Taliban exclude women from workforce but need financial support from the West

The recent news is that the Taliban have added one more restriction to the lives of women in Afghanistan to the already long list which is crushing to women and girls. The Taliban have banned women from hearing other women’s voices in its latest attempt to impose a hard-line version of Islamic law. It is an impossible situation for women and girls and totally unacceptable by Western standards and I expect by the standards of any other Muslim country.

In applying these bizarre, misogynistic restrictions they have excluded women from the workforce which must severely harm the country's economy. And yet the Taliban are dependent on ongoing and substantial Western financial aid to keep the country afloat. Bizarre.

Here is some more detail on this is absurd state of affairs.

The Taliban’s restrictions on Afghan women and girls are extensive and have intensified since they took over Afghanistan in August 2021. These restrictions primarily stem from an ultra-conservative interpretation of Islamic law and are enforced in ways that drastically curtail women’s rights and freedoms in daily life. Here are some of the main restrictions the Taliban has imposed:

1. Education Ban

• Secondary and University Education: Since their return to power, the Taliban banned girls from attending high school, and in 2023 they extended this ban to universities, effectively cutting off formal education for women and girls beyond sixth grade.
• Vocational Training and Tutoring Centers: Private tutoring centers that educate women and girls have also been shut down, and alternative education initiatives have faced restrictions.
• International Scholarships and Travel for Education: Afghan women are also prevented from traveling abroad to pursue higher education or accessing international scholarships.

2. Employment and Economic Restrictions

• Government and NGO Employment Ban: Afghan women have been barred from working in government offices and NGOs, with few exceptions, which has significantly affected their economic independence.
• Employment Outside the Home: Women’s opportunities to work outside the home are extremely limited, particularly in professional fields. This has led to a sharp decline in women’s participation in the Afghan workforce.
• Family Dependency: These bans have forced many women to depend solely on male family members for financial support, which can be especially difficult in cases where women are widows or the sole providers in their households.

3. Public and Social Life Restrictions

• Dress Code and Hijab Requirements: Women are required to wear a full-body covering, typically a burqa, in public, with limited exceptions.
• Restrictions on Movement: Women are generally not allowed to travel alone; a male guardian, known as a mahram, must accompany them for any travel beyond a short distance.
• Ban on Accessing Public Parks and Gyms: In 2022, the Taliban banned women from parks, gyms, and other recreational facilities, further restricting social interaction and access to public spaces.
• Limitations on Personal Expression: Women are restricted from speaking loudly in public or raising their voices. The recent ban on women hearing other women’s voices also suggests restrictions on social interaction, media, and music.

4. Media and Cultural Restrictions

• Representation in Media: Women have been banned from appearing in TV dramas and other media productions. Female newscasters and reporters are no longer allowed to present or cover news on television.
• Music and Singing: In addition to limiting women’s roles in media, the Taliban has enforced bans on music and singing in public spaces, including music performed or enjoyed by women.

5. Legal Rights and Protections

• Marriage and Family Law: Women are often pressured into arranged marriages, including underage marriages, which are legally and culturally enforced under Taliban governance.
• Protection from Violence: The Taliban has dismantled or severely limited institutions, such as family courts and shelters, that previously supported women experiencing domestic violence or abuse, leaving women vulnerable to violence without recourse to justice.
• Limited Access to Justice: Under the Taliban, Afghan women face significant barriers to accessing the legal system, particularly in cases involving disputes over marriage, divorce, custody, and inheritance, where decisions often favor male family members.

These restrictions represent a drastic rollback of the rights women had gained over the past two decades and have led to international condemnation. The lack of access to education, employment, public spaces, and even basic forms of social interaction has made Afghanistan one of the most challenging places in the world for women to live, with lasting impacts on Afghan society as a whole.

The claim that the U.S. or Western countries send $40 million in cash weekly directly to the Taliban is not accurate. However, there are nuances around international aid and financial assistance flowing into Afghanistan, primarily aimed at supporting humanitarian efforts in a country facing severe economic and humanitarian crises.

Here’s a breakdown of how this aid process works and where the funds go:

1. Humanitarian Aid Flow to Afghanistan

• Since the Taliban took control of Afghanistan in August 2021, the international community has continued to provide humanitarian aid, as the country faces severe poverty, food shortages, and healthcare crises.
• Much of this aid is managed through international organizations like the United Nations, the World Food Programme, and other humanitarian agencies, rather than being given directly to the Taliban.
• The U.S., as well as other countries and international organizations, contributes to this aid, which helps prevent economic collapse, hunger, and disease but is specifically allocated for humanitarian needs rather than government functions.

2. Afghan Central Bank and Limited Cash Infusions

• After the Taliban took over, Afghanistan’s central bank assets (mostly held overseas, particularly in the U.S.) were frozen to prevent the Taliban from accessing them.
• A small portion of these funds has since been unfrozen and distributed as cash shipments to Afghanistan, often around $40 million a week, but these funds do not go to the Taliban. They are carefully monitored and distributed by the United Nations and related organizations to support critical services and humanitarian needs, like food and healthcare.
• The aim of these cash infusions is to stabilize the economy and help prevent total collapse, which would further devastate the Afghan people, while avoiding direct support to the Taliban’s governance.

3. Restricted Taliban Access

• The Taliban have limited direct access to these funds, which are meant strictly for humanitarian purposes and are distributed through NGOs and international bodies. The U.S. has also set up mechanisms to ensure the Taliban cannot use these assets for governance or military purposes.
• The funds are tracked to ensure they are not used in ways that would violate international sanctions or end up under Taliban control.

4. Controversies and Concerns

• Despite these controls, there are concerns about the Taliban’s indirect benefit from international assistance, especially since they are effectively the governing authority. The Taliban could potentially exert influence over NGOs or other agencies distributing aid, though international organizations take measures to prevent this.
• Some argue that humanitarian aid inadvertently stabilizes Taliban rule by easing public discontent. However, the international community maintains that this aid is essential to protect Afghan civilians from severe deprivation.

In summary, while approximately $40 million is sent to Afghanistan in weekly cash shipments, these funds are strictly for humanitarian purposes and are not intended for Taliban use. They are managed by international organizations to ensure they support only humanitarian objectives, with strict oversight to prevent misuse.

Excluding women from the workforce is indeed economically detrimental, especially for a country like Afghanistan that is already on the brink of financial collapse. Preventing half of the population from participating in wealth-creating activities has significant economic and social repercussions that can accelerate the country’s economic decline. Here’s why this policy can be seen as particularly damaging in Afghanistan’s context:

1. Loss of Labor and Skills

• Afghanistan’s economy is heavily dependent on its workforce, and women have historically played vital roles in various sectors, including healthcare, education, and business.
• By barring women from the workplace, Afghanistan loses a substantial portion of its skilled labor, which can’t be easily replaced. Fields like healthcare and education, which were already under-resourced, are now struggling even more, resulting in a serious loss of service quality.
• Women in technical roles, such as engineers, economists, and administrators, also provided critical skills that were contributing to the country’s infrastructure and services.

2. Reduced Household Incomes and Rising Poverty

• Afghanistan has one of the highest poverty rates in the world, and women in the workforce provided essential income to support their families, especially in single-parent or widow-led households.
• Without female earnings, many families are unable to meet basic needs, pushing more Afghan households into poverty. This, in turn, can lead to a downward spiral of increased economic dependency, higher rates of malnutrition, and even forced child labor.

3. Impact on the GDP and Economy

• Women’s economic participation significantly boosts GDP in any country. According to the World Bank, female labor participation can directly impact national productivity and income. In Afghanistan, estimates suggest that female workers contributed notably to sectors like agriculture, manufacturing, and services.
• By excluding women from the workforce, Afghanistan has shrunk its economy, reducing its ability to generate tax revenue, attract foreign investment, and grow sustainably.

4. Isolation from International Aid and Investment

• The Taliban’s restrictions on women’s rights have led to international sanctions and limited Afghanistan’s access to the global economy. Countries and organizations that provided aid, funding, and investment are now reluctant to engage due to the Taliban’s treatment of women and girls.
• Foreign governments and agencies are more hesitant to invest in a country where half of the workforce is effectively banned from working, which further restricts Afghanistan’s economic recovery.

5. Long-Term Human Capital Damage

• Afghanistan’s young generation of women is growing up without access to education or meaningful employment opportunities, creating a “lost generation” with limited skills and job readiness.
• Over time, this depletes the country’s human capital and limits its prospects for future economic development, as education and skilled employment are foundational to an economy’s growth and innovation potential.

6. Negative Social and Health Impacts

• Social impacts from poverty, malnutrition, and lack of education compound when women are barred from contributing economically. These stressors affect family well-being, increase health risks, and create a cycle of poverty that’s hard to break.
• Additionally, Afghanistan faces a shortage of female healthcare professionals due to the employment ban, which particularly affects women’s healthcare, including maternal and reproductive services. This can lead to worsened public health outcomes and a higher mortality rate among women and children.

7. Missed Opportunities for Economic Diversification

• The Afghan economy has long been dependent on foreign aid and agriculture, but diversifying into areas like services, textiles, and small business entrepreneurship offered pathways to greater economic resilience. Women played significant roles in these sectors, especially in rural and community-based economies.
• By shutting women out, the Taliban further restricts the country’s economic diversification, leaving Afghanistan more vulnerable to economic shocks and less self-sufficient.

In Summary

By excluding women from the workforce, the Taliban is not only limiting Afghanistan’s immediate economic capacity but also stunting its long-term growth potential. The economic costs of sidelining women are high and can accelerate the country’s economic isolation and decline. Allowing women to work, on the other hand, would be an obvious step toward alleviating poverty, improving family welfare, and stabilizing the Afghan economy in the long run.

-----------

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. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

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.

Do domestic cats prefer women? Yes, in general, and I'll tell you why.

If you search on Google, "Do cats prefer women?" The answer comes back yes and some of the websites refer to a study. The DVM 360 website summarises the study. And when I read the summary my assessment of the reason why domestic cats tend (but not always) prefer women is because women prefer domestic cats!

Francisca Franken with Bean her adopted rescue cat who happens to be an Exotic Shorthair who nobody wanted because she was described as being feisty, a diva and ugly. I don't see ugliness in this face. Do you? Francisca certainly didn't. Image: Instagram.

Because women prefer domestic cats over dogs, they interact with cats more often and being female, they do so in a more gentle and respectful way generally (not always) than men. This doesn't apply across the board quite obviously. And this is not a black-and-white picture of domestic cats loving women and dogs loving men. It isn't as straightforward as that.

There is a big gray area. But the fact of the matter is that in a home where there is a man and woman, a married couple, and a cat and a dog, the woman will more likely approach the cat to interact with them. They do so nicely. The cat enjoys it. The cat wants to do it again. The cat therefore approaches the woman.

Because a cat-loving woman is bonded to her cat and intuitively begins to understand their body language signals and vocalisations, she responds to approaches by her cat in a sensitive and prompt way. She has developed an understanding about what her cat wants which would be a friendly interaction and some love and tenderness.

Or it might be a request for food or any other request if the cat meowed; and we know that the meow is basically a demand for attention and a request.

Reason

My assessment is that the reason why cats prefer women in general is because they are more likely to get what they want from women and the signs are that women instigate the interactions. In a study the researchers will see more interactions between women and cats than men with cats which gives the impression that cats prefer women. But the beginning of this preference is women being more likely to approach their cat. 

Favours

The study apparently found that cats seem to remember favours done for them and return those favours. For example, if owners comply with their cat's wishes to interact their cat will repay the compliment by complying with their owner's desires to interact. That isn't, in my view, a rational decision. It is simply that domestic cats enjoy interacting with a human being who cares for them and provides for them in a gentle and loving way.

And cats will do things that they enjoy just like people. Let's remind ourselves that domestic cats live in the human world. How they react to that depends on the world that humans create and whether it is cat friendly or hostile even slightly so. Domestic cats are reactive often. They are instinctively reactive.

Men

Now let's refer to men! What got me thinking about this was a video of a couple who adopted a cat, I think primarily to benefit the woman but the cat ended up referring the man. There is a very strong bond between man and cat in this video below. The cat's name is Milo and he is crazy about his human male companion. It's a love. It's as simple as that.

And this tells me really that cats don't really prefer women per se. They prefer people who interact with them in a very respectful kind and gentle, loving way. The cat then associates that person through their behaviour and body odour with pleasant experiences and go to them for more. Perfectly normal.

In the video it will be a bundle of nuanced behaviours by the man which provide signals to Milo that Milo will have a good experience when interacting. For example, he allows Milo to knead his chest through his vest. He tells the camera that it hurts like hell but he allows it to happen because he wants to do it for Milo. He understands that Milo is doing it because he relates to him as his mother.

The man is very tender towards Milo. His respectful and does all he can to please him. This is appreciated. It draws Milo back. It isn't about the gender of the human being. It is about their behaviour and an understanding of feline behaviour.

Pictures of cats used in myGP app cervical cancer screening campaign

In an act of enlightenment, the organisers of a campaign to encourage British women to attend a cervical cancer screening employed a picture of three cats; one hairless, one long-haired and the third shorthaired. They've equated the lack of hair or hair length on these cats to pubic hair on women and as to whether they shave or wax their hair or not. Apparently women are embarrassed to go for cervical cancer screening unless they have had their pubic hair waxed or shaved beforehand. I think that's the connection between this campaign i.e. hair length or no hair and cervical cancer.

It's caused offence in some quarters of the female population while others see the benefit of it. The key aspect of this campaign is that it has got people talking about cervical cancer screening. This is the objective because it will help encourage women to go to a clinic. This will save lives.

Some women thought it was demeaning to equate cats with cervical screening. I think it is quite enlightened because it is a kind of a fusion between women's liking of domestic cats (or that is the perception) and cervical cancer. The connection comes in the amount of hair or fur people and cats have!

It's quite imaginative in that sense. My opinion is that women have been too sensitive about this campaign. The bottom line is that it gets people talking about it. Not enough women apparently are attending screening clinics and one reason is that they can't get waxed during coronavirus lockdowns because the waxing businesses are temporarily closed down because of social distancing rules. There is a connection then with the amount of pubic hair women have and cervical cancer!!

Gayle Maxwell, a cervical cancer survivor, found it amusing and laughed at it hard. She thinks any form of awareness is fantastic and found the campaign funny. Another lady thought that it was "seriously inappropriate". They thought it was making sexualised jokes about women's reproductive health. I go back to the original point: awareness. The campaign catches the eye and that equates to awareness. It is using the obsession with pictures of cats on the Internet to achieve this. Well done I say.