酷我-北美枫

[anna]

Elka Ruth Enola 's letter about polygamy which was printed in today's Star. The star edited her letter by removing the first paragraph and the last line.



This is what she sent:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I do, I do, I do. The last taboo", May 24, is itself, a very clear indication of
what the problem with polygamy is.

The article begins by defining polygamy as "the act of having more than one spouse
at the same time". However, the entire article deals only with men having multiple
wives. Not a peep about women having multiple husbands.

Polygamy as described in the article is a misogynist approach to social organization
that is based on male dominance and control, where not even the notion of women
having multiple husbands is permitted.

An unfortunate assumption of this kind of polygamy is that women do not need money
earning skills since in that social structure all woman 'are looked after by men'.

As a women who is well capable of financial independence, having multiple husbands
might not be such a bad idea, especially if one excelled at housework, and another
was a gifted cook and the third was adept at secretarial skills. Needless to say, I
would have . with whom I wanted , when I wanted and how I wanted.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The last line which referred to . was omitted. . is the elephant in the room.

If in western monogamous relationships, . is often seen as a conjugal right, then
in the polygamous relationships under discussion, it is an absolute obligation.

By removing that line, you imply that The Star does not believe that . is a
central part of the polygamous relationship.

But ., especially in a polygamous relationship, is a statement of power. And, as
in war or 'honour problems', . (rape) is the instrument of choice. In such
situations, . determines ownership and value of 'the woman'.

Not too long ago, here, in Canada, a married woman could not claim that her husband
raped her because 'he was her husband', and hence the act of forced unwanted .
could not be 'rape'.

Does anyone really believe that in the polygamous relationships we are dealing with,
women only have . when they want it?

Often in polygamous cultures, there is an understanding that women have no . urge,
or rather 'nice women' don't have a . urge. Clitoral removal attempts to ensure
that sexual satisfaction and self-stimulation are virtually eliminated.

In polygamous cultures, marriages of a man with multiple wives is not predominately
about cooking and cleaning. . is central. The women are expected to have .
only with that man and on his terms.

There seems to be no limits on men having . outside of their polygamous marriage.
In fact, Islam allows for 'temporary wives'. 'Temporary' could mean one hour or six
months.

To ignore . is to totally distort the nature of the polygamous relationship.

Elka Enola
_________________
---------------------

Anna Yin

《爱的灯塔-星子安娜双语诗选》
<Nightlights> <Seven Nights with the Chinese Zodiac> ...

http://annapoetry.com

[[星子安娜]]

Elka Ruth Enola 's letter about polygamy which was printed in today's Star. The star edited her letter by removing the first paragraph and the last line.



This is what she sent:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I do, I do, I do. The last taboo", May 24, is itself, a very clear indication of
what the problem with polygamy is.

The article begins by defining polygamy as "the act of having more than one spouse
at the same time". However, the entire article deals only with men having multiple
wives. Not a peep about women having multiple husbands.

Polygamy as described in the article is a misogynist approach to social organization
that is based on male dominance and control, where not even the notion of women
having multiple husbands is permitted.

An unfortunate assumption of this kind of polygamy is that women do not need money
earning skills since in that social structure all woman 'are looked after by men'.

As a women who is well capable of financial independence, having multiple husbands
might not be such a bad idea, especially if one excelled at housework, and another
was a gifted cook and the third was adept at secretarial skills. Needless to say, I
would have . with whom I wanted , when I wanted and how I wanted.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The last line which referred to . was omitted. . is the elephant in the room.

If in western monogamous relationships, . is often seen as a conjugal right, then
in the polygamous relationships under discussion, it is an absolute obligation.

By removing that line, you imply that The Star does not believe that . is a
central part of the polygamous relationship.

But ., especially in a polygamous relationship, is a statement of power. And, as
in war or 'honour problems', . (rape) is the instrument of choice. In such
situations, . determines ownership and value of 'the woman'.

Not too long ago, here, in Canada, a married woman could not claim that her husband
raped her because 'he was her husband', and hence the act of forced unwanted .
could not be 'rape'.

Does anyone really believe that in the polygamous relationships we are dealing with,
women only have . when they want it?

Often in polygamous cultures, there is an understanding that women have no . urge,
or rather 'nice women' don't have a . urge. Clitoral removal attempts to ensure
that sexual satisfaction and self-stimulation are virtually eliminated.

In polygamous cultures, marriages of a man with multiple wives is not predominately
about cooking and cleaning. . is central. The women are expected to have .
only with that man and on his terms.

There seems to be no limits on men having . outside of their polygamous marriage.
In fact, Islam allows for 'temporary wives'. 'Temporary' could mean one hour or six
months.

To ignore . is to totally distort the nature of the polygamous relationship.

Elka Enola
_________________
---------------------

Anna Yin

《爱的灯塔-星子安娜双语诗选》
<Nightlights> <Seven Nights with the Chinese Zodiac> ...

http://annapoetry.com

[clair]

[[clair]]

[anna]

I don't know Safa's story. I googled it

http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/429490
_________________
---------------------

Anna Yin

《爱的灯塔-星子安娜双语诗选》
<Nightlights> <Seven Nights with the Chinese Zodiac> ...

http://annapoetry.com

[[星子安娜]]

I don't know Safa's story. I googled it

http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/429490
_________________
---------------------

Anna Yin

《爱的灯塔-星子安娜双语诗选》
<Nightlights> <Seven Nights with the Chinese Zodiac> ...

http://annapoetry.com

[anna]

follow up letters from ELKA.

I don't know if my letter below had any impact, but in today's Star on page AA3
there is a large colour photo of 2 young women with the caption "Nepalis (sic)
celebrate in Kathmandu..."

Since the Star never featured women in such a way, I expect that the drips have
flowed in an appropriate direction.

Elka

----- Original Message -----
From: Elka Ruth Enola
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 11:26 AM
Subject: Fw: Photos


Once again I have written to the Star about the media treatment of women.

Again, I do not expect the letter to be printed.

The aim is to educate those at the paper who can effect changes.

drip drip drip drip


Elka


----- Original Message -----
From: Elka Ruth Enola
To: Toronto Star Public Editor ; Toronto Star Letters
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 11:18 AM
Subject: Photos


At first glance this might seem to be a trite complaint, but it really is significant.

Whenever a photo of a group of men is captioned as 'a people', gradually, the
erasing of women from the mainstream expectations becomes normal and acceptable.

Hence, the photo on page AA2 of today's Star shows a vast number of men, but the
caption identifies them as 'jubilant Nepalese'. Most people seeing this, would not
question the exclusion of women.

But suppose, the caption, more accurately said, "jubilant Nepalese men..", then the
question of the missing women would be more probable.

In the article there is a sentence mentioning that young men set off firecrackers.
However there is no mention of women anywhere.

This is supposed to be an article about a new republic. Presumably it is to be a
democratic republic.

So it is fair to ask, "Where are the women?"

In our own society, we were told that calling police officers 'policemen' did not
mean that women could not join the force. However, the power of semantics soon
became clear, and gender specific job descriptions were changed to 'police
officers', 'mail carriers', 'servers' and 'actors'.

We still, however treat male sports as the real sports. So we get 'hockey' and
'women's hockey'; 'soccer' and 'women's soccer' etc.

Many people will just look at a photograph, read the caption but skip the article.
So it is critically important that the IMPLIED 'only men matter' message be removed.

Please pay more attention to this matter.

Thank you


Elka Enola
_________________
---------------------

Anna Yin

《爱的灯塔-星子安娜双语诗选》
<Nightlights> <Seven Nights with the Chinese Zodiac> ...

http://annapoetry.com

[[星子安娜]]

follow up letters from ELKA.

I don't know if my letter below had any impact, but in today's Star on page AA3
there is a large colour photo of 2 young women with the caption "Nepalis (sic)
celebrate in Kathmandu..."

Since the Star never featured women in such a way, I expect that the drips have
flowed in an appropriate direction.

Elka

----- Original Message -----
From: Elka Ruth Enola
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 11:26 AM
Subject: Fw: Photos


Once again I have written to the Star about the media treatment of women.

Again, I do not expect the letter to be printed.

The aim is to educate those at the paper who can effect changes.

drip drip drip drip


Elka


----- Original Message -----
From: Elka Ruth Enola
To: Toronto Star Public Editor ; Toronto Star Letters
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 11:18 AM
Subject: Photos


At first glance this might seem to be a trite complaint, but it really is significant.

Whenever a photo of a group of men is captioned as 'a people', gradually, the
erasing of women from the mainstream expectations becomes normal and acceptable.

Hence, the photo on page AA2 of today's Star shows a vast number of men, but the
caption identifies them as 'jubilant Nepalese'. Most people seeing this, would not
question the exclusion of women.

But suppose, the caption, more accurately said, "jubilant Nepalese men..", then the
question of the missing women would be more probable.

In the article there is a sentence mentioning that young men set off firecrackers.
However there is no mention of women anywhere.

This is supposed to be an article about a new republic. Presumably it is to be a
democratic republic.

So it is fair to ask, "Where are the women?"

In our own society, we were told that calling police officers 'policemen' did not
mean that women could not join the force. However, the power of semantics soon
became clear, and gender specific job descriptions were changed to 'police
officers', 'mail carriers', 'servers' and 'actors'.

We still, however treat male sports as the real sports. So we get 'hockey' and
'women's hockey'; 'soccer' and 'women's soccer' etc.

Many people will just look at a photograph, read the caption but skip the article.
So it is critically important that the IMPLIED 'only men matter' message be removed.

Please pay more attention to this matter.

Thank you


Elka Enola
_________________
---------------------

Anna Yin

《爱的灯塔-星子安娜双语诗选》
<Nightlights> <Seven Nights with the Chinese Zodiac> ...

http://annapoetry.com

[ericcoliu]

[[ericcoliu]]