Anti-Woman Chauvinists Pretending to Fight for Womens Rights

[Le Pere Duchesne]

Yesterday Hillary Clinton and Kevin Rudd, Australia's former Prime Minister and current Foreign Minister had a press conference proclaiming the sacred alliance between the two countries and all that bullshit no one actually believes or cares about.

What I found important though, was Kevin Rudd's announcement that Australia was donating $40-odd million to a UN programme directed at eliminating violence against women "in the region and around the world." Sounds laudable, doesn't it. But this same government is backing the US in Afghanistan, propping up a puppet regime that has Sharia Law enshrined in the constitution. This is the same government that backed the mujahadeen in the 1970's and 80's when they were throwing acid on young girls' faces for going to school and engaging in what can easily be described as the only war over the woman question in history. This is not taking into account the innumerable rapes by local militaries and police forces in the region, trained by Australia.

How ******** dare they pretend to be on the side of women anywhere, and how dare the liberal-feminists cheerlead this party, and no doubt, they will cheerlead this donation, without paying a moment's thought to this gross deviation between words and practice.

☭Gracchvs

[INTJasna]

i don't think its sexism so much as its bureaucratic bullshit >>

[Le Pere Duchesne]

tricky biscuits

i don't think its sexism so much as its bureaucratic bullshit >>

When you have a war between one group trying to overthrow the government because the government said that women can go to school, don't need to wear the head-to-toe burqua, and because the government lowered the bride-price... When you have that group, and you back it, and you arm it and fund it and train it and give it international support, well... no excuse matters.

☭Gracchvs

[ratrapid]

Gracchia Blanqui

Yesterday Hillary Clinton and Kevin Rudd, Australia's former Prime Minister and current Foreign Minister had a press conference proclaiming the sacred alliance between the two countries and all that bullshit no one actually believes or cares about.

What I found important though, was Kevin Rudd's announcement that Australia was donating $40-odd million to a UN programme directed at eliminating violence against women "in the region and around the world." Sounds laudable, doesn't it. But this same government is backing the US in Afghanistan, propping up a puppet regime that has Sharia Law enshrined in the constitution. This is the same government that backed the mujahadeen in the 1970's and 80's when they were throwing acid on young girls' faces for going to school and engaging in what can easily be described as the only war over the woman question in history. This is not taking into account the innumerable rapes by local militaries and police forces in the region, trained by Australia.

How ******** dare they pretend to be on the side of women anywhere, and how dare the liberal-feminists cheerlead this party, and no doubt, they will cheerlead this donation, without paying a moment's thought to this gross deviation between words and practice.

☭Gracchvs

So tell me the magic cure then. Shall we just nuke it and be done with it?

[Blind Guardian the 2nd]

Gracchia Blanqui

Yesterday Hillary Clinton and Kevin Rudd, Australia's former Prime Minister and current Foreign Minister had a press conference proclaiming the sacred alliance between the two countries and all that bullshit no one actually believes or cares about.

What I found important though, was Kevin Rudd's announcement that Australia was donating $40-odd million to a UN programme directed at eliminating violence against women "in the region and around the world." Sounds laudable, doesn't it. But this same government is backing the US in Afghanistan, propping up a puppet regime that has Sharia Law enshrined in the constitution. This is the same government that backed the mujahadeen in the 1970's and 80's when they were throwing acid on young girls' faces for going to school and engaging in what can easily be described as the only war over the woman question in history. This is not taking into account the innumerable rapes by local militaries and police forces in the region, trained by Australia.

How ******** dare they pretend to be on the side of women anywhere, and how dare the liberal-feminists cheerlead this party, and no doubt, they will cheerlead this donation, without paying a moment's thought to this gross deviation between words and practice.

☭Gracchvs

Source. I find it very hard to believe that this is a "war over women", as you describe it. It's little more than a moral justification for a conflict motivated by other means.

Source.

And, as usual, donations are made to the UN so people cannot accuse them of doing nothing for a particular agenda, whilst still allowing them to not get properly involved at all.

[ratrapid]

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Gracchia Blanqui

Yesterday Hillary Clinton and Kevin Rudd, Australia's former Prime Minister and current Foreign Minister had a press conference proclaiming the sacred alliance between the two countries and all that bullshit no one actually believes or cares about.

What I found important though, was Kevin Rudd's announcement that Australia was donating $40-odd million to a UN programme directed at eliminating violence against women "in the region and around the world." Sounds laudable, doesn't it. But this same government is backing the US in Afghanistan, propping up a puppet regime that has Sharia Law enshrined in the constitution. This is the same government that backed the mujahadeen in the 1970's and 80's when they were throwing acid on young girls' faces for going to school and engaging in what can easily be described as the only war over the woman question in history. This is not taking into account the innumerable rapes by local militaries and police forces in the region, trained by Australia.

How ******** dare they pretend to be on the side of women anywhere, and how dare the liberal-feminists cheerlead this party, and no doubt, they will cheerlead this donation, without paying a moment's thought to this gross deviation between words and practice.

☭Gracchvs

Source. I find it very hard to believe that this is a "war over women", as you describe it. It's little more than a moral justification for a conflict motivated by other means.

Source.

And, as usual, donations are made to the UN so people cannot accuse them of doing nothing for a particular agenda, whilst still allowing them to not get properly involved at all.

So often you say the same thing as me, but made accessible to the masses.

[Le Pere Duchesne]

ratrapid

Gracchia Blanqui

Yesterday Hillary Clinton and Kevin Rudd, Australia's former Prime Minister and current Foreign Minister had a press conference proclaiming the sacred alliance between the two countries and all that bullshit no one actually believes or cares about.

What I found important though, was Kevin Rudd's announcement that Australia was donating $40-odd million to a UN programme directed at eliminating violence against women "in the region and around the world." Sounds laudable, doesn't it. But this same government is backing the US in Afghanistan, propping up a puppet regime that has Sharia Law enshrined in the constitution. This is the same government that backed the mujahadeen in the 1970's and 80's when they were throwing acid on young girls' faces for going to school and engaging in what can easily be described as the only war over the woman question in history. This is not taking into account the innumerable rapes by local militaries and police forces in the region, trained by Australia.

How ******** dare they pretend to be on the side of women anywhere, and how dare the liberal-feminists cheerlead this party, and no doubt, they will cheerlead this donation, without paying a moment's thought to this gross deviation between words and practice.

☭Gracchvs

So tell me the magic cure then. Shall we just nuke it and be done with it?

My point is that these people are pretending to be doing great things for woman's' rights, when they backed one of the most backward and barbaric groups on earth in its efforts to turn back the clock on historical progress, and still back a section of that group, holding them up as a puppet regime, while enforcing that regime's power over the country, when that regime has Sharia enshrined in the constitution.

[ratrapid]

Gracchia Blanqui

ratrapid

Gracchia Blanqui

Yesterday Hillary Clinton and Kevin Rudd, Australia's former Prime Minister and current Foreign Minister had a press conference proclaiming the sacred alliance between the two countries and all that bullshit no one actually believes or cares about.

What I found important though, was Kevin Rudd's announcement that Australia was donating $40-odd million to a UN programme directed at eliminating violence against women "in the region and around the world." Sounds laudable, doesn't it. But this same government is backing the US in Afghanistan, propping up a puppet regime that has Sharia Law enshrined in the constitution. This is the same government that backed the mujahadeen in the 1970's and 80's when they were throwing acid on young girls' faces for going to school and engaging in what can easily be described as the only war over the woman question in history. This is not taking into account the innumerable rapes by local militaries and police forces in the region, trained by Australia.

How ******** dare they pretend to be on the side of women anywhere, and how dare the liberal-feminists cheerlead this party, and no doubt, they will cheerlead this donation, without paying a moment's thought to this gross deviation between words and practice.

☭Gracchvs

So tell me the magic cure then. Shall we just nuke it and be done with it?

My point is that these people are pretending to be doing great things for woman's' rights, when they backed one of the most backward and barbaric groups on earth in its efforts to turn back the clock on historical progress, and still back a section of that group, holding them up as a puppet regime, while enforcing that regime's power over the country, when that regime has Sharia enshrined in the constitution.

Oh those godamn Muslims and their beliefs.

[Blind Guardian the 2nd]

Gracchia Blanqui

My point is that these people are pretending to be doing great things for woman's' rights, when they backed one of the most backward and barbaric groups on earth in its efforts to turn back the clock on historical progress, and still back a section of that group, holding them up as a puppet regime, while enforcing that regime's power over the country, when that regime has Sharia enshrined in the constitution.

Would you rather they did nothing at all and actively worked against women's liberties constantly?

"Backwards and barbaric"? I guess cultural relativism is too much to ask from a committed revolutionary.

"Historical progress". Nice, you're using a unilinear model of human progression which was debunked decades ago.

[ratrapid]

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Gracchia Blanqui

My point is that these people are pretending to be doing great things for woman's' rights, when they backed one of the most backward and barbaric groups on earth in its efforts to turn back the clock on historical progress, and still back a section of that group, holding them up as a puppet regime, while enforcing that regime's power over the country, when that regime has Sharia enshrined in the constitution.

Would you rather they did nothing at all and actively worked against women's liberties constantly?

"Backwards and barbaric"? I guess cultural relativism is too much to ask from a committed revolutionary.

"Historical progress". Nice, you're using a unilinear model of human progression which was debunked decades ago.

Again, what I've said but explained.

[Blind Guardian the 2nd]

ratrapid

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Gracchia Blanqui

My point is that these people are pretending to be doing great things for woman's' rights, when they backed one of the most backward and barbaric groups on earth in its efforts to turn back the clock on historical progress, and still back a section of that group, holding them up as a puppet regime, while enforcing that regime's power over the country, when that regime has Sharia enshrined in the constitution.

Would you rather they did nothing at all and actively worked against women's liberties constantly?

"Backwards and barbaric"? I guess cultural relativism is too much to ask from a committed revolutionary.

"Historical progress". Nice, you're using a unilinear model of human progression which was debunked decades ago.

Again, what I've said but explained.

You place a more concise satirical spin upon it.

[ratrapid]

Blind Guardian the 2nd

ratrapid

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Gracchia Blanqui

My point is that these people are pretending to be doing great things for woman's' rights, when they backed one of the most backward and barbaric groups on earth in its efforts to turn back the clock on historical progress, and still back a section of that group, holding them up as a puppet regime, while enforcing that regime's power over the country, when that regime has Sharia enshrined in the constitution.

Would you rather they did nothing at all and actively worked against women's liberties constantly?

"Backwards and barbaric"? I guess cultural relativism is too much to ask from a committed revolutionary.

"Historical progress". Nice, you're using a unilinear model of human progression which was debunked decades ago.

Again, what I've said but explained.

You place a more concise satirical spin upon it.

We make a good tag team.

[Le Pere Duchesne]

Quote:

Source. I find it very hard to believe that this is a "war over women", as you describe it. It's little more than a moral justification for a conflict motivated by other means.

New York Times 9 feb 1980

"Land reform attempts undermined their village chiefs. Portraits of Lenin threatened the religious leaders. But it was the Kabul revolutionary Government's granting of new rights to women that pushed Orthodox Moslem men in the Pashtoon villages of eastern Afghanistan into picking up their guns."

Hardly a publication which can be accused of revolutionary or communist bias

Quote:

And, as usual, donations are made to the UN so people cannot accuse them of doing nothing for a particular agenda, whilst still allowing them to not get properly involved at all.

Yes, and I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of this particular instance.

Quote:

Oh those godamn Muslims and their beliefs.

There are tonnes of followers of Islam who don't follow that nonsense, and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be happy with your insinuation that they are one and the same.

Quote:

Would you rather they did nothing at all and actively worked against women's liberties constantly?

I don't expect capitalist governments to do anything different. The Soviet Union went in to back up the tottering Kabul regime, and if the lives of the Afghan women were worsened for it, so what, eh? Just have to make sure the damn commies don't win.

Quote:

"Backwards and barbaric"? I guess cultural relativism is too much to ask from a committed revolutionary.

One shouldn't need to be a revolutionary to reject moral relativism.

Quote:

"Historical progress". Nice, you're using a unilinear model of human progression which was debunked decades ago.

Not linear at all. But we are better than we were 14 hundred years ago.

☭Gracchvs

[ratrapid]

Gracchia Blanqui

Quote:

Source. I find it very hard to believe that this is a "war over women", as you describe it. It's little more than a moral justification for a conflict motivated by other means.

New York Times 9 feb 1980

"Land reform attempts undermined their village chiefs. Portraits of Lenin threatened the religious leaders. But it was the Kabul revolutionary Government's granting of new rights to women that pushed Orthodox Moslem men in the Pashtoon villages of eastern Afghanistan into picking up their guns."

Hardly a publication which can be accused of revolutionary or communist bias

Quote:

And, as usual, donations are made to the UN so people cannot accuse them of doing nothing for a particular agenda, whilst still allowing them to not get properly involved at all.

Yes, and I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of this particular instance.

Quote:

Oh those godamn Muslims and their beliefs.

There are tonnes of followers of Islam who don't follow that nonsense, and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be happy with your insinuation that they are one and the same.

Quote:

Would you rather they did nothing at all and actively worked against women's liberties constantly?

I don't expect capitalist governments to do anything different. The Soviet Union went in to back up the tottering Kabul regime, and if the lives of the Afghan women were worsened for it, so what, eh? Just have to make sure the damn commies don't win.

Quote:

"Backwards and barbaric"? I guess cultural relativism is too much to ask from a committed revolutionary.

One shouldn't need to be a revolutionary to reject moral relativism.

Quote:

"Historical progress". Nice, you're using a unilinear model of human progression which was debunked decades ago.

Not linear at all. But we are better than we were 14 hundred years ago.

☭Gracchvs

You are very blind. Using an American publication, talking at the height of the cold war, about an area primarily controlled by the Soviet. Yeah, no bias at all.

[Blind Guardian the 2nd]

Gracchia Blanqui

Quote:

Source. I find it very hard to believe that this is a "war over women", as you describe it. It's little more than a moral justification for a conflict motivated by other means.

New York Times 9 feb 1980

"Land reform attempts undermined their village chiefs. Portraits of Lenin threatened the religious leaders. But it was the Kabul revolutionary Government's granting of new rights to women that pushed Orthodox Moslem men in the Pashtoon villages of eastern Afghanistan into picking up their guns."

Hardly a publication which can be accused of revolutionary or communist bias

Quote:

And, as usual, donations are made to the UN so people cannot accuse them of doing nothing for a particular agenda, whilst still allowing them to not get properly involved at all.

Yes, and I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of this particular instance.

Quote:

Oh those godamn Muslims and their beliefs.

There are tonnes of followers of Islam who don't follow that nonsense, and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be happy with your insinuation that they are one and the same.

Quote:

Would you rather they did nothing at all and actively worked against women's liberties constantly?

I don't expect capitalist governments to do anything different. The Soviet Union went in to back up the tottering Kabul regime, and if the lives of the Afghan women were worsened for it, so what, eh? Just have to make sure the damn commies don't win.

Quote:

"Backwards and barbaric"? I guess cultural relativism is too much to ask from a committed revolutionary.

One shouldn't need to be a revolutionary to reject moral relativism.

Quote:

"Historical progress". Nice, you're using a unilinear model of human progression which was debunked decades ago.

Not linear at all. But we are better than we were 14 hundred years ago.

☭Gracchvs

No, but it is a quote which completely ignores the fact that the SOVIET INVASION might have had a little more to do with it. The portraits, the granting of liberties to women, these are little more than symbols of intervention and subversion by an invading force. The idea that if the Soviets had not bestowed freedoms upon Muslim women, there would be no conflict? I'm not buying it.

Hypocrisy is rife in all forms of politics. Even feminist politics.

There are other Muslims who would be offended if you stated that they were not different. Yes, beliefs differ. What a shock.

The Soviet Union was a flawless, benevolent organisation which only cared for the welfare of all humans? Are you seriously expecting me to believe that?

No, one needs to be an absolutist to reject moral relativism, which a revolutionary surely is.

It is linear. Humans live for progress, and without progress, we are lesser humans. Objectively, there is little we can say that makes us "better" unless we take your moral absolutist perspective.