Malala yousafzai - modern hero

[amateur51]

I don't think the attempted murder of a 14-year-old schoolgirl for writing a blog about women's education in Pakistan can be - or should be - compared with the killing of Osama bin Laden. This is not a Christian country -vs- Muslim country thing, nor has it been exploited as one, as far as I can see. And of course Malala is not the only one:

http://beta.dawn.com/news/769636/defy-the-odds-mehzar

You may not see it as that Pabs, but I'm pretty sure that fundamentalist Christians and Muslims may see it like that. Both 'sides' felt they had right on their side, that what the target was doing needed to be stamped out, eradicated as an example to others. The Taliban letter and some of Bush 43's speeches post-9/11 contain echoes, sadly

[scottycelt]

I don't think the attempted murder of a 14-year-old schoolgirl for writing a blog about women's education in Pakistan can be - or should be - compared with the killing of Osama bin Laden. This is not a Christian country -vs- Muslim country thing, nor has it been exploited as one, as far as I can see. And of course Malala is not the only one:

http://beta.dawn.com/news/769636/defy-the-odds-mehzar

Of course she isn't, Pab. The brutal and cowardly attack on young Malala was a purely internal matter and had nothing to with the US or any other Western country.

It is, of course quite natural for those in the West to express support for brave Malala's struggle for equal educational rights for women and girls that we simply take for granted here. It would be hugely strange if they didn't.

However, Malala is embroiled in a Liberal-Muslim vs Conservative-Muslim dispute, nothing more or less. You tend to get these disputes between 'liberals' and 'conservatives' in all societies whether nominally 'religious' or 'secular'.

It's happening in a very big way in Egypt right now!

[jean]

...it has to be said that the suppression of suttee and thuggee (at the same time that Macaulay was penning his views about education) was a Good Thing, although it could be argued that it was interference with another group's culture! There is often a wider picture to be considered and people's memories, however long, are also very often deliberately selective....

Your own memories may be slightly selective here, Pabs - whether deliberately or not I could not say. You give the British altogether too much credit!

...Although the Muslim Mughals interfered little with local customs, they seemed intent on stopping sati. Mughal emperor Humayun (1508-1556) was the first to try a royal fiat against sati. He was met with resistance from the local Hindu population. Akbar (1542–1605) was next to issue official general orders prohibiting sati and insisted that no woman could commit sati without the specific permission of his Chief police officers. The Chief police officers were instructed by him to delay the woman's decision for as long as possible. Pensions, gifts and rehabilitative help was offered to the potential sati to persuade her from committing the act. The Muslim Mughals strictly forbade and many times, rescued children from the practice. Tavernier, writing in the reign of Shah Jahan, observed that widows with children were not allowed in any circumstances to burn and that in other cases, governors did not readily give permission, but could be bribed to do so.

The emperor Aurangzeb was the strongest opponent of sati among the Mughals. In December 1663, he issued an "order that in all lands under Mughal control, never again should the officials allow a woman to be burnt".[19] Although the possibility of an evasion of government orders through payment of bribes existed, later European travelers record that by the end of Aurangzeb’s reign, sati was much abated and very rare, except by some Rajah’s wives...

It may well be that the practice of sati persisted among the Hindu population for longer than it otherwise might have done because the prohibition was seen as being imposed by colonisers, whether Mughal or British.

[Pabmusic]

You may not see it as that Pabs, but I'm pretty sure that fundamentalist Christians and Muslims may see it like that. Both 'sides' felt they had right on their side, that what the target was doing needed to be stamped out, eradicated as an example to others. The Taliban letter and some of Bush 43's speeches post-9/11 contain echoes, sadly

No, Ams, I still don't get it. Even the letter says that the reason she was shot was that "Taliban believe that you were intentionally writing against them and running a smearing campaign to malign their efforts to establish Islamic system in swat and your writings were provocative". Muslims at the Red Mosque in Islamabad denounced her as an apostate last November, accusing her of turning her back on Islam. British Muslims in East London issued a fatwah for apostasy (but had the kindness to add that the death penalty wasn't necessary). Not one word about Christians, Americans or the like.

But then the Taliban issues a rambling note that has talk of colonialism and - Lo! - it's a Christian -vs- Muslim thing. Clearly all our fault.

And yes, it is sad.

[amateur51]

No, Ams, I still don't get it. Even the letter says that the reason she was shot was that "Taliban believe that you were intentionally writing against them and running a smearing campaign to malign their efforts to establish Islamic system in swat and your writings were provocative". Muslims at the Red Mosque in Islamabad denounced her as an apostate last November, accusing her of turning her back on Islam. British Muslims in East London issued a fatwah for apostasy (but had the kindness to add that the death penalty wasn't necessary). Not one word about Christians, Americans or the like.

But then the Taliban issues a rambling note that has talk of colonialism and - Lo! - it's a Christian -vs- Muslim thing. Clearly all our fault.

And yes, it is sad.

Ah! I've got you now. Surely Malala is seen by Islamic fundamentalists as being in thrall to the Western (typically Christian) idea of men and women being equal so to assassinate Malala achieves both her downfall and the eradication of her success and it terrorises Muslim women of Malala's age back into line. I think too that since Afghanisatan, Iraq, 9/11 the background soundtrack is War on Terror, Axis of Evil v the Irreligious West, the anti-Muslim West. Two sets of religious ideas, both run by men for men, trouble all round

And of course, Blair bought us a part of that too. Cheers, Tony. And Barack & Dave want a piece of it too.

[greenilex]

Agreed, Am. It's the "by men, for men" part which is scary and not in any way surprising.

Education for women is seen as a great threat by traditional patriarchal society. It leads to people having control over their own bodies - shock horror - and the religious / political reaction to that is typically murderous.

"Western" ideas are seen as "haram" in Nigeria, for example; when we were there the traditionalists were still telling people that an eclipse of the sun was a punishment for their apostasy and espousal of western values.

The USA is the great Satan in this.

[Mr Pee]

The USA is the great Satan in this.

Of course it is. Blame everything on the US. Even the Taliban shooting a schoolgirl. It's all the fault of the West.

Unbelievable.

[amateur51]

Agreed, Am. It's the "by men, for men" part which is scary and not in any way surprising.

Education for women is seen as a great threat by traditional patriarchal society. It leads to people having control over their own bodies - shock horror - and the religious / political reaction to that is typically murderous.

"Western" ideas are seen as "haram" in Nigeria, for example; when we were there the traditionalists were still telling people that an eclipse of the sun was a punishment for their apostasy and espousal of western values.

The USA is the great Satan in this.

Well put greenilex

But of course it's not that long since women achieved their emancipation in the West and daily sexism is a commonplace, look at childcare and lower salary rates for example (you know all this ). It's all inspired by the 'great' world religions of course

[amateur51]

Of course it is. Blame everything on the US. Even the Taliban shooting a schoolgirl. It's all the fault of the West.

Unbelievable.

Think for yourself for once Mr Pee and use the Daily Mail for the only thing it's useful for - you really are such a pathetically complacent person

[Pabmusic]

Agreed, Am. It's the "by men, for men" part which is scary and not in any way surprising.

Education for women is seen as a great threat by traditional patriarchal society. It leads to people having control over their own bodies - shock horror - and the religious / political reaction to that is typically murderous...

Too true. Almost at random, here's a quote about women from the Koran:

Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and forsake them in beds apart, and beat them." (Koran 4:34)

The Koran further says that menstruating women are unclean, and men must stay away from them. Women are men's 'fields' and men can 'enter' with them whenever they want. A woman is worth half a man, and men are above women. Muslim men may marry up to four wives, including pre-pubescent girls, and can own sex slaves. Muslims are not allowed to marry non-Muslims, unless the latter convert to Islam. Women must cover themselves and be seen only by relatives, eunuchs, slaves and male children who have not yet had sex with women.

And Christianity is no better:

Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control. (1 Timothy 2:11-15)

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word… (Ephesians 5:22-33)

These are 'living' books to millions of people.

"Western" ideas are seen as "haram" in Nigeria, for example; when we were there the traditionalists were still telling people that an eclipse of the sun was a punishment for their apostasy and espousal of western values...

Absolutely. Yet there are people who resolutely defend the right for such 'cultural diversity' to be preserved, as if its more important than people's lives. (It's a good job the Aztec empire is defunct, or 'liberals' would be getting it in the neck for objecting to human sacrifice.)

The USA is the great Satan in this.

Yes. And the USA has much to answer for about many things. So do we, the Spanish, the Portuguese, the Belgians, the Dutch, the French [continues ad nauseam].

But they're not responsible for the attempted murder of a 14-year-old. An invidious culture based on religious ideology is.

[amateur51]

Too true. Almost at random, here's a quote about women from the Koran:

Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and forsake them in beds apart, and beat them." (Koran 4:34)

The Koran further says that menstruating women are unclean, and men must stay away from them. Women are men's 'fields' and men can 'enter' with them whenever they want. A woman is worth half a man, and men are above women. Muslim men may marry up to four wives, including pre-pubescent girls, and can own sex slaves. Muslims are not allowed to marry non-Muslims, unless the latter convert to Islam. Women must cover themselves and be seen only by relatives, eunuchs, slaves and male children who have not yet had sex with women.

And Christianity is no better:

Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control. (1 Timothy 2:11-15)

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word… (Ephesians 5:22-33)

These are 'living' books to millions of people.



Absolutely. Yet there are people who resolutely defend the right for such 'cultural diversity' to be preserved, as if its more important than people's lives. (It's a good job the Aztec empire is defunct, or 'liberals' would be getting it in the neck for objecting to human sacrifice.)



Yes. And the USA has much to answer for about many things. So do we, the Spanish, the Portuguese, the Belgians, the Dutch, the French [continues ad nauseam].

But they're not responsible for the attempted murder of a 14-year-old. An invidious culture based on religious ideology is.

Many thanks for this, Pabs

Where i think America does have some responsibility is the gap between what it preaches to Muslim countries (democractic justice) and what it practices against Muslim countries (drone attacks in Pakistan, the summary assassination of Osama bin Laden without trial). The sheer chutzpah of these actions might have emboldened, even perhaps sanctioned Taleban members to act similarly against a young women who is daring to speak out in a society under sharia law ('an eye for an eye' etc). And the alarming similarity of America's disregard for the borders and sovereignty of the borders of other nations and that of Israel America's primary Middle East ally cannot go unnoticed, surely.

[Pabmusic]

Many thanks for this, Pabs

Where i think America does have some responsibility is the gap between what it preaches to Muslim countries (democractic justice) and what it practices against Muslim countries (drone attacks in Pakistan, the summary assassination of Osama bin Laden without trial). The sheer chutzpah of these actions might have emboldened, even perhaps sanctioned Taleban members to act similarly against a young women who is daring to speak out in a society under sharia law ('an eye for an eye' etc). And the alarming similarity of America's disregard for the borders and sovereignty of the borders of other nations and that of Israel America's primary Middle East ally cannot go unnoticed, surely.

Thanks for the welcome drink, but I still can't agree. I doubt if the attempted assassins thought at the time that "It's OK to kill this girl because of American drones - anybody'd understand". I rather suspect that the thought was more like: "This girl is being disrespectful to Islam - she should die". In Iraq recently a boy was shot to death for saying something like "I don't care what Allah thinks...". He was about 13 or 14. I don't think America was responsible.

I see the issue as being the growing influence of Western culture on Muslim societies. The internet has opened 'closed' societies up (at least a little) so that a Muslim girl can post a 'blasphemous' blog - and the world can read it. And the world can see Islam's reaction. This is a painful lesson for Islam, as it is for fundamental Christians in comparable circumstances. No longer can a Muslim say with confidence that salt water and fresh water don't mix (as the Koran insists) because a few minutes on the internet challenges it (actually, a simple home experiment would challenge it quicker, but that type of thinking is just too lateral by far).

The US is blameworthy because of many things (it doesn't take much thought - I've posted myself a list of American interference in other countries' affairs since 1900) but it is really stretching things beyond breaking point to blame them for this. Perhaps I've been used to 30 years of prisoners telling me how it wasn't their fault - any excuse will do just as long as you don't have to accept the responsibility.

Have a drink.

[amateur51]

Thanks for the welcome drink, but I still can't agree. I doubt if the attempted assassins thought at the time that "It's OK to kill this girl because of American drones - anybody'd understand". I rather suspect that the thought was more like: "This girl is being disrespectful to Islam - she should die". In Iraq recently a boy was shot to death for saying something like "I don't care what Allah thinks...". He was about 13 or 14. I don't think America was responsible.

I see the issue as being the growing influence of Western culture on Muslim societies. The internet has opened 'closed' societies up (at least a little) so that a Muslim girl can post a 'blasphemous' blog - and the world can read it. And the world can see Islam's reaction. This is a painful lesson for Islam, as it is for fundamental Christians in comparable circumstances. No longer can a Muslim say with confidence that salt water and fresh water don't mix (as the Koran insists) because a few minutes on the internet challenges it (actually, a simple home experiment would challenge it quicker, but that type of thinking is just too lateral by far).

Meanwhile ... a cooling golden ale in exchange

The US is blameworthy because of many things (it doesn't take much thought - I've posted myself a list of American interference in other countries' affairs since 1900) but it is really stretching things beyond breaking point to blame them for this. Perhaps I've been used to 30 years of prisoners telling me how it wasn't their fault - any excuse will do just as long as you don't have to accept the responsibility.

Have a drink.

I appreciate your careful postings Pab (and the beers - cheers!) and perhaps I'll leave this by suggesting that things might have been different if America had gone into Pakistan, not shot Osama's woman companion, shot maybe but only wounded him and taken him back to America to face trial. It would have been a political and PR coup, it would also have been fraught with difficulty but then so was the assassination. The chutzpah of the seizure would have been moderated by the care for Osama's rights to a trial and it would have been seen as having a tremendous and laudable consistency.

Instead the stakes were raised, and America handed a PR gift over to Taleban. I understand your thoughts on Taleban thinking but if there is one amongst them who tries to address America's behaviour (as The Great Satan, as greenilex posted) then he will have had a field day internally.

Meanwhile, A cooling golden ale in exchange

[jean]

Yet there are people who resolutely defend the right for such 'cultural diversity' to be preserved, as if its more important than people's lives.

There are also people who recognise that more lives may actually be lost if the opposition to such abhorrent practices is seen by those practising them as a function of (post-)colonial dominance.

Things are not as clear-cut as you seem to imagine.

[Pabmusic]

There are also people who recognise that more lives may actually be lost if the opposition to such abhorrent practices is seen by those practising them as a function of (post-)colonial dominance.

Things are not as clear-cut as you seem to imagine.

I am quite content to regard the attempted murder of a 14-year old as wrong under any circumstances. And that does not mean just 'wrong within her culture'. As I regard human sacrifice as wrong under any circumstances. That - to me at least - is very clear-cut.