Along with her mother, Ms. Power said she approached the sensei with her concerns about the new environment, but was told that it was the student’s religious right. “[The sensei] told us to get used to it,” said Michele Walsh, Ms. Power’ mother.
Aiming to complete her training, Ms. Power nevertheless stayed in the school for another five months, but said her breaking point came when the male student began distributing religious literature.
In July of 2012, said Ms. Power, the student handed out copies of Islam; From darkness to light a booklet written by Toronto-based Islamic author Suhail Kapoor.
Only two days after Femen movement leader Inna Shevchenko was chosen as one of theinspirations for France's new official stamp, the controversial Ukrainian activist, known for her topless protests has sparked an outcry on Twitter for a July 9 tweet where she slams the holy month of Ramadan and Islam.
Former US President Jimmy Carter equates female genital mutilation and sex slavery with Catholic Church's refusal to ordain women:
ATLANTA — Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter says religious leaders, including those in Christianity and Islam, share the blame for mistreatment of women across the world.
The human rights activist said Friday religious authorities perpetuate misguided doctrines of male superiority, from the Catholic Church forbidding women from becoming priests to some African cultures mutilating the genitals of young girls.
Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says the materialistic approach taken by the Western civilization to women is an unforgivable sin. During a Wednesday speech on the occasion of the Muslim Women’s Day, Ayatollah Khamenei stated that the Western civilization allows for hedonism and the disrespecting of women, which is considered freedom in the West and anything other than that is viewed as captivity. The Leader noted that the Western civilization with its malicious, sexual laws is doomed to fall whether it likes it or not.
As I've written before, I don't find the Men's Rights movement particularly compelling. It seems like more of a harmless oddity than anything else.
But what has made it interesting lately is the hateful vitriol it has inspired in Women's and Gender Studies classes in academia.
One of the significant things Men's Rights groups is doing is challenging the preposterous, self-interested, psudo-academic facade of the ideological-based indoctrination occurring in Gender Studies programs.
Faced with these challenges, the radical who are immersed in identity-politics react as they usually do - by trying to shut down the free speech of people who they disagree with. That approach, better than anything, illustrates the vapidity and dishonesty of their agenda. What other reason would explain why they are so fearful of criticism that they react violently to try to shut it down?
I passed by the protest on Thursday outside the University of Toronto on my way to another event, but stayed for a minute of two to listen to what was happening.
As I approached, the protesters were shrieking "women hold up half the sky!." That saying is a quote from Chairman Mao, which suggests the totalitarian mindset of the Marxist infused Gender and Women's Studies Programs.
The complaints the Muslim Brotherhood have about the UN report include objections to Gay Rights, women's equality, and they want to preserve a husband's right to force sex upon his wife:
1. Granting girls full sexual freedom, as well as the freedom to decide their own gender and the gender of their partners (ie, choose to have normal or homo- sexual relationships), while raising the age of marriage.
2. Providing contraceptives for adolescent girls and training them to use those, while legalizing abortion to get rid of unwanted pregnancies, in the name of sexual and reproductive rights.
3. Granting equal rights to adulterous wives and illegitimate sons resulting from adulterous relationships.
4. Granting equal rights to homosexuals, and providing protection and respect for prostitutes.
5. Giving wives full rights to file legal complaints against husbands accusing them of rape or sexual harassment, obliging competent authorities to deal husbands punishments similar to those prescribed for raping or sexually harassing a stranger.
6. Equal inheritance (between men and women).
7. Replacing guardianship with partnership, and full sharing of roles within the family between men and women such as: spending, child care and home chores.
8. Full equality in marriage legislation such as: allowing Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men, and abolition of polygamy, dowry, men taking charge of family spending, etc.
9. Removing the authority of divorce from husbands and placing it in the hands of judges, and sharing all property after divorce.
10. Cancelling the need for a husband’s consent in matters like: travel, work, or use of contraception.
These are destructive tools meant to undermine the family as an important institution; they would subvert the entire society, and drag it to pre-Islamic ignorance.
I didn't make it to the Fiamengo speech at the University of Toronto last night, but expected it would be well covered.
Josh Dehaas from Macleans On Campus was there and wrote up a good report:
Only one person really lost her temper, after making a thought-provoking query about the impact of Fiamengo’s assertion that “children need their fathers” on lesbian parents. Fiamengo responded by suggesting there’s research that children do better in two-parent households. She didn’t like the answer. “That’s heteronormative bullshit,” the woman screamed, before a dramatic exit.
I don’t know that Fiamengo made a sound academic case. What I do know is that she deserves respect for gathering evidence and calmly presenting it. She also offered advice all students should heed. “Educate yourselves so you can challenge [each other],” and, “do it will style, not hatred.”
She’s right on that. The freedom to debate unpopular ideas is something universities have a duty to protect. On Thursday night at the University of Toronto, that ideal was challenged but prevailed.
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip -- The United Nations on Tuesday canceled a planned marathon in Gaza after the Palestinian territory's Hamas rulers banned women from participating, in a new attempt by the Islamic militant group to impose its ideology inside the crowded coastal strip. No comment as of yet from the morons at Queers Against Israeli Apartheid ..or U of Toronto's Women's Studies Dept.
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/03/05/3267415/un-agency-cancels-gaza-marathon.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy
Finding someone with a perceptive, analytical, intelligent mind in a university Women's Studies course, either as a student or instructor, is possibly a greater challenge than finding a Rabbi in Mecca during the Haj.
Their classes are filled with bitter women carrying more chips on their shoulders than you'd find at a lumberjack contest. They are punctuated by a few spotty, desperate males hoping to ooze into some action by demonstrating their subservience to dominant womankind. These classes are filled with facial piercings and tattoos aplenty, and you'll never see less than half a dozen of those miserable creatures draped with kefiyehs as a radical fashion statement, regardless of the time of year. These are the types of students who want a degree, but lack the brains to qualify for medicine, or physics, or engineering, or law, or English Literature, or remedial basket weaving.
Of course there are some who register just to find a date, since being an unattractive, overweight lesbian presents a number of practical obstacles to finding romance in the outside world.
One of the strange phenomenons that the idiocy of Women's and Gender Studies courses has given rise to is the reactionary Men's Rights Movement. The participants in Men's Rights groups are not, despite claims of moronic Women's Studies students, "rape and incest apologists" but a bunch of dorky guys who want some "man time." As they want it in wonky university environments, they have to give it some sort of academic and `social justice`pretense for official recognition.
It wouldn't bother the Women's Studies thugettes as much if these men wanted gender segregation for the purpose of a big, sweaty Gay orgy of invasions which would undoubtedly increase their empathy with the female experience. But as they are mostly heterosexual males who really just want to be able to drink beer and play video games without some chick making them talk about their feelings, feminist outrage has understandably ensued.
Part of the problem is that the men in "Men's Rights" groups must spend too much time in university classes where Women's Studies students are picking up other credits, or in government-funded workplaces that employ too many people with sociology degrees. Aside from the idiocy those environments present, and assuming you're never litigated in Family Court, men's rights aren't being assailed too vigorously and anyone who thinks otherwise is probably living in an insular bubble.
At least it seemed that way until Feminazis helped by making the Men`s Rights groups' points for them.
Radical feminists deplore the term `Feminazi.`They see themselves as social justice martyrs, and how dare anyone compare their heroic, hairy-armpitted activism with Hitlerism!?!
But what else can you call violent, hateful fanatics who use thuggish tactics and intimidation (see video below) to try to suppress something as benign as a conversation about male suicide rates and the (alleged) difficulty of being a male in the modern world. And all because it offends their hysterical sensibilities.
There is a laughable irony to a group of people who, as a whole are enthusiastic supporters of the anti-Semitic Israeli Apartheid Week and call mere condemnation of it "an attack on free speech" while they violently try to prevent points of view other than their own from being expressed.
Following the violent melee and attempted censorship of a Warren Farrell lecture on "Men's Rights" at the University of Toronto (along with gross misrepresentations of his statements and writing) by that university's Women's Studies students last November, they are now enraged that another lecture criticizing the idiocy of their field of "study" is allowed to be taking place at the same school.
This time the lecturer is a woman; a professor from that bastion of neo-Conservative ideology, the University of Ottawa, by the name of Janice Fiamengo.
Professor Fiamengo's speech will, in the word of the event's organizers, discuss "the problems of academic feminism at Canadian universities: dubious scholarship, indoctrination, dogmatic teaching approaches, limitations on free speech, effects of “equity hiring,” and the consequences for men in the humanities "
A worthwhile subject, totally within the purview of academic discourse, and so naturally, Women's Studies Feminazis and the totalitarians at the socialist, regressive NDP and Union-controlled website rabble.ca want it shut down.
One of the outcomes of the violent protest at the Farrell lecture was that some of the protest leaders were named and shamed by a US-based "Men's Rights" website. That tactic may be the best way of dealing with those who would like to hide in a mob while trying to take away other people's rights.
Heather, a feminist and social justice advocate, says at least one of those young women has been exposed to online bullying and harassment. For that reason, she doesn’t want to see the Janice Fiamengo talk go forward. However, she doesn’t know if she will take place in any kind of protest because she fears the backlash.
Heather, who asked her last name be withheld because she doesn’t want to become a target for harassment, said she doesn’t think a talk criticizing women’s studies belongs at the University of Toronto.
“That in itself is disrespectful to all of the female students and staff at U of T,” she said.
A bully who complains about not participating in an attempt to bully others because she is afraid of being bullied is just one of the astounding ironies you can chalk up to the hypocritical idiots populating Women's Studies courses. Extrapolating academic criticism of Women's Studies programs to being "disrespectful to all of the female students and staff at U of T" is another. But that is to be expected from people in an academic field that endeavors to restrict academic expression it finds offensive.
The lecture by Janice Fiamengo will occur Thursday, March 7 at 7 pm in the University of Toronto's George Ignatieff Theatre. The talk itself should prove interesting, but there is every possibility the real excitement will take place on the way in.
"Women should be able to wear whatever they want and men should shut up about it" was the line that got the most applause at the public consultation on Human Rights and the Law held by the Ontario Human Rights Commission and the University of Toronto on Wednesday evening. But the irony was that despite the feminist overtones of the statement, Winnifred Sullivan, the Director of the Law, Religion, and Culture at the State University of New York seemed to be alluding to women's right to wear hijabs, niqabs and face veils during citizenship oaths -garments used to subjugate and de-sexualize women.
And this outspoken advocacy for cultural diversity rights by feminists seemed confined to the interests of immigrants in the west, since there is no commensurate movement by them to fight for the rights of women in Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Pakistan to wear mini skirts or appear in public without a hijab. This is essence is the direction that Human Rights Commissions in Canada are pushing towards, a cultural relativism they describe as "deeper equality" which would eradicate the last vestiges of the traditions that built the institutions and laws that gave birth to western tolerance and freedoms.
One of the night's speakers, David Seljak, Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of Waterloo reminded the audience that Canada is a secular society with elements of the Christian traditions that the country was founded upon, such as a seven day work week and Christian public holidays like Christmas and Good Friday. The implied goal of a deeply equal society would be to eliminate such traditions so that newcomers who are altering Canadian demographics have a greater stake in society.
What was not discussed during the evening, moderated by Ontario Human Rights Commissioner Barbara Hall, were the failings of multiculturalism.The opposite was true. Professor Seljak barely concealed his disdain for the Canadian government's efforts to retain elements of the national culture by restricting alien garb in certain situations, such as niqabs in voting booths and criminal trials.
When westerners go to eastern countries with the expectation that the natives would allow and adapt to our cultural practices, it was usually proceeded by a military conquest and came in the form of imperialism and colonialism that the "progressives" in our society despise. Yet they are enthusiastic supporters of a reverse form of cultural imperialism that lets foreigners come to Canada and expect the majority culture to change to accommodate the minority.
There is a big difference between tolerance and restructuring. It doesn't harm Canadians or diminish Canadian traditions to allow a Muslim woman to wear a hijab or a Sikh to wear a Turban, or to let someone take a vacation day on their religious holiday. But advocates for the idea that no culture is superior to another are following through with its corollary; that our culture therefore is not special nor is it particularly worth preserving.
Millions of Canadians who remain oblivious to what Human Rights Commissions want to accomplish in this area would be deeply disturbed by the cultural suicide they want us to commit in the name of Deeper Equality. Another irony is that the people who are so willing to abandon to cultures that bear little resemblance to Canada's have been so anxious to protect it from infusions of American culture, from which ours is almost indistinguishable.
America was on the minds of a few people at Wednesday's consultation. Ali Mallah, a former Canadian Arab Federation, NDP and CUPE vice president and a fixture at anti-Israel protests who is a vocal supporter of terrorist groups like Hezbollah, was there, his unkempt appearance making him look like a caricature of a union goon. Speaking in a heavily accented, lisping voice, he got up to make a speech in which he pompously pontificated about Canadians "occupying native land." Mallah was obviously more interested in the appearence of, rather than genuine, empathy for "occupied" Natives. Since unlike those of us who were born in Canada, Mallah traveled here as an adult from half way around the world to become a Canadian occupying native land, and to the best of my knowledge, hasn't given any back to them. He railed against the Islamophobia of "right-wing Christians" in the United States whom he compared to being "equal in hate to bin Laden." Mallah failed to note any right-wing Christians beheading apostates in America or strapping explosives to themselves to murder scores of heathen children, but those are mere details.
Rather than reaffirm Mallah's paranoia and hyperbole about Islamophobia, panelist Sullivan indeed corrected him. She pointed out that it wasn't just the right wing, but all segments of American society that are Islamophobic. Take that Ali, that'll teach you to bad mouth the "right wingers."
There was one question in the Q & A at the end of the night that stymied the panelists. In fact, it seemed to send their brains into a tizzy the way that a logical contradiction on the old Star Trek TV show caused a computer to overload. They refused to answer when I asked how Human Rights Commissions dealing with religious tolerance can deal with intolerant religious practices that promote the subjugation of women and the persecution of Gays. They were rendered speechless at having to contend with the idea of an oppressed group trampling on the legitimate rights of other people.
Unless Canadians are willing to participate in their democracy and speak out against the destruction of Canadian vales and traditions, having their rights trampled on is something we may see more and more of in the near future.
The Saudi leadership was humiliated at the news of a woman being sentenced to lashing for the "crime" of driving a car earlier this week. That story made headlines all over the world and was being used as another stick to castigate the Gulf monarchy's medieval rule.
King Abdullah reversed the sentence for an obvious reason. Because it being publicized was an embarrassment. Not because of some trend towards liberalization going on in the Wahhabi kingdom.
But you wouldn't know that from reading Patrick Martin in the Globe and Mail. Martin seems to view his role as a columnist as being a press agent for terrorists and tyrants. Prosecuting and beating a woman for driving is a gross violation of human rights, and a minor act of clemency for an infraction that the civilized world was mocking is described by Martin as an indication of "just how serious the Saudi ruler is about enhancing the civil rights of women in the Kingdom." Or it could be an indication of how serious the Saudi ruler is about trying not to look bad in the international press, and it's a good thing he has boosters like Patrick Martin to help spread that message.
This comes in the wake of the Saudi leadership giving women minor enfranchisement privileges. Yet the Globe and Mail didn`t seem to have much to say about how that move came only a couple of weeks after Saudi embarrassment over the exposure of how they tried to suppress `Ethical Oil` ads which highlighted the abusive, unfair treatment of women in Saudi Arabia.
The one thing that keeps the Saudi rulers in place is the wealth they derive from oil, and Canada illustrating how their product is the equivalent of `fair trade`` petroleum was bad for Saudi business.
That`s what is going on in Saudi Arabia right now - not a blossoming of a women`s rights movement but some press releases by one of the world`s largest oil producers.
This is not the first time Martin has acted as an apologist for the worst elements in the world. In a`radio interview in which he discussed a Globe and Mail series on Gaza a few months ago, Martin dismissed Hamas rocket attacks on Israel as being `firecrackers.` This vapid, hypocritical comment shows the level of analysis Canada`s``national newspaper` is giving its readers. Or if I`m wrong, Martin might be willing to demonstrate it by standing in a room while a few of those `firecrackers`that can level a house are lobbed in his direction. I wouldn`t bet on him volunteering for that any time soon.
No shock there. But this story is funny in how they warp reality:
"Combing through Iran news today, I came across an article in one of the pro-Ahmadinejad websites. The title was 'Israeli Women Sell Their Bodies: [Pictures Included]' and the first paragraph said:
'In a blatant act of decadence and social moral corruption, women are displayed for sale in shop windows throughout Israel's major chain stores'. The article quotes several Israeli papers to back up its claim for this depraved social perversion which is gripping Israel and ends with a paragraph which says:
'Each woman has a price tag, which also displays her age, weight, size and her country of birth. The pictures below show modern women slavery in Israel, a country which claims to have democracy!'
So the message to the people of Iran is clear, democracy will lead to women being displayed in shop windows as sex commodities, is this what you want?"
.. sure enough, the truth is nothing like what the pro-Ahmadinejad sites are claiming .. It was in fact a protest to highlight the problem of human trafficking for the sex industry and the protesters were calling for people who pay for sex to be prosecuted too."
The new police chief of the Iranian city of Esfahan says it is a crime for women to cycle or roller-skate in public, RFE/RL’s Radio Farda reports.
The two were among a range of women’s activities deemed criminal by Hassan Karami in an announcement on October 18.
Further criminal activities include singing near Esfahan’s famous Khajoo Bridge and playing volleyball in public. Karami also said that it is a crime for either sex to play cards in public parks.
Karami said police will “severely prosecute” offenders. He added that the number of police stations and patrols in Esfahan should be increased in order to combat crime in the city.
Some of the worst human rights abusers in the world share their thoughts:
IRAN
"It is my honor to represent a country whose respect for women and the dignity of women is rooted in its ideological beliefs and cultural past... [However, there is] persisting and rife discrimination and violence against women, in particular, in France, Norway, Slovakia, Sweden, Luxembourg and Ireland."
SYRIA
"There are certain situations where women's physical make-up must be taken into consideration when enacting laws. Women, [it] must not be imposed on them certain heavy work, such as working in mines and other hard labor."
SAUDI ARABIA
"Islamic Sharia has granted women the same rights as men on the basis of principle."
.jpg)
