Sawt al Niswa | صوت النسوة - sexism

Ad Feministem: a Lesson in Logic

Lamia Moghnie — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 09:15:00 +0000

Prezi.com

Sara Emiline AbuGhazal

One argumentative fallacy I remember from the Introduction to Logic class I took 10 years ago was called: “Ad hominem” which means “To the man.” It is a false, incorrect way of arguing that we use very commonly when we go after the person presenting an argument in an attempt to discredit them using irrelevant accusations. Here are some examples of ad hominem:

A: Let’s go to Shtrumpf and have a salad bar.
B: No, let’s not go to Shtrumpf; they are too expensive.
A: You can never pick a good restaurant (or you are such a cheapo) (or you are a party pooper).

Here we see how A, instead of answering the argument of B, which is a valid argument, resorts to attack or belittle or ridicule or try to discredit B on false grounds. If A had said: you are a liar (or no, Shtrumpf is affordable), she would have had a point. Instead she commits the ad hominem fallacy by talking about person B rather than about his arguments.

At the time, ad hominem was meant to be a gender-neutral term like mankind, but it is interesting to observe how the fallacy actually becomes a strategy when addressed at women. This could probably be referred to as “ad feminem.” An example would be:

Ah, you got into a car accident because you are a woman & women can’t drive well (as opposed to “you got into a car accident because you didn’t hit the brakes at the right moment”)

Ad feminem is a fascinating world of bad logic in itself, but I will focus on a specific type of sexist argumentation which I will call “ad feministem.” Yes, my friends, ad feministem is probably the most common form of sexist argumentation. This is the technique of discrediting women who believe in gender equality and won’t take any bullshit about it by making reference to their personal beliefs or politics or qualities (regardless if these qualities are true or false). For example:

C: So what if Lebanese women can’t grant nationality to their kids; they shouldn’t be marrying foreigners anyway.
D: It’s every person’s right to grant citizenship to their family, be they women or men. Why discriminate?
C: What do you know? You’re always pissed off at everything.
or C: Of course you’ll think that, you’re a woman so you’re biased.

Ad feministem gets worse when we’re talking about sexuality matters. Women are immediately made out to be whores and nymphos and lesbians and sluts. Here is an example:

E: I think women should have the right to have sex on their own terms as long as they are educated about sexual health and birth control and feel confident to make their own decisions.
F: But that will lead our society to disintegrate, women won’t get married anymore and they won’t stay loyal to their partners, it will all become chaotic.
E: Actually, allowing women the same freedoms allowed to men and promoting a positive approach to sex and sexuality from both genders leads to a society that is more equal, more open, and more healthy.
F: Actually, you’re a slut who likes sleeping around, so you want all women to behave like you.
or F: You’re a lesbian who hates men and wants to delete them from society.

And the attacks can get pretty vicious (not that there is anything wrong with being a lesbian or a slut) and personal, against the selves and the bodies of women. That makes it really hard for any woman to keep on fighting. That’s probably why very few do. Every time we try to stand up for women’s rights, we get called angry, jealous, bitter hags. Every time we try to deconstruct gender, we get called ugly, sick, complicated man-haters. Sometimes we get called violent too because we raise our voices and refuse to be “polite” when “polite” is synonymous with shutting up. Often, people think we can’t take a joke. We can take plenty of jokes, when they’re funny, and laughs at the expense of women aren’t funny. When we try to wake up the little powerful voice inside a young woman, we are accused of sabotaging the entire society and ruining what is otherwise seen as a very successful social order. When we said Mohammad Iskandar’s song was not only sexist and demeaning towards women but actually promoted (promoted!) sexism as a cool thing, we were called ball-busting, uncivilized, rude, violent bitches. And when young men comfortable enough with their gender stood by us, they were called faggots. This is all not just isolated name-calling but a systematic argumentative technique that silences us, scares us, falsely discredits our arguments: ad feministem!

Friends, you call me feminist like it’s a bad thing. It’s not. I wear the political label with more joy than anything I have ever worn. But regardless of what you think of the word, whether by calling me a feminist you are praising or cursing me, sound logic dictates that you can’t use it as an argument to discredit or shut me up. You can’t use anything that I am (or you think I am) against me. Fight my ideas, my arguments, my logic instead. The next time I find you attacking me personally, I will consider myself winning.

Publisher:

Sawt al' Niswa

Section:

Opinions

Category:

Activism

Tags:

Featured:

Reflections on the logic of things, Lebanese style.

Lamia Moghnie — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:45:00 +0000

Claudine Farah/ كلودين فرح

I always wonder how it was decided that women were lesser citizens than men. Did men think that women were doing most of the job in procreation so they decided to be part of the process by making the child their own, legally and socially, as a way to create more balance? And how were women convinced by it? And what about this conflicting idea that sex is taboo and sexual drive is a vulgar instinct but everything in human society is basically decided based on sex, procreation and gender, even things that have nothing to do with genitalia? The good thing about this is that most of the world seems to have noticed that the laws were too misogynistic, and attempted to change them, at least the laws that blatantly deprive women of their basic human rights.

Unfortunately, that’s not the case in Lebanon. Adding insult to injury is the fact that women themselves don’t see anything wrong with our laws! To them, “It’s the law” or “It is how it is” are far more logical replies than my crazy, illogical “Why do I have my father’s name? Why do I have to give up my roots to get married? Why do I hardly have any rights over my own children?” So, it’s more logical that whenever a woman gets married, she has to be deleted from her family’s records and be registered with her husband’s family, in a place she might have never heard of, has never belonged to…

Why is it more complicated to keep her original family records unchanged? Why is it more confusing if the child was registered in either or both his/her parents’ name? Why is it more difficult to give the child either or both of his/her parents’ nationalities?

As for the ridiculous reply of “It’s the law of nature,” or “God’s will,” am I biologically more my father’s than my mother’s? How is that calculated? If it was God’s design to give women less rights over their offspring, then why do they do most of the job, physically and socially, during pregnancy and throughout the child’s life?

How can a married Lebanese woman consider herself free and independent if the laws stipulate that she give up all her history and past and follow her husband’s?

What frustrates me even more is how women can study those outrageous misogynistic laws and still have any respect for themselves. Simply put, it’s beyond me how we have women lawyers and judges in Lebanon. How did they succeed academically and how did they advance in their careers, knowing full well that the laws they accept, abide by and apply consider them a lesser species, just because they were born with vaginas and not for any other reason whatsoever?!

Of all the Lebanese self-loathing women, I despise these self-proclaimed free, career women; those lawyers, judges, politicians who never even saw anything wrong with those outdated, defunct laws which are still applied in this day and age. I despise all those “independent, strong” women who claim to have gained freedom because they now get to be “productive” by working outside the house on top of their usual household slavery and they pride themselves on managing to strike a balance between being a good housewife and a successful businesswoman. Did family men ever have to strike any such balance?

To be honest, I also despise any woman who actually gets married under these current Lebanese laws. However, I can understand, up to a point, how people can sometimes be blinded by their society’s normalization of abnormal situations, not know their rights, and not understand what they’re getting themselves into. What I can’t accept and respect are those submissive, spineless women in power who know full well what the Lebanese laws say and not only do they accept them and apply them, they keep reinforcing them!

When I read the ruling in Samira Soueidan’s case, I felt as if my own hopes in Lebanon were shattered. I can only imagine how that persistent, strong woman must have felt after all that effort and pain just to demand a very simple, logical human right that she shouldn’t be struggling for in the first place!

When I read that the ruling judge was a woman, I thought it was a joke. How was a woman capable of pronouncing such a verdict? I wonder what she was thinking delivering it. I can’t give her any excuse whatsoever.

If she said, “It’s the law, there’s nothing I can do about it,” I’d have said: “Bull! Either change it or resign – that would be more decent, actually, and far more effective.” If she was one of those women who believe the ridiculous sectarian argument, which is brandished whenever they have no logical explanation to their absurd restrictions and rules, then I wonder how she became a judge in the first place.

So, a woman giving her Lebanese nationality to her kids from a foreign husband would disrupt the “impeccable” balance between the different religious sects. But a Lebanese man giving his Lebanese nationality to his kids from a foreign wife is OK? Why wouldn’t he cause imbalance? Who’s to say that I’d follow or believe in my father’s religion or sect anyway? And what does religion have to do with women’s equality, with a mother’s basic rights? Who’s the mathematical genius who made all those calculations to decide that Lebanese women marry more men from the X unwanted sect while Lebanese men marry more women of the Y wanted sect? What imbalance are women creating but not men and based on what scientific proof or study?

The truly logical step would be for both men and women to have the legal capacity to decide which religion, family and nationality their children would inherit. Nobody should be forcibly uprooted from their family’s registry and nobody should have to struggle to give their children what ought to be theirs legally. But then again, if this very simple logic were applied, that sectarian delusion would be completely exposed as the bizarre Lebanese oddity that it is, one which makes no sense at all. It would probably be the end of the world as we know it. God forbid Lebanon becomes a secular State, where the legal system guarantees equal human rights for all its citizens of whatever gender, color, religion, sect, orientation…

It’s such an ideal dream to many, but one which would upset the tribal, sectarian, patriarchal “harmony,” thanks to which the Lebanese people have been basking in a “heavenly peace” and “stability” ever since the country’s independence.

Publisher:

Sawt al' Niswa

Section:

Opinions

Category:

Women's rights

Tags:

Featured:

New Song Counters Sexist Pop in Lebanon

Azadeh Faramarziha — Wed, 16 Jun 2010 21:00:00 +0000

Sawt al Niswa

Guest Contributor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4Y5_6fppNQA

Kudos to May Matar and Toni Abi Karam for this new song that parodies popular sexist songs in Lebanon. We’ve seen a wave of them lately that are insulting and demeaning to women, and especially discouraging to our young girls. Here is a catchy song to rule them all! I bet the patriarchal music industry isn’t going to like this. But we do! Express your solidarity, support, and appreciation by emailing the composer tony_abikaram [at] hotmail.com and artistmay.matar [at] hotmail.com today!

You can also join the Facebook group here.

Publisher:

Sawt al' Niswa

Section:

Opinions

Category:

Feminism & Media

Tags:

Featured: