She’s a misandrist OMG!!!

How many times have we come across men who whine about feminists being misandrists? Men, who refuse to accept that they in any way are offending women, assume that being men, they can judge and decide what a woman feels, thinks, deciphers and understands. Such men want to whine and create an us versus them argument instead of admitting that there is a problem which needs to be addressed and solved. This behavior is rather a pattern among many of the pseudo-enlightened, know-it-all and so-called Pakistani atheist and agnostic men.

I already blogged about it a few days ago, however, today I feel the need to write more about it. Why? Because once again the same sleazy, clichéd arguments were used by men who want to justify objectification under the argument, ‘boys will be boys’ or ‘she asked for it’ as she’s dressed a certain way. They have no hesitation in saying, she’s a misandrists for calling out a man misogynist for liking sexist jokes; women are psychopaths and need to develop a sense of humor to appreciate our sexist jokes; she needs to get laid; she has hormonal problems; she is PMSing – the list is far too long, and I too tired to jot it down.

All of these accusations could actually be addressed as topics in their own right, and I might do so one day. But today again, I will stick to the accusation of misandry leveled at feminists. In my previous blog post, I wrote about the general hostility of misogynist men (incidentally that makes up most of their populace) and the occasions on which they label a woman a misandrist. This time it is about what prompts this behavior.

Mostly men who indulge in this name calling are scared shit of strong women. These women not only challenge the societal mindset, which the pseudo-enlightened thinks he does too, but they also call him out on his bullshit. So they are insecure of not only being challenged but also of losing control all together and being exposed for what they are.

Let’s admit once and for all, that guys who go all out and attack a woman for being a misandrist, and further have the nerve to whine about being discriminated against instead of admitting to their faults, are the worst semi-educated-pseudo-intellectuals suffering from a misplaced alpha male syndrome. They only prefer women whom they can patronize, lecture, manipulate and be condescending to. And if a woman cannot be fitted in any of these boxes, she must be that uncontrollable-psycho-man-hating-baby-killing-bitch (who can outmaneuver and expose his pseudo-intellectualism).

Let’s also establish here that these men are cowards. 

Most men are misogynists by default

In online debates, I am often branded as a misandrist (which is not even recognized by MSWord) by men who have a problem with harsh criticism of their sexist behavior and jokes. I often criticize men and wonder if men are misogynists by default. I also have a low opinion of men in general, because of misogyny. And apparently, having a low opinion of men is a crime in a patriarchal society. For having this low opinion I can be ‘punished’ in many ways, including being labeled a prude, anti-sex, anti-men etc, or as my mother fears, made to live a single life forever. What for me however, is most shocking is not being labeled or remaining single, but rather being meted out this attitude by atheists? It is not only shocking but disappointing. I have lesser animosity from the religious in this regard, and it is scary because atheists pride themselves on their enlightenment, critical thinking capabilities and liberal/secular ideals.

The first time I was branded a misandrist was, when I questioned men who spoke only about feminism in the sexual liberation context. I found their interest was not really in having emancipated women around them who enjoyed equal status, rather women who had no inhibitions getting in bed with them. The second time was when I raised objections to men who loved posting references to porn under the guise of freedom of speech. Third objection was regarding images of naked women or particularly of breasts as a gesture of appreciation in a public forum.

This raises several questions in my mind. One of the major one being, are many of the atheist men I interact with only so because they were looking for sexual outlets? Having been an active woman atheist among the Pakistani Atheists, I have heard several complaints from fellow women atheists that they were considered ‘easy’ in terms of sex by atheist men. Some of them even refuse to join the Pakistani atheist forum because they feel that it works more like a fraternity. In their opinion Pakistani atheist men only want to interact with women as sexual interests. Given the Pakistani context, it does make a lot of sense because of the gender segregation and restrictions on individual freedom.

Also, this brings me back to the earlier part of my post, where I mentioned the hostility of many atheist men when it comes to them facing criticism for their misogyny. If it is accepted as a hypothesis that many men find atheism to be more to their liking because they feel it gives them sexual freedom, no wonder they will be hostile when women turn out to be not so easy as they had originally expected them to be. This could also be the reason why many of them refuse to understand misogyny outside its rigid and most narrow definition, which literally just translates to hatred for women. When they translate misogyny to just hatred of women, they want to take the argument once again into the sexual aspect where women become objects of their adoration and can be fitted into neat boxes of mothers, sisters, daughters, girlfriends, wives etc instead of individuals in their own right. It also is the escapist way. Defining misogyny as mere hatred easily allows men to wash their hands off of any responsibility on an individual level, because they can say, oh I have a girlfriend, if I hated women, I wouldn’t be with one.

According to sociologist Allan G Johnson, "misogyny is a cultural attitude of hatred for females because they are female." Johnson argues that:

"Misogyny .... is a central part of sexist prejudice and ideology and, as such, is an important basis for the oppression of females in male-dominated societies. Misogyny is manifested in many different ways, from jokes to pornography to violence to the self-contempt women may be taught to feel toward their own bodies."

Perhaps I should not be shocked and shaken each time, after all I have listened to sexist jokes, accompanied by accusations that I don’t laugh because I lack a sense of humor.  Some have even been crude enough to imply I need to get laid. All this because I dared to challenge the status quo, defined by men for women. However, the problem for me right now is not that I am being labeled a misandrist but that I need to reconcile myself to act graciously to these misogynist men.

Men who blame it on the society they live in and need time to de-configure themselves from all the misogyny which has been hardwired into them since birth. Interestingly, even at this, they are at liberty to ask for time to reconfigure, putting the burden of patience on women. So, no matter how I suffer at their hands, I have to be understanding of their psychological hang-ups, their so-called fight with the society which forces them to act the way they do.

Once again the society wants me to be the patient one being a woman, and I have to be more understanding and tactical because I am desperate for things to change?

Atheist ill-logic

• Reactionary #atheists' logic: #Muslims are wrong to be #patriotic in their country, but wrong again for not being patriotic in adopted ones.

• Reactionary #Facebook #atheist warrior: Immy K's are Mummy Daddy…. the leftist are Mummy Daddy.

• Islamophobe #atheist #logic: I am all for freedom of speech but I should not be called an Islamophobe by the 'apologists'.

• Hypocritical #atheist logic: I am against death penalty, but #MumtazQadri and his fans deserve it.

• #Misogynist #Atheist #logic: I am a feminist too being logical and all, but women ‘do’ tend to over-react.

• #Cultish #Atheist #logic1: #Muslims are crazy to defend prophet; Dawkins is a genius, who disagrees, is an illogical fool.

• #Cultish #Atheist #logic2: #Muslims think everyone should read and follow Quran…. Did you read ‘The God Delusion’.

• Judgmental #Atheist: I hate that I am judged for not being religious; #believers are so dumb to not question religion.

• Salafi #Atheist #logic: A #Shia can never be a ‘true’ atheist.

Facebook group politics

These are a few things I have been observing for some time on different Facebook groups. And apparently, yes I need to get a life instead of being so much concerned about Facebook groups that I write about their socio-political conditions.

'Gangwars'
As facebook is increasingly becoming an integral part of our life, we have now started mirroring what we go through in our society every day. However, in a much civilized manner, where instead of guns and knives, we use bullets made of words, laced with venom and vitriol. The current trends of 'your group' against mine, makes me think of gangwars in LA or Karachi. People post something in a hidden, insinuating manner against someone (in a few cases directly too - Like graffitti in another gang's area) which pits two groups against each other. Your friends and his friends battle it out with their scathing and cutting words.

But has anybody noticed that often in these rapid fire rounds, people who post the most are the ones who are otherwise dormant? It seems the one's who have the least to contribute intellectually are the active ones when it is about controversy and gossip. An interesting phenomenon in my opinion. It is fun too in some ways.

Wannabes
In the whole fiasco also emerge the wannabes who would go after admins of a group to create anarchy and indulge in self promotion. They either want to be an admin, or have someone to promote as an admin. Interesting bunch of people mostly.

Just for trolls
Then there are those 'fake' profiles that crop up in these wars too, with weird emo images from kissing animes to wrist cutting and controversial or famous celebrity images. They are the worst in my opinion. The trolls. Being anonymous gives them an added advantage over the others and they can troll beyond limits. These kinds come with an extra bag of arrows. I sometimes wonder if they are some so-called friends to know so much about the other group per say, that they are capable of washing the dirty laundry out in the open.

The pacifists
This kind wants to participate in the gangwar to make it stop without taking sides. They would try to be the sage, giving advise left right and center despite knowing that their comments are flashing in front of blind eyes (cannot use deaf ears here).

Opportunists
These people are opportunists. They wait until the gangwar subsides enough so they can give their sales pitch. Mostly their objective is getting recruits and attention. Delivering a few googlies against admins of the rival group is also an often used tactic.

Emotional blackmailers slash lecturers
These can actually be categorized under various forms including emo-wannabes, emo-trolls, emo-pacifists and emo-opportunists. They like giving emotional lectures about how one should behave and not be like others. Actually, that's pretty much their rhetoric. Not be like others. Nothing less, nothing more. It's such a general way of addressing any issue, that one cannot even argue with them.

Yes-men/women
And these are the best kind. They have no two thoughts rubbing against each other in their head, or at least that's how it appears. The motto of their existence on any group is to just agree with everything. Often they exist only to increase the number of likes on the 'Opportunists' posts, and are a part of the rival 'gangs' entourage.

Incessant likers who never post
These people hardly read much in my opinion and are an extension of the previous category. What are their reasons for liking everything are varied; they might be only letting everyone know of their existence; they are intimidated; confused but want to show they know whats going on; or they just do so for the heck of it.

Black-sheep
And last, but not the least are rebels and the misfits. They are never much liked and usually take the brunt of most of it. They are the cause of discussions, controversies, fights and at times even work as punching bags, specially for the opportunists.

I suppose this is enough for now. I'll add more when I observe any more anomalies in this cyber social world of ours.

PS I forgot the 'Don't give a damn' types. Come to think of it, they most probably have a life beyond internet and Facebook.

Learning Beyond Borders

Pakistan is the most troubled country as far as I know from international media resources. From terrorism, extremism, lack of women’s rights, child labor, and lack of education to general civic apathy towards all of these concerns. It is a cauldron of conflict and troubles. It has been in focus since the US chose Pakistan to fight it’s proxy war with the USSR. I never realized what this meant for the rest of the world in terms of being aware and informed of other countries until I met a 19 year old illegal immigrant from Guatemala.

The country itself at least for me was obscure and under no threat from anywhere. However, my recent encounter with Peter, who I met a few weeks ago changed my perception. My conversation with him was shocking at first. Here are bits of that conversation:

Peter: Where are you from?

Pakistan.

Peter: Where is it?

It is in Asia, next to India.

Peter: Is it far?

Yes.

Peter: How did you come to America?

I came here to work (I thought he wanted to know my visa status).

Peter: No, how did you cross the border.

I came in an airplane.

Peter: (Shocked) Why?

Because Pakistan is faraway and there is a sea. (By this time I was uncomfortable because I did not know how to explain and he had no understanding of even basic geography)

Peter: You use a phone?

Yes. (I thought if I showed some pictures from Pakistan, it may help him) Do you want to see pictures from Pakistan?

Peter: Yes. (He looked at the pictures and said it is beautiful and that he would like to see snow some day. So I told him he can go to other places in California where it snows. He looked shocked to hear that too, and asked) It snows in US?

I tried explaining to him as best as I could, but I don’t know if I succeeded much. 

I moved on in a dazed state and realized that the rest of the world is as messed up as my home country, if not more. I have often met people in Pakistan who are unaware of the outside world. I shouldn't look down on them because they never had the same opportunities as I did to go to school or study and read. What they know is limited in terms of geography, politics and general knowledge. Just like my knowledge about Guatemala is limited, because we only know what corporate media feeds us with.

This conversation has made me realize that I am as ignorant of the current or past political conditions of Guatemala as Peter is ignorant of basic geography. The education system in Guatemala is perhaps far bleak than in Pakistan. But what I worry about now is the level of awareness among the world in general; including the privileged ones like me, who live in a bubble. A bubble of information created by the owners of the news corporations, who feed us what they want, and which we consume without questioning.

Here are a few links I am currently reading to change and try to find out things beyond what I am supposed to know.

http://wais.stanford.edu/USA/us_supportforladictators8303.html

http://www.esperanza.de/eng/bildung_e.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efra%C3%ADn_R%C3%ADos_Montt

Bhai is the Army’s ‘Burqa’

Until today I thought only Disney and Warner Brothers were capable of subliminal messages, hidden in the frames of their cartoons and animations. But a real human-like (not CGI) cartoon actually took the cup when he had the guts to show up on electronic media and sing a song for the Army. “Burqay may rehnay do, burqa na uthao,” Bhai has in the past given epic performances, providing plenty to talk about. This time though, he even out did himself. This was as subliminal as it can get in the Pakistani narrative.

There are actually several great things about this whole charade. Let’s start with some here, and whoever chances to read my blog, can add more in the comments section.

1- Bhai kept the private channels from showing squabbles between different political parties while providing ‘quality’ entertainment to all and sundry.

2- He indulged in a sit-down comedy while his party offices acquired by goons, my bad, volunteers and activists all over Karachi were being raided by Rangers.

3- He threatened the Army to take off the ‘veil’ if his butt isn’t saved from the British police.

4- Diverted the public enough to make the Army look like the harmless savior it claims to be.

5- And last but not the least he along with his Rabita Committee gave a go ahead, and sealed the fate of their unwanted and not-so-useful-anymore members.

Yesterdays shenanigans are a proof that the magic hat is still with the Army and it can pull out as many rabbits as it wants. So let’s hail ‘Bhai’ as the savior for the minorities, Ahmedis, poor serfs and last but not the least, the Pakistan Army.

Using the Godfather way

People often question why the Muttahidda Qaumi Movement (MQM) has so much support in Karachi and not other parties. (And I'm not a supporter of any party - a disclaimer was necessary here) MQM was not always there, rather it was the mullah party and the feudal party who had Karachi in their clutches after the capital was shifted to Islamabad. The city was divided between the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and the Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) with some smaller parties until 1987 when MQM swept Karachi and Hyderabad in the local body elections. However, it did not happen overnight or because the Urdu speaking suddenly wanted to support MQM for its linguistic and ethnic origins.

There is a documentary about the Medici made by PBS. It describes how from being mere bankers the Medici gained support from the people. By doing favors. Or I guess it can even be called the Godfather way. They did favors for people regardless of their social standing and in return gained their loyalty.

This is what the MQM does in Karachi. They do things like getting the electricity bill fixed for Muhammad Liaquat, which was screwed by the KESC; or one of the sector boys takes care of the weekly grocery shopping of a few women in the 'mohalla'; and some goon beats up the guy who teased Farrukh's sister on the street. These things enabled the MQM to get more and more support from the public. Another reason they get more support is that they do not have feudal lords in the upper echelons of the party. Rather they have doctors, engineers etc.

To increase their support, finances and vote bank, the ANP desperately needs more land in Karachi. Why the ANP needs land? That is the only way they will be able to generate more funds and more votes for themselves to stay around, following the MQM lead on getting to the public directly. I remember my Pakhtun taxi driver who always said that although he is not in ANP directly, if anybody in his 'abadi' has a problem, they go to the local sector to get it fixed. Hence the land mafia of any particular party is a goodwill and recruiting office. Less land for any party means, less funds and less voters. The tragedy for ANP is, it came to Karachi at a point when most land is already occupied or built.

PPP on the other hand screwed up its vote bank, which was mostly in Lyari and the suburbs of Karachi. They failed the people by not doing enough and are now fighting tooth and nail to get it back. In all this mayhem, the only people silently going about their business, and getting more support, are the bloody mullahs. One gets to see an increasing number of zombies in black abayas and more and more men with pants above their ankles in Karachi.

If only the sparring parties would take this as a hint and stop indulging in the urban warfare, Karachi may still have hope.