Are feminists really behind the French burka ban? I’m very much in favour of the French law passed this week banning women from wearing the full hijab, or burqa, in public places. Not because I think the burqa ‘oppresses women’ (it doesn’t – or only the attractive minority of women), but because it is a symbolic step against the Islamification of Europe. An Islamification whose end result is similar to feminism - male sexuality being restricted in order that the sexual interests of others can selfishly benefit. The burqa is an attempt to enslave and deny male sexuality (men are not even permitted to gaze on female beauty in the street) as much as it is to enslave or oppress women.
But what really angers me is the constant media portrayal, and general assumption, of the burqa ban being something championed and carried through by French feminists. Is this really the case? A recent opinion poll found that over 80% of French people were in favour of a ban. In fact a majority in most of the European nations surveyed were in favour of a ban in their own countries. Interestingly, there was ‘little or no variation between the genders‘ in the level of support. Now, given that we know only too well how prone women are to vote for their own selfish gender interests, it does seem a little surprising that if this is about the oppression of women that there is no variation between genders. It should also be noted that the socialist opposition party abstained from voting in favour of the ban.
Isn’t it a little more likely, given the general deafening silence of feminists towards Islam, that this is all about Sarkozy and his center-right party appealing to the ‘Islamaphobic’ fear that the white population in France have of the rapidly accelerating demographic shift between themselves and their un-integrated muslim minority? This ban is about preventing white working-class votes falling into the hands of the far right and, in itself, likely no more to do with feminists standing up against the Islamic ‘oppression of women’ than is the recent Swiss ban on building minarets.
Don’t believe me? Well why don’t you listen to the voice of third wave feminism herself?
Jessica Valenti on the French Burka Ban :
Banning the burqa doesn’t further women’s rights – it limits them. Now, obviously there’s a difference in Islamic women’s dress from the hijab to the burqa – but legally banning any of them erases all agency from Muslim women.
Is anyone really surprised by this? Surprised by the fact that a feminist who wants men caged for having sex with love dolls is opposed to a law that increases men’s buying options in a sexual market?
Well, actually, depressingly, I think most MRA’s are still surprised by this. But thankfully, not anti-feminists with intelligence.
An adequate discussion of men-women in the Islamic and Hebraic traditions would require a whole book, so I limit myself here to one sentance : Islamic garb, like other phenomena such as foot binding and female circumcision, is as much to do with female-female competition as it is with men jealously guarding their women.
(a footnote in the forward of Steve Moxon’s ‘The Woman Racket’)
Pretty girl get’s choked and humiliated by feminist school bully
Warning – very disturbing video
Now, the supposed oppression of women under Islam is not the only thing that feminists are mysteriously silent about. Whilst feminist sexual pressure groups such as the NSPCC, posing as child protection charities, are busy organizing massive freebie conferences from Brazil to Japan, dedicated to ridding the world of the tragic scourge of 17 year old Lithuanian girls happily showing themselves on webcam, another internet phenomena has grown up in the last few years – the YouTube bitch fight. And strangely, whilst those who profess to care about ‘children’ will stop at nothing to prevent nubile 16 and 17 year old girls from freely giving sexual enjoyment to men, somehow, the existance of thousands of online videos showing children as young as 5 beating, bullying, and maiming each other has somehow slipped under their collective radar.
Slipped under their radar? WTF am I talking about? Dozens, if not hundreds of websites (mostly openly based in America – a country which locks up teenagers for ‘sexting’ each other) feature hardly anything but these horrific videos. And the sole purpose of these websites is to make money from the graphic and undeniable, but non-sexual, abuse and traumatisation of children. In fact, judging from the invariable calls of ‘this is going on YouTube’ intermingled with the screams to ‘fuck her up Ashley’, there is no doubt that if these websites didn’t exist (i.e. were shut down by the FBI after being lobbied to do so by ‘child protection’ groups) then thousands of young children wouldn’t have had their trauma viewed by millions, if not avoided altogether in the first place.
But of course feminsts and their sexual pressure groups have no interest in stopping the abuse of children. Their only desire and motivation is in limiting competition to themselves and their female supporters by preventing teenage girls from entering the free sexual market that their feminist predecessors were only too happy to proclaim back in the 60′s and 70′s.
Two girls, who appear to be no more than 10 years old, fight each other, apparently spurred on by adults, in a YouTube video that was uploaded over 6 months ago and has thus far received 7,000 viewers. 5 people have upvoted the video, 2 have downvoted it…presumably because they feel it is not violent enough.
If any feminists reading this (and I know most of my readers are feminists) can give a satisfactory explanation as to why NOT A SINGLE feminist or A SINGLE ONE of their sickening child protection charities are campaigning against these videos, and yet it has been necessary (and easy) to introduce world-wide legislation to imprison any man who looks at a picture of a 17 year old girl in a bikini, I hereby promise to abandon this website and become a committed supporter of feminism henceforth.
The silence is deafening.
The flames of hell are not good for the skin.
Pingback: Tweets that mention Jessica Valenti opposes French burka ban | Anti-Feminism | Men's Rights | Male Sexuality -- Topsy.com
What on earth is wrong with two girls fighting? Will their wombs drop? Do you think that only boys should fight? You don’t have any real arguments! Absolutely ridiculous.
I’ll publish your comments, even though they are retarded and contain no rational argument. It’s of no relevance if you personally are a psychopath and think there is nothing wrong with American webmasters making money from showing small children beating and bullying each other. My point is that child protection societies should care far more about that than men who click on a mouse to view an image of a 17 year old girl in a bikini.
I didn’t say anything about boys fighting being o.k? How retarded are you? I’m making the point that child protection groups are only interested in abuse (or non-existant abuse) when it hurts their own sexual interests.
Does a 17 year old girl’s womb dry up if she is photographed in a bikini, by the way? And is that your only criteria of child abuse? Fucking brood mare. Or are you just somebody who get’s turned on by watching these ‘bitch fights’?
If you don’t think there is anything wrong with videos like this please die a slow and painful death : http://www.mentalzero.com/Vicious-Gang-Repeatedly-Kick-Defenseless-Girl-In-The-Head-1632.html
Besides, you can moderate any comments out- so you may have had hundreds of rational, well argued, legitimate comments, but you won’t have published any of them.
I know Wikipedia is not a very good source but this entry here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_scarf_controversy_in_France
brings up an interesting idea. Apparently a French Demographer named Emmanuel Todd found that females of islamic cultures were much more likely to date and marry non-muslims in areas were the veil is not tolerated vs areas were it is (of course correlation does not proove causation). The theory is is that the veil essentially wards off non-muslim men from appraoching muslim women but if muslim women no longer wear the veil then more non-muslim men will approach them and some muslim women may accept them as companions. If banning the veil may lead to more non-muslim men approaching muslim women and dating/marrying them this means that the less attractive western women (i.e. feminists) will face greater sexual competition, if some of them suspect this perhaps that may form part of their motivation to oppose the birka ban.
IMO the fact that there is a POSSIBILITY that birka bans lead to greater exogamy amoung muslim females then birka bans should be adopted EU wide. The reason for this being that currently intermarriage between white europeans and north africans/middle easterners is heavily skewed towards arab men pairing off with white women, one of the obvious causes of this is that the muslim religion allows muslim men to marry christians and jews (but some liberal/secular muslims interpret this to mean any “woman of good character”) while muslim women must marry muslim men. Robert is correct when he states that men are programmed to try to safeguard their own women while not objecting to “taking” women from other tribes (but insisting that that is the way things should be is naturalistic fallacy) and the islamic “double standard” could be used as an excuse by secular arab males to cover up what is in reality an ethnic double standard. What ends up happening is that Arab males end up being able to acquire white female companions (who are given much more sexual autonomy) while white males will have a tough time trying to reciprocate…and IMHO this can increase islamophobia among europeans (“you can and do take our women but you won’t let us take yours”). In fact during the 1970s their apparently were race riots in East Germany caused by Arab and East German males fighting over females. Currently some muslim women (and fair minded muslim men) are challenging this double standard and they argue that the quranic evidence for it is very weak, I hope they are successful and I hope that arab/north african women get more autonomy from thier culture to choose non-muslim men as their companions if they so desire. Dispensing with the veil (and hopefully greater autonomy for muslim women) has the possibility of allowing white men to at least reduce the dating disparity and give them (and of course muslim women) a greater number of partners to choose from…I also think that this will lead to less islamophobia.
Great point Highwayman.
As well as reducing Islamaphobia through less native sexual resentment, it would clearly help integration through cross-cultural relationships. Which I guess is what a lot of muslim men don’t want, as the children of muslim men will likely be muslim, whereas the children of european male/muslim female will likely be christian or secular.
I’ve witnessed the arab/muslim double standards at first hand in London. I’ve also witnessed how arab men will have no qualms about approaching teenage girls. Similarly in Germany with the Turkish population. Of course this is changing now as paedohysteria even creeps into the Turkish ghettos of Berlin, but I’ve seen muslim men in their 30′s approach 14 year old blonde girls many times in Germany and go off with them. In fact it (was) clear that that is the age they prefer.
QUOTE: “Which I guess is what a lot of muslim men don’t want, as the children of muslim men will likely be muslim, whereas the children of european male/muslim female will likely be christian or secular.”
It need not necessarily work out that way, they could always make it a condition upon marriage that the children must be raised muslim be it that the father or mother is the muslim parent. Many “christians” in the West are christians in name only. The resistance of some arab/muslim men to allowing their women greater autonomy in choosing their partners is likely rooted in the fact that many of them probably like the idea that thier women are reserved for them while they have their choice of white (christian or secular) or arab/muslim women…and who wouldn’t like to be in that situation. But the fact of the matter is that is a breeding ground for conflict and that situation is not sustainable. I would also argue that not only should EU countries ban the birka but they should NEVER allow muslim polygamy as this would encourage hoarding of females and increase sexual resentment and Islamophobia. Another potential solution to this situation is that Arab/Muslim men could voluntarily abstain from non-muslim women out of fairness to their muslim women and in the interests of peaceful relations with non-muslims but…I don’t see that happening. Unfortunately their is also the possibility that European men could retaliate and start becoming more possesive towards European women, but this would be a giant step backward and I DO NOT want this dilemma to be resolved in that fashion. Hopefully this situation can be resolved in a fair manner towards everyone and IMHO increasing arab/muslim female exogamy is the preferred solution.
QUOTE: “I’ve seen muslim men in their 30?s approach 14 year old blonde girls many times in Germany and go off with them. In fact it (was) clear that that is the age they prefer.”
I would have no objection to that as long as they treat the girl with kindness and respect and they allow non-Turkish men (who would treat young girls with kindness and respect) to date their 14 year old girls. None of this “we can help ourselves to the frauliens but our women belong to us” bullshit. In the case of Turkish women though I believe that they have a reputation of finding European men repulsive so even if they had the same autonomy as German girls the German males may still fair badly in their attempts to find a Turkish female as a companion. My understanding though is that thier are some Morrocan girls who certainly like European men though and from what I understand Morrocan women marrying European men is an increasing trend in Morroco…things might start to get better.
Believe it or not in Costa Rica before the late 1990s it was not uncommon to see American male expats (yes…AMERICAN!!!!) pairing of with young Costa Rican girls aged 15 to 17. The country soon came under American and Child Welfare Advocate gunsights however and it was forced to crackdown on “child sex tourism”. Don’t even think about dating a girl under 18 in Costa Rica now if you are a foreigner the cops might even go so far as to arrest you on false charges of employing an underage prostitute.
If you don’t mind while I am on this subject I would like to make a public service announcement to all readers. STAY AWAY FROM UNDER 18s IN LATIN AMERICA. Although sex between adult men and young girls may be more culturally tolerated there that does not mean that it is tolerated between FOREIGN adult men and young girls. Also although many Latin American countries have Age of Consents listed as being below 18 in many cases they have other laws such as “seduction of a minor” and “corruption of a minor” whereby an older male can still be charged criminally for having consensual sex with a girl over the Age of Consent but under the age of 18. These laws may be poorly enforced among the locals but strictly enforced with foreigners, especially since these countries are often under international pressure to combat “child sex tourism”. Some countries like Cuba even have their age of consent set at 16 for sex between Cubans but 18 for sex between Cubans and Foreigners. Also many countries have laws forbidding their citizens from having sex with minors overseas (thier seems to be some confusion as to whether or not the American law bans Americans from having sex with under 16s overseas or under 18s) and Latin American police know this, some of the more corrupt ones may arrest you for being with say a 15 year old girl and try to extract bribes from you by threatening to report you to authorities in your hoem country.
Thanks Highwayman, interesting points. Although the UK has had sex tourism laws for a while it was only last year that they ‘closed a loophole’ and made it illegal for a British citizen to have sex with somebody in another EU country under 16 but over the local age of consent. The feminists behind the law were pushing to make the age 18, but for whatever reason in the end they had to settle for 16.
Wow, that sounds grim in South America. Is that the case even in the southern nations such as Argentina, Uruguay, Chile? I remember reading about the Italian tourist who was arrested for kissing his 11 year old daughter on the cheek on a Brazillian beach.
I guess it’s the usual sexual trade union tactics. Use child prostitution as a way of making sure that Western men have NO access to young females. If you look up ECAPT’s official anti-child prostitution video that gets played on airplanes etc you will notice a telling moment showing what appears to be a 16 year old girl dancing in a latin american nightclub and being picked up by a Westerner. The video is supposed to be about stopping 11 year olds being sold and pimped, but really it’s all about stopping Americans or Europeans picking up sexy 16 year olds in night clubs.
BTW, I’ve been reading one of Belfort Bax’s books – very interesting comments regarding the (then recently introduced) age of consent of 16. He makes a point about how unfair it was to men because most girls had started puberty before 14 and that how could a man tell whether a girl was underage or not. Just think what he’d have to say about present child porn laws which criminilize any man who clicks on a picture of a girl (even a cartoon) who looks under 18! (when most females complete puberty by 16 thesedays). He also makes clear that even the new age of consent introduced by feminists (16) was understood as a means of stopping child prostitution and ‘child rape’ and not intended to prosecute men having relationships with 14 or 15 year olds. I’ll make a post on it maybe this week or next.
Of course today, he would have been drummed out of the ‘men’s rights’ movement for rationalizing his own perverted desires, just like Jay Hammers…
WRT to the case involving the Italian man and his 11 year old daughter my understanding was that this took place in an area where (real) child sex tourism was known to occur and the locals assumed that his daughter was an underage prostitute due to the fact that the Italian man was white and his daughter was mixed-race (his wife was black) which led them to call the police and then all hell broke loose. I remember at one point his wife was protesting for his release while the cops were still confining him! I have not followed the story since.
QUOTE: “Wow, that sounds grim in South America. Is that the case even in the southern nations such as Argentina, Uruguay, Chile?”
I don’t know all the details about the penal codes of various South American countries but I do know that pretty much all of them have so-called “Two-Tier” Age of Consent laws. The way this system works is that you have an Age of Consent set at say 14 for statutory rape but then you have various other laws governing sex between girls aged 14 to 18. These laws can be called “corruption of a minor”, “seduction of a minor” or “contributing to the delinquency of a minor” or “Estupro”. Sometimes these laws are prosecutable by the state other times the girls parents have to iniatiate a lawsuit depending on the jurisdiction. A perfect example of this was Brazil were the Age of Consent was 14 BUT with parental consent, without parental consent the Age of Consent climbed to 18. The parental consent clause was repealed in 2009 AFAIK and thier “seduction of minors” laws were repealed sometime before that but you are still dealing with a country that is under tremendous international pressure to “combat child sex tourism” and is known for having a police force that is prone to corruption so dating a girl under 18 there is still very dangerous most Brazillians that I have spoken to have told me that foreigners should treat the AOC in Brazil as if it were 18.
Basically the problem with Latin America is: 1) most countries have 2-Tiers AOC laws which can allow for prosecution of consensual sex between older men and young girls over the AOC but under 18; 2) Most of these countries are under international pressure to combat “child sex tourism” and can enforce these laws in a manner that would make their AOC defacto 18 for tourists (for example any gift that you give your 16 year old girlfriend could be deemed “seduction” or even prostitution) 3) Cultural tolerance for sex between older men and young girls may not extend to foreigners (especially due to the “child sex tourism” stigma) and there may be pressure on the police to put a stop to it; 4) Police in Latin America are known to be corrupt and they may arrest you for being with a girl under 18 to extract bribes from you as they may know that you are in violation of one of your home country’s sex tourism laws or they may simply charge you (falsely) with being with an underage prostitute and then demand bribes.
In the case of Uruguay it is my understanding that they do have “corruption of minors” laws governing sex with girls between age 15 and 18 but I am not sure exactly how they are enforced, same with Chile regarding sex with girls aged 14 to 18. Argentina has many restrictions on how consent can be obtained for sex with girls between 13 and 16, I was always under the impression that sex with girls aged 16 to 17 was legal and acceptable there (the only restrictions that I am aware of are against prostitution and “coersion”) but the country has been under a lot of pressure recently as it has been targeted by feminists and child welfare advocates as being a major child sex tourist destination as well as having a major “trafficking” problem so I don’t know if things have changed.
I want to be clear that I am only giving general guidelines, I am not authorized to practice law in any South American country and as such I cannot give legal advice, best to consult a barrister/solicitor (“attorney” for american readers) in one of the countries to get all relevant details.
WRT to the Sexual Trade Union’s role in all of this the international pressure placed on these countries is certainly the result of Child Welfare types who are in reality feminist front groups (read some of ECAPT’s dissertations to see what I mean) however the 2-Tier AOC laws themselves are a legal inheritance from thier former Iberian colonial masters and have been in place for a very long time. In fact both Portugal and Spain to this day have 2-Tier AOC laws (Portugal has an AOC set at 14 but has laws for prosecuting men for sex with girls aged 14 to 16 if it is alledged that the girl was “taken advantage of” and Spain has a similar law governing sex with girls aged 13 to 16. Germany also has a 2-Tier system although thiers seems to be well defined and with a reasonable burden of proof.
After rereading some of my comments above I feel the need to apologize if my comments regarding Latin America come across as too depressing or killjoyish. I am sure there are foreign who continue to enjoy the company of young girls in those countries but given the current circumstances it just seems like playing russian roulette, the dangers I mentioned are VERY REAL. Some people who come to this blog or who read my comments may be people who may be prone to looking for ways to skirt current social sanctions against older men being with young girls and may be tempted to go to areas where such relationships are traditionally less frowned upon (i.e. Latin America) I felt the need the give such people a cold shower before they take the risk of doing such things but I think I may come across too strong. I don’t blame Latin American societies for having double standards against foreigner’s in many cases this is due to international pressure placed upon them.
The Semite roots of Islam are the same roots of Judaism and Christianity which follow doctrines of a sort of female “subjugation.” In all three cases, women are viewed as creatures that should be cared for and loved by their husbands and men in similar ways that the God in each of the three scriptures “loves” his people (Jews, Christians, or Muslims). In this way, marriage is seen as a reflection or microcosm of God’s love and is in no way oppressive to women. In this initial ideal, men are traditionally seen as “protectors” and caregivers of their wife and treat them with extreme respect and love. What has happened throughout history and has created animosity of the feminist community towards traditional Christian ideology has been the historical and systematic abuse of this concept in America (such as using the ideology to brand women as “lesser beings” or using it to justify beatings, etc.). The prevention of women from voting in America and the expectation of women to not pursue their own personal goals was perceived to be a protectionistic measure, but in reality contributed to male dominance and control over women, not a voluntary idealistic love that is portrayed in Semite-rooted religions. The American traditional Christian views became that women were lesser beings and should be treated as slaves to the household and to their husbands (though it is true that children really do need love from both parents and a large amount of attention and to pursue personal interests over those obligations is very selfish). Similarly, in Islamic countries, women are traditionally seen as “lesser beings” and are systematically subjugated by males and to a larger extreme than is in America. Burqas are a way of male control over women through a limitation of individuality and are based upon initial ideals in Islam much like teachings of modesty and purity in Christian or Judaic texts. The reason there is support for Islamic teachings dealing women but not Christian teachings is the stigma that Christian white culture in America has been branded with; oppressive.
Great post, we are unable to subscribe, is it us or your settings?: Jessica Valenti opposes French burka ban | Anti-Feminist Theory of Feminism, Male Sexuality, Men's Rights : RUSSIAN ESCORTS IN LONDON
I appreciate your contribution, but are you spamming our page?