A discussion that arose with a conservative (male) friend earlier this week has left me with conflicting thoughts that I need to share. He accused me of being a cultural imperialist because I identify as a feminist. I defined feminism, in this discussion, as the belief in political, social, and economic equality of the sexes. But what about women, he asked, who don’t want equality? He flat-out stated that he doesn’t believe in equal rights for women on the grounds that defined gender roles are what make certain societies function the way that they do. At first it was easy for me to dismiss his view entirely as completely ridiculous. But I wanted to understand where he was coming from.
This friend of mine comes from a very traditional (aka patriarchal) society in the southwest tip of Africa. When he gets married, he expects that his wife will behave in a certain way. He will expect her to fulfill a certain role within their (his?) household. And I will admit that this offends me and brings me to the question that I am struggling with: How can I respect a culture (and especially the women of that culture) and at the same time see the gender roles within that culture as completely unequal and therefore unjust? It’s easy to decide how we feel about an issue involving violence or hatred, like the issue Irene posted about Afghan girls who were splashed with acid just for going to school. But am I not so arrogant and overconfident in my own beliefs as to dismiss my friend’s entire culture of which I really know relatively little. Thoughts?
Gender Agenda 
I’m so glad you made this post. I’m sure this topic is going to come up a lot.
I part ways with a lot of my liberal friends when I say that i’ve never really bought the idea of cultural relativism. I think you’re entitled to your opinions, even when discussing a culture that isn’t your own. If we can look at what happened to the Afghan girls and say “that’s horrible,” we should also be able to look at what’s happening in your friend’s culture and say the same thing. Of course if may not be as horrible. It way be horrible in a different way. If so, we should acknowledge that, but we disapprove of the situation in Afghanistan bad–hell if we disapprove of what’s happening in our own culture–then it would at best inconsistent for us to keep quiet about your friend’s views.
The problem is people often criticize other cultures without knowing very much about them. Now if you make a value judgment on your friend’s culture and he tells you that you’ve got your facts wrong, that’s one thing. You can take what you’ve learned, revise your opinions, and you’re better for it. But you shouldn’t let that keep you from challenging his ideas in the first place. Just like you shouldn’t tell him that he can’t criticize the shortcomings of the U.S.
Another thing to keep in mind that while your friend does know more about his culture than you do, you (assuming you identify as female) know more about being part of an oppressed group. He’s speaking from position of male privilege. Where does he get off speaking on behalf of the women in his culture? If you had this conversation with a woman from that same environment, she might have some very different opinions.
i totally agree with what lucie said.
P.S. kteepe’s friend is a fucking PRINCE.
I agree half-heartedly with parts of what have been said, but I feel it is important to remember that liberal feminism from the North has been used as an excuse for continued neocolonial and imperialist actions across the South.
I’m curious about what women’s movements and groups exist within his culture, and how often your friend talks about feminism with women from his own culture.
“it is important to remember that liberal feminism from the North has been used as an excuse for continued neocolonial and imperialist actions across the South.”
I would like to learn more about this. I’ve never really heard of this before, (which isn’t too surprising, I haven’t heard of a lot of things). Do you have any examples/citations I could read?
Bejai,
Off the top of my head I’d suggest:
“Feminism and War: Confronting U.S. Imperialism”
“Dangerous Brown Men”
“Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism”
I think I agree with Royce Drake – Liberal (esp. white) American feminism has been complicit with far-right imperialist programs (for example, NOW’s support for the invasion of Afghanistan).
Another problem I see in this post is the idea that only American women have a history of women’s activism, let alone defined by American feminism. Women’s activism in the Global South doesn’t have to look like white Western feminism. And it’s also highly problematic to assume it doesn’t exist across the board except through the White (Wo)man’s Burden of enlightening/”saving”.
I would recommend Feminism without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity by Chandra T. Mohanty.
Bq, I completely agree with you and Royce Drake, but I want to point out that in the context of a conversation about feminism with someone from a different part of the world, the whole white American guilt, “i guess I shouldn’t judge” mentality isn’t very helpful. All it does is stunt the exchange of ideas.
I’ll resist the urge to get into a debate about the legitimacy of invading Afghanistan and just point out that saying we should be able to think critically about other cultures is not the same as condoning a military occupation. The globalized world empowers the pen as well as the sword.
That said, I agree that white, American feminism has not been very understanding of the conditions for women of other races and nationalities and I don’t think that feminism movements have to, or should be uniform across the globe. I do, however, think there are certain qualities that they would all share. How, by any stretch of the imagination, can you call it feminist-friendly for women to be given strict, subservient roles in a household? You just can’t. Yes, the culture may explain this condition, but it does not excuse the condition.
Eh, even that changes based on race. I’ve heard some feminists talk about how it’s not the work that is inherently degrading – it’s the value assigned to the work. While many white women found being stuck at home imprisoning and arguing for the right to work, many black women were working right from the start and not fighting for the same things in the same way.
Also, nowhere in my post did I advocate for a sort of patronizing cultural relativism – what I’m talking about is understanding your positionality to the situation and also not making the assumption that there aren’t women doing activism in their own communities already in various Third World countries. Who is to say there aren’t women in this guy’s home town who disagree with him? The problem to be cautious about is deciding for other women what their problems are and not doing ally work – overriding what orgs/people on the ground are working on.
This one activist fighting against FGM remembers going to an international conference and getting nowhere and finding herself on the defensive because of the fascination and self-righteousness that it engenders in a lot of white feminists. And there are other examples of foreign activists exacerbating problems when they get involved without contacting local activists because of a lack of understanding of local context and realistic channels for efforts.
“While many white women found being stuck at home imprisoning and arguing for the right to work, many black women were working right from the start and not fighting for the same things in the same way.”
This avoids the point. That reality does not suggest that women should be given these roles at birth by the the men in their lives or by the larger society.
“I’m talking about is understanding your positionality to the situation and also not making the assumption that there aren’t women doing activism in their own communities already in various Third World countries. Who is to say there aren’t women in this guy’s home town who disagree with him?”
I don’t think anyone has made this assumption. well actually, a lot of people have made this assumption, but not within kteepe’s post or any of the responses to it. What I saw was kteepe wanting to question her friend’s ideas about marriage and I just fail to see what is arrogant about this.
I also don’t think it’s arrogant to say that, in some respects, women’s rights in the U.S. has advanced further than in other countries and that therefore, American feminists might have something to offer women from other countries. I think that for a women, the question “would you rather live in the U.S. or in Saudi Arabia?” can be answered quite easily, although due in part to *outside influences* the atmosphere in saudi arabia is changing very slowly. You’re right to say that these ideas cannot be exchanged through force or with a “holier than thou” attitude, but cultural diffusion, inherently is neither bad nor good.
I’m feeling as conflicted about this as when I wrote my original post, especially after reading all of the comments. I have been close with this friend for about a year, but we never talked about feminism because he was reluctant to do so. He felt sure that I (as an American woman) would be upset by what he had to say. But I thought it was important that we talked about something that is so important to me, so I pushed. And I’m sorry to say that he was right. It’s been a couple of weeks since that talk and I feel like our relationship has completely changed. And its because I no longer feel that he sees me as equal to him. Every comment that he makes about women now seems almost like an insult, although I know that he is not thinking it in that way. I think I’m going to talk to him again, and just get things out in the open… And thank you very much to Royce Drake for the book suggestions, I’m excited to check them out.
I’m sorry to hear that your talk strained the relationship between you and your friend, kteepe. I hope things work out so that you guys can remain close.
“This avoids the point. That reality does not suggest that women should be given these roles at birth by the the men in their lives or by the larger society.”
Actually, the point i was making is that it’s not up to you to decide FOR other women what their issues/problems are and what the main agenda for women as a whole are, because there is no universal or monolithic woman. This creates problems in organizing and alliance-building. Again, you’re trying to set up this binary of enlightened west vs. barbaric patriarchal Others. And that’s bullshit. You’ve completely talked past my points.
At the end of the day, you can’t really argue with your friend in any case unless you actually know the history and politics of the particular country your friend is from. Have you talked to women from there? Have you made any effort to actually, you know, research gender politics in the context of that country? God forbid you actually rely on research instead of lazy assumptions and racialized generalizations.
“I also don’t think it’s arrogant to say that, in some respects, women’s rights in the U.S. has advanced further than in other countries and that therefore, American feminists might have something to offer women from other countries.”
On whose backs? the privileges many women have here are DIRECTLY related to the (often gendered) economic oppression of people in the third world. Are you fucking kidding me? Get the fuck out with this imperialist bullshit. Go read some women of color/third world feminist texts. Maybe they’ve got a thing or two to teach you instead?
Again, you’re putting forth this universalizing notion, this sense that what works in the American context is what works in other countries. If you don’t know jackshit about the politics on the ground, how can you “help”? This is classic white feminist bullshit. You seem to have this White (Wo)Man’s Burden nonsense going on. You’ve shown your laziness in not even bothering to understand the specific context of your friend’s country.
I think I see the gap between us here:
“I don’t think that feminism movements have to, or should be uniform across the globe. I do, however, think there are certain qualities that they would all share. How, by any stretch of the imagination, can you call it feminist-friendly for women to be given strict, subservient roles in a household? You just can’t. Yes, the culture may explain this condition, but it does not excuse the condition.”
Yes, subservience is bad, obviously. But what I was responding to (and I was not clear about this) was the underlying assumption threading throughout your comments that you have the tools to recognize what the major issues are for women in this country and that it is, “you know”, one of those patriarchal brown countries.
There’s an assumption throughout this whole thing that only American women stand up for themselves. The idea that third world women are generally passive victims directly ties into imperialist arguments. This whole missionary-style “we can teach them!” shit you’re pulling really skeeves me out. Secondly, the quality of life for American women directly ties to their positionality in an imperialist nation that is directly responsible for supporting leadership and economic policies that are incredibly violent and harmful towards women in a number of countries. So I wouldn’t go as far as to say that “we” need to “enlighten” the dark hordes or whatever the fuck you’re on about.
*don’t mean to come off as overlooking the differences in quality of life and positionality for American women as well as their different relationships to the state.
Bq, you make some good points, but I wish your comments weren’t laced with swear words.
“the privileges many women have here are DIRECTLY related to the (often gendered) economic oppression of people in the third world.” this is a really great point and we should talk about it more.
but Bq, kteepe isn’t a lazy evil white feminist with a white (wo)man’s burden. her post demonstrates that she wants to learn how to approach this whole problem: “I’m feeling as conflicted about this as when I wrote my original post, especially after reading all of the comments.” she’s trying to learn and trying to be good and trying not to make assumptions. isn’t that a good thing? what wrong has she done here?
Irene, you have no right to police my tone. It’s actually a common tactic to derail conversations about racism.
And I as a woman of color have no obligation to respond to old racist memes sweetly.
“neither Kteepe nor Lucierohan have ever expressed the slightest desire–to my knowledge–to enlighten “the dark hordes.”
You’ve clearly ignored quite a bit, then.
““I also don’t think it’s arrogant to say that, in some respects, women’s rights in the U.S. has advanced further than in other countries and that therefore, American feminists might have something to offer women from other countries.”
This comment reiterates the usual teleological narrative of progress that a liberal/colonialist framework rests upon. And makes the false assumption that American women’s gains are from being better/smarter feminists. This comment and entire post homogenizes Third World societies.
At the end of the day, what is the object? The poster did no research on the particular gender dynamics of the country. This is a typical American approach – make sweeping generalizations and engage in hand-wringing about cultural relativism while having no clear idea of what the specific practices/politics are.
Ben and Ork summarized my issues with what you’ve said pretty well, but for the sake of responding to my own challenge…
Bq, I think you’ve put about a billion words in my mouth. I find it hard to believe that you’ve read everything I’ve written. I haven’t once defended making generalization about areas one knows nothing about. I haven’t once said that we should decide anything *for* women in other patriarchal societies. In fact, I said exactly the opposite in my first response:
“the problem is people often criticize other cultures without knowing very much about them. Now if you make a value judgment on your friend’s culture and he tells you that you’ve got your facts wrong, that’s one thing. You can take what you’ve learned, revise your opinions, and you’re better for it.”
“Where does he get off speaking on behalf of the women in his culture? If you had this conversation with a woman from that same environment, she might have some very different opinions.”
“On whose backs? the privileges many women have here are DIRECTLY related to the (often gendered) economic oppression of people in the third world. Are you fucking kidding me? Get the fuck out with this imperialist bullshit. Go read some women of color/third world feminist texts. Maybe they’ve got a thing or two to teach you instead?”
Look I realize I’ve haven’t walked the shoes of anyone from a Third World country, or of anyone from another country, or of anyone else who lives inside my own country. but it is so ridiculous that you should use this as grounds for dismissal. All I have is my knowledge, and my own experiences living as a woman (well actually a girl) in the U.S. well actually, in new york. And you’re right, that means that I have certain privileges that came at the expense of other people. It also means that I know what it’s like to enter a voting booth and drive a car. And if you don’t think I should be able to say, unapologetically, that that’s a good thing, well I really don’t know what to say.
Now I’m going to put this is caps so that you don’t miss it. YOU’RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT THAT WOMEN OR COLOR AND WOMEN IN OTHER CULTURES HAVE THINGS TO TEACH ME. I AM WILLING TO LEARN AND LEARN AND LEARN UNTIL MY HEAD FALLS OFF.
and guess what? if they have things to teach me (which they do they do they do) then why is it “imperialist” to suggest that yes, I also have things to teach them?
one more qualifier to my experience:
im actually a WHITE girl living in new york.
Bq, I respect your right to be angry, but this is our safe space to experiment with ideas and run situations in our lives by people. I have no intention of de-railing your points about racism. I tell other people on the blog when I think their writing style could be more effective. I think the way we write is nearly as important as what we write. I want our blog to be full of constructive criticism, not point by intimidation. You say,
“The poster did no research on the particular gender dynamics of the country. This is a typical American approach”
Are you familiar with ANY other American blog approaches?! Blogs are usually made for people to spew what’s on their mind, nevermind have goals to discuss gender, feminism, sex, and life. kteepe was posting a general thought that was rooted in EXACTLY what you’re yelling at her for. She ended her original post, “But am I not so arrogant and overconfident in my own beliefs as to dismiss my friend’s entire culture of which I really know relatively little.” This place is made for us to make mistakes and have conversations in. I believe that we write to provoke conversation. Not to have insulting matches.
This is our own space, and I think it’s reasonable to want to write our own thoughts, without fear of personal attacks. Otherwise no one is going to want to write anymore. Please consider that everyone here wants to make something better. Then write with a little more compassion for your fellow feminists. Please stop the hating.
“this is our safe space to experiment with ideas and run situations in our lives by people.”
we all need to sit down and write a constitution for this blog. ive put it up on facebook, inviting basically all the hundreds of people im facebook friends with to come and critique our blog. maybe i should take it down. let’s discuss what this blog ought to be, in specific details, and then advertise accordingly.
um, it’s not a safe space for me as a woman of color. you are making this a “safe space” for white privilege. listening when it’s uncomfortable is how real understanding occurs.
and this was not an insulting match – you are part of a wider national context. i pointed that out. you refuse to engage with me out of defensiveness.
women of color are frequently called “haters” (especially considering the recent history of this on the US feminist blogosphere, this is especially interesting to see again).
Wow. just wow.
People have died because of the misconceptions and racist assumptions that you’ve displayed here. It’s incredibly privileged to put your temporarily hurt feelings above that.
“um, it’s not a safe space for me as a woman of color. you are making this a “safe space” for white privilege. listening when it’s uncomfortable is how real understanding occurs.”
Bq, I agree with you on that, though I wish you wouldn’t speak as though you’re the only person of color on this blog. if you want to say my or kteepe’s views are imperialist, you’re entitled to do so. But you’re not really substantiating that claim. You’re using the word “imperialist” as an epithet. You don’t like what I’m saying so you’re using the word as a vague condemnation. well, when you do that, Bq, the word loses all meaning and no one’s better for it.
And I don’t remember the last time a civil conversation killed anybody.
Bq, you bring up a good point. I am, in fact, a privileged white American girl. I am racist. We are all racist, we have been raised in a racist society. I don’t want to be racist. You tell me my friends are racist, our thoughts are bullshit, and will kill people. Of course I’m going to be defensive. But I need to read more. It is not your responsibility to educate me. And I appreciate your anger because it’s arresting my thoughts.
Hey all, I’ve been a reader here for a while and have really enjoyed the blog. I’m really quite impressed with the civility of debate, very refreshing in comparison to most of the stuff on the internet. Interesting topic here, sure are lots of things to say. As to your comment, lucierohan:
“and guess what? if they have things to teach me (which they do they do they do) then why is it “imperialist” to suggest that yes, I also have things to teach them?”
Hmm. Part of me agrees with this statement (or rather, implication-via-rhetorical-question) and wants it to be true, and another part says it’s not historical. Do the unequal power relations that have for so long existed between the United States and, say, Saudi Arabia create an obligation on the part of us here in the United States to recognize that we have been doing the teaching for a little too long, and maybe it is our turn to be merely taught? Just a musing.
hey rich, welcome to the blog. I’m so glad you’re enjoying it.
I think that you’re concern, like many of Bq’s concerns, are generally valid ones. you’re right. It’s not historical. U.S. and European history is plagued imperialism and forced social changes (most of which reversed progressive attitudes instead of encouraging them). I would argue, however, that our present (though it cannot escape from our past) is more complex than evil hegemony vs. the masses. Don’t get me wrong. The U.S. is a hegemony and we do live in a unipolar world (for now), but let’s take the Saudi Arabia example. To call the relationship between the US and Saudi Arabia one-sided (in the United States’ favor) is to ignore some very interesting developments in the country. Voting and driving rights for women are in clearer view than ever before. Now credit for this goes to saudi women who have been protesting in many ways (including via internet) and to Saudi scholars to have expressed discontent with the laws. But some credit must go to diplomatic pressure from Western countries and the UN. And as for the economic oppression that comes with this, Saudi Arabia has a GDP and a per-capita income that have been growing quite rapidly in recent years.
Now I’m not trying to make a blanket statement about the US being a benevolent hegemony. That’s not a side I’m used to taking, and I don’t plan to take it any time soon. I’m just trying to discourage blanket statements about the opposite. They dismiss the realities of power politics and globalization. These two principles (well i guess power politics is a principle while globalization is more of a development), as far as I can see, are irreversible and blindly railing against them, instead of trying to work within them doesn’t help anyone.
You miss a little, you miss a lot. I don’t read the blog for a while and the comments become insane. I don’t really feel like talking about every comment that as been said– partially because arguments change every few comments but I will say that:
1. bq’s concerns about this not being a safe space for women of color is serious. It should not be brushed aside, and all of us who are contributors should think long and hard about that without getting defensive. The, largely white, feminist blogosphere has a bad history of excluding, ignoring, and marginalizing the voices of women of color.
2. If we are going to avoid profanity I’m going to have much more boring posts in the future– curse words are an important part of my vocabulary. And I agree with bq that focusing on those words is a common technique of silencing real concerns and emotions. Calling for civil conversation is a technique for removing emotion from very emotional topics, and attempting to create some (fictional) objective, rational discourse– discourses that often favor those least affected by an issue.
3. I wouldn’t think that imperialist is any more of an epithet than racist, sexist, misogynistic, etc. They may or may not be hurled as insults, but they obviously have very real meanings with histories of oppression, and it isn’t fair to say that a word is only being used as an epithet if the person doesn’t explain why it is so. That’s like asking why something you said is racist or sexist or xenophobic.
4. That said liberal feminism has fucked the world up just as much as any other imperialism, and it makes me nervous to talk about imperialism and American hegemony as useful tools. I’d hardly call the rallying against globalization as blind, in fact the people who rally against it are the ones who get to see it up close and personal.
Royce Drake,
I think you’re right that at least the comments I’ve made have changed in substance. Looking back that the progression of this comment section I see that this conversation progressed in a very strange way to say the least.
I don’t like that people are judging Bq for cursing. We all curse in our posts and in our comments and it disturbs me that people are only opposed to it when it comes with genuine anger, though I think Irene’s latest comment constitutes a submission to Bq’s point. I would like to know if anyone thinks I’ve dismissed Bq (or royce drake, or anyone else who disagrees with me) in any way. Please, if you think I have, spell it out as clearly as possible because that’s really not what I intended to do and if I am doing it, I don’t want to continue to do it.
I think that the terms “racist,” “misogynistic,” and “sexist,” can be used as epithets and I think that people should explain why they are using these words. Ideally I wish people just wouldn’t use these words, honestly. I know that sounds really weird, especially since I’ve used all of them (and “imperialist”) during heated debates (as you may have been able to tell at this point, I make not special claim to consistency in my views.) I’m going to make a post about all this because I think it’s going to take a long time to work out my thoughts on the subject. I’m sorry if that sounds evasive.
I don’t think it helps anyone to rail against globalization, because I don’t think it can be reversed. Do you think it can be reversed? Have you read anything that makes you think it can be reversed? If Bq still reads this blog, have you read anything that makes you think it can be reversed? If so, I’m really interested in reading it. I don’t deny that globalization is, in many ways, negative. Do you think this is the result of the principles of free trade or the inequities of free trade in reality? At the moment, I think its the latter. For example, American subsidies on agricultural products that stifles agriculture in South America and Mexico. Do you think free trade is inherently inequitable? If so, I would like to hear why.
Finally, if American hegemony is, in some ways, a useful tool (by the way, I don’t think anyone has made any specific argument against this point), then why should it make you nervous to say so? Like really, what if it is helpful sometimes? For India and for the Asian Tiger economies? It seems like globalization has helped about 4 billion people more out of poverty since the 1990’s (if you haven’t read “the bottom billion,” i think it’s a very interesting book.)
Basically, question everything, right? I’m trying to do this. Even for the anti-american (i don’t mean that in an inflammatory way) beliefs that i’ve held on to for quite a while.
On cursing:
I realize that my comment was made in the midst of a heated argument and it was disrespectful to disregard the argument and focus on something seemingly irrelevant. However, I felt that the cursing was used in a way to make fellow bloggers feel inferior (which maybe they should?) rather than the cursing I have experienced previously on the blog which has been used to express general frustration at a vague concept. I have found myself writing very angry posts and, after I’ve finished, have gone back and replaced the curses with more descriptive adjectives. Maybe I should allow myself to convey my anger, but I feel that my arguments are clearer when they’re less inflammatory. I’ve just had a lot of irritation all my life with my family members using swearing to intimidate each other when they have nothing substantial to say and just want to win an argument… I react defensively to it.
Royce, I don’t think a lack of swearing makes the blog boring at all. We’ve had plenty of awesome debates without it. Maybe you don’t find them fascinating? (cf. relationshipist, why i find it so hard to battle my socialized instinct to look “feminine”)
However, I will put my tender feelings aside and concede that I won’t interrupt an argument with my judgments on swearing again. Does this make sense or I am being oppressive?
Irene, I was just saying that my posts would be more boring in the future. Only because when I consciously avoid cursing I generally start not using my own voice.
I was saying nothing for other people’s posts. I can totally recognize that other people can use their voices without cursing.
Lucie, I’d never argue that anything could be reversed, only changed. And I think the (neo)coloniality inherent in both globalization and American autonomy– with all the military interventions, lack of political and cultural autonomy, and exploitation for cheap resources and labor that come with it need to be changed. (Those are the aspects of both, by the way, that, I find, make them poor tools for change).
@ Bq – Hear, hear. Because white American women have gained some rights that Saudi women seek does NOT mean we have anything to “teach” them. The context is completely different and we know next to nothing about their experiences and their cultural dynamics. We have no expertise — our situation just does not apply to theirs, and it’s pretentious to assume that we can offer them something more valuable than what they know and think based on their own lives.
@ Royce – Ditto.
Globalization may or may not be reversible. But it is destructible and changeable.
“Because white American women have gained some rights that Saudi women seek does NOT mean we have anything to ‘teach’ them.”
Well no, not in your sense it doesn’t. we’re talking about paternalistic kind of “teaching” vs. the kind of teaching that takes place in any open dialogue between adults. Teaching takes place even in efforts that values solidarity. It’s by no means one-sided, or it shouldn’t be.
We do live in different worlds, but why should that stunt an exchange of ideas? Matriarchal societies all over the world obviously evolved in a different way from American society, but researching them has made me rethink aspects of gendered power structures in the U.S.
Having lived in third world countries, men like your friend don’t respect women. They act like he does, feeling entitled and superior to women knowing they should know their place and claiming ‘it’s cultural” as his justification.
Who cares if it’s cultural. Ethnic genocide is cultural, female genital mutliation is cultural, the gang rape of non-Muslim women by Islamic men inorder to intimidate them is cultural.
Not all cultural practices are equal or should be preserved. Keep your American feminist ideals, they help more women than they harm. Women in the Middle East and Africa often try to win rights but do not recieve the support of American feminists who end up with the stupid justification of cultural relativism that just because a woman was born under another culture or country that she shouldn’t be entitled to not live as a second class citizen because it’s cultural.
and the other thing feminsts are stupid about is they ignore the colonial imperialism of these third world or Islamist hell holes, desires to spread their culture and impose it on us. You think the USA is the only colonial imperialist power?
The Prophet Muhammed launched a genocidal military campaign and Islam has destroyed many cultures, such as the Byzantine christians, the Zoroastirans, the Hindus, many African cultures, many south east asian cultures, many cultures in the Balkans. The Islamic slave trade is where we purchased our slaves from. Muslims enslaved blacks in Africa from the 7th century up until 2007 in their slave trade. The majority of their slave trade was not agricultral like ours, but a sexual slavery, and black men were castrated, few lived thru that operation. Sudan is a good example of how enlighted they are. The Taliban is another. Muhammed turned a multi-cultural pluralistic city into one of the only two cities in the world (Mekka and Medina) where you cannot enter if you do not declare yourself a muslim. You can’t even drive up to the city if you are not Muslim and are forced to live in compounds. Blacks in saudi live in horrific ghettos. Yet, the mutlicultural morons are more afraid of not offending people by speaking out.
Read “The Legacy of Arab-Islam in Africa: A Quest for Inter-religious Dialogue ” by John Azumah
Seriously, if you don’t think your culture is good, why believe it in it in the first place? Too often I see people join stupid crusades like the Palestinian cause, never mind Hamas kills homosexuals, believes in religious and gender apartheid, ethnically cleansed most of the Christians from Bethlehem and Nazareth — and they expelled the Jews out of 18 arab nations into Israel — but no, morons on a cultural relativist campaign line up to support regimes that will destroy them. It’s cultural sucide on our part and it’s not very wise.
[…] https://genderagenda.wordpress.com/2009/01/24/cultural-relativism-and-feminism/ […]