Threatened, Missing or Arrested Bloggers: Submit a Report

Global Voices Advocacy hosts a page keeping track of the status of bloggers around the world who have gone missing or have been arrested and follows-up on them. Their project, Threatened Voices, tracks the suppression of online free speech.

Lend your support to these bloggers here. If you have any information on their whereabouts and status please contact the Threatened Voices project by either leaving a comment on the specific blogger's page or submitting a report regarding any bloggers you know who have been threatened, gone missing, or have been arrested or whether they have been released.

Who Profits from Censorship? Timothy Karr Tells All

Back in 2004, when I was still a student at a private university in Washington, I was appalled to discover that the company who regulated my university networks, Cisco, also sold products that allowed the Chinese government to censor websites and regulate information access. Cisco is not the only company profiting from authoritarian regimes. Timothy Karr, the campaign director for Save The Internet as well as a contributer to The Huffington Post, has written extensively on US companies aiding and abetting censorship overseas. One of his recent reports, "Censorship: Made In the USA" is a damning indictment of American companies supporting the crackdown of Arab bloggers and newsreaders simply by doing business with regimes not particularly for civil liberties.

Karr cites a new report published by the OpenNet Initiative, an NGO advocating for an Open Internet. The report lists several US companies who have sold technologies that red list or block access to websites to oppressive governments. These include the popular McAffee, Inc., Websence, Inc., and Palo Alto Network.  Previously, Karr had published a story concerning another US company, Narus, "which sold to Egypt and Libya an Internet spying technology that lets state security forces track online and cellphone communications and even target the speaker's whereabouts for arrest." This story kicked off an investigation by the House Foreign Relations Committee and the State Department. Karr writes that the results of these investigations are still pending.

According to Karr, Rep. Bill Keating (MA) is the only voice on Capital Hill promising to propose legislation that would prevent US companies from selling censorship technology. Karr has posted a link to a petition to both Rep. Keating and Sen. Dick Durbin (IL) to get this legislation moving forward. Of course, despite citizen action I have my reservations that these measures will succeed. One could say, the United States has a political interest in promoting free media, but on the other hand it depends.

This is not the first time American companies have committed abuses overseas where the interests of capitalism take precedence over liberal ideals. The logic these companies operate on is that simply because they sold the perpetrators the tools of the crime leaves them innocent of the crime because they're just doing business and are not responsible for the purposes for which their products are used. This logic is flawed because in the long-run these companies will suffer 'moral costs' of their amoral investments. Here moral realism can be applied: public opinion will ultimately tarnish the reputation of these companies and when the political status quo is overturned in countries where oppression has been the norm (as currently seen in the Middle East) they will lose their business. Companies can't continue doing business this way and profit in the long-term without considering the people they're exploiting and how that will effect their markets and image in the future. It's simply bad business. Short-term profits won't compensate for long-term losses.

On the bright side, however, some American companies understand the concept above and have taken steps to do business by promoting civil liberties. In 2009, Google faced-off with China over censorship barriers and had its license to operate in China revoked. Google has since renewed its license with China without making concessions to censorship. Moreover, Google is crafting and seeking influence Internet policy by supporting an open and free Internet. If other US companies followed Google's business model, conducting their business practices to empower people with their services and products instead of repressing them, they would be creating greater opportunity and profiting themselves by the very act of profiting others.

Update: A really fascinating story on Google just came out in which the Internet giant is investing $1 million on Internet censorship detection technologies. Go Google!!!

________________________

Timothy Karr also runs a popular blog, MediaCitizen (http://mediacitizen.blogspot.com/), covering issues as far ranging as criticism of media policy, censorship, analysis on old media and new media.

Crackdowns on Bloggers & Journalists Amidst Protests

Syrian blogger Ahmed Abu Al Khair (http://ahmadblogs.net/) has been arrested in Syria earlier last week. Global Voices Advocacy contributer, Anas Qtiesh, reported that Ahmed was previously arrested in February and has been subsequently re-arrested amidst protests in Daraa last week. Qtiesh also reports that journalist, Khaled Elekhtyar has gone missing.

To read the full story and support these individuals please click here.

Al Jazeera has also covered the status of Arab bloggers amid crackdowns here.

Update: It appears that one of Bahrain's most influential bloggers, Mahmood Al-Yousif (http://mahmood.tv/), has also been arrested last night.

Rape as a Weapon of War: Women Fight Back in Libya

A terrible story came out of Libya earlier last week of a woman who was raped by government troops in Libya. Iman al-Obeidi, however, would not be silenced by shame. She stormed into a hotel in Tripoli where foreign journalists were based to openly disclose her identity and tell her story. Government minders in the hotel started a brawl with her as foreign journalists sought to protect her. She loudly declared that she had been detained at a check point, tied up, abused, and gang raped.  Hadeel Al-Shalchi of the Associated Press reported: "The woman, who appeared in her 30's, wore a black robe and a floral scarf around her neck and identified herself. She had scratches on her face and she pulled up her black robe to reveal a bloodied thigh. She said neighbors in the area where she was detained helped her escape."

At the end of the scuffle however, al-Obeidi was dragged out by the government minders who then came back and claimed to the journalists that she was drunk and mentally ill. These comments were later retracted and a government spokesman claimed it was a case of rape and it was being investigated and that al-Obeidi was "safe and well." A recent follow-up to the story by Al Jazeera today noted that al-Obeidi was still missing that that government officials were trying to bribe her family with large sums of money to convince their daughter recant the story. Her mother declared publicly that she told her daughter to "keep silent" (in regards to recanting), and her family had noted that she had been targeted after she had participated in a pro-democracy protest. Furthermore, while government spokesmen declared to journalists that al-Obeidi was a "prostitute," her family furnished Al Jazeera with photos of her receiving her law degree.

Al Jazeera reported: "Iman is rapidly become a cause célèbre in Libya. Highly unusual in a culture that traditionally secludes its women and exercises a code of honor."Moreover, the Al Jazeera reporter noted that "other women" had been detained along with al-Obeidi and their status is unknown. 

Libyan state TV, predictably, has not been kind to al-Obeidi. A friend shared with me the following link to a state TV response to the rape story. The newscaster had the gall to declare: ‎"From a psychological perspective, we know that any woman who has gone through any kind of rape it's impossible that she would have acted like this woman right after being raped" and claimed she had received this opinion from "doctors." Furthermore, today Libyan state TV aired what the claimed was 'secret footage' of al-Obeidi being interviewed by officials which appears to be some actress with her face covered up in al-Obeidi's scarf. 

Iman al-Obeidi's case is a reflection of a larger issue that often occurs in war - rape used as a weapon against women. This is not unique to Libya although certainly in a culture where rape victims shrink back in shame and silence, al-Obeidi's courage is astounding, more so in front of pro-Gaddafi minders and international journalists. She gives a voice to rape victims who have otherwise chosen to remain silent. Al Jazeera reporters talking to doctors in Libya discovered that Gaddafi soldiers had "condoms and viagra" in their pockets suggesting that they were intending to rape women on rebel territory. Doctors also noted that they were treating rape victims. 

Of course, the drama is just unfolding. In a diabolical twist, today, The New York Daily News just reported that al-Obeidi is to face criminal charges for slander, her accusations a "grave offense" to the 15 men whom she claims raped her.  British-based Telegraph further detailed that a Libyan government spokesman stated, "The boys accused of doing this are furious. They want to kill her. They have filed a case to defend their family name. In our culture these are very serious charges that will last for generations." The Libyan government response is stupefying. To blame the victim as a perpetrator against national honor after she faced horrific trauma at the hands of Gaddafi troops is appalling. There is no honor in raping and abusing a woman.

Bourzou Daragahi, writing on the LA Times Blog, stated, "Human Rights Watch, a New York-based advocacy group that has been trying unsuccessfully to gain access to Libya, demanded that her family and international media be allowed to independently verify the official claim that she is free and safe." He also added: "Sarah Leah Whitson, director of the Middle East and North Africa division of the rights group, said that 'Libya has a history of mistreating women who have been raped or sexually abused and often jails them for what it describes as their own protection. Libyan judges also have an unfortunate practice of arranging for rapists to marry their victim, with the consent of her family, to 'save' her from ... an otherwise tainted future,' Whitson said in an email. 'The marriage also allows the rapist to avoid jail time.'" 

Libyan women have come out onto the streets to rally in support of al-Obeidi and her family has taken a decidedly non-traditional stance in publicly supporting their daughter and seeking her release. It will be a matter of time before we find out what's become of her and the other women that have been detained with her. 

The Cyber War Against Political Oppression & Censorship

In good news, Al Jazeera English reported this past January that Slim Amamou, a Tunisian blogger, was appointed Minister for Youth and Sport in the new Tunisian government. Under the censorship strictures of ex-dictator's Ben Ali's regime, Amamou was an active blogger and a CEO of a Tunisian web development company. According to Al Jazeera, he and several other Tunisian bloggers were circulating news and videos supporting protests in opposition to Ben Ali's government. Their Facebook passwords were hacked, accounts deleted and Amamou, along with another Tunisian blogger, were subsequently arrested and later released with Ben Ali's disgraceful exit from Tunisia.

Although the Internet has brought a tremendous amount of opportunity for the exchange of news, views, and ideas on a global scale it has also proven to be politically ambiguous territory and a more contentious ground for political battles especially in oppressive countries where individual bloggers are transforming into revolutionaries. Bloggers have proven to be a potent political force in countries with stringent censorship policies and state-run media, so much so that they are subject to arrest, threats on their lives, and torture. Amamou is not the first blogger to be arrested in consequence of writing or spreading information criticizing government actions or rallying support for protests. In June 2008, The Guardian reported that that record numbers of bloggers had been arrested by repressive governments, such as China, Burma, Iran and Mubarak-ruled Egypt at the time.

More recently, several Syrian bloggers have been arrested or reported missing in light of the uprisings and protests taking place in the Middle East. They have proven to be courageous and outspoken. According to the International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX) cited in the last link above, one Syrian blogger, 28 year-old Hadifa (http://ahmadblogs.net/) "appealed... for support for recently detained bloggers and for political prisoners in the Golan Heights (a region that Israel occupied in 1967 and annexed in 1981). He had also posted demands to the Syrian authorities, comments about the recent uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt, and advice on how to circumvent online censorship." The Daily Star also recently reported Lebanese bloggers were subjected to unprecedented crackdowns in 2010. In China, blogger and Guardian contributer, Ran Yunfei, has been arrested on the charge of 'subverting state power.'

Author Robert Greene wrote a particularly timely essay on his blog, The Descent of Power: An Interpretation of the Global Economic Crisis. His essay emphasizes that the Information revolution with the advent of the Internet and its ensuing social networks, forums, and news sharing platforms is devolving traditional centers of power by placing information access into the hands of individuals and in the process empowering them politically. A few relevant excerpts from his essay:

"In anthropology there is a concept known as historic fatality. What this means is that occasionally there emerges a certain idea, a certain way of doing things that is so immensely seductive to human beings that eventually it spreads around the globe and forever changes our way of life... We can make three generalizations at this point. When a group of people is given power, it forms a power center. This means, for instance, that a team of military leaders tends to think in two directions–how to promote the interests of the ruler, while also advancing its own agenda. Things now become political, as their interests will clash with other power centers. The ruler must now manage this growing complexity. The power environment becomes increasingly dangerous. 

Second, once people have been given power on this level, they do not want to give it back or return to an older way of governing. They work to keep what they have and extend their power base. And finally, once power becomes diluted and divided this way, it tends to keep on dividing, like a split atom. More and more people must be brought in to keep the whole functioning. And so over the course of centuries, power slowly became less and less concentrated... To a lesser degree we could talk of modern media as another power center that came to prominence in the 20th century, which in turn acted to dissolve and dilute previous concentrations of influence... Of course there remain concentrations of power and wealth in the world today. But on the other hand, there is no denying the remarkable evolution and dilution of power from that time millennia ago when it was mostly in the hands of one man. 

From this position in the present we can project into the future a period of even greater dilution, as more and more people around the globe feel the right and necessity to have more control over their lives... What interests me here is not the technology, but how it changes our relationship to power and authority, altering in so many ways the social dynamic–how people interact with one another. In this instance, the Internet is flattening out relationships that were once hierarchical and funneled through various centers. This tends to eat away at the prestige and authority of traditional sources of information such as newspapers, or expert opinions. It calls into question the need for so many middlemen in the world, and reveals the dubious source of their power."

The Internet is one of those historic fatalities. Individuals no longer have to go through media "middleman" to get their information and therefore politically bias media bureaus and state-run media are no longer the primary source of information. Moreover, younger generations who have been educated outside their countries are more tech savvy and more likely to figure out ways around government censorship programming and firewalls. In the long run, that means even the most oppressive governments will be unable to control the access individuals have to information. Bloggers, "twitterers", Googlers, and Facebookers all now hold a stake on information - its sourcing, framing, and dissemination - and they have power. This makes the Internet a space of serious political impact and influence and that means that the war against political oppression is not just on the streets in protest but in the cyber sphere against censorship.

It will be interesting to see how the cyber war will develop over time in the century and who will ultimately win. It is not just the philosophical and legal ramifications of freedom of information which must be considered but also the political empowerment of individuals in the face of traditional pillars of information control, namely governments and big corporate media outlets.
___________

Please visit the Committee to Protect Bloggers and the Committee to Protect Journalists to see what you can do to support politically dissenting bloggers around the world. 

What is the Future for Women in the Middle East?

Dr. Peggy Drexler, a sex and gender specialist and contributor to The Huffington Post, wrote a thoughtful piece ruminating on the future for women in the Middle East in lieu of the changing political climate. Her assessment is not cheerful. She highlights how in Iraq, despite Nouri Al Maliki's promise for greater political representation for women, the women currently in the Iraqi parliament were placed there by male relatives and that the one appointed female minister holds a barely-funded powerless post catering to women's issues. Moreover, in Tunisia and Egypt, despite the ouster of dictators, women in both countries have to grapple with the possibility that greater conservative elements may be voted into government with the possibility of changing progressive family codes to more restrictive religious-based laws as seen in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein.

"In Tunisia and Egypt, and possibly more countries to come, women helped win freedom from autocracy. But the next battle may be just beginning," concludes Drexler. Women in the Arab world are facing great risk and opportunity with the political changes taking place in their countries, but there is no doubt that gender equality for women in the region will require not only change in the political establishment, but indeed, an entire change in attitude of the men in their societies, a cultural and social shift that views women not simply as wives to be locked up behind closed doors but as participating and contributing members of society. That's not to say they haven't made strides in the past century. Indeed, among the middle class, many women have been educated, hold careers, and still raise families even in the most conservative of Arab countries (see Saudi Arabia). However, there's still a long way to go in the transformation of social attitudes among men in a mostly male-dominated society.

Fortunately, Egypt, in particular has a rich feminist history, Nawal El Saddawi serving as the modern face and voice of feminism in Egypt. Yanar Mohammed, the founder of the Organisation of Women's Freedom in Iraq (OWFI), fights on behalf of the rights of Iraqi women. We can only pray that more charismatic and courageous personalities like these two women make history in other countries where women have been traditionally subjugated to the private sphere. It will be interesting to see how women's rights develops in the Middle East into the next decade.

Daniel Ellsberg Defends Wikileaks

A really interesting interview with Daniel Ellsberg, the man who leaked the Pentagon Papers, by Anti-War Radio. You can listen to the interview on the link provided above or read the transcript on the same page. Ellsberg defends Julian Assange and Bradley Manning, a US soldier accused of leaking war documents to Wikileaks and who is currently in prison.

An excerpt of Ellsberg's take on the Wikileaks drama:

"To say that Julian Assange is guilty of treason has some problems since he’s an Australian citizen. But anyway, I was called a traitor, which was no more true of me than it is to say Bradley Manning, who is accused now of leaking, sitting in a jail in Quantico – he’s no more a traitor than I am, and I’m not. Neither of them are terrorists any more than I am, and I’m not. 

So I did get these comments. I didn’t get the “terrorist” at the time, because that wasn’t in vogue as a demonizing label then 40 years ago, but I would be called a terrorist now. I have no doubt at all, if I put out the same documents now, they would call me a terrorist, because that’s the bad thing now. 

Now, more than that, of course, I was – they’re searching now for a law with which to indict Assange for what he did, and of course Assange’s role is that essentially of the New York Times in the case of the Pentagon Papers or of WikiLeaks. There really is no basis in law that they’re going to find that can nail or can entrap or indict Assange that doesn’t apply to the New York Times exactly as well, since they have put out these clearly classified documents to the public.  

In fact, they’ve made the choice, along with the other four newspapers, Le Monde, Der Spiegel, The Guardian, and El Pais in Spain – they made the choice so far which documents in this Cablegate series to put out. Assange has put out on his own website essentially only those, with a few exceptions, but almost entirely those that have been chosen to be referred to or put out by these mainstream newspapers. 

So there is no judicial basis, no legal basis, for charging Assange with anything that doesn’t apply equally well to the New York Times, and it’s clear that the administration is not anxious to get in a legal fight with the New York Times. So they’re trying to distinguish Assange not only from me and the Pentagon Papers, but from the New York Times, and that’s really pretty impossible to do."

The end of the world? No, just the continuity of history. Fukuyama was wrong. History didn't end.

Catching up with news this week has left my head dizzy. The recent tragedy in Japan is set to earmark the world's most expensive natural catastrophes at USD $170 billion. What makes this all the more tragic is that Wikileaks released cables highlighting Japan had been warned by an IEAE official back in 2008 that some of its nuclear plants were not ready for earthquakes and had not updated their safety procedures. Japanese politicians and nuclear industry heads turned a blind eye to the warnings for the sake of business and expanding Japanese nuclear projects.

Developments in the Middle East and North Africa are also not looking positive. Libya, in the meantime, has exploded into civil war and recent news suggests that Libyan rebels are beginning to lose ground to Gaddafi forces. Some commentators are opining that Obama is missing out on a golden moment to intervene in the Libyan crisis, although the US President is calling for Gaddafi to make an exit. I honestly believe the US is delaying any action because of our recent experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention it's a "damned if we do, damned if we don't" situation per usual in international intervention considerations.

In Bahrain, the royal family is calling for the aid of Saudi security forces in a protest that is getting out of hand. Literally, this morning, there were photos of Pearl Square up in smoke and the Bahraini government declared a state of emergency and martial law. Speaking of Saudi Arabia, we're not getting much information concerning protests in Saudi, although Reuters noted that Saudi Shi'ites marched in support of Shi'ites in Bahrain. There was also a rumor circulating a week or so ago, of a 27-year old Saudi Facebook activist who was allegedly shot dead by Saudi security forces, although no one has been able to confirm this story.

Palestinian protesters called for an end to their divided government and to corruption in the Palestinian Territories although protesters were apparently met by Hamas security forces who fought to disperse the crowd. This amidst the publicity surrounding the Palestine Papers, which revealed the mess of backdoor negotiations between the Palestinian Authority, the US, Israel, and Britain, and other regional players with a stake in a potential settlement.

One would think that the whole 2012 hype had an inkling of truth, that the world is heading for a cataclysmic end, just from reading the news lately between consecutive natural catastrophes, potential nuclear meltdown in Japan, and major political transformations in the Middle East. I take from the Oswald Spengler school of thought: change is the only constant, history is cyclical and, unfortunately, repeats itself. It's interesting to note, at least in recent history, turns of centuries marked dramatic changes. From 1800 into 1900, we suffered two great wars; from 1700 into 1800, revolutions; from 1600 into 1700... well, actually, in 1700 the Pacific Northwest happened to be struck by a magnitude 9 earthquake and Japan by an ensuing tsunami.

Goes to show, some things never change but we could well be better prepared for them.

Speaking the Truth as a Way to Meaning

Another fabulous post by the Fate Project's blog, Musings:

Truthfulness and Self-Care 

08 February, 2010
Posted by Golabuk in General 

In dialogue, one of the five points of fate practice, truthfulness includes what the Greeks called parrhesia, translated as “frankness” or “candor.” Michel Foucault offers some insights into parrhesia: 

<<To begin with, what is the general meaning of the word parrhesia? Etymologically, parrhesiazesthai means “to say everything”—from pan (“everything”) and rhema (“that which is said”). The one who uses parrhesia, the parrhesiastes, is someone who says everything he has in mind: he does not hide anything, but opens his heart and mind completely to other people through his discourse. In parrhesia, the speaker is supposed to give a complete and exact account of what he has in mind so that the audience is able to comprehend exactly what the speaker thinks. The word parrhesia then, refers to a type of relationship between the speaker and what he says. For in parrhesia, the speaker makes it manifestly clear and obvious that what he says is his own opinion. And he does this by avoiding any kind of rhetorical form which would veil what he thinks. Instead, the parrhesiastes uses the most direct words and forms of expression he can find. Whereas rhetoric provides the speaker with technical devices to help him prevail upon the minds of his audience (regardless of the rhetorician’s own opinion concerning what he says), in parrhesia, the parrhesiastes acts on other people’s mind by showing them as directly as possible what he actually believes.>> 

The most valuable of Foucalt’s points on parrhesia is its relation to self-care: 

<<In the writings of Plato, Socrates appears in the role of the parrhesiastes. Although the word “parrhesia” appears several times in Plato, he never uses the word parrhesiastes—a word which only appears later as part of the Greek vocabulary. And yet the role of Socrates is typically a parrhesiastic one, for he constantly confronts Athenians in the street and, as noted in the Apology, points out the truth to them, bidding them to care for wisdom, truth, and the perfection of their souls. And in the Alcibiades Major, Socrates assumes a parrhesiastic role in the dialogue. For whereas Alcibiades friends and lovers all flatter him in their attempt to obtain his favors, Socrates risks provoking Alcibiades anger when he leads him to this idea: that before Alcibiades will be able to accomplish what he is so set on achieving, viz., to become the first among the Athenians to rule Athens and become more powerful than the King of Persia, before he will be able to take care of Athens, he must first learn to take care of himself. Philosophical parrhesia is thus associated with the theme of the care of oneself.>> 


It may not be apparent at first look how frankness and self-care imply each other, but a practical example or two will make it obvious. Imagine a man in a corporate job he despises, but depends on for his income. Each day, he goes to his office, resigned to put in another eight hours while secretly longing to start a small business of his own, or take up some artistic direction that calls him but also intimidates him for the lack of security it promises. Let’s say that this man is called in to his superior’s office for a performance evaluation, during which he is asked point blank: “Are you happy working here? Where do you see yourself in five years?” and so on. Now, it should be clear that we are not in a position to dictate to this hypothetical individual what constitutes self-care. Perhaps it lies in staying on a bit longer, perhaps not. But we can surely say what constitutes truthfulness in this situation, and remember that we are examining here the idea that truthfulness and self-care stand in intimate relation with each other. Our man can lie for the sake of the evaluation, to keep his job and his income, and so on. In other words, he can be untruthful for a good reason, and no one is ever untruthful without one. Or he can be truthful, which will cast him into a fate that becomes far less predictable. He may be fired on the spot for his confession. On the other hand, his supervisor may be so impressed by his honesty that he gives him free reign, or even is moved by the man’s courage to share a denied dream of his own. In any case, it is one thing to say nothing for a time; another to dissemble when asked a direct question, the truthful answer to which we know only too well. What we are suggesting here is that the best outcome lies in the hands of candor, no matter how it may appear. We may even speculate that when it is time for a truth to come to light, the forces of chaos arrange for someone to ask us the revealing question. At such moments especially, the gods are watching and listening.

We are not denying by this example that it may be in the man’s interest to stay on the job for a time, but ultimately, he will remain set against his better fate as long as he is willing to deny, postpone, or misrepresent the truth. This truth is not his doing. It is written in his nature by the hands that created him. He wants what he wants, and cannot want otherwise. So are we given to ourselves, and must work out our relation to who we already are, so that we may become most fully who we are meant to be. 

Another example: Imagine two lovers who, having awakened from the lovely dream of courtship, are now standing face to face with their own and each other’s issues. This, of course, is where two people learn what sort of love they really have, even whether what they have is love at all—since we may get close to each other for many reasons that have nothing to do with love. In each of these two, a daimon lives and speaks the truth. One aspect of this truth is the “yes” and “no” of our nature. In other words, some things will be, in truth, acceptable; others, not. The “yes” and “no” of us, like our likes and dislikes,” are given, not subject to our will. We may wish we did not love someone we love deeply for all the pain it causes us, or wish we did love someone toward whom we feel nothing of the “divine madness,” as Socrates calls it. In either case, our will stands by helpless while the gods play out our character and our story, for they have written both, leaving to us the fundamental choice between humility and hubris, willingness and willfulness, truthfulness and invention. We are saying here, in expanding on the point made by Foucault, that the best that these lovers can do, for themselves, each other, and their union, is to honor their daimon and be frank with each other, saying “yes” when that is the truth, and “no” when it is not. So much damage is inflicted in romantic unions by one person or the other or both failing to practice parrhesia when the crucial moment comes, because in abandoning parrhesia, they abandon self-care, and this choice, while no doubt serving certain short-term interests, is unsustainable.

What would happen in our lives if we took up parrhesia as a direction for living—if we resolved always to tell the truth as an expression of self-care? One thing that would happen is we would extricate ourselves immediately from the suffering of those who are not yet on their own side. And how can we befriend the gods, life, and fate if we haven’t befriended ourselves?

Bye Bye 'Broadsheet,' I will miss you!

I missed out on the fact that one of my favorite women's issues blog is about to shut down. I would like to give props to Salon.com's feminist blog, 'Broadsheet.' Salon.com is a liberal online publication and Tracy Clark-Flory has been covering controversial women's issues for Salon since 2005 with dedication and pizzazz so I've been reading her on and off since university. Unfortunately, she's moving on to bigger and better things. I will miss the Broadsheet immensely! Three cheers to a an amazing blog!

Calling Men Out On Double Standards

Yesterday was International Women's Day, a significant day given that in three-quarters of the world women are still struggling for social, political, and economic equality. This is especially true in the traditional strongholds of macho culture: the Mediterranean, South America, the Middle East, parts of Africa, and Asia, where men are considered worth more than women on a cultural standard. Even today, in China, boys are still considered blessings and girls looked down upon or forced to work on their beauty and compete with one another to get "prize" husbands. In Portugal, Brazil, and Spain, there still remains a traditional expectation of the "good obedient Catholic wife," and ironically honor killings are still very common among the white Christians of Lusitanian and Latino cultures if a man's wife is ever caught cheating on her husband. But meanwhile many of these men believe they are entitled to be be unfaithful to their wives, to flirt and play outside of the house, while expecting their wives to be entirely faithful to them. Spain has the highest rate of domestic violence in Europe, according to the BBC: "At least one woman dies every week in Spain at the hands of her partner." 

In Egypt, yesterday, women gathered in Tahrir Square to mark International Women's Day in a protest for their equality. In a sad reminder of how far there is yet to go for women's rights in the Middle East, a group of men came out to protest against equality for women in Egypt and drowned out the women. According to Deutsche Presse: In a twist to the slogan 'Down with the regime' - widely chanted throughout the anti-government protests that led to the ouster of Hosny Mubarak as president - several men chanted 'Down with women.' There were also reports from an activist on the scene that the female protesters were sexually harassed. Shame on the men who desire freedom for Egypt but not freedom for her women. Shame on their hypocrisy.

This is the cost of the culture of machismo, cultures that do not see the value of women and equate female value solely on ideas of sexual purity and obedience. It is a culture of humiliation and double standards where respect is measured on the boundaries of sexuality, on the delusional idea that it's honorable for a man to sow his oats at the expense of a woman and that a woman's place is to be a loving and loyal wife to an unfaithful cad. Meanwhile, these men lose respect for the women that give in to his advances and charm outside of marriage but he still expects his wife to be a picture of sainthood. Men who live by this double standard are hypocrites at best.

I've touched upon the sexual double standard in previous posts. Macho culture holds to the inherent 'specialness' of the male because simply he was born male. This concept has been permeated in these cultures for thousands of years, boys are treated better than girls from the moment they're born boys. Typical of Lusitanian and Latino cultures, boys are spoiled, given the bigger morsels at the dinner table, expected to go out and play without curfews while their sisters stayed at home and had to adhere to curfews. I am not blaming men entirely for this, women themselves, mothers and grandmothers raised in such a culture, often co-opt this concept of 'male specialness.' These men grow up in environments where they are imbued with a sense of their exceptionalism vis-à-vis women and think that being 'manly' equates with their ability to do whatever they want while guarding their sexual territory: their wives, girlfriends, or any other women that are supposed to be under 'their control.' They are born and raised with a sense of undue entitlement that humiliates the women they interact with, marry, and cross in their lives because of their skewed attitudes concerning gender roles. They live like hypocrites, applying morals and standards to women which they themselves do not abide by.

In lieu of International Women's Day and on behalf of women everywhere: Gentlemen, if you expect morality from women, be moral. If you expect love, be loving. If you expect respect, be respectful. Otherwise, you have NO right to judge your wives, sisters, daughters, or female friends as to how they behave if you're incapable of acting by the standards you yourself set for them. There are no double standards.

If some men from these cultures continue to believe they are entitled to rights and allowed to engage in behaviors women can't, they need to revise their values. They are not worthy of good or loyal women if they are not going to be good upstanding men. Let's throw out the myth: it is not a woman's civilisational responsibility to make men moral, it is each individual's responsibility by his God-given reason to chose to be moral by the standards they have set for themselves. They should become the embodiment of what they want in the opposite sex otherwise they have no right to judge or seek to hold the opposite sex to a standard they won't live by.

The One Hundred & Seventy-Third Night

Smitten with love and ignorant of love,

My poor forsaken heart burned with desire.

No sin did I commit, save that my tears

In spite of me revealed my secret fire.

With little hope I long and pine for three,

And what avails even the great when they desire?

My ardent sighs of passion rise to thee,

As if the coldest breath is blazing fire.

O you, whose love grows deeply in my breast,

Reign in my heart and rule as you desire,

A lonely heart that pines and wastes away.

Where cold disdain is but tormenting fire,

Reap what you sow then, either good or ill;

The lover's lot is but a martyr's pyre.

Glory to God who caused the moon to rise,

Bringing together lover with lover.

For who has seen the sun and moon at once

In Eden or on earth; who has ever?

~excerpt of poetry from The Arabian Nights, translated by Husain Haddawy

This by far has to be my favorite translation and abridgment of 1001 Nights. Husain Haddawy puts together a very readable version and the poetry within the stories are indulgent and beautifully interpreted. Thumbs up. Truly worth reading and buying if you've got an inner romantic to feed.

Indulging in Romance, Mysticism, and Movies

As the world explodes in massive political changes I've taken to watching movies as a mode of relaxing and shutting off my brain which spends too much time over analyzing. Flavors of the week? Foreign films (maybe not foreign to some of you) and classic film noir. Last week I watched Caramel directed and starring Nadine Labaki, a Lebanese romance. Compared to American movies where sex is blatant, no one even kissed in this film but the romance was indulgent in all its implications. I found it a really refreshing sort of movie to watch.

I also re-watched Casablanca which I adore! Ingrid Bergman is such a classic beauty and there's nothing like watching Humphrey Bogart be that dark, classy, handsome hero. I really enjoy film noir, and want to watch more of it. I'm entertaining seeing The Maltese Falcon, also starring our boy Humphrey; Rififi, a French crime film of the same genre; and Gilda starring Rita Hayworth.

I've also caught wind of Tunisian director, Nacer Khemir, who has directed a trilogy of spiritual films based on Sufism - Wanderers of the Desert, The Dove's Lost Necklace, and Bab'Aziz: The Prince Who Contemplated His Soul.






The films have a mystical and fantastical quality about them and plots quite similar to that of a fairy tale. Khemir noted in an interview that he felt it was his duty as a filmmaker to show another face of Islam unlike the stereotypes perpetuated by Western governments and media. In discussing his film Bab'Aziz, Khemir states:

Fundamentalism, as well as radicalism, is a distorting mirror of Islam. This movie is a modest effort to give Islam its real image back. No other mission seemed as urgent to me as this one: to give a "face" to hundreds of millions of Muslims who are often, if not always, the first victims of terrorism caused by some fundamentalist. And although this movie is based on the joyful and love-giving Sufi tradition, it is also a highly political film, and deliberately so. It is a duty nowadays to show to the world another aspect of Islam, otherwise, each one of us will be stifled by his own ignorance of "the other one." It is fear that stifles people, not reality. There are nearly one billion Muslims in the world today, that’s one sixth of the Earth’s inhabitants. To try your best to know your neighbor better is a form of hospitality. Hospitality is not just about housing people and feeding them; hospitality is about listening and understanding. You cannot receive someone in your house, just feed him and ignore him! In my opinion, this is a movie that encourages people to listen to each other and, perhaps further down the line, to really come together.