Cats have more rights in terms of freedoms than women in Afghanistan says Meryl Streep

NEWS AND OPINION: I cannot avoid expressing my strong opinion about the highly objectionable way the Taliban suppress and in effect incarcerate women and girls in Afghanistan. It is monstrous misogynism of the most heinous kind. The world should be up in arms about it. The world can get together; should get together to stop this.

Meryl Streep is an intelligent and gentle woman and in this video - which has gone viral - she gently chides Afghanistan's Taliban leaders about the way they suffocate women and girls in their country. They have stripped away all their rights to the point, according to Meryl Streep, where girls and women have less rights in terms of freedoms than domestic cats in Afghanistan. She was speaking at an event on ‘The Inclusion of Women in the Future of Afghanistan’.

There are 2 play buttons in the infographic in order to play the vide embedded in it.

And today a female cat has more freedoms than a woman. Meryl Streep. by Michael Broad

--------------

It would seem to me that women and girls in Afghanistan have lost almost all their rights. There is nothing left to strip away other than the right to feed themselves and breathe the air.

And remember, the Taliban said that they would respect women's rights when they took over the country after America and its Western allies vacated the place in acknowledgement that they had failed. But during the occupation by Western forces, women and girls in Afghanistan enjoyed much greater freedoms and rights. The Taliban and their oppressive attitudes towards women and misogynism removed them all.

Women enjoyed a normal life for a time. They were able to express their views and have a sense of equality and then suddenly it was all removed when the Taliban broke their promises. They are an insidiously disrespectful lot of misogynists in my honest opinion.

They cannot be trusted. It would appear that their attitudes about women are so backward that it is hard to know from which era they come or is it purely about a distortion of the Islamic faith (see link below). Perhaps during humankind's evolution when they were living in caves as Neanderthals, men treated women as the Taliban treat women today. But I suspect even the Neanderthals treated women far better than the Taliban treat Afghanistan's women today.

Good on Meryl Streep. She believes that more pressure needs to be applied to the Taliban to change their ways. I don't think the world can accept it. The world needs to intervene. Governments these days are frightened to intervene in these situations. They think it always leads to failure. They've been burnt in the past. Look at Iraq and Vietnam for instance. And Afghanistan is an example of Western failure in intervention. Although on different matters. America tried to change the culture in Afghanistan and did so while they were there.

But I don't think a history of failure should prevent people from trying to change gross misdeeds in one country in the future. We must maintain optimism and commitment to improving the world. We should not accept appalling behaviour in one country. The Taliban will argue that other countries should respect their culture. I get that. We should respect the culture of other countries.

But when that culture is so oppressive of human rights to women the rules change. You cannot respect a culture which is so diabolical that domestic cats have greater freedoms than women and girls.

One last point: I suspect that domestic cats live a pretty difficult life in Afghanistan. The country is relatively poor and animal welfare organisations run by Westerners disappeared from that country when the Taliban took over. I don't think that the Taliban have any great respect for animals. They probably abuse and use them in the same way that they abuse and use women.

I suspect that the concept of animal welfare animal rights do not enter the heads of Taliban leaders judging by the way they treat their women and girls. This despite the fact that the hadiths of the Quran demand that Muslims respect cats.

My gut feeling is that cats have almost no rights. And yet they have more rights than female humans.

Reasons for existence of misogyny

I asked AI (ChatGPT) about why this misogynism exists. These views come from the internet in general. I don't necessarily hold these views. For me it is more about male power. I asked AI about that and you can see the response lower down.

Misogynistic behaviour within any cultural or racial group is a complex issue influenced by various factors. It's essential to approach this topic with sensitivity and an understanding that misogyny can exist in different forms across all cultures, not limited to any particular race or ethnicity. Here are some key factors that can contribute to misogynistic behaviour:

1. Historical Context: Many societies have a long history of patriarchal structures that prioritize male authority and dominance. These historical power dynamics can shape attitudes toward gender roles and contribute to ongoing misogyny.

2. Cultural Norms and Values: Cultural beliefs and practices can play a significant role in shaping gender relations. Societies that emphasize traditional gender roles often foster environments where misogynistic attitudes are normalized.

3. Socialization and Education: From a young age, individuals are socialized into their cultural norms, which can include harmful stereotypes and attitudes toward women. Education systems that reinforce these stereotypes contribute to the perpetuation of misogyny.

4. Media Representation: The portrayal of women in media—whether in television, films, music, or literature—can reflect and reinforce misogynistic attitudes. Negative stereotypes and objectification of women can shape societal views on gender.

5. Economic Factors: Economic inequality and dependency can exacerbate misogynistic behaviour. In cultures where women have limited access to education and economic opportunities, traditional gender roles may be more pronounced.

6. Religious Beliefs: In some cultures, religious teachings may promote patriarchal views or limit the roles of women in society. Interpretations of religious texts can influence attitudes toward gender equality.

7. Fear of Change: As societies evolve and gender roles shift, some individuals may react defensively, leading to an increase in misogynistic behaviour as a way to reassert traditional power dynamics.

8. Peer Influence: Social groups and peer pressure can reinforce misogynistic attitudes, particularly among men. Group dynamics can lead to the normalization of derogatory language and behaviour toward women.

9. Psychological Factors: Individual psychological issues, such as insecurity or a need for control, can also manifest in misogynistic behaviour. These issues can be compounded by societal norms that condone or encourage such attitudes.

10. Intersectionality: It’s important to consider how race, class, sexuality, and other identities intersect to shape experiences and attitudes. Misogyny may be expressed differently across different communities and can be exacerbated by factors such as racism and economic inequality.

Addressing misogyny requires a multifaceted approach that includes education, challenging cultural norms, promoting gender equality, and fostering dialogue within communities. Engaging with these issues critically and empathetically can help combat misogyny and promote a more equitable society.

Is one reason to do with male power?

Yes, male power is indeed a significant factor contributing to misogynistic behaviour within many cultures. Here are several ways in which male power influences misogyny:

1. Patriarchy: Many societies are structured around patriarchal systems that prioritize male authority and dominance in various aspects of life, including family, politics, and the workplace. This power structure often leads to the marginalization of women and reinforces misogynistic attitudes.

2. Control and Dominance: Misogyny can manifest as an expression of control or dominance over women. When men feel their power or status is threatened, they may resort to misogynistic behaviours as a way to reassert their authority.

3. Socialization of Masculinity: Many cultures socialize men to adhere to traditional notions of masculinity, which often include traits like aggression, control, and emotional suppression. These traits can contribute to misogynistic behaviour, as men may feel pressured to demonstrate their power through dominance over women.

4. Fear of Vulnerability: The societal expectation for men to be strong and dominant can lead to a fear of vulnerability. In this context, women may be viewed as threats to male power, leading to hostile attitudes and behaviours aimed at maintaining control.

5. Economic Power: Economic inequalities often mean that men hold more financial power, which can lead to controlling behaviours in relationships and contribute to the perception of women as dependent or subordinate.

6. Exclusion from Power Structures: Women's historical exclusion from positions of power—whether in government, business, or religious institutions—perpetuates male dominance and reinforces the idea that men should control societal norms and values, including those related to gender.

7. Reinforcement of Gender Roles: Male power often reinforces rigid gender roles, where men are seen as leaders and providers while women are relegated to supportive or subordinate roles. This dynamic can foster resentment and hostility toward women who challenge these roles.

8. Cultural Narratives: Many cultures have narratives that glorify male power and aggression while devaluing female strength and independence. These narratives can normalize misogyny and legitimize male dominance.

Addressing misogyny rooted in male power involves challenging these societal structures, promoting gender equality, and redefining notions of masculinity to be more inclusive and respectful of women's rights and autonomy.

Islamic Faith

There is also a strong Islamic faith context here as women are very much in the shadow of men in Muslim countries. Also the Taliban exercise a very extreme version of the Islamic faith. But they use the faith to exercise control and power over women as they fear them in that if women are given equal rights it will undermine the male dominance over Afghan society. And of course the men use force to maintain this absolute control over women all of which is totally unacceptable by normal Western values.

Click this to read more on the Islam context.

------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also: sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. Also, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable.

Child rapist allowed to compete at Olympics while an equestrian who gently whipped a horse is banned?

Dujardin banned from Olympics while van de Velde is allowed to compete by Michael Broad

----------------

This is a short note on something which troubled Nick Ferrari on LBC this morning. LBC is a popular British radio station and Nick Ferrari is a very popular, long-standing presenter on that station. He saw a disconnect or a lack of equality in the way two Olympians have been treated by the authorities.

Charlotte Dujardin is all over the news because she was secretly videoed using a lunging whip on a horse being trained for dressage, ridden by a young rider. This is a very long whip which might at worst sting a horse but it's a fairly benign training instrument which is an extension of the arms. That said she made a terrible mistake in whipping this trainee horse. She admitted it. But her illustrious career as a former gold medallist is in tatters because of the revelation.

She's been banned from going for another gold medal which would have made her Britain’s most decorated female Olympian in her own right. And she has lost funding from the UK authorities. Her reputation is in tatters as mentioned.

She's not been been charged with any animal welfare offence. And therefore she not been found guilty of a crime. Although we don't know whether she regularly used that kind of whipping treatment in her training programs. There is no suggestion that she did but the fact that she was filmed doing it might arguably indicate that she has used the method before.

What did Charlotte Dujardin do to force her to withdraw from the Olympics? - click this for her full story.

But set against that bleak picture for Charlotte Dujardin, we have the story of Steven van de Veld, a convicted child rapist who was convicted of raping a British 12-year-old girl in 2016. He was subsequently tried and convicted and has been punished according to the law. And he's allowed to compete at the Paris Olympics. The IOC is facing calls for an investigation into how a convicted child rapist has been allowed to compete at these games.

There is growing outrage at the presence of Steven van de Velde in the volleyball competition. Some senior people believe that it is irresponsible of the authorities to allow him there. It sends the wrong signal to the world at large. And there's an argument that even though he has served his sentence and been punished he should not be allowed to compete because the Olympic Games is about creating a harmonious environment. It's about promoting high standards. It's about excellence in sport and in general behaviour. These are top athletes who are influencers.

Many of them who are awarded gold medals will be strong influencers in the future of young people in particular and this underscores the need for them to be of good character.

There is an argument for banning Van de Velde from the Olympics and if that had happened it would put him in line with the ban of Charlotte Dujardin. It would make more sense. At the moment there seems to be a high degree of inequality between these two athletes and the application of different standards.

-----------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

My boyfriend said he'd save our cat but not a stranger if both were drowning

The title to this post comes from The New York Times. I can't access the paper because they are now insisting on paying subscriptions but I can guess what it's about as I am sure you can.

The title intrigues me. I like it because it very strongly points to the boyfriend regarding animals as equals to humans. Through his behaviour the boyfriend is granting animals near human rights.

Man saves drowning cat. Extraordinary image create by AI to my order. I asked the computer to create an image of a man saving a drowning cat. The AI computer created Superman and a large clapping crowd 👍😉😎.

It is an attitude which is very much in line with the modern-day thinking of many people. But also, there are many people who would think that he is totally crazy. There are still many people who think that humans have dominion over animals as per the bible. 

They believe that humans can use animals as they wish and that animals are there to serve people in any way necessary including providing food for humans.

But the tide is turning thanks probably because of the Internet providing lots of information about the sentience of animals. Providing information about the emotions that animals deal. And providing information about the fact that some animal species are self-aware which means they understand who they are and place rather than acting instinctively without knowledge of their presence. 

RELATED: Scientists propose that we should regard animals in general as conscious beings.

But there's nothing wrong with the boyfriend's attitude. The problem probably would come if he actually had to make a real-life choice between saving the family cat who was drowning rather than a stranger who was drowning at the same time and in the same place.

You can imagine the scenario. A cat and a human are drowning in a lake. A man Johnson dives in and saves the cat but leaves the man to drown. I think he would be in big trouble. He might even be charged with criminal behaviour.

In reality, it is probable that the scenario would never arrive and if it did he could save both. And also, if it did happen, the cat wouldn't drown because cats are great swimmers. Cats are better swimmers than people normally and therefore you would tend to save the man first and then the cat secondly if the cat required it.

The boyfriend's enlightened (for me 🤔💕) attitude is in advance of the general attitude of humankind in general as the world is still developing and becoming more civilised. When the world is truly civilised perhaps in many thousands of years time (if ever) we will treat humans and animals in the same way.

There are instances in some advanced developed countries were cats and animals do have considerable rights. In the UK the Animal Welfare Act 2006 provides certain rights to animals at the outset under the law. Break the law and you are a criminal if successfully prosecuted.

In the Spanish family courts, animals are treated a bit like children in divorce proceedings. The court must look at the parties' abilities to look after the animal and consider the animal's welfare. These are the basic rules concerning caring for a child. In other words, animals are treated as sentient beings in divorce proceedings with some important rights.

What do you think about the boyfriend's attitude?

---------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Indigenous Sami reindeer herders support Gaza in protesting against Israel

The Sami reindeer herders are descendants of northern Europe's nomadic people and it said they can trace their roots back to the end of the last Ice Age about 10,000 years ago. They have been practising traditional reindeer herding since the 17th century. It is much more than a job. It is a way of life. Their historical lands have been divided up by the creation of four different countries across which the Sami people now live: Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia.

Sami child. Image: MikeB under license.

"Our bodies know the pain"

The words above where spoken by Ella Marie Haetta Isaksen, a Sami activist and artist widely known for her singing.

The Al Jazeera article by Shafi Musaddique about the reindeer herders of Norway is, I think, very poignant. The journalist says that the Sami people of Norway sympathise with the Palestinians in Gaza because "our bodies know the pain". 

The Sami's work and lifestyle defines them. They are very connected to nature in an old fashion way; something which the modern human does not follow. It's one of the great problems of modern life. People are disconnected from nature.

Connected to nature

The Sami people are respected for their connection with nature. They say that they don't live off the land but live within it. The problem is they are seeing their lands being destroyed. Europe's oldest and last remaining indigenous people are under very severe threat because of a range of issues impacting their lifestyle.

Huma rights abuses against the Sami

Arguably, there's been a long line of historical abuses perpetrated against the Sami people including:

Forced assimilation: the Sami faced policies designed to erase their culture, traditional way of life and languages. The programmes included forced relocations and boarding schools where Sami children were forbidden to speak their language. There was a suppression of cultural practices.

"Scientific" racism: the Sami people were subjected to dehumanising research. It was practised under the guise of "racial science", a concept which has now been discredited. It involved measuring skulls and forced sterilisation under the guise of eugenics.

Land dispossession: the Sami's traditional lands were seized for forestry and mining and later for green energy projects like wind farms. The core of their lives, reindeer herding was severely disrupted. This negatively impacted their culture and livelihood.

Present-day challenges

We can move forward to the present and there are further challenges which are gradually chipping away at the lifestyle of the Sami people.

Environmental threats: as mentioned wind farms, resource extraction and mining and other industrial projects are taking place on Sami lands which is destroying their culture. The projects damage grazing, disrupt migration routes for the reindeer and pollute water sources.

Limited self-determination: there has been some recognition of Sami rights but governments (four governments as mentioned) often make decisions affecting the Sami people without proper consultation and without respecting their lifestyles and traditional land use.

Discrimination and hate speech: there is prejudice against the Sami people, discrimination and hate speech. This, as can be imagined affects their well-being, emotional health, mental health and has a negative impact upon their general lifestyle.

Consequences

These human rights abuses and injustices have far-reaching consequences on them.

Loss of culture and identity: their language has been suppressed together with traditional practices. There is a loss of cultural heritage. A weakening of Sami identity.

Economic hardship: being dispossessed of their lands has caused economic hardship. It has disrupted their livelihoods resulting in them being dependent on government support. This undermines their integrity and their self-esteem.

Health issues: having suffered a loss of culture and discrimination, there are mental health problems and high rates of suicide within some Sami communities.

Resisting these abuses

The Sami people appear to be fighting back in resisting these human rights abuses. What they are doing includes the following.

International advocacy: they are bringing their causes to international bodies such as the UN in order to pressure the countries in which they live to force them to respect their rights.

Land rights activism: they are fighting against the developers of the projects that damage their lands by taking legal action such as a landmark case against the Fosen wind farm company in Norway.

Cultural revitalisation: they are working to revive traditional practices and to promote the Sami culture and their languages within their communities and further afield.

They are described as not being a monolithic group and people had different points of view about their human rights and their existence.

My comment: personally, I am very sympathetic towards them. It's a great shame that these traditional peoples are abused like this. It brings to mind the Aboriginal Australians, who've been abused and the Native Americans in the United States. They've all been abused by Europeans. The Europeans travelled to North America and abused the wildlife and the Native Americans. The Europeans were transported to Australia where they abused the Aboriginal Australians who were there tens of thousands of years before them. It's a great shame that a so-called civilised race, the Europeans, were so badly behaved towards indigenous people and their lifestyles. Pure ignorance and arrogance. The same attitude which resulted in the mass slaughter of the tiger (as pests) in India during the Raj.

------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Bunch of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) police beat up woman selling vegetables

NEWS AND COMMENT: This is the tweet: "The Communist regime’s dog-like city management officials, beating a poor woman who sells vegetables! It appears her husband is forced to watch this scene! Beasts! #CCPChina".

Do they need a license to sell vegetables in China? What has she done wrong? That is not the point though. The point is that if she has done something wrong the police should either caution her or after spelling out her rights regarding evidence arrest her for violating a specific law.

But this is China where they kill dogs in the street all the time by beating. Where cats are stolen for the cat meat market in their many thousands and where the f*** police prefer to beat up a woman rather than abide by the law.

Note that her husband is retrained while he is forced to watch this crime by the police whose job it is to stop crime.

If they had owned a dog, it would have been killed there and then. An example of poor human rights in China. As you can expect animal right are pretty well non-existent in China. You don't want to be a dog in China. You really wouldn't.

Chinese police beat up woman trading in vegetables. Screenshot.

-----

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.