Muslim country in the Middle East has highest rate of acid attacks on women

[Toontown]

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
But why can't they wait?
All those violent deaths due to religious problems wouldn't be necessary, if the murderers would only wait for the miscreants to go to their "final reward" which would occur.
I guess seeing the bad guy chopped up and crisped is food for the soul.

You're asking me?

All I know for sure is that the universe branches, every which way. In one or more of those branches, monkeys don't eat crispy soul food.

[I Ratant]

Originally Posted by Guybrush Threepwood

Pakistani....
Not offensive

Paki
Offensive

Not hard.

.
OK.
Stone Age barbarian instead.

[Toontown]

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
OK.
Stone Age barbarian instead.

You're going to piss off the cultural equality cops.

[I Ratant]

I had an epiphany couple days ago.
Had to watch an "awful" movie...
Full of blacks talking to each other using "that" word, and just sounding awful... to my white bread ears, as the person I was viewing the movie with told me.
When I considered my reaction, I compared that flick to the typical white bread comedy I grew up with... and found it was really no different.
Other than being aimed at the black community, the silliness in the movie duplicated the silliness in any of the classic comedies, from Buster Keaton on.
She liked it, had a good time watching it.
I decided I could watch those without feeling the "white man's burden" of cultural superiority, in the future.
Just people being people.

[KevinCanada]

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

Wait, did I say "Muslim country in the Middle East"? I meant to say Christian country in the Western Hemisphere.

I'm sorry, my fingers must have slipped.

I would like to see numbers for muslims against non-muslims, If we are going to compare differences. It may paint a different picture. Rape statistics paints a very large picture in Sweden.

In my own experince. People blame Islam, but the blame is the end result of something else which has been taken out of context from mis communication (semantics) if you will or language barriers in the form of religious muslim communiticing with non religious people. East and West have different methods of thought and approaches to issues which only adds to the misunderstanding and blaming islam.

I'll run the numbers for sweden, with sources in a follow up post.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Cleon

Indeed. Likewise, since we know that Black men, White men, and Hispanic men all commit rape, we should obviously just focus on criticizing Black men, because....


...ahhh, screw it.

Originally Posted by Cleon

I'm sorry that it made your position look bad. Truth hurts, doesn't it?

It didn't make baron's position look bad.

How many black men use being black as reason and justification for rape and in fact are protected by black culture for their rapes? That doesn't sound at all like the problem of Islam 'supported' (for lack of a better word) violence against women.

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

It's almost like some people are offended that I had the temerity to point out that this is an issue that stretches far beyond being simply a "Muslim problem".

That may have been your goal, but the OP can easily be read as trying to lessen the criticism of the violence in the Muslim world.

I see a different tenor of discussion about this than I did for the Catholic church and child molestation.

While I tend to agree with both of you that this obviously isn't just a Muslim problem, many Muslim controlled areas/cultures have a problem with it with special causes and influences. I can't see where baron has been unreasonable about this.

EDIT: In short, dismissing that many Muslim countries have a special problem with such violence is as wrong as dismissing that other countries and cultures also have similar violence issues.

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by KevinCanada

I would like to see numbers for muslims against non-muslims, If we are going to compare differences.

The BBC article in my OP notes that there are higher overall numbers of attacks in countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh than in Colombia, but those countries also have higher overall populations than Colombia.

The article was drawing a comparison of rate per equivalent population, with the caveat that reported vs. unreported attacks can be a factor.

There's also the issue of the number of acid attacks on a year to year basis. In Malaysia, for instance, there were 45 acid attacks from January through October of last year, but only three in all of 2009, while in Bangladesh over 500 acid attacks per year were recorded before the government started efforts to combat it in 2002, resulting in a 15-20% decline in attacks per year since then (there were 84 attacks in Bangladesh last year, and 15 through April of this year), with the goal of stopping attacks completely by 2015.

A report by the Avon Global Center for Women and Justice at Cornell Law School about combating acid violence in Bangladesh, India, and Cambodia can be found here. Warning: it has some pretty graphic images in it.

Quote:

In my own experince. People blame Islam, but the blame is the end result of something else which has been taken out of context from mis communication (semantics) if you will or language barriers in the form of religious muslim communiticing with non religious people. East and West have different methods of thought and approaches to issues which only adds to the misunderstanding and blaming islam.

I'm under no illusions that my thread has changed anybody's mind here at JREF, no matter what their opinion was before I posted the OP.

Regarding me or regarding Islam.

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

That may have been your goal, but the OP can easily be read as trying to lessen the criticism of the violence in the Muslim world.

Yes, I know. That's something I've actually been anxious about since I first saw the BBC article and thought about posting it here, and agreed with baron about when he noted that my approach in the OP was doing the subject no favors. Are my efforts to point out via this thread that Islam and Muslims do not deserve all the blame directed at it actually serving to misdirect the blame that Islam and Muslims do deserve? I honestly don't know.

But since I started this thread in a public forum, I deserve to take the consequences of that in a public forum as well.

Quote:

EDIT: In short, dismissing that many Muslim countries have a special problem with such violence is as wrong as dismissing that other countries and cultures also have similar violence issues.

I agree.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

Yes, I know. That's something I've actually been anxious about since I first saw the BBC article and thought about posting it here, and agreed with baron about when he noted that my approach in the OP was doing the subject no favors. Are my efforts to point out via this thread that Islam and Muslims do not deserve all the blame directed at it actually serving to misdirect the blame that Islam and Muslims do deserve? I honestly don't know.

But since I started this thread in a public forum, I deserve to take the consequences of that in a public forum as well.



I agree.

Well, look at it his way, even if you had made a thread calling out Columbia for it's violence against women and the caustic attack problem specifically with no mention of Islam at all, some people still would have chimed in with, 'oh but in Pakistan those dirty blahblahblatheringblah...' I was worried that my comment would be seen as defending that type too.

It's a tricky dance and we can't be expected to pull it off all the time.

[KevinCanada]

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

I'm under no illusions that my thread has changed anybody's mind here at JREF, no matter what their opinion was before I posted the OP.
Regarding me or regarding Islam.

I agree this is likely true anyhow here are the numbers

Sweden Rape Statistics.
(Sweden is the only country we presently have for comparison I am aware of or I would show more countries for thoroughness)

Rape chart by country in 2009
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics
(the rape numbers are accurate, the Muslim populations are estimations)

Sweden 53.2 per 100,000pop Muslim population approx 5%
United States 28.6 per 100,000 Muslim population approx 0.6%
Morocco 3.6 per 100,000 Muslim population approx 98.7%

On the surface it looks like, Islamic nations do a better job controlling rape. I only use Morocco as there is no data from other Muslim nations that are nearly 100% adherence.

Unfortunately these numbers lie and while accurate lack context. When we apply the new information the numbers change.

News Article I am clipping the numbers from
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=096_1267472543

- "In 2005, Swedish lawyer Ann Christine Hjelm found that 85 percent of the convicted rapists were “born on foreign soil or from foreign parents."

Using 2005 Census and cross referencing to Muslim population density from the respective countries we find that 30.33 percent of immigrants are Muslim using the listed countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sweden

85% of 53.2 = 45.22 rapes per 100k

Therefore in Sweden
Sweden has a rape rate of 7.98 per 100k
Immigrants account for 45.22 rapes per 100k
Muslims account for 13.72 rapes per 100k of the immigrant population.

Muslims account for 5% of Sweden's population, but contribute to 25.79% of the rapes.

(allow +/- 2% for errors in numbers due to rounding)

[KevinCanada]

To the Op:

When comparing internal numbers, I can understand much of the information being the same, or worse in non-Muslim countries in some situations as in the Acid attacks on women.

I do have to argue it is out of context of the issue at hand. As the rules in a top down structure. That being Western Law over it Citizens versus Islamic Law over it citizens. Plays by a different rule book when it comes to Muslim Versus non-Muslim situations.

The argument of lets blame Muslims comes from the latter form of interactions, not from a internal law point of view from within individual countries.
Furthermore rape information from Muslim dominated nations is hard to come by. I did find some info on turkey 98.6% Muslim.

They reported 1.4 per 100,000 rape rate.
Turkey accounted for roughly 1/9th (fast math, I m not re-running numbers for this) of the Sweden immigration Muslim population. If we take 11.11% out of the 13.72 rapes per 100k we get 1.52 rapes per 100k are from Turkey immigrants into Sweden

Now factor in if we assume the Turkish rape rates are the same in both countries 1.4 versus 1.52 per 100k. But Turkey immigrants only account for 11.11% of Muslim rapes in Sweden. This translates into a 900% increase of Rape for Muslims against others when they leave their homeland.

Personal opinion here people notice these things, then start looking to Islam asking why, then they start finding those Islamic verses in the Holy Book or Hadiths, about right hand possess, girls are war booty etc etc etc. Then they shout Islam. Evil..... They maybe misguided on the Laws and what it should be teaching. But they are just observing the end result.

[LordofTruth]

Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets

So why single out Islam? Because you don't think it's as 'progressive' and 'tolerant' as Christianity? About 30% of Americans would like to see the US become a repressive theocratic state, and many others would not oppose it. Bashing Islam without acknowledging the aims of fundamentalist Christians in your own country is not only hypercritical, it's also stupid - because you are playing right into their hands (unless that's what you want to happen?).

If and when, gods forbid, the time comes to resist a theocratic takeover in America, then I hope those who do resist don't have to frame their arguments in terms of lots of other religions and cultures, where meaningful comparisons might not even exist, in order to make a valid point about the crazy Christianists.

Americans - is that time now, or do you see it coming soon? I'll do what little I can if it is. I know a few Americans, and they don't seem worried about it so I don't give it much thought. I'm very interested though.

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
That "honor violence" has to go to the scrap heap also, to get out of the Stone Age.
It's a cultural situation older than the religion.
We jail people that do that "honor" thing to others.

Hey, Pakistan made it illegal to throw acid on a woman way back in in 2010. They don't actually enforce that law yet, but maybe someday they will!

[Dcdrac]

Originally Posted by LordofTruth

If and when, gods forbid, the time comes to resist a theocratic takeover in America, then I hope those who do resist don't have to frame their arguments in terms of lots of other religions and cultures, where meaningful comparisons might not even exist, in order to make a valid point about the crazy Christianists.

Americans - is that time now, or do you see it coming soon? I'll do what little I can if it is. I know a few Americans, and they don't seem worried about it so I don't give it much thought. I'm very interested though.

I will take on extreme theocrats whatever their religion , do not worry about that

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by I Ratant

I had an epiphany couple days ago.
Had to watch an "awful" movie...
Full of blacks talking to each other using "that" word, and just sounding awful... to my white bread ears, as the person I was viewing the movie with told me.
When I considered my reaction, I compared that flick to the typical white bread comedy I grew up with... and found it was really no different.
Other than being aimed at the black community, the silliness in the movie duplicated the silliness in any of the classic comedies, from Buster Keaton on.
She liked it, had a good time watching it.
I decided I could watch those without feeling the "white man's burden" of cultural superiority, in the future.
Just people being people.

This is a point I have been making re:certain old tv shows from the 50s(and on) for a very long time. All title maids are smarter than their employers but may have a friend who is dumber than a post. Except for a small group in the early 50's (Burns and Allen and Betty White) all sitcom husbands are dumber than their wives but the wives sometimes let them shine or the maid solves/fixes the problem.

Teenagers alway mess up BUT wind up realizing Dad/Mom is right (occasionally Granpa or another relative is right).

It's all canned stories - who plays in them and how well they play in them makes for longevity or fast death.

AND in the special class of sitcoms and their movie equivs which I like to call "The trickster tricked" ( with any Lucille Ball or Gale Storm show an exemplary demonstration) the primary plot line is pretty much always A needs to trick B to get something/get to do some thing (Or the reverse of either) and sets up the trick and B finds out and tricks A . Occasionally there may be a double reverse, but not most of the time.

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by KevinCanada

News Article I am clipping the numbers from
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=096_1267472543

That's not a news article, that's a BNP press release.

I'm not making an exaggeration or a smear...the "article" in question is literally a statement written and released by the racist, fascist British National Party, which one of LiveLeak's users cut-and-pasted into a submission to that site.

They didn't even read the actual Daphne II study in question (which can be found here, and which is solely about measuring attrition, the process by which rape cases fail to proceed through the justice system), they simply copied what they found at this article from The Local and added stuff about Muslims.

You can tell because the BNP release said "According to the report, the Swedish rape rate 'cannot be explained purely by an increased tendency to report rapes and other more minor sexual offences.'", but that's not a sentence from the report, indicated by their use of quotation marks, but is instead something concluded by the author of the article in the Local (which goes entirely uncited by the BNP release, despite the verbatim quotation from it).

The actual report itself says "Whilst it has been argued that a range of methodological, legal and substantive factors maximise the number of rapes registered in Sweden compared to many other EU countries, especially when viewed annually (von Hofer, 2000), it is an open question whether these are sufficient to explain the disparity between reporting in Sweden and all other European countries," which is a lot less definitive.

And in addition to the BNP apparently having no problem with copying quotes from The Local and pretending they're actually from the report, the BNP also has no problem ignoring what else the article they quote from has to say about the report, because that doesn't fit with the anti-Muslim spin they're trying to put on the report: "The high incidence of rape in Sweden has a strong connection to nightlife and partying, specifically after-club parties in private homes. Early sexual debuts, high alcohol consumption, 'free sexuality' and the 'right to say no' quite simply results in more rapes, the study concludes."

Quote:

- "In 2005, Swedish lawyer Ann Christine Hjelm found that 85 percent of the convicted rapists were “born on foreign soil or from foreign parents."[b]

As far as I can tell, this claim comes from this news opinion item (which is also referenced at a lot of the same websites which reposted the BNP release itself), in which it's reported that Ann-Christine Hjelm looked at criminal proceedings in the Swedish Court of Appeals, and found that of the 27 rape convicts whose appeals court cases she examined, 85% were foreign born or had parents who were foreign born.

Though I will note that if the members of the Muslim immigrant community in Sweden are responsible for only 25.79% of the reported rapes, but that 85% of convicted rapists are from that Muslim immigrant community, that doesn't tell me that there's a problem with Muslim rapists in Sweden.

That tells me that there's a problem with white, native-born Swedes getting away scot-free with rape, since (using your numbers) they're responsible for 74.21% of the reported rapes, but make up only 15% of those convicted for rape.

And indeed, the Daphne II study notes that of the 100 sequentially-selected rape reports they tracked through attrition, conviction was far more likely in cases where the perpetrators "came from a minority background, were unemployed and had consumed alcohol".

At any rate, because of this, I wouldn't trust any numbers or information taken from the BNP or related sites. At most, I'd try to locate the actual reports and studies they reference (if any), and use the numbers straight off of there, to minimize bias as much as possible towards either side of the debate.

[Caper]

Originally Posted by tomwaits

Saying there was a "corrosive substance attack" just doesn't have that same ring to it, though.

Either does "basic attack".... (whats the word or term I'm looking for to describe a "basic attack"... that really isn't basic (non complicated) at all.)

I worked in a lab and worked with strong acids and strong bases... but I don't know... I'm sure there is stronger of both.

I got a lot of strong acids on my clothes and skin... never really large quantities... but when I'm adding 5mls of sulfuric acid to 300 samples... I'd get careless... and many times I was rushing and wouldn't wear gloves.... Over 3 years... I lost a couple of finger nails..... get the odd drop that hurts like hell. on the skin.. leaves a mark.... but you wash it off and go back to what I was doing.

One time a girl I worked with was dispensing nitric acid... or maybe sulfuric and I think maybe 50mls spilled down her arm somehow... it wet her bracelet and the acid that came off that back onto her arm... did some damage as well..... There was some gross damage done to that arm.


Anyway... I always found the strong bases I worked with, not near as bad as the strong acids... maybe they work a different way? Maybe someone can explain? I would get some on my fingers and my fingers would get right slippery... I was told it was because the skin was starting "melt" (lack of a better word)..... but it never really hurt... after washing it off... the skin would just turn kinda white and hard... then die.... but it would never really burn like it did with an acid. Is there a reason for this? Was the base just not as far on the other side of the pH scale as the acid was? I don't know..... I just was left with the impression that a strong base would act as fast as a strong acid... thus why it may not be used in attacks... maybe I'm wrong.

[baron]

I must say I'd struggle to make a clear connection with Islam in those figures (CWASU report). I'm not saying such a connection doesn't exist but it's not obvious and because it wasn't the subject of the report I'm not sure it can, or should be, extrapolated.

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

Though I will note that if the members of the Muslim immigrant community in Sweden are responsible for only 25.79% of the reported rapes, but that 85% of convicted rapists are from that Muslim immigrant community, that doesn't tell me that there's a problem with Muslim rapists in Sweden.

That tells me that there's a problem with white, native-born Swedes getting away scot-free with rape, since (using your numbers) they're responsible for 74.21% of the reported rapes, but make up only 15% of those convicted for rape.

Possibly but not necessarily, it would depend on the nature of the crime. If men from one ethnic group tend to commit rape with partners or in social situations then proving guilt would be vastly more difficult than for a group that went out attacking strangers on the street. Whether this is the case is again not clear from the report.

[I Ratant]

Originally Posted by WildCat

Hey, Pakistan made it illegal to throw acid on a woman way back in in 2010. They don't actually enforce that law yet, but maybe someday they will!

.
The only way to change a cultural/religious offense is to prosecute those offenses.
Making them illegal is only the start. Once the population recognizes how awful the offense is, then it will diminish, but that's a looooooooooong time in the future of those Stone Age countries.
I was appalled to see all the female students at Pakistan's university in burquas.
All of them!
That could only be a self-defense measure against the surety of a violent attack by some Stone Age male, offended by the exposure of any part of a woman in public.

[I Ratant]

Originally Posted by fuelair

This is a point I have been making re:certain old tv shows from the 50s(and on) for a very long time. All title maids are smarter than their employers but may have a friend who is dumber than a post. Except for a small group in the early 50's (Burns and Allen and Betty White) all sitcom husbands are dumber than their wives but the wives sometimes let them shine or the maid solves/fixes the problem.

Teenagers alway mess up BUT wind up realizing Dad/Mom is right (occasionally Granpa or another relative is right).

It's all canned stories - who plays in them and how well they play in them makes for longevity or fast death.

AND in the special class of sitcoms and their movie equivs which I like to call "The trickster tricked" ( with any Lucille Ball or Gale Storm show an exemplary demonstration) the primary plot line is pretty much always A needs to trick B to get something/get to do some thing (Or the reverse of either) and sets up the trick and B finds out and tricks A . Occasionally there may be a double reverse, but not most of the time.

.
Oh yeah, Lucy's writers wrote the Bible for all sit-coms since.
Essentially no one learns from experience and doesn't do the funny thing anymore.
I mention this to the nerds in love with Sheldon on TBBT. They just can't get it. And neither will he, it's not in the script.
What struck me about the movie I was watching was my attitude towards the characters changed while I was watching.. instead of pitying the display of the culture, I accepted it as normal, which it is, for the culture, and it was well done. "Friday After Next" was the movie.
Just another Lucy plot, but with black actors in a black culture.

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by baron

Possibly but not necessarily, it would depend on the nature of the crime. If men from one ethnic group tend to commit rape with partners or in social situations then proving guilt would be vastly more difficult than for a group that went out attacking strangers on the street. Whether this is the case is again not clear from the report.

That's why any conclusion about the effect on rape statistics by the presence of immigrant communities (Muslim or not) should preferably be drawn from a study (or studies) that specifically sets out to examine and measure those sorts of things, with very clear definitions.

Ad hoc calculations based on numbers drawn from disparate sources that aren't necessarily measuring the same thing, and may not even have been gathered with any kind of methodological rigor, don't actually tell us anything useful about the problem or its causes.

That's the point I was trying to make with my own calculation, anyway.

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
The only way to change a cultural/religious offense is to prosecute those offenses.
Making them illegal is only the start. Once the population recognizes how awful the offense is, then it will diminish, but that's a looooooooooong time in the future of those Stone Age countries.

Bangladesh is certainly doing a lot better since they instituted a change in their law back in 2002. They're hoping to end the problem by just 2015.

[baron]

Is it just me or have they got the gender suspect %s wrong in almost all the tables?

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by baron

Is it just me or have they got the gender suspect %s wrong in almost all the tables?

No, I noticed that too.

It doesn't appear to be wrong so much as just backwards - the numbers in the rows for "Male" and "Female" under the Suspect column just need to be swapped with each other, in each table.

[fuelair]

This is a combination response to Caper and sort of more for why it's a bad thing:
1. Concentrated acids and bases need some water to start dissociating (which is when they can "eat" stuff). Personally observed this when I got a couple of drops on my palm (40+ years ago)-18M H2SO4 - and observed that it was neither burning or hurting, just sitting there. That did not stop me from moving swifty to the nearest sink and flushing it off - and that's when the burning (temporary and just a trace of redness) started. Had it been 5 or 6 molar I would likely have needed some medical treatment. Had it been that and I was nowhere I could get washed off rapidly I may well have needed a lot of medical activity. This is the situation for thrown acid victims - it is usually done where there is difficulty getting it washed off quickly.

2. Acids generally require 2 or three minutes of washing and a bit more if eyes are involved. Bases are different. they do their damage under the outer layers with a particular love for your fats/fatty tissues which, in essence, they start converting to soap. Because, once diluted just enough to do so, they start moving under the surface, you need to wash them more quickly and longer - 15 to18 minutes or so depending on amount and strength.

3. When handling them wear gloves and goggles even if they are low concentration (Molarity or Molality or Normality for fellow chemists)



Note: I write on a lot of topics and some appear/are completely unrelated so just to pass on why I may be so qualified - since occasionally questions come up: I have an M.L.S (G. Peabody), BS (Phys Sci minor and Bio major) G. Peabody. Half+ of an MBA (got bored) random physics,bio,geology,chem+ (USF and other FL), then, on my own mostly, Television /film production/history, History of random topics(censorship/prostitution/abnormal psych) SF and Fantasy lit(and other media).....I will happily discuss those and other topics with most anyone and have a great time doing it.

This is a reasonable, but not complete list.......

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

No it is inaccurate to say just one religion is at fault they all have extremeists trying to push their agenda on the majority and yes you should be criticizing those extremsits of all the major religions.

This is just silly. Every religion? Where are the Amish extremists trying to push their agenda on me? How would a Shinto extremists even go about trying?

This is misguided PC nonsense. Just as there are huge differences within the major religions, there are also huge differences between religions. There is nothing wrong with discussing these differences or even discussing a particular religion independently of other religions. The important issue is to be both factual and contextual when you do it.

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

I will take on extreme theocrats whatever their religion , do not worry about that

The point is that if and when you do, you shouldn't feel the need to make up false equivalencies in order to conform to some false PC requirement.

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

I was hoping you'd post here, because I really value your opinion on things like this!

Anyway, I don't know that it adds extra barriers, so much as different barriers. Religion, for both good and ill, acts as a cohesive social and moral force (in that it shapes the morals of a society, not that it necessarily is "moral" in the sense of "good").

As you point out, it can be incredibly difficult to get religion in a society to change direction, but if you can, it will then make propagating moral changes within that society a lot easier. This is especially true in places with a much more coherent religious community. Not to mention the fact that it's easier to fight against conservatism and traditionalism when you're making only a few changes to society, rather than coming in and trying to make massively sweeping reforms to everything at once.

Take the example of the SIS in Malaysia, whose website I linked above. They find it much easier to try and change societal attitudes towards women and equality by couching those changes within a framework of Muslim religious faith, because it would be a lot harder to get Muslim society to accept gender equality if it's presented as something that's mutually exclusive with Islam. Because if you tell a highly religious society that you can either be modern and egalitarian but have to abandon your religious identity, or you can hold on to your religious identity but will have to reject any notion of women's equality, you're unlikely to get people flocking to the first choice. Since the abandonment of Muslim religious and cultural identity is associated with Western imperialism and cultural displacement, if you force that kind of either/or choice on people, they're most likely going to make the snap-choice to stick with their cultural and religious identity, even if they're unhappy with some of the practices of that culture and religion and would otherwise favor the particular and specific changes being offered by the non-Muslim culture.

By removing that false dichotomy, by saying you can be both devoutly Muslim and support gender equality, SIS and groups like them hope to make the acceptance of things like full equality for women easier to accomplish in Muslim states and communities. "This isn't an attempt to discard and replace your culture and your religion," they're saying, "because these things are a part of your culture and your religion, and therefore accepting them isn't any kind of 'surrender' to the imperialist West in some kind of Great Clash of Civilizations."

This has basically been the position of Muslim modernizers since the 19th Century, pioneered by the likes of al-Afghani and Abduh.

So this in a nutshell is why it's not a good idea to offer uninformed blanket criticisms of Islam. It's not merely bigoted, but it works against efforts to reform in parts of the world where Islam can be leveraged as an agent of change.

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

EDIT: And, regarding this issue in Colombia, the lack of a coherent religious response to this can make it more difficult to combat. A campaign saying "Macho men don't hurt women. People who hurt women are cowardly pussies" without any kind of moral social force like the Church behind it can easily result in men simply responding, "Oh yeah? Who says?", with the result that nothing actually ends up changing. Look at the way the anti-drug campaign (especially the anti-marijuana campaign) in the US has failed to gain traction, for example.

Of course, you could always look at the battle against the acceptance of gay marriage that churches in the US are losing as a counter-example, but that could also be an example of the differences between societies where religion is more of an influential force vs. societies where religion is prevalent but not the controlling factor.

If this whole issue is anything, "simple" is not it.

Do you think it's fair to say that perhaps the hierarchical structure of Catholicism is advantageous in this way? If the issue is ending a particular type of violence against women you could get the help of the Vatican which would bring on local religious leaders. By contrast Islam is different traditions and schools of thought without a centralized authority.

[JJM 777]

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

did I say "Muslim country in the Middle East"? I meant to say Christian country

In Middle East it might be common that religious honour is part of the honour / revenge attacks.

I doubt that religion is a factor in these attacks in Colombia.

[I Ratant]

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

Bangladesh is certainly doing a lot better since they instituted a change in their law back in 2002. They're hoping to end the problem by just 2015.

.
If the secular government can take away the powers of the religious to end lives over religious problems, there's hope.
If someone offends in a religious situation, there's excommunication.
If the offender continues to offend, then get a restraining order.
Other than that, let the spiritual world be separate from our real world.

[rwguinn]

All the statistics thrown around on rape in various cultures are a wonderful thing--it means that somebody is looking at the situation.
They are also meaningless.
When reporting a rape exposes the raped (especially if female) to a potential death sentence by stoning, just how accurate can the statistics be?

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by rwguinn

All the statistics thrown around on rape in various cultures are a wonderful thing--it means that somebody is looking at the situation.
They are also meaningless.
When reporting a rape exposes the raped (especially if female) to a potential death sentence by stoning, just how accurate can the statistics be?

While that is certainly a valid concern when discussing rape statistics for someplace like Saudi Arabia, I'm pretty sure that's not a factor in the discussion of rape statistics in Sweden.

[rwguinn]

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

While that is certainly a valid concern when discussing rape statistics for someplace like Saudi Arabia, I'm pretty sure that's not a factor in the discussion of rape statistics in Sweden.

True enough.
but comparing them back to the base culture/religion is also meaningless. The Muslims and people of Middle-Eastern culture residing in Sweden LEFT their places of origin for a reason, whatever it may be.
Making assumptions about Islam or even ME culture from the actions of Swedes of that ancestry is, like, not a valid assumption at all...

[LordofTruth]

The best analogy for the way I think about it, and I'm not saying it's a good analogy (although I think it's pretty neat), or that my thinking's particularly accurate, is along the lines of:

If the story of a true crime, such as an acid attack or rape, was written as a book, how much would the religion feature in order to tell the complete story? Rightly or wrongly, in a lot of cases of 'honor' attacks or rapes commited by muslims, I suspect that the religion would occupy a good chapter or two, whether it was doctrinal islam or a sense of muslim identity on the part of the attacker, which for whatever reason they thought justified or neccessitated it. Other considerations would be tangled up in this, and perhaps more important than the religion, but the story wouldn't be complete without this discussion of islam in the life of the attacker.

In the case of the Columbian acid attacks, I'm not sure Catholisism or Christianity would warrant much more than a couple of paragraphs. The empahsis there would be on other things, such as the macho culture.

I've been through (secret) phases as a bit of a true crime fan (come on, admit it, you have too), and so those who (secretly or otherwise) have read some will know that a lot of true crime books tend to focus on the life and psychology of the criminals, and how all these imputs lead to the crimes, rather than the crime itself, which often only takes up a few pages.