Friday Links — September 19, 2008 September 19, 2008
Posted by Fatemeh in Links.Tags: Muslim women, News
trackback
- Dr. Aafia Siddiqui’s 12-year-old son has been handed over to Pakistani authorities. More from MuslimMatters.
- A Muslim convert was refused burial in a Tunisian Muslim cemetery because she did not have an Arab surname.
- An Algerian woman and her daughter were murdered by her son.
- A female suicide bomber kills 22 in Diyala, Iraq.
- The hopes of Afghan school girls (and boys).
- Soraya Tehrani writes about drugs and Iranian women.
- A Moroccan theologian who has been sued for claiming that girls can wed at nine reiterates his stance.
- Though Iranian women have made inroads in public social and economic roles, their domestic roles are still the same.
- Teachers in Denmark worry that Muslim schoolchildren are at a disadvantage if they fast for Ramadan.
- The Saudi Gazette covers hijab styles in the media.
- Samar Fatany writes about moderation in faith.
- Bangladesh has asked a top lawyer in the country to mediate between Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia.
- A law in Singapore will soon make it easier for ex-wives to receive payments from their ex-husbands.
- A fashion show in Saudi Arabia will focus on “veiled woman.” More from the Saudi Gazette.
- Islamic courts in the U.K. can be legally binding.
- The establishment of the Secretariat on the Protection and Enhancement of Muslim Women (Senada) has been approved by the government and aims to protect Muslim women in Malaysia.
- A senior female Muslim policewoman plans to sue the U.K.’s police for racial discrimination and bullying.
- Iran’s Dr. Yasaman Farzan receives the prestigious International Union of Pure and Applied Physics’ Young Scientist Prize in Particle Physics.
- A state in Malaysia bans women from performing in front of a mixed-sex audience.
- Feministing covers A Jihad for Love.
- Dr. Qanta Ahmed’s book gets some more press! Via Progressive Muslima News.
- (rolling eyes) Muslim women like having pretty hair, too! Oooooooooooh! They’re not so different, after all!
- Saudiwoman’s Weblog explains the relationship between Saudi women and their drivers.
- A Muslim family worries about the resurgence of Islamophobia in Oregon.
- The National examines a Syrian group of female preachers called the Qubeisiat.
- Samira Laouni speaks to the men’s half of the mosque.
- Cambodian Muslim students will be allowed to wear head scarves once the new school year starts.
- A Muslim woman says she’s been fired from her job at a Seattle, Washington, Best Western for continuing to wear the headscarf she’s been wearing since she began working there.
- Achelois ponders on Muslim women and Greek comedy.
- Hala_In_USA discusses “airing dirty laundry” and the guardianship of Saudi women. Via Global Comment Online.
- A film about the stoning of Soraya M. opens at Toronto’s film festival.
- A bill in Indonesia’s parliament will define pornography as “acts that incite sexual desire.” Vague, wouldn’t you say? Here’s a good post on the negative impact of such a law.
- Haya al-Manie proposes institutional safeguards for problems posed by domestic maids.
- Arab News discusses public opinion polls about Saudi women’s rights.
- Al Jazeera looks at the hijab as fashion statement in Egypt.
- Asharq Alawsat reports that domestic violence cases in Saudi Arabia drop 80% during Ramadan.
- The Nigerian man with 86 wives has refused to divorce all but four of them, despite earlier reports. So he was arrested. And has gotten himself 86 lawyers; one for each wife, I guess.
- The BBC looks at the problems Eritrean women face through three women.
- The Guardian discusses Ramadan soap operas.
- Faisal al Yafai writes a post about Egyptian sexual harassment.
- ALL THINGS PAKISTAN ponders about the rape rate in Pakistan. Via Global Voices Online.
- Payvand News features Noushin Ahmadi Khorasani’s views of Ahmedinejad’s government and women’s rights.
- SaudiAmber reviewsThe Women.
- During Ramadan, an illegal maid racket thrives in Saudi Arabia.
- Princess Lulwa of Saudi Arabia died this week at the age of 80. May Allah give her peace.
- Bangladesh’s former Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, has been allowed to return to Bangladesh to contest elections.
- Global Voices Online discusses divorce and women working in Egypt.
- Islam in Europe looks at online dating sites for Muslims that advertise polygynous marriage though it’s illegal in Sweden.
- IslamOnline reports on the removal of barriers to exercise for women.
- Menassat profiles the first online magazine for LGBT Muslims, based in Beirut.
- Nadz writes about her experiences at a Global Fund for Women conference in Morocco.
- Payvand News interviews Elnaz Ansari, an Iranian women’s activist.
- Shirkat Gah suggests a letter-writing campaign for the women who were buried alive in Pakistan. Via WLUML.
- Nayereh Tohidi writes about the state of Iran’s laws after the shelving of a sexist law on polygyny.
- Women in the Philippines are calling for a ceasefire in Mindanao.
- The University Daily Kansan looks at Muslim women who wear the headscarf.
- Social enterprises are one way to help underrepresented communities.
- Mauritian women are active in grassroots campaigning, but are still not present in larger political bodies.
- Indonesian rights groups call for an end to child slavery in Malaysia.
- Saudi Arabia announced 1,000 scholarships for Saudi women to become nurses in order to address the country’s nursing shortage. Sabria Jawhar gives her opinions. Via Global Voices Online.
- Sara discusses her thoughts on hypocrisy in Ramadan. Via Global Voices Online.
- Fann 3arabi features artist Hend Al Mansour.
- Remember Nujood? The Yemeni girl who got herself a divorce? She’s back at school. Via Yemen Journey.
- Fatemeh Keshavarz writes about a disturbing trend in Islamophobia. Via Islamify.
- Islam in Europe profiles a Danish Muslim fashion house and raises the concerns of Rotterdam’s school district that girls from immigrant backgrounds aren’t returning to school after the summer.
- Saudi Arabia’s only film production company run by women will bring a different point of view about Saudi Arabia to the world.
- Payvand News highlights an Iranian organization working to transform disadvantaged women’s lives in Iran.
- Susan El-Baneh and her new husband died in the attack on the Yemen-based U.S. embassy. May Allah grant them peace.
- SaudiAmber takes a look at a book about the veil.
- The New Nation interviews Ayesha Jala about the position of women in contemporary Muslim society.
Immigrant women, seeking status change, face forced vaccination for sexually transmitted disease
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/09/18/immigrant-women-seeking-status-adjustment-face-forced-vaccination
The vaccine is Gardasil, the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine–also the most expensive vaccine on the market and the only vaccine to be approved for use in only one sex.
The article author concludes:
Instead of mandating vaccines for immigrant women’s bodies, the U.S. government should increase access to health information and services that are unbiased, age-appropriate, culturally-competent and non-coercive. Mandating a vaccine that specifically targets young non-citizen women is both sexist and xenophobic. It will only add to the current anxieties among many communities of color about the vaccine and the government’s interest in vaccinating a particular community, in this case, immigrant women.
I should add that I posted the above link because it makes some provocative points about such topics as the increased costs (green card fees tripled last year) and the obvious lack of consideration for what immigrant women may think of this, but overall I believe all women in the US should eventually be required to be immunized against the human papillomavirus. I put this disease in the same category as polio: a preventable epidemic.
Actually Salaam, a legislation is being “considered” in Canada to enforce the vaccination for all girls in Grade 7 along with the usual hep.B vaccination given in junior high. I’m not suprized though, because it is more expensive for the Canadian health care system to treat women with ovarian cancer then to simply pay for the vaccination. And if it could save lifes of women from one type of ovarian cancer than more to it. However mandating this expensive vaccines to only immigrant women, who most likely already have had the human papillomavirus is none sense. I don’t know their ages but (”I think” the statistics demonstrated by the age of 30 most people have already come in contact with this virus, it’s just deadly for some people). Unless you mandated it for everyone like in the case of Hep. B, or TB than you can’t marginalize a few.
P.S. I hope we as Muslim women and men could raise more awareness on Childrens Rights and in particulary Child Molestation in our communities. It exists here in North America and it also exists abroad. It only takes one person to make a challenge, such as the Moroccan lawyer filing a complaint against the Skeik that issued a Fatwa on marrying and having sex with children. What’s also* dangerously ignorant about this Sheik’s comment were “A nine-year-old girl has the same sexual capacities like a woman of twenty and over”. hmm… I smell something very ignorant!
We have done tremendous work raising awareness on the abuse of women and the abuse of men (which does exist), I think many people including myself tend to forget about children, but I know we could do GREAT WORK in this area as well. INSHALLAH.
So thanks for this Friday post— I’m happy someone step-up to the plate… and I hope it keeps other public figures on their toes.
Last year the Texas governor tried to mandate the HPV vaccine, and there was a huge response from the conservative Christian crowd, as Salon’s Broadsheet describes here:
Today, Lone Star State Gov. Rick Perry signed an executive order to require all girls entering sixth grade to be vaccinated against human papillomavirus, according to the Associated Press. Perry, a conservative Republican opposed to abortion and stem cell research, avoided the battle such an aim would incite in the Legislature by issuing the order himself. Despite the fact that we can now successfully vaccinate against HPV — the most common cause of cervical cancer, which kills 4,000 women yearly — many conservatives are up in arms over the implications of inoculating young girls against a sexually transmitted disease. To do so would undercut messages about safe sex, possibly encouraging sexual activity, they argue.
This line of reasoning is so loony, so unabashedly callous, it’s amazing to hear it so widely parroted. It essentially deems naughty girls who do not heed parental warnings about the dangers of unsafe sex as expendable — either to an HPV, a disease we can prevent, or, in the worst cases, cervical cancer.
Hmmmm, where have I heard this line of reasoning before?
But I do have to acknowledge an ethical conundrum here. If you assert that young women don’t have the right to control whether a vaccine is injected in their bodies, how do you also consistently hold the position that the anti-abortion movement should keep its laws off your body?
Salam,
As Gardasil has been mentioned, I feel I must post a link:
http://www.blueridgenow.com/article/20080820/ZNYT04/808200380&title=Drug_Makers__x2019__Push_Leads_to_Cancer_Vaccines__x2019__Fast_Rise
Getting back to this blog:
The article Oregon seemed a bit sensationalist. Unless I missed something, there was nothing to indicate a recent event that made the man worry about his wife going out for the shopping – other than the elections.
Or put another way, perhaps the caption is misleading (”resurgence of Islamophobia in Oregon” – perhaps “in Oregon” should be placed earlier to emphasize that it refers to the couple, not Islamophobia).
Your link to pakistaniat is malformed – you need to fix it. Speaking of that link, I guess I have some issues with it. This has come up quite often in the past.
The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (http://www.hrcp-web.org) compiles statistics for each year. You can find them in their Publications section. For 2007, there were a total of 731 reported rapes across the country. For the previous year, it was 800-900.
Two years ago, the following BBC article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6148590.stm) was brought up on some forums, replete with Muslim bashing (in the forums – not the article), because it said that in Pakistan a woman is raped every two hours, and gangraped every eight. There’s a link to the HRCP site, and at that time I confirmed that the statistics came from there (can’t find them now).
So let’s see (numbers below are reported rapes):
That’s a total of 15 rapes a day across the country.
That’s 5475 rapes a year – much higher than the earlier figures, but I’ll accept it for the sake of argument (and because I’m sure the HRCP claimed them).
Let’s assume a population of 150 million – half that of the US (it’s actually more like 170 million).
So let’s scale this up to the US population. That would be 10950 rapes a year.
In 2005, the US had almost 94000 reported rapes. ( http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/violent_crime/forcible_rape.html)
Looking at it all naively, that means a woman is 8.5 times more likely to be raped in the US than in Pakistan – even after making the various concessions I did above.
(This, BTW, killed off almost all discussion on the topic on that forum).
As I said, the analysis is naive. I’ve mentioned these statistics to a bunch of Pakistanis, and they’re the least willing to accept them – saying “Yes, but those are only reported rapes! There are probably many, many more.”
I have two responses:
1) If only 1 out of every 9 rapes were reported, then at worst Pakistan would be at the US level, and still below Canada’s. Needless to say, that’s perhaps unacceptable to many Muslims. (But then again, I originally looked at all this to counter claims coming from non-Muslims about misogyny among Muslims in Pakistan…)
2) No doubt, I’ll grant that rapes go unreported. The real question is, “What percentage?”. Without any studies or numbers to go on, I’m not going to simply accept claims like 99.5% going unreported. I DID see a mention of a PhD study in the 2007 HRCP report indicating that perhaps about a third DO get reported (although many of those then back down on any attempts at prosecuting the accused).
I don’t mean to belittle the stigma that may exist in reporting such things in Pakistan. But at least I’m willing to simply shrug and say “I don’t know the percentage” rather than make assumptions on it without a sound basis.
Of course, a number of rapes in the US go unreported as well. Back when I researched this, I saw claims that over half perhaps go unreported (sorry, don’t have link handy, and don’t take my statement as fact anyway).
But really, 100 rapes in Karachi per day? 365,000 rapes per year in Karachi alone? In a city of 13 million? The equivalent of that in the US is 8.42 million rapes per year…
And please don’t misunderstand me: I don’t mean to imply that the US is the standard to strive for. My point is twofold: 1) The statistics seem a lot more benign than it is in some industrialized countries (in case you ever get into a discussion with non-Muslims). 2) We shouldn’t just accept figures unless they’re justified.
Finally, if someone DOES have good statistics, backed by studies, I want to read them!
Ugh. Bad figures. That should be:
“But really, 100 rapes in Karachi per day? 36500 rapes per year in Karachi alone? In a city of 13 million? The equivalent of that in the US is 842,000 rapes per year…
Link fixed.
Dude:
I understand what you’re trying to say. But I’m not really not comfortable with this whole “let’s compare to America” stuff. I mean, sometimes its as if people do it to deflect responsibility from Pakistan to other countries. See it happens in other countries as well, why point out Pakistan. Even the numbers you give, REGARDLESS of what happens in the US or other countries, are too many.
(And considering Canada’s population is minuscule compared to Pakistan I doubt there are more rapes here than in Pakistan – where did you get your stat for Canada?)
Sobia:
First, let me just address the Canada point. I didn’t mean Canada has more rapes than the US or Pakistan. It has a higher rate of rapes. If you’re a woman there, you have a higher probability of being raped than in the US (more than twice the likelihood). I got the statistics from http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita
(BTW, calculating from that page, I get almost 22000 rapes in Canada – so it seems higher than Pakistan even on an absolute comparison).
I never did further research in Canada – if you dispute the figures on that page and have better ones, I’d like to know for future reference. Also, as you can see, the US is number 9, still quite a bit worse than European countries.
If we accept the 5475 figure for Pakistan, it would be ranked 49th. If we accept the 900 figure it would be 63rd.
I already pointed out that the goal wasn’t entirely to compare with the US, but more of a “counter” to criticism from others (particularly Americans). If people (generally non-Muslims) wish to be critical of rapes in Pakistan, I’ll insist that at least they should be critical of places that are worse. If they are, then I’m comfortable with their criticism of Pakistan.
One could look at this whole thing from various angles. For some, any rate of rape is bad. I’m generally not sympathetic to that viewpoint – I think it’s unreasonable to expect rapes to go down to 0. Society should always work hard to reduce it as much as possible, but feeling guilty or bad because it isn’t 0 is a bit silly. Especially when you have 170 million people.
Another perspective is that the issue is not the number of rapes that occur – which may be lower than, say, the global average – but to look at the problem of society’s relative acceptance of it. I suspect that was partly the point of the post, and I do sympathize with it. I’m just not going to accept wild statistics being thrown around as was done there.
Simply put, my comment was a bit reactionary, because I often see an absolutist disapproving stance towards Pakistan when it comes to rape – perhaps partially because of the whole Hudood ordinance fuss a few years ago. This comes from both Muslims and non-Muslims, Pakistanis and non. In my discussions with them, it’s quite clear that they consider the problem being very bad, but fail to actually have any perspective on what “bad” is. Hence the comparsion with the US.
My response to your comment has been long-winded. Brevity is not my forte. But given what I’ve written in my comments, and given your statement:
“Even the numbers you give, REGARDLESS of what happens in the US or other countries, are too many. ”
Let me ask you what I generally ask others. How is it too many? What figure is not “too many” for you? From which angle are you saying it’s too much? Is it because you think there really are many, many more rapes than the numbers I gave (and if so, do you have anything reliable a la a study to back it up)? Or is it something entirely different that I have not taken into account?
dude, I appreciate the contextualizing of rape rates. I think that’s necessary. However:
Check yourself. One rape is too many. Anywhere and everywhere.
I agree with Fatemeh. One rape is one too many. And THAT is what I mean by too many.
I still don’t think there is a need to compare. We know rape occurs everywhere and that it is a problem everywhere. I remember when the Mukhtar Mai case came out, many Pakistanis were saying the same thing. It happens in the US so why is Pakistan being singled out. I understand that we don’t want to make it seem as if it’s more common in Pakistan than other countries but in some ways it seems if the international attention wasn’t there, Mukhtar Mai would never have gotten justice. The Pakistani justice system is not all that sympathetic toward women.
You’re right about the point of looking at society’s acceptance of rape in Pakistan, as well as what they consider rape to be. I sometimes can’t help but wonder if in the sub-continent, and this includes India as well, people think of rape in only a sexual sense and not a violent one. Its as if rape is a sexual act enacted violently as opposed to what is commonly understood today – a violent act enacted through sex. I mean, I have seen Indian films in which the hero will contemplate raping the heroine. Or they will depict rape in a sexually arousing way.
At the end of the day a rape is a rape is a rape – regardless of where, when, who, and how many.
One rape is too many. Anywhere and everywhere.
From a certain standpoint, sure. Likewise for murder and theft.
But should a rape occurring take precedence over all the other issues that concern the country/world?
That was my point. We have a finite amount of time on this world, and it’s not enough to tackle every problem – that’s why I don’t view (some) things on an absolute scale: I have to prioritize. For me personally, once the rate of rape goes below some threshold, I’d like resources to be spent on bigger or more prevalent problems.
Sobia:
I remember when the Mukhtar Mai case came out, many Pakistanis were saying the same thing. It happens in the US so why is Pakistan being singled out.
If it really did happen often elsewhere, I would ask the same question. However, I’m not sure it does. For me, that case and similar ones stood out because of the implicit acceptance in society – not because of the actual act. Had it occurred and the perpetrators brought to swift justice, I would not have been too bothered. What made that case, and others like it, noteworthy was the lack of willingness for the authorities to do anything about it. Because of it, I feel the fuss that was created over it was well worth it.
You’re right about the point of looking at society’s acceptance of rape in Pakistan, as well as what they consider rape to be
It’s scary. I’ve met no shortage of Pakistani (males) who insist that most cases of rape in Pakistan aren’t. Their reasoning is solely: “Given the societal structure, it’s very difficult for a rape to occur. All the woman has to do is scream and all the neighbors will come for help. That she didn’t scream indicates that she was a willing participant.”
Those who say this are not misogynists. They’re just totally clueless on not only rape, but on fear in general. And yes, I agree: Almost all of them view rape as a sexually driven act.
So I’m all for rape awareness and educating the public about it.
(I hope none of what I said here sounds like a contradiction from my earlier comments – they shouldn’t be)
“That she didn’t scream indicates that she was a willing participant.”
This is not an uncommon attitude, even in the west, it’s very typically “blame the victim”, but I have a really hard time understanding that this view is borne out of cluelessness. Rather, I think it comes from a very misogynistic and sexualized perception of women in general. It’s like the snuff porn that was really popular in the 80’s. (When the porn industry glorified depicting women being killed in the middle of an orgasm because “she likes it”).
“Those who say this are not misogynists.”
Then what_are_they?
Clueless and living in a patriarchal society that benefits them?
@ dude: I have to agree with s.c. in the fact that swift justice for rape survivors doesn’t happen regularly–anywhere.
While I see your points, I always bristle at the phrase “there are bigger issues” when it comes to stuff like this. That phrase is used to silence people and it’s been used to silence Muslim women for a long time (”we can’t give you the right to vote now, we have bigger issues.” or “we can’t allow you to get into the workforce now, we have bigger issues.”) This phrase diminishes the importance of the issue (whatever it is) to those who are fighting for their right to whatever.
I doubt that’s the way you intended it, I just wanted to put out there that I really hate that phrase and I don’t really think it has a place when we’re talking about issues that effect quite a lot of women.
@s.c.:
it’s very typically “blame the victim”, but I have a really hard time understanding that this view is borne out of cluelessness.
Because when you know nothing about fear and rape, then it sounds very logical. If they don’t realize that the victims are generally incapable of screaming, then they’ll think it’s natural that they should scream. How do you actually expect them to automatically know how a woman will behave in those circumstances?
Let’s say I own a store and one night many valuable items disappear (and I have insurance on them). I call the police to report a burglary. They notice that the lock has not been forced, and all the evidence points to the burglars just walking in. The police will find it suspicious and contemplate the likelihood that I’m trying to scam the insurance agency. It’s not because the police hate me.
The difference is that their reasoning is based on experience and reality. Whereas those of those Pakistanis is borne out of a false reality. It’s not misogyny, it’s ignorance.
Calling others misogynistic simply because they don’t agree with every one of your views on women or on rape will make you part of the problem – especially when other explanations exist. Each and every one of us likely has a ridiculous notion or two rolling around in our heads.
(And yes, a lot of folks in the US think likewise. The reason, I suspect, for both is popular culture – especially if you watch older, nonserious movies. Women always screamed when afraid. I’m not kidding here.)
Then what_are_they?
Clueless and living in a patriarchal society that benefits them?
Basically, yes. That it benefits them does not make them misogynistic. Unless you also think millions of ordinary Americans just happen to hate Iraqis. And millions of people around the world hate all those workers who work in sweatshops to create the clothes many wear.
It’s not hatred – it’s ignorance.
@Fatemeh:
I’ll take your point and perhaps rephrase it when I speak to women in the future. Is that what you intended?
Frankly, though, it’s a perfectly good and valid phrase that just has happened to have been hijacked.
As for “bigger issues”, I’m never of the opinion that no efforts should be made. I’m not one of those who thinks we should not fund space programs and fund medical research instead. My only concern at times is the proportion in efforts.
In any case, on this and many other issues, I have no problem with people who want to dedicate their efforts to tackling a problem. I myself focus on certain things even when I fully know that there are more serious issues out there.
I only get upset when:
1) Someone comes to me and insists I should focus my efforts elsewhere. I suppose I may have sounded that way in my earlier comments, but it was not my intention.
2) Taxpayer money is involved and I think too much is allocated at the neglect of something else.
However, even if no taxpayer money is involved, when I see society as a whole putting too much emphasis on something I feel is minor, and neglecting that which I feel is major, I do point it out. I don’t insist any particular person should change, but my goal is to get them to think about it.
(I don’t want to create more arguments, but one of those cases is when you look at the major conflicts raging about in the world, and see that a small conflict domninates the press, whereas a major conflict with a an order of magnitude greater casualties is neglected).
(Brevity’s not my forte, as I already said).
I see your point, and yes, that is what I was intending. I’m also in the camp that likes to treat the larger problem (structural inequalities and skewed perceptions of women, for example) that causes things like rape, but we can’t forget that to someone who has survived rape (or another outcome of larger problems), it’s a big issue.
Rape in itself is a big issue. Why are we minimizing it? It has been used for centuries to subjugate and humiliate people into submission thus perpetuating oppression. I’m a little surprised that Dude, you consider rape to be something minor.
I’m thinking I should probably just shut my mouth at this point, but …
Sobia:
I’m a little surprised that Dude, you consider rape to be something minor.
I was wondering where you got that idea until I read:
However, even if no taxpayer money is involved, when I see society as a whole putting too much emphasis on something I feel is minor, and neglecting that which I feel is major, I do point it out. I don’t insist any particular person should change, but my goal is to get them to think about it.
Perhaps you misunderstood me. Of course, on an absolutist scale, a rape is not minor. Nor is a theft. Nor is speeding, when it results in an accident.
In the paragraph I quoted, I was talking about society as a whole, and speaking from a relativistic viewpoint – not an absolutist one. Put this way: If I’m a mayor of a city of 10+ million, and at some point this year a rape occurs, I can’t divert as many resources from the fire department, and from the public hospitals, and from traffic police, as I like. If I did, I’d be in a much bigger mess – even if I took care of the rape issue.
I’d be forced to look at the scale of all these problems in the city, and try to give each resources in proportion to the gravity of the problem. And that may mean that if I don’t have that many rapes, but do have an epidemic of robberies that the resources I’d allocate for the former would be “minor” in comparison to those for the robberies.
Would you disagree?
That wouldn’t change the fact that an individual being raped is still horrific.
I’m not seeing the two as being incompatible – perhaps I’m not getting my point across.
Perhaps this may clear up what I mean.
In 2006, Detroit had a murder rate of 47.3 per 10000 people – the highest of any sizable city in the country.
That’s over 4000 murders in the city.
If by next year they could bring it down to 2 murders (not rate, but overall), would you agree with the following statement?
“Homicide is not a big problem in Detroit.”
I don’t know alot about Pakistani culture in Pakistan, to know how rape is treated in society. However, it seems to me like there is alot of stigma around being a victim of rape in Pakistan (this is just from what I have read, so please correct me if I am wrong), as well as a woman’s sexuality being tied up with ‘honour’ in Pakistani society. If there’s a large stigma around it, I have a feeling women would normally opt not to scream while they’re being raped so that everyone would hear. This is also true for the west.
Also, would a woman scream if its domestic rape? Studies have shown that in the west, most women are raped by people they know well, is it the same for Pakistan? If it is then we should consider the fact that domestic rape is considered to be ‘lesser’ (or not even considered ‘rape’) and often goes unreported. Furthermore, (this is just based on a women’s studies course I took, I have not researched this) countries all have different methods of reporting rape, some consider domestic rape as rape, others do not.
The issue of allocating resources may have alot to do with how the justice system defined rape, and if rapes are being reported accurately or not.
Your point about homocide is interesting, its alot harder to treat homocide and rape as the same thing. To be crude, if you’re the victim of a homocide (ie – someone killed you) then you’re no longer around to deal with the long term psychological effects of such a crime and fight for your rights in a really flawed justice system at the same time (although I do not mean to downplay the devastating effects this may have on near and dear ones), the way that rape victims so often do
Theft (assuming it is theft of material possessions, like the store example you mentioned, and that it is not a case of theft + rape) is also different because if someone took away your merchandise, you yourself as a person were not physically subjugated and humiliated, even though financially and security-wise you may feel vulnerable.
I believe in Pakistan many rapes are by people women know. Many women are raped by their husbands. But I have also heard of women/girls being raped by their cousins, uncles, etc. Additionally, many girls who work as domestic help will get raped by their employers. This seems to be the case quite often. But I am not sure of numbers.
I would fear that in Pakistan stranger rape is probably a little more common than it is here in the West. There have been instances of kidnapping, or women being raped during a home invasion. Again not sure of numbers.
But overall I would imagine that acquaintance rape is also more common there as it is here.
Dude:
Thanks for clarifying.
I understand your point about homicide in Detroit. The only problem is there aren’t just 2 rapes a year. The numbers of rapes are on the high side nonetheless and therefore not a minor problem.
And lets not look at total populations when we talk about rape of women. Only count the population of women when speaking of rape of women. So that would cut most of your numbers in half roughly. This greatly increases the rate of rape.
Ugh. First, let me correct a ridiculous figure. The number of homicides in Detroit was just over 400 in one year, not 4000 (it should have been per 100,000 people, not 10,000). I don’t think it changes my point, though.
Detroit is bad, but not that bad!
@s.c.:
If there’s a large stigma around it, I have a feeling women would normally opt not to scream while they’re being raped so that everyone would hear
That’s actually not what I meant. They don’t scream because they’re incapable of it. Sudden fear makes it almost impossible for anyone (male or female) to make sounds. When your worst fears are about to be realized, you lose your voice.
Some years ago, after making King Kong, Naomi Watts was on The Tonight Show and Jey Leno asked her about how difficult it was to scream loudly on the set (in terms of strain on the throat). She did point out that the whole concept was silly, because when someone is terrified, they don’t scream.
(Not to imply that Naomi Watts is an expert on anything, but her point is valid).
Your point about homocide is interesting, its alot harder to treat homocide and rape as the same thing.
My point was not to say they are the same. It was that by any ordinary viewpoint, homicides are really bad. Yet, looking at a societal level, people do have a notion of an acceptably low rate. And likewise for rape (at least some do).
@Sobia:
I understand your point about homicide in Detroit. The only problem is there aren’t just 2 rapes a year.
Well, OK. It sounds like you’re willing to accept 2 rapes in the city of Detroit in one year (currently at almost 600 per year) as being a low figure. Is that correct? Because I got a different notion from an earlier comment of yours.
The numbers of rapes are on the high side nonetheless and therefore not a minor problem.
But that’s the crux of my point all along. IF you’d consider 2 rapes a year low, and also talk about “high” (here and in a previous comment), then you should have a notion of what constitutes a “high” rate.
Obviously, most (including myself) have not really thought deeply about what I’d consider “high”, and I don’t reasonably expect you to answer me with a clear figure unless you’ve put a lot of thought into it. I can’t easily come up with a simple threshold figure myself. Perhaps a range. Doing that in a vacuum is a bit hard – which is why I resort to comparing with others. Perhaps the US was a bad example, because their rate is somewhat high. But if you won’t do comparisons, and do accept a notion of a low rape rate, then you need to define what is considered a worrisome rate, and first start any discussion on the matter with that rate, so that others know what you’re talking about.
And lets not look at total populations when we talk about rape of women. Only count the population of women when speaking of rape of women. So that would cut most of your numbers in half roughly. This greatly increases the rate of rape.
It greatly increases the rate of rape everywhere – roughly by a factor of 2. In my comparisons earlier, this doesn’t affect anything I said, because all quantities are scaled by the same amount.