I find it very interesting that people with first world problems
would deign to lecture DU and the world about a woman who, by stripping to the waist and challenging the religious extremists who run her entire fucking world, and will probably kill her for it...(Not unlike the attempt on that little girl who got shot in the head for pushing the idea that girls should be able to GO TO FUCKING SCHOOL)..
I find it interesting that there are people here who would compare HER to what a stripper does.
I find it interesting that, like the Monk who set himself on fire for his belief against the war in Vietnam, that this woman might have done just the same thing...and NONE of the 'champions of feminism' get how much those two human beings are alike.
I find it interesting that there are self proclaimed champions of feminism who's big fucking deal here is to post a couple of shots of naked people in San Fran and DARE to equate one with the other.
First world problems: There are boobie stories and then there's REALLY confronting a patriarchy who will decapitate your ass for stripping to the waist.
Or bury you to the shoulders and then have people throw rocks at your head until you are mush from the clavicles, up.
At this point my contempt and cynicism knows no bounds.
Lost a couple of people I have previously admired today.
As usual, YMMV
= new reply since forum marked as read
no, actually, the leader of tunisia's secular opposition was murdered, after the US-supported 2011 'color revolution' which opened the door to fundamentalism and neoliberalism.
and *this* is a brave woman: because she's nobody and isn't invited on TV shows, and doesn't make the western papers, unlike Ms. Tyler.
A woman chants slogans and holds pictures of assassinated leftist politician Chokri Belaid during a demonstration against the Islamist Ennahda movement in Tunis February 23, 2013. REUTERS/Zoubeir Souissi
But don't expect the brave boob-defenders here to mention any of this:
The secular opposition leader's assassination on February 6 provoked the biggest street protests in Tunisia since the overthrow of strongman Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali two years ago.
"We agreed ... to go to the Human Rights Council in Geneva to request an investigation into the killing of Belaid because we have doubts in the Tunisian judiciary," Zied Lakhdar a leader in the Democratic Patriots Party, told Reuters.
"We believe that the investigation was not serious and there is a lot of ambiguity and doubts," he added.
Tunisian authorities say they have arrested four hardline Salafi Islamists in connection with the killing, but that the gunman who fired the fatal bullets is still on the run.
Tunisia's moderate Islamist ruling party Ennahda has denied accusations by some of its opponents, including Belaid's brother, that it was involved in the assassination.
http://www.newsdaily.com/stories/bre92a0nr-us-tunisia-assassination-un/
fucking psyops.
Yeah.. I've got a few folks here who I consider to be related to the inimitable Otto
"what am I doing wrong?"
Don't start a ruckus.
Well, not just yet. 
attack this brave and wonderful lady and FEMEM because it doesn't meet with their approval. Hypocrites are pissed off because they can't CONTROL what other people do. Hence multiple posts, hissy fits, beating on the chests, you damn name it. Am disgusted.
differences. 
and that, my friend, is the truly "important distinction". 
( On Edit Note: the question above does not assume that you think any particular way about these issues. Your post was just a starting point for me to express my own long-winded thoughts.)
The two are not synonymous, but they are often treated as such. It is not demonizing to assert the obvious fact that if one group is oppressed, another group must be privileged over them. it is not demonizing to describe the ways that gender norms, as practiced by both men and women perpetuate a system that ultimately oppresses women (and oppresses many men, too). It is not demonizing to ask both men and women to think deeply about the ways that they think about gender, sexuality, responsibility, choice, and even their own identities in a critical way. I have seen gender oppression portrayed more or less as a zero-sum game by anti-feminist or MRA men on this board. I think that is a sad way to view the situation. There is good evidence that a lot of the disproportionate sufferings of men (such as reduced life expectancy, increased rates of incarceration, and increased risk of being injured in a violent attack) are a result of patriarchal gender norms that create imbalances and disparities for everyone. Both men and women really can win, but we do both have to think about our thoughts, behaviors, and actions for that to work.
Unfortunately sexism is pervasive enough that I don't expect it to be absent from our reactions to even the most noble display of a female body, as that presented by Amina. This does not mean that I disagree with her tactic; I admire her bravery and support her wholeheartedly. However, I am aware that there will be responses to her act that will seek to exploit those images for ultimately sexist ends; and there were certainly contributions to the various threads today that had much more to do with goading *American* feminists (and, I do think, with titillating a more or less anti-feminist audience) than they did with supporting a *Tunisian* feminist. Amina's images of herself are very powerful and beautiful. However, I have no doubt that there will be--and probably already have been--presentations of those images within the American internet community that will be intended for sexual objectification.
That isn't really Amina's problem; she is fighting patriarchy as she faces it in the manner that she deems most effective. To the extent her images are exploited for other ends than those that she intends, condemnation rests solely with those who exploit her. However, it is a problem for American feminists; and if I may offer a defense of those whose reactions may have been disrespectful or inconsiderate of what Amina is fighting for, the fact is that feminists are human beings, as vulnerable to ethnocentrism and a lack of awareness of their first world privilege as any other group.
Moreover, when it comes to the issue of body image and sexuality, it is enormously difficult--and admittedly somewhat subjective--to disentangle that which is truly empowering from that which only feigns empowerment with the actual goal of objectification. Even offering this as a subject of discussion or critical thought makes one vulnerable to charges of extremism, censorship, and prudishness--no matter how carefully or explicitly one makes the case that you are not advocating any of the over-the-top things you are accused of. It is easy to understand why emotions run high. I will hold out hope that those feminists who reacted to Amina's actions in a judgmental or inappropriate way will recognize where their perspectives might be limited by privilege, just as I hold out hope for some men who feel threatened or demonized by the discussion of privilege itself.
Response to bettyellen (Reply #149)
.. that was straight up, great, well aimed rant.
Not much new there.
One of them posted this cartoon last year:
What does that tell you about their reaction to this?
off to google
Response to LittleBlue (Reply #138)
all of the back story on this. You've obviously struck a nerve.
They stepped in it again
I find it hilarious how little self-awareness they seem to have.
I normally hate that phrase first world problems but you have a point this time. We don't have a gun pointed at us while fighting for our rights. It takes real courage to do what this young woman did.
No way I could have even come close to what you have just written.
Perfect.
-p
is on the same side of the "patriarchy" on this issue, the one that they are always railing about. 
At least, it seems that way from reading their responses in threads about these brave women protesting in that repressive fundamentalist male dominated culture.
Well done, Sir.
you say it as eloquently, as intelligently, as in-your-face-no-BS-tolerated-here as is humanly possible.
Well done, sir - extremely well done.
misconceptions of Tunisia.
Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #239)
Response to Evoman (Reply #238)
ps. it's "bare" (quick! edit!!)
seek to lecture women on this board about those aspects of our feminism of which they disapprove.
as to lecture First World Women on our "complaints".
I believe it in giving credit where credit is due.
if for nothing beyond its complete lack of self-awareness.
arrogant.
"First World White Man scolds First World White Women for "complaining".
The irony is rich.
dollop of wishful thinking"
Spot on again, my friend.
we need reminding.
Thank you for writing this, Cliffordu.
I just spent the better part of the morning reading a few things here in GD and I am left wondering these very same things.
There has been a lot of false equivalency, red herring and to be honest -- attempts to shame some members when it runs counter to a few. It's one of those things that makes DU kinda suck. Antagonism in general sucks.
It is almost impossible to have a real and honest dialogue about some of the very real issues you have touched upon. I really wish we could have an honest dialogue.
You sir, do not make DU suck.
Thank you Cali!
Of course it won't get the number of views & hits because it doesn't have the word tits in it.
I can't pass judgement on those women, however, offensive words have no place in a discussion about women fighting for their rights. Amina’s message is that women are more than just objects for men - our bodies are our own, our minds are our own. But that DUer chose an account of the story that had an inflammatory title, which was in total contradiction to her message!
Words have power & when we relegate women to tits & ass in language, we are relegated to that in reality.
