J. Soltys's Weblog

February 29, 2008

In the News…

coffee-and-newspaper.jpg

From the “Succesful females that sexualize themselves” files:

Diablo Cody, former stripper and now Oscar winning screenwriter of the hit movie Juno, has been the latest successful female to have nude pictures of herself appear on the internet. Most of the pictures reveal her in provocative clothing and poses.

It has been revealed that Fox News reporter Courtney Friel posed for Maxim magazine before landing her job at Fox. After her hiring, she removed the photos from her website.
I guess it was a respectable method to use in attracting job prospects, but embarrasing to admit to once you’ve found employment. Strange how that works.

Lene Alexandra, the Norwegian singer and model has wrote and produced a video expressing how wonderful her breasts are. The song, titled “My Boobs Are OK” is a hit in the Norwegian music scene. With a refrain that that goes, “My boobs, my boobs, my boobs are OK”, along with photos of her revealing her over-endowed breast, it’s no wonder people are taking notice.  

Actress Kate Beckinsale in an interview with Allure magazine revealed she thinks her best feature is her vagina. She even has created her own nicknames for it.
Isn’t funny how women, as they have become more empowered,  they behave more and more like men? This is why I find masculinity more harmless than offensive. If it was as bad as women believe, they would avoid any behavior remotely similar to it.

Jennifer Lopez has had her ass insured for 1 billion dollars. She sends a strong message to our young girls that the female ass is worth more than the female brain.

Sherri Shepard, co-host of The View, believes that mothers walking around naked in front of their sons his OK. She says her breast bouncing around in front of him is harmless. However, in a display of the ever present female ego, she says that fathers walking around naked in front of their daughters would be traumatic. She states that nobody wants to see an external organ flailing about in front of them. 
As they say, the ego is fraught with ignorance and hypocrisy. Watch video.

From “Fighting the myth Men are Monsters, Women are Martyrs’ Files”:

New Jersey Nanny Admits Drugging Toddlers So They’d Sleep: A 24 year old nanny spiked the drinks of a two toddlers aged 3 and 1 years with an allergy medication because she felt she couldn’t handle the responsibility of caring for the children.
So why didn’t she just kill them like most women do? (I know, too blunt. But sadly, too true. Please read on.)

Woman Gets 30 Years for Poison Plot: A British woman has been sentenced to 30 years in prison for trying to kill her husband by lacing his food and wine with antifreeze. Husband Lee Knight spent 10 weeks in a coma and was left deaf, blind and brain damaged.
The feminist are right. Women can be as competitive as men in the sciences. The last two women have shown a natural talent in chemistry.

Conn. Girl Lights Teacher’s Hair On Fire: Milford officials expelled a Jonathan Law High School student, who was accused of lighting her science teacher’s hair on fire during class. Police said the girl was arrested after igniting George Lardas’ ponytail with a lighter.
The feminist are adamant that this is not the young girls fault. Rather it is a reaction to the inherent sexism in our nations academics in which boys receive more attention than girls. This was a cry for help from a young girl who felt neglected, ignored, and maligned by her teacher and the institution.

St. Helens Newborn Found In Toilet: A mother abandoned her newborn baby girl in a toilet at a St. Helens nursing facility, police said Tuesday. Police said their investigation showed the 21-year-old mother, who works at the nursing facility, tried to kill the baby and cover up her existence.
The real tragedy in this story is that Oregon has enacted the “Safe Haven” law where the woman could have turned her child over to any staff member of the hospital with no questions asked. Instead, she attempted to murder the innocent child.

Baby Found In Hospital Trashcan Dies: A baby whose mother allegedly threw him in a hospital trashcan after giving birth to him in a hospital restroom has died, KPRC Local 2 reported. Investigators said she went into a restroom, gave birth to her son, wrapped him in paper towels and tossed him into a trashcan. CPS officials said she told them she did not want any more children.
Again a woman chooses to murder the child rather than just hand it over to hospital staff. More importantly, Texas is where the Safe Haven concept began so it’s hard to believe she was ignorant of the law.
Yes, some men run from the responsibility of caring for their children, but at least we allow them so live. Women are given numerous choices to avoid the responsibility of caring for a child, but they overwhelmingly choose to kill it – and we accept this behavior.

Sauk Village girl who suffocated her newborn baby is sentenced to 5 years of probation: A Sauk Village girl who suffocated her newborn daughter, then placed her in the trash, was sentenced Tuesday to 5 years of probation and mandatory counseling by a Cook County Juvenile Court judge. Although court officials discussed sentencing the girl to time in a juvenile detention center, attorneys and officials involved in the case said the girl would be better served if she remained in the custody of her mother. She suffocated the baby with a blanket and put her body in the trash, police said. The body was found later that night by a female relative.
As part of her counseling, she is being treated for post-traumatic stress disorder, and eventually her entire family will get counseling.
During the sentencing, Stuttley (the judge) told the girl that she’s young and that it’s expected she’ll make mistakes.

What the f*** is going on here. This is so hard to believe! When a young man kills his own child it is called murder, and he will be looking at some sort of prison sentence. When a young girl kills her child, she is treated as the real victim, given compassion, understanding, and professional treatment to get her life back “on track”. Her violence upon a newborn child is dismissed as just a youthful indiscretion that every young girl makes? What’s next, “Newborn Killer Barbie” for girls to “take away” the stigma of being a child murderer?
As one writer put it, “Men are demonized, women are diagnosed“. Or as I like to say, if you murder, your best defense is to be female. The potential for a “get out of jail free card” is only one form of many female privileges in our “male privileged” society.

Contact:

soltys.joe@gmail.com

https://jsoltys.wordpress.com

Photo Courtesy of: stockxchng.com

Advertisements

February 27, 2008

Domestic Violence Prevention – More Hyperbole Than Truth:Part 1

screaming_mouth_open.jpg    As a writer of male issues, I find myself facing a paradox when I come across individuals that are showing a genuine concern for men’s issues, but after further review, find their ideology behind the work is suspect, and/or their methods to address the problems appear to exaserbate the problem rather than offer a quality solution.

This came up again after I read and watched some material by Jackson Katz. Jackson is a male anti-sexist crusader that focuses on the violence perpetuated by men and boys. He uses research and experience to draw relationships to the causes of this violence. His biggest offender is the distortions of masculinity through the modern media which he says portrays and influences men and boys – and society in general – that violence and masculinty is a normal symbiotic relationship. 

I had previously heard about Jackson Katz, and when I recently came across his name again I decided to look at what his thoughts are with respect to men, women, and domestic violence. What I found was a mixture of truth wrapped in traditional domestic violence hyperbole and mythology. What is even more troubling is that Mr. Katz seems like he truly means well, and truly wants to help men, but his ideological position is based in feminist mythology – which he openly admits. This creates a natural contradiction that cannot be overcome.
Feminists and their ideology is focused on compassion and understanding for women’s issues only. When it comes to the male gender and their issues, most feminist have repeatedly shown they would rather devalue, disparage, and use any methods possible to inhibit men from receiving the necessary attention or resources needed to address their problems. They will consider men’s issues only if men are willing to accept only THEIR concept of “cause and effect” concerning the genders, which is historically entrenched in the belief that women are martyrs, men are monsters.
This is why I cannot accept Jackson Katz as a true ground-breaker in addressing men, women, and domestic violence. His problems and solutions are based in rehashing the same mythology and hyperbole of the feminist. Instead of being an independent male voice in a sea of females and establishing a greater diversity and equality within domestic violence circles, he chooses to align with them and preach to the choir.

I’ll admit I have not read any of Mr. Katz’s books. Instead I chose to “look before I leap” in purchasing his work. This is what I found from various resources on the internet. I’ve put his position in bold letters, and my own counter-points in italics.

There is a “pandemic” of violence in this country with the majority of it committed by men and boys.

Fact: Serious violent crime in this country has been decreasing rapidly in this country for the last fifteen years. Actual violent crime fell by 56% from 1993 to 2005 – one of the the lowest levels ever. Serious violent crimes include rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and homicide. Fact: For young adults between the ages of 12-17 who have committed serious violent crimes, between 1993 and 2005 the numbers show a decrease of 57% by these young offenders. For young adults (over 18 years of age), there was a decline of 58%.

Fact: Between 1993 and 2005, the rate at which individuals were victims of violent offenses using a firearm decreased 61%.

Fact: Rapes in this country have fallen by 57% between 1993 and 2005, and the combination of rapes and sexual assaults fell 35% between 1994 and 2005.

Fact: Intimate non-fatal violence fell from 1993-2005 by 60%, and female victims of iintimate partner homicide fell by 24%.

(All statistics come from the Bureau of Justice)

So as one can see, I’m already suspect about the message Mr. Katz delivers. If there is a pandemic of violence in this country, I would like to know how he derived this “crisis” from our nation’s crime statistics.

But what is more interesting is how he draws the relationships together. He claims the media is influencing men and boys with destructive masculine images which promotes violence upon women and males themselves. The usual culprits in this belief are rap music, violent video games, violent movies, professional wrestling, pornography, etc. However, this argument never seems to hold up to reality. If we are to believe that the media and its proliferation of violence and sexuality, coupled with overt or subtle gender conditioning is responsible for the violence perpetrated by men and boys, then the statistics I mentioned above would be trending in the opposite direction.
For example, the rise in violent video games over the last ten years should have resulted in a rise of violent crime – but it is trending downward. The influence of rap music over the last twenty years and it’s degradation of women as bitches, whores, and sex objects should have resulted in a higher rate of sexual assaults and rapes of women. Couple this with the easy access to numerous forms of pornography on the internet, and in accordance to this “cause and effect” ideology, crimes against women should be reaching all-time highs. But it’s not – it’s in reverse.

Using deception and hyperbole to attract attention to their cause is not an unusual behavior for the feminist-based domestic violence prevention advocates. Some of the most notorious examples of feminist deception and hyperbole have been:

  • In the 1990’s, the president of the National Organization of Women proclaimed a March of Dimes study that reported battering during pregnancy as the leading cause of birth defects and infant mortality. The March of Dimes said no such study existed. NOW offered no apology.
  • A number of domestic violence studies presented to the public have claimed to be representative of the general population of women. However, further research into how some D.V. studies were conducted has shown some of the researchers conducted their studies using women housed in battered women shelters, thereby infusing an egregious bias into the research, which in turn, distorts the numbers by delivering excessively high results.
  • In 1993, it was reported by numerous domestic violence advocates that Superbowl Sunday is responsible for a surge in domestic violence for women. After investigating the claims, it was found no such research existed.

In his videos, Mr. Katz is perplexed as to why the media doesn’t use more feminist voices when covering stories about men and violence. Maybe it isn’t because they lie, maybe it’s because feminist are just too damn honest. 

Here are some quotes from famous feminist thinkers:

Andrea Dworkin: A commitment to sexual equality with males is a commitment to becoming the rich instead of the poor, the rapist instead of the raped, the murderer instead of the murdered.

Marilyn French: All men are rapists, that’s all they are. They rape us with their eyes, their laws, and their codes.

Germaine Greer: Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release.

Maybe I’m too pragmatic, but I feel it doesn’t take a PhD in rocket science to begin drawing some conclusions as to why the media avoids these people. And considering Jackson Katz holds these people in adulation, I will continue to hold his sincere commitment to men and boys in question.

In the next article, “Domestic Violence Prevention – More Hyperbole Than Truth: Part 2“, I’ll dig deeper into some of Jackson Katz’s other statistics and claims, and use my own personal experience working with men to debate his beliefs.

Contact:

soltys.joe@gmail.com

Photo Courtesy of: Morguefile

February 25, 2008

Yes, I Am An Extremist

abstract.jpg  Since I have been indirectly labeled an extremist, I feel this qualifies me to be in the position to reach out to others who may be the same.

This is how I felt after reading Jonah Bloom’s article at Glenn Sack’s blog. Jonah is Executive Editor and writer for Advertising Age, a weekly marketing and media publication. Mr. Bloom wrote a column titled, When It Comes to Whining About Ads, Father Knows Best” with the sub-title “Extremist Group’s Rants Shouldn’t Detract Ways advertising Must Be Held Accountable”

Well, beginning an article that labels men and fathers – who are conscious about how the media and advertising agencies portray them – as “extremist” is a little extreme itself, isn’t it? In this day and age, when someone labels a class of people as an “extremist group”, it has the tendency to imply radicals who fly loaded passenger jets into skyscrapers. Obviously Mr. Bloom is skilled in extremist hyperbole himself.  

But it gets worse.

Mr. Bloom’s article centers on the number of men and fathers who voiced complaints and opinions about the recent Superbowl commercials and the consistent double-standard they’ve felt in the media for some time.  Advertisers are very conscious not to use visuals or language that might appear derogatory, degrading, or insensitive to certain groups of people in our society. However, there is one group that is always the exception – men.
Males as a whole are still the largest class of people that can be openly discriminated against without fear of serious reprisal. Portraying men as dumb, insensitive, childish, or on the receiving end of “humorous” violence, usually of the genital kind, can be seen in many forms of media. The particular commercial used as an example in Mr. Bloom’s article was the one produced by Pepsi which showed Justin Timberlake being mysteriously dragged towards a young woman drinking a Pepsi product.  The whole commercial consisted of him enduring a brutal, endless stream of violent acts upon his person, including the proverbial “crotch crushing” present in so many forms of media.

The protesters were questioning this apathy towards males in the media, including advertising, when compared to women or other groups. I assume Mr. Bloom would be offended by a commercial that shows women enduring numerous episodes of genital and bodily violence in the name of humor. I say “assuming” because ironically, even though Mr. Bloom opened up his article with an e-mail received about this double-standard, he fails to seriously address it. Strangely, he avoids the whole argument concerning the disparity in violence directed at males and females in the name of humor even though it is the opening topic. He dismisses the commercial’s violence as simply “Justin Timberlake bumping into stuff”, and labels the men and fathers who voiced their concern as “unhinged individuals with too much time on their hands.”

While he chose a road of indolence when trying to comprehend and analyse the argument presented to him, he sure was tenacious and laborious in itemizing and analysing those who dared voice their opinion. Here is a sample of the words he chose to describe the men, fathers, and environment they create by protesting the negative images portrayed by the media and advertisers:

extremist, lunatic, assault, gaggle of men, loose coalition, attacked, tortured, trumped-up charges, acolytes, cheap, backlash, endlessly parsing, unhinged individuals with too much time on their hands

Let me just tell you Mr. Bloom, as a card carrying member of the extremist groups you mention, I am very upset by your choice of words. I am seriously dismayed that your extremist language is much more experienced than mine or my cohorts. Your choice of words makes me and my cohorts look like “extremists lite”.

He continues his harangue, and towards the end of the article he really shows his skills in the hypocrisy department. Invoking a pious guilt trip, Mr. Bloom thinks that there are more important issues within the advertising industry other than worrying about the negative images of men and fathers. He says the most pressing issues in the industry right now are: financial institutions with aggressive campaigns pushing credit to consumers whose debt loads are already crushing; advertisers spending billions to support an Olympics in a country with an abysmal human-rights record;  companies with shocking environmental records making claims to environmental friendliness; the merits and pitfalls of advertising drugs directly to consumers; and that presidential primaries could come down to who spent the most on ads.

So I took a look at some of his recent articles to gauge his concern on these issues, the information he offers, and what he is doing to challenge this dark side of the advertising world. Here is what I found:

“A-List Agencies Are More Than Just New-Biz Machines”

“Agencies Will Have to Steer Marketers Toward the Big Ideal”

“A Brief Guide to the Ins and Outs of the Ad World in Summer”

“Attract Better Marketing Talent with Better Marketing”

“The Awards Shows Need to Tear Down Silos, but It Won’t Happen”

Well, I guess he’s really busy right now. He’ll get back to those serious advertising issues as soon as he can.

I’ll admit there are probably serious issues facing advertising today, but of course in the scope of ALL things, of course one can find many “other” issues such as, too many children starving, tragic acts of genocide, unbridled terrorism, famine, disease, and drought just to name a few. But the audacity of Mr. Bloom to use this tactic to challenge and de-value the sincerity of men and fathers who protest their negative image in various forms of media is a cop-out. It is even more offensive considering he chooses to invest the majority of his time in advertising – an industry whose sole purpose is to find ways to manipulate an individual’s psyche into believing he or she needs to purchase something they may really not need.

But I’m going to call a truce. If Mr. Bloom is willing to minimize his thoughts about men and fathers who voice their concern about their negative image in advertising and media, I’m willing to minimize my opinion about how hypocritical, self-absorbing, and narrow-minded his article is about this subject.
Who knows, maybe it will be the beginning of a beautiful friendship in which Mr. Bloom converts to the cause, and speaks  out about the negative images of men and fathers in advertising.

No. I take that back. With his sharp tongue and pen, he’s too much of a risk. With him in the group, we would run the possibility of looking like a bunch of extremist.

On the opposite side of the spectrum…

Last Thursday night I was a guest on the B-Dub At Night Radio Program. I was asked by B-Dub to talk about one of my recent columns -“I Want Success… And Exploit Myself“- and also discuss men’s issues in general. B-Dub gave myself and the discussion of men’s issues a generous amount of time on his show. A download of the complete show and my interview is available at his website.
To show my appreciation, I’ve included a link to his website on the sidebar of this blog. I would ask others who are advocates of men’s issues to check out his work and display our appreciation by listening to his show. He has shown he is friendly towards men’s issues and it would be beneficial for us to help him succeed. 
His show is on daily at 10pm eastern, except on Friday, when it starts at 12am eastern.

Contact:

https://jsoltys.wordpress.com

soltys.joe@gmail.com

Photo courtesy of : Free Photographs Network

February 22, 2008

In the News…

coffee-and-newspaper.jpg     Here are some interesting stories/articles I have gathered over the past weeks:


Players allege Duke failed to protect their reputation

In a move that has never been seen before in legal circles, the unindicted players of the Duke Lacrosse team are suing Duke University and the city of Durham. CNN reports the players and their attorney are alleging they “suffered emotionally and their reputations were injured during the months in which three of their teammates were falsely accused of sexual assault.”

While I am glad to see false accusations of rape being dealt with the same seriousness as rape itself, I am still upset that the actual woman who started this whole mess has gone unscathed. As a matter of fact, the Rev. Jesse Jackson and Operation Push offered to pay for her college education even if the charges were proven false.  So while this woman’s accusations destroyed many lives and reputations, she however, is being rewarded for her nefarious behavior with a free education.
Displaying that kind of “actions vs. consequences” to a national audience, do you think this these lawsuits will really put an end to this behavior? No. The actual perpetrator suffers no consequences. What’s the motive to stop others?
Click here for a PDF of the actual case filing.

Ask Dr. Helen – Is Male Bashing Curable

This is a great letter sent to Dr. Helen by a man who is frustrated by all the negative labels and stereotypes about men. It appears he has given up on trying to please women because he finds they are never pleased with men. His letter is one I think most men can relate to. Also, Dr. Helen gives him some advice that is identical to my position concerning women who openly bash men:
Make it unpleasant for them to let out their toxic tirades and they will stop—and it often takes so little effort. Notice that people in public places and the media rarely say anything derogatory about women. Why? It is socially unacceptable and they are afraid to. Make it costly for people to bash men and they will stop. Start with small steps—if all men and the women who gave a damn spoke up or told people to knock it off when the male bashing started, we would hear a lot less of it.


Male And Female Adolescents Equally Victims Of Physical Dating Violence, Study Shows

This article was originally posted at the end of last year. It’s just one more piece of research – in a growing body of research – that shows women are as aggressive and violent as men in relationships these days. What the research also found, was that boys are as likely as girls to admit to being victims of dating violence. I am not sure I would state that this is always true, I would opinion that were seeing a shifting of the paradigm, where boys may be less uncomfortable reporting female violence directed at them.

Boys, Too, Suffer Long-term Consequences Of Childhood Sexual Abuse

Contrary to popular myth, being “Hot for Teacher” is a better fantasy for young males than realty. This study finds that child sexual abuse has the same psychological consequences for males as well as females. But the most poignant finding in the study is that a whopping 40% of the male victims reported the perpetrator as being female. 
I now understand why women call their young lovers “boy toys”. It’s a sick reality.

Strokes Among Middle-Aged Women Triple

Did you ever hear women complain about how men are irresponsible when it comes to their health? Well, this is another health study which shows women are just as guilty as men when it comes to irresponsible living. The study found the number of women having strokes is increasing at an alarming rate due to the increasing rates of obesity in the female population. It appears we need to rethink the “couch potato” as a “guy thing”. Maybe we should now include the term “couch crumpets” to honor the arrival of our female counter-parts into the mix.

From “Fighting the myth Men are Monsters, Women are Martyrs’ Files”:

Pregnant Woman Accused of Assault at BarA woman who is seven months pregnant is accused of smashing a beer bottle against a bartender’s head after she was refused another drink. Police said Keisharra Abercrombie, 30, assaulted the female bartender on Saturday after being told she shouldn’t be drinking alcohol.”
She’s seven months pregnant and getting liquored up?

S.C. Teacher Sentenced to 6 Years for Sex Acts With 5 Boys:  “A former middle school teacher was sent to prison for six years Tuesday for having sexual encounters with five teenage boys.”
That’s it? A little more than one year for each victim? If this was a man who had sex with five little girls, do you think he would see this kind of leniency? Absolutely not. The community would want him hung from the highest tree. This is an example of how we value the emotional and physical well-being of females more than the emotional and physical well-being of males. Since the victims were male, and the perpetrator female, there is no national outrage over this rapist’s light sentence.

Police Say New York Woman Stabbed Man With Kitchen Knife for Calling Her ‘Ugly’ :  “A woman in Westchester County is facing charges that she stabbed a man who said she was ugly. She allegedly used a kitchen knife to stab him in the shoulder.”
Using their usual positive spin on female destructive behavior, I sure feminist will make the argument that this incident proves men should be doing more to empower women and get them OUT of the kitchen, in the name of men’s health.

Shot ex-cop’s wife makes frantic confession to police, prosecutors say :  “The Queens woman accused of killing her ex-cop husband pumped him full of lead with two of his own guns, piercing nearly all of his organs, police sources said.”

Here is a story that draws together several issues facing men today:

  • Domestic violence perpetrated against men by women is immediately labeled as female self defense.
  • Blaming the victim is deplorable and should never be used – unless the victim is male.
  • The female murderer claims years of spousal abuse, yet the claims cannot be substantiated.

In this case – as in most cases of female-on-male violence – the woman is claiming years of spousal abuse. Now I’m not one to immediately disclaim a woman’s claim to this type of abuse because I know it happens too often. But what also happens too often are women using abuse as an excuse to minimize their accountability in these situations, or maximize their situation in divorce and child custody battles. This woman claims she shot him in response to his attack on her which resulted in a broken nose. However, authorities saw no signs of injury anywhere on her body. And I also will raise suspicion with respect to the brutality of the murder. She emptied two guns into his body. In a legitimate act of self defense, wouldn’t timing be of great importance? Getting your hands on one gun and immediately defending yourself would be normal behavior, but taking your time to grab an extra gun reeks of vengeance, not self-defense.

Ending the week on a good note.

Here is a great video summarizing men’s issues with great visuals and great music. It appears on You Tube by a man calling himself Proudguy. Click here to watch.

And here is a video that was originally sent to me by e-mail. It is from the “The Red Green Show“. 
What I like about this video is how it captures the beauty of masculinity. It displays masculinity’s creativeness, innovating spirit, and “never give up” attitude. Hope you enjoy it as much as I did. Click here.  (Also check out his “Luxury Car” segment.)

Contact:

https://jsoltys.wordpress.com

soltys.joe@gmail.com

Photo Courtesy of: stockxchng.com

February 19, 2008

I Want Success… And Exploit Myself

sexywoman.jpg    Who is actually responsible for overt female sexualization.

I asked myself this question after a week in which adult women were reported to be engaged in what some in society would label “improper” or “lewd” behavior.

First, the Sacramento King cheerleaders have brought attention upon themselves after provocative photos of the women surfaced on the internet. Second, Pamela Anderson completed two Valentine’s Day shows at the Crazy Horse in Paris, where she wore only a black body stocking while riding around stage on a motorcycle.

Most feminist and women rights supporters find the sexualization of the female body degrading and disrespectful towards women. The usual culprits they blame for this type of female degradation is male dominated entities such as corporate America, hip-hop and rap music, and of course, old man patriarchy.

But is that argument true today? Most women today are in position of greater opportunity, so objectifying themselves is a matter of choice rather than need.

Take the case of Pamela Anderson. This woman has made more money than the average male, has more valuable assets than the average male, and has more clout towards financial gains through the use of her name alone than any average American male. A long time ago she could have ditched using her sexuality as a means for financial gain and stability, investing her fortune instead into other business ventures. But she still chooses to use her body to make a living.

And she is not the only woman with tremendous opportunity at hand, but also enamored with flaunting her sexuality in some way – for better or for worse:

  • Carrie Underwood is “sexin up her style” according to Fox News. The multi-platinum recording star performed at the recent Grammy Awards wearing black hot-pants and knee high black leather boots. She has decided to forgo her good girl image.
  • The mayor of Arlington in Oregon, Carmen Kontur-Gronquist, caused a stir when racy photos of her sprawled across the town’s fire truck wearing intimate lingerie surfaced.
  • Divorce attorney Corri Fetman gained national attention when she posted a sexually charged billboard in Chicago advertising her law firm. She also agreed to pose for Playboy, and author a column for the magazine. 
  • The Spice Girls have made a serious come back, and it is reported the girls are showing more flesh than ever. It has also been reported some members have engaged in acts of lewd dancing with male fans on stage.
  • Miss Nevada, Katie Reese, lost her title after pictures surfaced of her engaging in lewd sexual behavior. In one photo she is kissing the exposed breast of another woman.
  • Miss USA Tara Conner almost lost her crown when her drunken and sexual exploits were exposed, including what the New York Daily News described as “steamy liplocks” with the current Miss Teen USA.
  • Lindsey Lohan has decided to pose nude for New York Magazine in a pictorial that pays tribute to the very last Marilyn Monroe photo-shoot in 1962.
  • Paris Hilton, heir to the Hilton fortune, was the featured dancer at a burlesque show at a Los Angels nightclub. Paris wore leather panties, leather bra, fishnet stockings, and heels during her performance.  

And I could go on to include the names of many other women who’ve been blessed with promising futures and careers, but have still chosen to pose provocatively for magazines such as FHM, STUFF, Playboy etc, or have utilized sex as a tool to advance their careers. These women are not “down on my luck”, vulnerable, young, naive, women with starving kids at home. These are women who have achieved some kind of fame and status above most men and women in society. 

Considering historical feminist ideology defines female exploitation as a natural by-product of women’s lack of power and status in society, the logical assumption would be that as women remove themselves from these constraints, the sexploitation of women would decrease. But has it? Women have begun to excel in many fields of life, most notably in academics. This has led to the rise of their success, status, and power in numerous professions including medicine, law, politics, business, and research to name a few. But at the same time, overt sexualization of women has increased with it.

So I come back to my original question. Who is really responsible for the current trend in overt female sexualization?

While the focus has been to blame men, patriarchy, and rap music, it is apparent that the real culprit is women themselves – not just women in general, but very successful and influential women. It appears to me that as much as women what to be respected for their minds, they also have an insatiable desire to create a persona that includes a strong sexual allure. Consequently, this is why I feel there is a rise in female exploitation. As women become more empowered, they have more opportunity and resources at their disposal to invest in this desire. Just look at the explosion in plastic surgery, Botox, and other vanity services whose clients are predominately women.

My point: It is not my place to tell women how to act or behave. But I am within my right to defend and counter the majority opinion that places shame and blame upon men and masculinity as the primary impetus behind the sexploitation of females in this country. When considering third world countries, where women have limited rights, and limited resources, I accept the argument that these women can be easily exploited. But here in the U.S., it is not so simple.

If society is truly serious about diminishing the sexualization of women, maybe it needs to accept the fact that some of its most successful women – the ones anointed with rescuing women from this societal ill – are the ones dragging women deeper into its very core.

Contact:

https://jsoltys.wordpress.com

soltys.joe@gmail.com

Photo courtesy of: FreeDigitalPhotos.net

February 14, 2008

The “Liberties” of Female Violence

warflagovercasket.jpg

Has anyone noticed the way we in society defend various forms of female violence, but are disturbed greatly by various forms of male violence?

This phenomenon is being played out in Berkeley California, where the city council made an attempt to run the Marine Corp. recruiters out of town. This was an attempt by the city council to take their anti-war stance to the next level.

It was working quite well at first, gaining national attention after the city council austerely proclaimed the recruiters are “not welcomed in this city“. The council then proceeded to grant the anti-war/feminist protest group, Code Pink, the right to a privileged parking space in front of the Marine recruiting office once a week, and a sound permit allowing the group extraordinary protest rights to assist the city in its efforts to drive the Marines out of town. The council also was trying to force the recruiters out by declaring the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is a violation of Berkeley’s anti-discrimination policy towards gay and lesbians. Also on the agenda was addressing zoning changes for recruiting stations which would declare recruitment offices could not be opened within 600 feet of residential districts, public parks, public health clinics, public libraries, schools or churches. Rounding out this arduous “anti-war proclamation” was the city council advising the Marines that “if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome guests.”

But then things turned sour for Berkeley.  U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina viewed Berkeley’s actions as  “a slap in the face to all brave service men and women and their families.” He then met Berkeley’s bold rhetoric and actions with a little of his own. He acknowledged Berkeley has a right to their beliefs, but with that right comes a responsibility. He began measures to ensure that if Berkeley wanted to continue to protest the government, then Berkeley would have to finance it on their own. He began a process to withdraw about 2 million dollars of federal money slated for Berkeley. Suddenly Berkeley’s city council was feeling “unwelcome”. 

In a heated show down which drew anti-war and pro-military supporters, Wednesday the Berkeley city council voted 7-to-2 that the Marines could stay. According to CNN, “the council said it would no longer send a letter to the local Marine Corps Recruiting Station and Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway saying recruiters aren’t welcome in Berkeley.”

I guess it’s true: Money talks and bullshit walks.

But this is not the whole story.

The hypocrisy at work here would be hilarious if it wasn’t so real. Code Pink is not only a feminine anti-war protest group, but also a group that supports a woman’s right to an abortion. Just as recently as last month, members of Code Pink joined other women’s rights organizations in our nation’s capital to celebrate and defend a woman’s right to kill her unborn fetus.

I find it amazing how Berkeley, feminist, women, and society in general view female violence upon innocent lives differently from that of similar male violence. Men’s wars are viewed as testosterone driven violence, foolish in its ideology, in its conception, in its implementation, and appalling in its consequences. The innocent lives lost in these wars are labeled terrible tragedies. However, men’s wars cannot begin to equal the body count per year of the innocent, defenseless lives lost through the estrogen driven “liberty” of abortion.

Since the Iraq war began, it is estimated that 1.7 million people have lost their lives. This includes coalition forces and civilians (And I’m even being really nice here because I used stats from an anti-war organization – giving the advantage to the anti-war protesters). However, in that same time period, the estrogen fueled abortion machine killed almost 7 million innocent lives – in the U.S. alone!

So where is the outrage in Berkeley and elsewhere over the tragic lose of these innocent lives? There are a handful of abortion clinics in and around Berkeley, but not one city council member body is sticking his or her neck out to give anti-abortion protesters free parking spaces, permits, and other beneficial protesting tools to eradicate the senseless killing of these helpless lives. And how does Code Pink get away with such hypocrisy? 

During their support of Roe vs. Wade last month, Liz Hourican, a Code Pink member, was asked this very question. According to a report from Cybercast News Service, Liz philosophized the organizations “war vs. abortion” position like this:

With regard to the war and this issue, it’s very much the same thing. This is about basic human rights – standing here and being able to take care of women. Take care of women first. This is my body. I should have the decision over my body.”
 

Her argument that war and abortion is the same thing holds true – both take numerous innocent lives. So why establish one and try to eradicate the other? It’s simple; their true mission is not to end senseless killings, it’s about power, control, the female ego, and gender politics.

Code Pink, as well as other feminist and their supporters perceive abortion as a tool of liberation and freedom for women. When men kill in the name of freedom and liberty it’s perceived as masculine brutality. When women kill innocent lives, it is perceived as a human rights issue, the freedom to make choices concerning a woman’s well-being. It’s about liberation.

Pink’s hypocrisy reveals their protests are really about the female ego – the perception of females as having superior qualities over men to make life and death decisions. This is apparent in their obvious belief that when men kill, it is truly evil; it is a display of rage, selfishness, and nefarious hedonism. But when women choose to kill, it is about something greater. It’s truly about sacrifices made for a greater good. In other words, they have “good reasons” for their actions. 

Therefore, their cause can now be seen for what it actually is – an issue of power and control – an egomaniacal assumption that they and other women have a superior ability over men in these same situation. The need to wrestle power away from men, and place the rights and well-being of women first – as Liz so unequivocally points out – which translates into discarding the rights and well-being of men, children, and others that stand in their way . Under the Code Pink matriarchy, killing is a right reserved for women only, and should be defined only by women. Only they can do it for the greater good.

The real tragedy here is how we as a society have let Code Pink and other feminist define female violence as some sort of “benevolent violence”. This is not only seen in the “war vs. abortion argument”, but also in other societal tragedies. Whether it is mothers killing their children, or wives killing their husbands, female violence is endowed with numerous excuses to placate a woman’s violent actions – and sadly, society buys into it. For men, as we see, their violence is devoid of those same excuses.

I could care less about whether someone is pro-abortion or anti-abortion, pro-military or anti-war. My point is, when  someone begins to tell me how awful war is, and I find this individual thinks the killing of thousands of unborn children everyday is not a priority, I know I’m dealing with someone who has a distorted view of life and death.

Therefore, their words, and their cause, falls on deaf ears. 

Resources:

U.S. Senator Wants to Revoke Funding From City of Berkeley, Calif., for Vote to Boot Marines

Berkeley City Council Moderates Anti-Marine Position

Fast Facts: U.S. Abortion Statistics

Anti-War Code Pink Rallies with Pro-Abortion Protesters

Casualties in Iraq

Contact:

soltys.joe@gmail.com

Photo Courtesy of Geek Philosopher

February 12, 2008

Male Privilege – An Oxymoron

male-symbol.jpg        I was searching through some recently released research articles when I ran across this one. It is titled,

“Domestic Violence Harms Long-Term Health of Victims”.

I began reading and was pleasantly surprised to find that the first paragraph started like this:

 Women and men who are victims of intimate partner violence are also more likely to suffer from chronic health conditions and participate in risky behaviors, U.S. health officials report.” 

I could not believe what I was reading. A report on domestic violence not only acknowledged men as victims along with women, but did so in the first paragraph.  About f***ing time I thought. 

I have written previously how when issues cross gender lines – with women being perceived as victimized more often than men – the information will rarely include a mention of male victims or their statistics. And if the report does include male victims, it usually is buried somewhere in the report, and if you blink, you will miss the acknowledgement of male victims. 

But here was a newly released report about domestic violence acknowledging male victims right beside female victims. I felt the hard work of many men to raise awareness to male victims of domestic violence by female abusers was beginning to pay off.  

Unfortunately, the article was a tease, just like that girl from high school who led you to believe that something magical was about to happen, only to recognize your fathers advice that “If it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is.”

After reading through what appeared to be equitable treatment of both male and female victims in this article, the moment of equity was shattered by the director of Violence Against Women Prevention at Harvard University School of Public Health, Jay G. SilvermanHis comment about this new research included this:

“Beyond concerns for these data representing the true state of [intimate partner violence] and associated health concerns,  this is certainly an important study.”

“Although women and girls suffer far higher rates of abuse, are far more likely to be injured, and far more likely to be killed by male partners than are men reporting abuse from women, there is a push from some professional quarters to equate these experiences and remove considerations of gender.”                          

If I am interpreting his comments correctly, what Mr. Silverman is really trying to say is, equating domestic violence as a public health concern – meaning gender neutral terminology – is at its best, a disservice to women, and at its worst, an insult to female victims of domestic violence. 

Again we see that sexism still reigns in domestic violence circles. Mr. Silverman and others like him are insulted at the inclusion of men and their children in the aggregate of those harmed by domestic violence. He and others engage, without hesitation, in treating female victims of domestic violence as they should be treated – as human beings. But sadly, these same people treat male victims of domestic violence and their children as simply numbers. They perceive the extension of their compassion and resources to be delegated by statistical numbers – mercy to those with a greater percentage sign, pity on those in the minority. 

Consider that most people who are affiliated in some way with domestic violence prevention, and/or research, are also stringent women rights advocates. These same people refuse to accept “playing the numbers game” when the numbers would discriminate against women, and place any hardships upon them in a given situation.  

For example, how would Mr. Silverman and women’s rights groups react if the government decided to deny most female Iraq war veterans physical and mental health care because most of the wounded in this war are men, meaning they deserve access to most government dollars? And then establish only male soldiers as true wounded veterans because that’s the way the numbers add up? 

How would these same people feel if corporate America decided to pay men more than women because after all, the numbers show American men are the dominate bread winners in the family, and therefore, women, children, and society in general, are dependent upon them for stability?  

OOPS! I forgot. That one has been tried by men. And women are still bitching about it years later.  My we are quick to forget that when men tried playing the “numbers game”, women refused to accept it.

Today, women’s groups and their supporters try to shove this same sexist bulls**t down are throats. It’s an insult to both men and women’s intellect to think that just because they’ve wrapped their version in compassionate pretty paper, an honest mind will not see that it’s still the same sexist bulls**t behind their pretty bows. 

But let me end on a good note. This article appears on the website MedicineNet.com, and if you look up their information concerning domestic violence, you will find male victims being acknowledged. While most of the information is weighed heavily towards female victims, they acknowledge society’s refusal to see males as true victims of domestic violence with this quote:

“Despite the myth that violence against men does not occur, 800,000 men are victims of intimate partner abuse.” 

 For more information about domestic violence and the myths surrounding it, check out the website Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting (RADAR).  

Another good website is Domestic Violence Factoids by well known D.V. researcher Richard Gelles.

Contact:

soltys.joe@gmail.com

February 11, 2008

Men, Women, and Crimes in the name of God

religious.jpg                                         This article was originally written 27-Sep-2007 

                   Warren Jeffs was convicted this week as an accomplice to rape. He was the leader of a Mormon polygamous sect called the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. He was convicted on this charge because he performed a wedding for a 19 year old male and a fourteen year old female. The two later consummated the marriage. The husband, now 26, has been charged with rape. Warren Jeffs is looking at possible life in prison, and the husband is definitely looking at serious prison time. 

 This case is interesting to me because it shows the hypocrisy in our justice system and our culture. But first let’s establish the obvious – this is a very religious sect that looked upon Jeff’s as a prophet. Jeff’s himself is a deeply religious person who really believed he was some sort of Messiah. So why wasn’t he viewed as being mentally ill by our justice system, and within our court of public opinion? Instead, he was labeled with the usual “dominate, male-ego machine” personality who was in need of power and control, abusing all that came into contact with him. Is there any gender bias here? 

In 2004, the Associated Press ran an article titled “Religiosity common among mothers who kill children“. This article states,

“Women who kill their children commonly cite God, the devil and other religious influences for their actions.”

It also states,

“Although the mothers are also often found to be severely mentally ill or psychotic, the recurring theme of religiosity begs the question: Is religion to blame?”

The article then continues to present some interesting information:

 “In a recent study of 39 Ohio and Michigan women – all acquitted by reason of insanity in the deaths of their children since the 1970s – about 15 had religious-themed delusions, said Dr. Susan Hatters Friedman, a psychiatry fellow at Case Western Reserve University.

Another study of 56 Michigan mothers referred for psychiatric evaluations from 1974-1976 after killing their children found nearly a fourth of them experienced religious delusions, said study co-author Dr. Catherine Lewis, an assistant professor at the University of Connecticut Health Center.

Not only does the article point out our justice system’s leniency with mom’s who kill their children, but I feel it also raises the question of sexism between female and male religious zealotry. As far I as I know, Warren Jeffs’ mental competency wasn’t an issue in this case even though he professed to being a prophet. Wouldn’t somebody with this mentality have had some kind of ugly childhood?  

And consider this: he was not the individual who actually committed the criminal act of rape upon the 14 year old girl, but he could be facing life in prison. Now let’s compare.  If a woman kills her child/children, her mental competency is immediately questioned. And if she professes to kill in the name of God, the potential to avoid prison increases significantly.

Is it just me, or is this another disturbing trend of discrimination towards men in our criminal justice system? When speaking about the court of public opinion, I cannot remember David Koresh, Jim Jones, Jim Baker, or other male criminal religious leaders ever being graced with the label of being mentally ill wrapped in sympathetic tones and offered leniency and compassion at the company water cooler for their actions. But if you are a female child killer, it is guaranteed.

 I am not condoning what any of these men have done; I am just looking for equal justice. Women and their supporters are willing to fight for all the rewards that come with equality to men: power, money, status, etc. But these same people become yellow bellied when it comes to being held equally accountable.I feel if that if we, as a society, find it acceptable to apply the skills of using intellect, reasoning, compassion, and understanding to forgive women who kill their own children, and other heinous criminal acts, why aren’t we doing the same for our men? 

Sexism is the only answer.

February 8, 2008

Please, I’m Not That Type of Girl

woman-eye-hand.jpg    After forty years of feminism we can look back and see all the great achievements made by women. Without trying to undermine the sincere and respectable achievements made by women, I am always left confused as to why society so easily accepts – and actually enjoys – showcasing male vices in conjunction with their achievements, while at the same time, refrains from doing the same for women, instead focusing only on their respectable behavior.
In the name of equality, if society feels compelled to discuss male indiscretions under the auspices of “improving them”, then we as a society should feel comfortable enough to extend this process to women.

Let me explain.

For years feminist and their supporter have done a wonderful job creating the impression that men and responsibility are incompatible. If one listens to them long enough, one is left with the feeling that men will use any method possible to alleviate themselves from accountability for their actions. While I won’t deny that for some men this is true, it certainly does not apply to all men, but it is clear that an important foundation of the women’s movement has been to force men to take responsibility on many levels.
But in my writings, I try to show that for every indiscretion or vice that men may harbor, one can find women just as guilty of harboring the similar or same. In the last couple of weeks I have seen examples of this being true – men aren’t the only ones who will go to great lengths to avoid accountability for their actions. Women are becoming quite skilled at using any excuse, or employing any individuals necessary to help them avoid responsibility and accountability.
Here are some of the examples I found:

— An alleged female con-artist who was skilled in identity theft, and allegedly used this skill to gain entrance into Ivy League universities, is facing up to thirty years in prison. The woman’s father told the media that his daughter is not responsible for her behavior – it’s Hollywood’s fault.
Earnest Reed, father of Esther Reed, is quoted in the New York Post as saying, “My own feeling is the movie industry influenced her – they molded her thinking that wasn’t good.” He elaborated on his assumption by saying, “Profanity and nudity and things of that nature were not permitted in the house. Videos were banned.”
There ya go. Now we fully understand what drives criminal activity around the world. Duh! Why didn’t I see that.

— A Texas woman who was involved in a high speed chase with police that resulted in her crashing and killing her 9 month old daughter was sentenced to 28 years in prison.
Her attorney defended she was not fully responsible for her actions. According to Fox News, “He said she did not know her actions were wrong because she was in a manic state of her bipolar disorder.”
Question: Who was responsible for seeing that she takes her medication, or recieves the proper treatment in the best interest of her daughter?
I assume she thought it was somebody else’s responsibility, not hers?

— A Pennsylvania woman who created an adoption scam and bilked eager parents-to-be out of thousands of dollars says she did so because she is a product of a troubled family. News Day quotes the woman saying, “That’s all I knew was scamming. That’s how I got by.”
News Day also quotes her attorney – trying to diminish her accountability – saying, “[she] was the product of an ‘abusive family’ and had medical problems that ‘played’ into what she did.”
Many abusive men come from abusive families, but I don’t see the court system or society cutting them any slack.

— A former stripper from the Chicago area pleaded guilty to being an accomplice in the murder of another man after she falsely accused him of rape. After agreeing to have sex with the man, Ashley Raye Lawrence then told her boyfriend that the sex was not consensual. Her boyfriend shot the man. He then asked Lawrence for a knife to stab him. Court testimony shows she tried to diminish accountability by stating she was under “sudden heat” from the sexual encounter. However it was determined she knew the purpose of her boyfriend’s need for the knife and gave it to him anyway.
This is a new one to me, “sudden heat”. It is obviously another creative attempt by women to try and diminish one’s responsibility for one’s actions.

— And this is the best one of all. Kelsey Peterson, the woman who is alleged to have abducted one of her students, and fled to Mexico to continue a sexual relationship with him, told the judge the 13 year old boy was abusive to her and she was the real victim.
Peterson said the boy was “in charge” during their trip to Mexico. KETV reports Peterson telling the judge, “He has threatened me many times and used physical abuse towards me in our relationship, but before we left, he was pressuring me to leave, and so that’s why we chose to leave. He used to threaten me as in, ‘I will kill you if you ever leave me.’ He left bruises all over my arms and across my chest, at times when he would get angry with, me so he was very much the dominate male in the relationship.”
Who’s advising her, Gloria Steinem?

So one can see, it is apparent women and responsibility is just as incompatible – as much, if not more – with respect to men and responsibility.
Thanks to feminism, accepting responsibility has become an issue for both men and women. Men are burdened by society with unnecessary and unjustified guilt, humiliation, and shame for actions of irresponsibility that are not equally placed upon women in similar circumstances. This has led to male frustration and the belief that no matter what I do I am wrong, so why try to do right?
For women, feminism has tenaciously taught them – and society – that women are not responsible for their actions, that some other person (usually male), or some other paradigm (usually patriarchal in nature) is truly at the heart of the problem.

My point: I could care less about what excuses men or women make for trying to get out of the responsibly of their actions. What we need in this society is more accountability and responsibility from males and females – not less.
But more importantly, I want to make clear I am not devoid of extending compassion to those individuals who have endured a traumatic upbringing, or traumatic event in their lives. I just believe that if we are going to show compassion for these people, it must consist of two important elements:
1. One’s abuses of the past, and any corresponding mental and emotional issues, do not resolve one from accountability for their actions.
2. If we as a society agree that compassion should be considered when handing out punishment, then these adjusted punishments must apply equally to ALL people. Men as well as women must receive EQUAL distribution of compassion in sentencing. Also, this compassion must not be influenced to any degree by a person’s race or religion.

Right now I feel our justice system is influenced by the feminist ideology that men are inherently violent, and women are inherently pacifist. Just look at how the death penalty is distributed in our country. The disparity between men and women put to death over the years for crimes against others is shocking. It’s for this reason I feel some of the women mentioned above may see lighter sentences than men in similar circumstances.

Anyway, the next time you hear or read commentary from a feminist or female writer concerning the topic of men and their need to avoid responsibility, understand that these same women will show just how skillful they are at avoiding responsibility if put in the same situation.
As a matter of fact, when it comes to avoiding accountability, I feel women can teach us men a few things.

Female Teacher Arrested for Having Sex with 8th Grader
CO-ED CON’S DAD BLAMES H’WOOD
Texas Woman Who Fled Police Sentenced to 28 Years for Crash That Killed Her Baby
Woman who scammed adopters is sentenced
Former stripper pleads guilty to role in killing
Kelsey Peterson Calls Teen Abusive
 

Contact:

soltys.joe@gmail.com

Photo courtesy of FreeDigitalPhotos.net

February 7, 2008

Live and Let Die

nodeathpenalty.jpg   A while back there was a story that made international headlines concerning a woman from Saudi Arabia who was raped by a gang of men. There was an international outcry that erupted when the Saudi legal system placed the sentence of 90 lashes upon her for being with an old boyfriend at the time of the attacks. It is illegal in Saudi Arabia for a female to be alone in the presence of a non-family male.
I wrote about how this international outcry from politicians, human rights organizations, politicians, and numerous writers in the media were all ignoring the fact that the male companion the woman was with was also beaten, raped, and sentenced to 90 lashes for his role in all of it. None of these same people gave a damn about the physical, emotional, and human injustices he was subjected to. The world’s martyrs were only concerned about the female victim.
Eventually, enough international pressure was put on the Saudi government over this incident that they retreated and abolished her sentence. A few days later, with much less fanfare, the media reported the male companion’s sentence had been abandoned also.
I used this international event to validate how the physical, emotional, and mental well-being of our men is not a priority in most societies, even in those socities that openly discriminate against women.

I now read there is a new story making international headlines concerning the Saudi government and the arrest of an American woman.
It appears the woman was sitting in a Starbucks with a male colleague when the Saudi Arabia’s Commission for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice approached them. The American woman was arrested for being in the presence of a male, and according to the London Times she was, “interrogated, strip-searched and forced to sign and fingerprint a series of confessions pleading guilty to her crime”. She wound up spending a day in prison.
I’m sure this story will stir up more controversy, and I’m sure it will be the harbinger of a few invectives written in newspapers about how sexist the Saudi government is, and how this is an example of how women everywhere are openly discriminated against everyday.

But I can guarantee there is one story about a serious violation of human rights that will not be spoken in the same breath as the story above. The reason being, this victim is a male.
In Iran, a 22 year-old man has been sentenced to death for drinking alcohol – a criminal offense in the strictly Islamic nation.
According to reports, this is the man’s fourth offense relating to alcohol consumption. Therefore, according to the Islamic penal code, the punishment for these numerous offenses is death by hanging.

It is obvious that the young man has an addiction to alcohol. Anybody that has been previously made aware of the serious consequences of his or her actions, yet continues to engage self-destructive behavior, needs professional help, not the death penalty. The man is an alcoholic, not a criminal.
But I will stick my neck out and predict the international community will remain silent on the injustice this man is facing. When the Saudi government was going to sentence a rape victim to numerous lashings – meaning she would suffer but live – it was viewed as an unconscionable act by the Saudi government. But when the Iranian government is going to kill a male only because he suffers from an addiction to alcohol, there is no outcry from all the martyrs in the media, in politics, and in the human right’s organizations. He is simply a man, and as I’ve pointed out before, men’s lives and their well-being is low on many agendas including those of politicians, advocacy groups, and many countries, including those countries that are well-known for their open discrimination of women.

While I am truly appalled by the discrimination of women in these countries, what is always missing is the fact these same countries also violate the civil and personal rights of their own men as well as their women.
The fight for women’s rights in these countries should also unequivocally include the awareness and prevention of the inalienable rights of all the citizens in these countries. That would be an effort in equality. Anything less is a snow job.

American Woman Jailed in Saudi Arabia for Sitting With Man at Starbucks
Iranian faces execution for drinking alcohol — report

 Contact:
soltys.joe@gmail.com

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.