We all have the right to be offensive. Apparently, my history teacher was wrong and Voltaire never actually said: "I despise what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
" As quotations go, it's only GCSE clever – an interesting juxtaposition for young teens, a notch above "'Assume' makes an 'ass' out of 'u' and 'me'. " If you're still quoting it at A-level, that's OK but you won't win any prizes. In an undergraduate essay, it should get no more credit than "Too many cooks spoil the broth" or "At the start of the war, few of the combatants knew how it was going to end.
" While it's an important sentiment, it should also, in a mature, free country, be an obvious one. It's not complicated – it's a truism, not a paradox. So why, when the small bunch of extremists, bigots and opportunists that is Islam4UK announced that they wanted to stage a demonstration in Wootton Bassett, did the home secretary say he would support attempts to ban it?
I hate the idea of the demonstration going ahead. Whoops. Faisal al Yafai: What western feminists should do about the veil. A few years ago, the Moroccan feminist writer Fatema Mernissi published Scheherezade Goes West, a book in which she drew comparisons between the treatment of women in the west and in the Arab and Muslim worlds.
Men in both societies, she concluded, oppressed their women, but in different ways: the west by only allowing youthful women to express their sexuality, and only in certain ways; Islamic societies by allowing sexual expression, but limiting women's physical space. Whatever one thinks of Mernissi's analysis, her book points to a significant cross-pollination of feminist thought.
Like other equality movements, feminism crosses borders and feminists from the west and the Muslim worlds need each other and have a great deal to learn from each other. The question is, how can they best do that? Feminism, as I wrote last week, is having a difficult time across the Arab and Muslim worlds in prising its narrative from political Islam.
Time to get rid of it. Burqa, « les talibans auraient applaudi »... - Les blogs du Dipl. Gloc : 29 janvier @10h18 “Mais ici, il s’agit de quelque chose de totalement différent.
Ce qui se cache derrière ces lois c’est le marché commercial de la sécurité d’une part, et la stigmatisation d’une population particulière d’autre part. Comment pouvez vous commercialiser, des systèmes de vidéo surveillance des drones, des satellites espions, si les gens se cachent sous des vêtements ?” Merci de votre commentaire sur ce blog qui, pour l’essentiel, semble cantonner cette question vestimentaire au seul point de vue de la stigmatisation des mœurs d’une population à des fins politiques.
Comme vous le dites, “il s’agit de quelque chose de totalement différent.” “Ce qui se cache derrière tout cela, c’est le marché”, et pas seulement celui de la sécurité - bien qu’en effet, celui-ci en soit le bénéficiaire le plus visible - mais, plus précisément la marchandise, comme forme dominante des rapports de production.