a toy gun, lets suspend him from school and outlaw all forms of 'aggressive' play"), and where more and more young people are experiencing excessively prolonged adolescence followed by difficulty in getting any kind of decent job after university. This leads the young, sheltered generations who have grown up in Western society to extremism because they haven't got a fucking clue what to do with themselves. Maybe if they were actually making something of themselves in life like their parents and grandparents were they wouldn't be so quick to blow themselves up. People weigh the consequences of their actions a lot better once they've grown up a little and actually have something they risk losing if they make the wrong choice.
I'm certainly not blaming Western society for Muslims trying to kill the rest of the world: Islam is a vile ideology and Muslims have been trying to conquer the world for 1400 years. I just think these factors might explain why native Western Muslims seem to cling to Islam more than their immigrant parents do, as opposed to other groups of people, where the native-born children are (most of the time) more accustomed to their country's culture then their immigrant parents are.
Lauren at July 4, 2010 11:03 PM
The problem with islamic people is not whether they were immigrants or were born from an immigrant family. One of the many problem with them is that they demand too many special privileges, special rights and special benefit for their islamic community. And that is not acceptable whether they are immigrants or not.
WLIL at July 4, 2010 11:50 PM
Perhaps, they would start to behave more decently when they are without dangerous weapon and go back to stone age.
WLIL at July 5, 2010 12:00 AM
Sorry it's in Norwegian but you can find an entertaining translation if you translate.google it.
http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10002677
Basically, one Muslim girl was bullied for not wearing a hijab and an ethnic Norwegian girl was bullied for being blonde and pale by what they call the moral police. It's in a school in Oslo no less.
Kendra at July 5, 2010 12:23 PM
In malaysia, quite many of the moslem don't wear hijab or islamic scarves, but they are still as intimidating as those moslems who wear the hijab.
I, as a minority nonbeliever, have been bullied and verbally abused by moslems who don't wear the hijab and those socalled moderate who don't wear the hijab were as bad.
WLIL at July 5, 2010 5:03 PM
Leave a comment