Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Let's cut to the chase. The main point - the main area of celebration contained within my post to which you object - is the spectacle of people such as yourself jumping in to protect and defend the gender-treatment honor of a part of the world, and society, that has long treated half of its population abysmally. This amuses me to no end.
* * *
Let's just say, I suspect your motives. I don't think you believe this for a second. As I mentioned to Sam, I think you chose bedfellows based on ignoble criteria. Just as NOW suddenly about-faces and deems that a CEO can rightly have sex with a lowly underling female in the face of Clinton's actions, you defend Islam's record concerning women at a time when you decry an anti-Islamicist attitude in our actions. Call me cynical . . .
|
Look, I don't see how simply saying: "Jesus, Hank, girls actually DO get to go to school in Muslim countries (islamist or islamic)."
is somehow doing any of the things you suggest it is.
Does such a simple correction necessarily imply that we are defending those countries' treatment of women generally, or think they are "gender-neutral"?
Why does it suggest a broader point or agenda? Why not just take it at face value.? Or, am I as usual keeping things too simple and failing to read between the lines?
Just call me Club-Left.
S_A_M
