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

[tomwaits]

There was that movie Crazy Love that involved such an incident in New York between the infamous couple Burt Pugach and Linda Riss. They were jews, though. Not sure what this says about the OP but it was an entertaining movie.

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by tomwaits

Not sure what this says about the OP but it was an entertaining movie.

Well, I'd just spent the last few days posting heavily in defense of Christianity and Christians in a couple of threads here. I was concerned that my reputation among the usual crowd here as an "Islam Apologist" might be diminished as a result, so I figured I had to do something to make up for it quick.

[baron]

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

Because, as I've mentioned twice already (though one of those times was in an edit to the post you replied to), I started this thread to both publicize the fact that violence against women (even via such specific methods as acid attacks) is an endemic problem that cuts across all national, cultural, and religious boundaries, and to highlight the double standard and bigoted agenda of those people who like to meticulously document every single occurrence of crimes like this in a Muslim country or community, while completely ignoring its prevalence in countries and cultures where Islam isn't a factor.

It would depend on context. As I said, anybody who believes that Islam is behind every acid attack, or even most acid attacks, is an out-and-out idiot. Such people can be safely ignored and certainly they should not have threads started for their benefit.

However, if someone makes the link between Islamic culture and acid attacks then they have made a perfectly fair observation and they should not be criticised for making that point. It's no different to making the Colombian link with machismo culture, or the more global link with alcohol. The presence of one cause doesn't negate or diminish the impact of another.

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

Again, I refer you to the UN report I linked above. This story from Colombia will come as no surprise to anyone who's familiar with that report or the information in it. Anyone who gets all their news about acid attacks on women from places like Jihad Watch, though, will probably have no idea that hundreds of women in Latin America are suffering under the exact same kind of assault as the hundreds of women in Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Indeed they are and if people aren't aware of this then they are ignorant. On the other hand Jihad Watch is dedicated to criticising Islam so you can hardly expect it to start discussing non-related matters.

I still strongly maintain that your approach in the OP does the subject no favours and pitting one set of tragedies against another to attempt to prove a point is distasteful.

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

And they'll probably have the same reaction you do: "Oh, Colombian men do this for a whole lot of different reasons, totally disconnected from their religion and culture. But Pakistani men still do it because of Islam!"

And yet I said very early on that many Pakistani men do not do it because of Islam. How come you conveniently ignored this? The key issue here is you refuse to accept that Islam has any part to play in the issue of violence against - and repression of - women, and until you leap this significant hurdle and start being honest with yourself there's little sensible debate to be had.

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by baron

I still strongly maintain that your approach in the OP does the subject no favours and pitting one set of tragedies against another to attempt to prove a point is distasteful.

Quite possibly, yes. I often need people to remind me, every so often, that I'm doing something I really, really shouldn't be doing.

However, something kind of pushed me to the breaking point recently, and so I felt the need to vent. This story appearing on my BBC feed simply provided the catalyst.

Quote:

And yet I said very early on that many Pakistani men do not do it because of Islam. How come you conveniently ignored this?

Because I didn't start this thread to argue with you. If you really want to spend some time and energy, I'd really prefer it if you do so helping out here instead.

Quote:

The key issue here is you refuse to accept that Islam has any part to play in the issue of violence against - and repression of - women,

No, I'm well aware of that and fully accept it. I even gave you a recommendation for a book that is pretty much all about discussing the problem of gender issues in Islam.

What I'm lashing out against is the blinkered, exclusionary focus on only Islam when it comes to issues exactly like this. Especially by those who claim to be "critics of Islam", because they're doing worse than not helping the situation.

Quote:

and until you leap this significant hurdle and start being honest with yourself there's little sensible debate to be had.

No one is making you post in this thread.

[crimresearch]

Originally Posted by baron

However, if someone makes the link between Islamic culture and acid attacks then they have made a perfectly fair observation and they should not be criticised for making that point. It's no different to making the Colombian link with machismo culture...

A link that you dismissed earlier...

Originally Posted by post#3 link

A national survey revealed that 84% of women feel that Colombia is a machista country and that three-quarters of women feel discriminated against.

Originally Posted by baron

Your links bear no relationship to what you said and what you said bears no relationship to what I wrote. Other than that, great post

Obvious pretzel is obvious...

[I Ratant]

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

"And according to the Dhaka-based Acid Survivors Foundation, Bangladesh, which has a population of 165 million compared with Colombia's 47 million, saw 84 attacks in 2011."

How about your figures now?



So, when it happens in a Christian country, there are a whole host of complex reasons behind it that have nothing to do with religion. But when it happens in a Muslim country, there's a very simple, direct explanation for it: religion.

The implication, of course, is if we could just get those countries to stop being Muslim, problems like acid attacks on women would then just go away.

And Colombia shows the giant, gaping flaw in that little theory.

Plus, I like how you so blithely describe what is the main reason for the acid attacks on women (as opposed to the separately-described use of acid in muggings) as "sexual violence by gangs and domestic violence by husbands", rather than using the term you'd use had these very same attacks been carried out for the very same reason by Muslims: honor violence.

It's a double standard. And, worse, when all the attention is focused on the religion of the attackers when the attacks are carried out by Muslims, the non-Muslim victims and perpetrators get completely ignored.

The problem isn't "Islam", it's attitudes towards women. Attitudes that are shared by and are the cause of problems in countries and cultures all over the world, both Muslim and non-Muslim.

.
It is the attitudes towards women, but these have different forcing factors in different cultures.
The Latin lover will be outraged that his beauty isn't appreciated, for instance.
The Paki will throw the acid because the woman isn't in a burqua.
One attack is ego, the other is religion. Both are stupid, but the religion is the stupider.

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
It is the attitudes towards women, but these have different forcing factors in different cultures.
The Latin lover will be outraged that his beauty isn't appreciated, for instance.
The Paki will throw the acid because the woman isn't in a burqua.
One attack is ego, the other is religion. Both are stupid, but the religion is the stupider.

I personally don't think it's any less stupid for a man to feel justified in mutilating a woman simply because he's a narcissistic self-centered ******* than because he thinks his Deity of Choice is cool with it.

It's definitely not any more acceptable to do it for non-religious reasons than for religious reasons. "Sure, Colombian men throw acid on women, but it's not like they're doing it because they're Muslim or anything" is the absolute wrong response, as far as I'm concerned.

[ehcks]

Originally Posted by baron

However, if someone makes the link between Islamic culture and acid attacks then they have made a perfectly fair observation and they should not be criticised for making that point. It's no different to making the Colombian link with machismo culture, or the more global link with alcohol. The presence of one cause doesn't negate or diminish the impact of another.

I don't see how. You can't link one religion to acid attacks when an apparently equal amount of those attacks happen in a country of a different religion, as well as over a billion of people of that religion don't attack people with acid.

[crimresearch]

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
It is the attitudes towards women, but these have different forcing factors in different cultures.
The Latin lover will be outraged that his beauty isn't appreciated, for instance.
The Paki will throw the acid because the woman isn't in a burqua.
One attack is ego, the other is religion. Both are stupid, but the religion is the stupider.

And how exactly is the 'crime of passion' concept of offended machismo justifying outraged violence not a product of religious (Catholic Canon/Mosaic law) tradition in the culture, but outraged honor violence is?

[Toontown]

Doesn't matter what their religion is. God is pissed.

God is pissed because He's sorry he made father-rapers, mother-stabbers, head-whackers, clit-snippers, acid-tossers...

The list of transgressions could go on indefinitely, but the bottom line is, He's pissed, and He's going to do something about it. And it's going to hurt. It's going to hurt bad, and it's going to hurt for a long, long time.

Don't mess with God. He's baaad. He created acid-tossers. Spit on some dirt, rolled it up in a ball, put the living whammy to it, and made it walk and talk.

He's been regretting it ever since though. Didn't really think it through. Didn't consider what that dirt was going to do when it became all animated and greedy and needy and beady-eyed and such. He just made that dirt walk because He could.

But He's going to fix that dirt. Fix it good. Been making long range plans for that dirt. He hurt dirt long time.

[I Ratant]

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

I personally don't think it's any less stupid for a man to feel justified in mutilating a woman simply because he's a narcissistic self-centered ******* than because he thinks his Deity of Choice is cool with it.

It's definitely not any more acceptable to do it for non-religious reasons than for religious reasons. "Sure, Colombian men throw acid on women, but it's not like they're doing it because they're Muslim or anything" is the absolute wrong response, as far as I'm concerned.

.
Both are culture driven.
The Colombian is likely to be Catholic, but vain and not acting as a Catholic, but as a douche.
The Paki has the religion's sanctions to justify his actions.
It's another failure of the "religion of peace" to actually be peaceful and tolerant.

[ANTPogo]

In other acid-throwing news, apparently the spokesman for US Rep. Nan Hayworth (R-NY) has decided that if getting acid thrown on them is good enough for women in Pakistan and Colombia, well, then it ought to be good enough for female Democratic Senators, too!

Naturally, he was careful to specify that this should only happen to the women.

[Modified]

Originally Posted by Madalch

While these are corrosive as all-get-out, these are strong bases, not acids.

The drain cleaner that comes double-sealed is concentrated sulfuric acid. It will clear a drain when nothing else will, though it will also cause your entire house to smell like rotten eggs. I imagine skin damage might not be instantaneous as pointed out above though.

The fastest skin damage I've seen was a guy who spilled 50% hydrogen peroxide across his hand in a chemistry lab. It pretty much caused instant blistering. The damage wasn't as bad as it looked, but he got to the sink and rinsed it off in probably one second.

[I Ratant]

Originally Posted by crimresearch

And how exactly is the 'crime of passion' concept of offended machismo justifying outraged violence not a product of religious (Catholic Canon/Mosaic law) tradition in the culture, but outraged honor violence is?

.
The Colombian has an inflated idea of his worth.. He's a man, and she is only a ho-bitch.
The Paki may not be insulted personally, but sees the woman as not being submissive enough to the rules of Islam, even when he may not know her personally.
Her deviation from the Koran line has to be punished by the acid. Or cutting the nose off, or killing the girl student, or sending all the nurses home from the hospital..

[crimresearch]

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
Both are culture driven.
The Colombian is likely to be Catholic, but vain and not acting as a Catholic, but as a douche.
The Paki has the religion's sanctions to justify his actions.
It's another failure of the "religion of peace" to actually be peaceful and tolerant.

Again, how is it 'not acting as a Catholic' to use Christian scripture and Catholic law to sanction honor violence against women and children, but it is acting as a Muslim to do exactly the same things for exactly the same reasons?

[I Ratant]

Originally Posted by Toontown

Doesn't matter what their religion is. God is pissed.

God is pissed because He's sorry he made father-rapers, mother-stabbers, head-whackers, clit-snippers, acid-tossers...

The list of transgressions could go on indefinitely, but the bottom line is, He's pissed, and He's going to do something about it. And it's going to hurt. It's going to hurt bad, and it's going to hurt for a long, long time.

Don't mess with God. He's baaad. He created acid-tossers. Spit on some dirt, rolled it up in a ball, put the living whammy to it, and made it walk and talk.

He's been regretting it ever since though. Didn't really think it through. Didn't consider what that dirt was going to do when it became all animated and greedy and needy and beady-eyed and such. He just made that dirt walk because He could.

But He's going to fix that dirt. Fix it good. Been making long range plans for that dirt. He hurt dirt long time.

.
Sumbitch better not try to find the source of the dirt.
Stay away from mirrors, god.

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by I Ratant

The Paki may not be insulted personally, but sees the woman as not being submissive enough to the rules of Islam, even when he may not know her personally.

No, it most definitely is taken personally. That's the honor part of "honor violence" - their own personal sense of honor, or the only slightly more expansive sense of family honor. If specific religious reasons are present at all, they're secondary to that.

[Toontown]

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
Sumbitch better not try to find the source of the dirt.
Stay away from mirrors, god.

To understand God, think of a man. Then take away reason and accountability.

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by Toontown

To understand God, think of a man. Then take away reason and accountability.

Given the focus of this thread (violence against women), I have no doubt whatsoever that your paraphrase of that line is entirely intentional.

And, coming from you, I must say that I'm not surprised in the least.

[JeanFromBNA]

I have received extensive burns from sodium hydroxide. Because I didn't know what it was, I kept trying to rinse it off with water. Turns out that it's exothermic, Vinegar finally neutralized the chemical reaction that was chewing its way trough my epidermis.

[Roger Ramjets]

Originally Posted by Tony

I'll never understand the urge some atheists have to come rushing to the defense of Islam as if it is some poor, misunderstood orphan.

I'll never understand the urge that some theists have to come rushing in to attack Islam as if it is some vast monolithic organization with a well understood nefarious goal.

Christians, Buddhists, Shintoists, even nominally Atheist organizations can be just as bad, if not worse. All religions are nutty at the core, and all are ripe for the abuse of power and trust. But that doesn't mean that religion makes people evil. People use religion to justify their actions, bending and shaping it to suit their nefarious goals.

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?).

Originally Posted by baron

you started this thread as a cheerleader for Islam

Riight. So pointing out that Islam is not the only religion followed by those who commit violence against women is being a 'cheerleader' for it? Did you not know that the vast majority of Muslims are against throwing acid into womens' faces? If it's also being done by Christians, what does this tell you about their real motivations? Religion is just a convenient excuse, not the reason.

The OP is not 'cheerleading' for Islam, just providing some balance and recognition of the facts. You could wipe Islam off the map tomorrow, and it wouldn't stop violence against women. Because it's not the cause.

[baron]

Originally Posted by ehcks

I don't see how. You can't link one religion to acid attacks when an apparently equal amount of those attacks happen in a country of a different religion, as well as over a billion of people of that religion don't attack people with acid.

Of course I can make that link and so can anybody willing to apply a sliver of reason. I've already explained very clearly that a phenomenon may have more than one cause and acknowledging all causes as worthy of attention is basic common sense.

Sometimes I reach the point of bafflement when I see people defend Islam like this. If we had been discussing how alcohol is a factor in violent attacks then everybody would engage in a sensible manner. There wouldn't be this upsurge of indignant people protesting that hey, billions drink alcohol and they don't attack anybody so it can't possibly be a factor. Neither would we hear things like, "Whoa, people attack other people over money so that proves alcohol isn't linked with violence!" It would be an absurdity in a conversation about anything but Islam, yet when Islam is in the mix it becomes par for the course.

Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets

Riight. So pointing out that Islam is not the only religion followed by those who commit violence against women is being a 'cheerleader' for it? Did you not know that the vast majority of Muslims are against throwing acid into womens' faces?

Gee, d'you think? Thanks for putting me right on that because I thought that every violent act ever perpetrated was down to Muslims. You live and learn.

Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets

If it's also being done by Christians, what does this tell you about their real motivations? Religion is just a convenient excuse, not the reason.

The OP is not 'cheerleading' for Islam, just providing some balance and recognition of the facts. You could wipe Islam off the map tomorrow, and it wouldn't stop violence against women. Because it's not the cause.

No, it's not 'the' cause and I have never in my life heard anybody say that it is. Why is this miserable straw-man trotted out time and again by Islam apologists? It is a cause. A cause. And as such it should be subjected to the same depth of scrutiny as all the others. You need to pull your head out of the sand and wise up. I'm sure it makes you feel fuzzy and warm to side with the downtrodden Muslim and be all progressive and liberal, but one day - soon, I hope - you'll realise that attitudes like yours are contributory to retarding the global fight for gender equality by refusing to acknowledge the problem and railing against those that do.

[Dcdrac]

It is not jsut one religion that is targetting women and not just one weapon that is clear, targetting just one relious group is disingenuous

Look at Theocracywatch...........

http://theocracywatch.org/women2.htm

[baron]

Jesus H Crazylegs Christ, I'm outta here.

[ANTPogo]

I prefer to side with these Muslims, thank you very much.

http://www.sistersinislam.org.my/

[Dcdrac]

Originally Posted by baron

Jesus H Crazylegs Christ, I'm outta here.

That does appear to be your standard response to people pointing out that is not just one religious group up to horrendous things, and even among those groups it is extremists.

[baron]

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

That does appear to be your standard response to people pointing out that is not just one religious group up to horrendous things, and even among those groups it is extremists.

It's not my standard response, I've never written that before in my life. For the sake of variety I try to vary my expressions of exasperation with those who can't be bothered to read the thread and instead post up the exact same ignorant strawmen as have been addressed multiple times, including in the exact post before yours.

[Dcdrac]

It is not a strawman to point out that singling out just one religious group as an exemplar of horrendous behaviour is clerly inaccurate and flying in the face of the facts.

The facts are there are extremists in all three of the monethestic religions who are attempting through various means and with varying degress of success to enforce their will on the majority population.

The vast majority of their co-religionists are not doing the same so to present one religiosu group as some homogenosu bloc is also inaccurate.

[ANTPogo]

Not to mention that saying "sid[ing] with the downtrodden Muslim...[is] contributory to retarding the global fight for gender equality by refusing to acknowledge the problem and railing against those that do" completely ignores groups like SIS in Malaysia, who see their faith as an integral part of their fight for equality and justice.

[Dcdrac]

here is a site that provides food for thought in this issue and it breaks it down by religious group

http://library.thinkquest.org/07aug/01443/fo_home.html

[catsmate1]

Originally Posted by Tony

I'll never understand the urge some atheists have to come rushing to the defense of Islam as if it is some poor, misunderstood orphan.

It seems to be the urge of that skeptics have to point out dubious assertions and unreliable, if popular "facts".

[catsmate1]

Originally Posted by baron

<snip>
Shops sell the stuff quite freely in these countries.

In most countries.

Originally Posted by Tony

This is what I wonder. How the hell do these people come across cup sized portions of acid that they then can carry with them to their destination?

Hardware shops.

Originally Posted by Modified

It's pretty easy in the US. Just go into a home improvement store and buy the drain cleaner that comes in a bottle inside a sealed plastic bag.

Yes. I was in Homebase yesterday and they have 98% sulphuric acid in 500ml plastic bottles and sodium hydroxide in pellet form in 250g bags.

Originally Posted by tomwaits

Ok. But when people say "throw acid" or "acid attacks" they aren't really being technical about it, are they?

Not really.

Originally Posted by Madalch

They ought to be.

You're talking about journalists. Accuracy is optional with many of them.

[catsmate1]

Originally Posted by MG1962

In Australia a ways back we had a real rash of these types of attacks. I suspect it was a case some twisted individual thought it was a good idea and a bunch of men with irrational grudges did copycat attacks

It seems to be cyclical, one attack triggers a number of copycats and then the problem dies away for a while.
Acid attacks were relatively common in 50s/60s London amongst criminal gangs.

[Dcdrac]

Originally Posted by Tony
I'll never understand the urge some atheists have to come rushing to the defense of Islam as if it is some poor, misunderstood orphan.

Personally I am not defending Islam just pointing out that you all the three monothesitic religions have their extremists using various strategies and weapons.

And when you look cloesly at all three their texts all have statements about women being inferior in them or serving their husbands or the source of sin and temptation, theres no getting away from it and singling out jsut one of them is clearly wrong.

[Dcdrac]

The Eirc Rudolph case for instance is an example of religious extremism in action

http://crime.about.com/od/current/a/rudolph.htm

And others

http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2011...orism-exposed/

[Xulld]

Originally Posted by Howie Felterbush

Battery acid would be a pretty lame thing to attack someone with.

Unless the plan was to put a bunch of little holes in their jeans. It doesn't do any real instant damage to skin. I remember the first time I had a battery tip over on me while I was filling it. I thought it was going to be like the blood from the creature in Alien, bubbling and fizzing and eating through both me and the floor. It just wiped right off. I was a little bummed.

Yea I was helping a guy jump his vehicle, and faster than I could yell no he had the negative to pos, and pos to neg. Boom, the battery exploded. I had small spatters of battery acid on my face and forearms. I was able to get it washed off in less than 5 minutes, it left little red dots of irritation but nothing else, I was happily surprised.

. . the guy was like . . . I didn't know that could happen, I wanted to strangle him.

[I Ratant]

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

No, it most definitely is taken personally. That's the honor part of "honor violence" - their own personal sense of honor, or the only slightly more expansive sense of family honor. If specific religious reasons are present at all, they're secondary to that.

.
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.

[I Ratant]

Originally Posted by Toontown

To understand God, think of a man. Then take away reason and accountability.

.
I usually add "crazed hate filled old" to "man", when thinking of the persons that assume god's role in society here, with their murders and violence, they do "in god's name".
(Apparently because god doesn't act quickly enough.)

[Dcdrac]

has religion had its day as a useful mechanism?

[crimresearch]

Originally Posted by baron

Of course I can make that link and so can anybody willing to apply a sliver of reason. I've already explained very clearly that a phenomenon may have more than one cause and acknowledging all causes as worthy of attention is basic common sense.

Sometimes I reach the point of bafflement when I see people defend Islam like this. If we had been discussing how alcohol is a factor in violent attacks then everybody would engage in a sensible manner. There wouldn't be this upsurge of indignant people protesting that hey, billions drink alcohol and they don't attack anybody so it can't possibly be a factor. Neither would we hear things like, "Whoa, people attack other people over money so that proves alcohol isn't linked with violence!" It would be an absurdity in a conversation about anything but Islam, yet when Islam is in the mix it becomes par for the course.



Gee, d'you think? Thanks for putting me right on that because I thought that every violent act ever perpetrated was down to Muslims. You live and learn.



No, it's not 'the' cause and I have never in my life heard anybody say that it is. Why is this miserable straw-man trotted out time and again by Islam apologists? It is a cause. A cause. And as such it should be subjected to the same depth of scrutiny as all the others. You need to pull your head out of the sand and wise up. I'm sure it makes you feel fuzzy and warm to side with the downtrodden Muslim and be all progressive and liberal, but one day - soon, I hope - you'll realise that attitudes like yours are contributory to retarding the global fight for gender equality by refusing to acknowledge the problem and railing against those that do.

Simply repeating the same strawman about 'you are defending Islam' as a magic wand to make the facts go away, doesn't seem to be working too well for you, even though you've added running away from inconvenient questions and denial to your mix.

Please do let us know if you come up with anything on topic, correct, or useful.