Afghan women: Don't exclude our men

Submitted by anthony on Thu, 2010-04-08 14:24

Article here. Excerpt:

'In a place where women have few rights, it seems improbable women would plead for men's advancement too. But, it's happening in Afghanistan.

Not for the reasons you might think, but because many Afghan women realize without the support of fathers, brothers and uncles, they will remain second-class citizens.

For years, the United States has developed and funded special "women's only" programs to help women start their own small businesses.

And while those efforts have been greatly appreciated, some global women's groups wonder if these programs are as effective as they could be when it comes to achieving equality in a patriarchal society.

More disturbingly, some other women's groups say these efforts, if not done well, may actually endanger women.

"Women are put at greater risk of violence when they must return home to frustrated, unemployed husbands who don't understand why their wives are getting training and credit and they are not," says Ritu Sharma, president of Women Thrive Worldwide.

It's time, says Sharma, to look at helping Afghan women in a more inclusive way – and that means including brothers and husbands – as well as sisters and wives.
...
Sharma and others are urging U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to integrate genders across all of the United States' assistance programs and foreign policy, in addition to promoting women's empowerment programs in places where women need a special focus.

It's the only way, she says, that Secretary Clinton's own words will ring solidly true, "... human rights are women's rights ... and women's rights are human rights."'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

"Sharma and others are urging U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to integrate genders across all of the United States' assistance programs and foreign policy..."

Wow, that was unexpected. OK, so they are urging the Hildebeast to "integrate genders" in these programs,. Presumably this means that they want to see her make or advocate for these various non-sex-dependent services being available to men too? Holy cow! Alert the press! But wait 'til they find out what kind of creature they are dealing with. Her years of gender feminist indoctrination will not be so easily set aside and they will see her real agenda.

The "women need more help than the men" stuff is of course still in this article and the attitude is there, even though men are, despite the Hidebeast's past assertions, the primary and most numerous victims of war (whether as war-fighters or civilians). But even so, it is unexpected to see any kind of advocacy for the male sex coming from anyone anyplace, especially under such war-torn conditions. Amazing.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Thu, 2010-04-08 19:05

Some of the recent posts have been about some unexpected recognition of the need to help men. It is an improvement however I still find it offensive as they mostly imply that men only matter through women. Lets not empathize for the Afghan boys who also don't have an education but instead get a gun, but if that hurts women...

I'm not sure if the politicians are just using some of the feminist assertions (men are violent, privileged, women matter more...) in order to get more done for men's rights or if that's just how they see it.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by fondueguy on Fri, 2010-04-09 00:23

So let me get this straight: The only reason anyone wants to help men is because they blieve these men will all beat their wives if they are left out? Sounds more like a job for harry reid than hitlery.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by V3N0M on Thu, 2010-04-22 06:58