Another wonderful column from Kunwar Khuldune Shahid, this time “apologizing” to “the #MuslimahPride social media jihadis.”
It’s amazing what a week of introspection can do. I now realise how ridiculous it was of me to try and promote Western, postcolonial and imperialistic ideals like gender equality and human rights. I realise how foolish it was to stereotype everything by quoting your authentic religious commandments and regularly reported events in Islamic countries. I realise how obnoxious it was to think that demonstrating against stoning women to death was a better cause than protesting against shameless infidels. Last week’s letter was clearly a remonstration against the fact that women spoke out, not against the fact that they could’ve spoken out against something more meaningful. In any case, who am I to judge what’s more deserving of a protest; women being stoned to death, or a protest against women being stoned to death. It’s obviously a cultural debate and has got nothing to with basic human rights.
Funny how it’s like “Dear Muslima” except it really isn’t. It even starts with “Dear Muslimaat”…but its point is quite different.
I was imprudent enough to believe that you could’ve taught those infidels the “right way” of preaching freedom, instead of showcasing denial about the atrocities that your fellow women face for not choosing the way of life that you’ve ostensibly chosen. I was foolish enough to think that a protest in hijabs in support of women being coerced into wearing them would’ve been an astoundingly effective way of telling the world that despite your differences you stand with those who face death threats and need liberation. I’m sorry I thought “Nudity doesn’t deserve brutal death” would have been a far stronger message than “Nudity does not liberate me”.
If only they will pay attention.
Now that’s an example of sarcasm properly used. An admirable piece of writing.
It’s also a great application of the not-pology. 🙂
Just a thought; did it not occur to the protesters protesting the protests (why does that remind me of the film Enemy of the State?) that,if they are happy to conform to their religious ideals, then the protests weren’t being made on their behalf and therefore had less than the square root of nothing to do with them?
Perhaps people who have been persuaded to welcome their oppression because of their “religious ideals” and acquiesce in and aid the oppression of people who don’t share those “ideals” need protests to be made on their behalf even more than the people they oppress..
Some of my favorite bits:
What an epic WIN! Great piece of writing, 100% spot on.
I really wish more people (esp. some of those on Pharngula and elsewhere on FTB who think its trendy or whatever to support Islam and decry so-called “islamophobia”) would read it and take in its message. As long as they do understand its meant as sarcasm!
A decent empathic, reasonable and enlightened human being maybe?
@2. fastlane : “It’s also a great application of the not-pology.”
Yep. Best. Not-pology. Ever!