Human Rights are the Concern of Everyone

When we’re all looking to achieve the same end result we should all pull in the same direction. Okay? That’s right isn’t it? Everybody knows that your enemies’ enemy is your friend, right?

Wrong!!  At least according to some people who seem to have forgotten what being an activist for human rights entails, that statement is somehow wrong anyway.

Last night I received the following message in my facebook inbox:-

“Hello Stu,why do you think people don´t sign your peticion about goverments forbide the FMG [female genital mutilation],i don´t urderstand this,i had copy the link in some groups like [deleted] but they had remove it.Sorry for my English.”

The sender was a Spaniard (whose English is infinitely better than my Spanish) who wasn’t even a facebook “friend” (they are now) but was worried about people not pulling in the same direction to achieve the same end, and thought they’d let me know. I replied (after considering this bombshell for long minutes), quite casually, that there are a lot of egos around on the internet and that I wasn’t really worried as a lot of people are sharing and posting anyway.

I then read this piece (about LGBT campaigners) this morning and that got me thinking a bit more on the subject. Why would anyone not want to support another campaign that’s looking to achieve the same thing? Why would there be animosity between two sets of people who were working for the same rights for the LGBT community?

The answer, when it came to me, slapped me across the face with a wet haddock! It’s ego, pure and simple! There are people who, although they’re aim is usually admirable and very noble, are only in it for the prestige that being the “leader” of a human rights campaign brings. These people see any other person who wants to start another campaign as a threat to the esteem they’re held in among the “masses.” What utter, ridiculous nonsense! It’s as if they see the actions of others somehow diluting their kudos! There’s too much “I’ve done this” and “my work” so, as a result, focus on the issue at hand is compromised to the detriment of the very humans whose rights we’re all trying to protect/attain!

This has got to stop. In my opinion anyone in the human rights business who is only concerned about their own standing should be barred from working in the field. As the great Billy Connelly says about politics: “The desire to be a politician should bar you for life from ever becoming one!” Power corrupts.

The answer? Tough one! I, myself, will always be taking the middle stance and will try to promote ANY cause that I feel should be promoted. If there are two factions trying to achieve the same thing then each will be treated equally with the proviso that I will point out the futility – to both – of any in-fighting among them and the harm that this in-fighting does to their cause! There is not enough “agreeing to disagree” to help each other with knowledge, resources etc. 

What did the British imperialists do in the Middle East? Divide and rule! It worked for them then (we’re still seeing the consequences in much of the bloodshed in that part of the world) and it’s still working, in a slightly different way, for human rights abusers today. Let’s pull together!

I’m a man of peace. I also believe firmly in freedom of speech, tolerance and freedom of expression. Whatever life choices anybody makes will – as long as they don’t hurt anybody - have my full support. If you could find a photograph of me you’d have an idea what a feminist looks like.

In the last few weeks I’ve commented on quite a few internet threads regarding the burqa and female genital mutilation. On the subject of the burqa, I would like to see this wretched garment banned worldwide. Whenever I’ve mentioned this I quite often see comments such as: “Why not respect the right of these women to dress how they like?” Or: “What about freedom of religion? In a democracy people are entitled to their beliefs!”

I’d like to relate a story to you. This happened to me when I was visiting Lancaster city centre one day about six years ago. As I was walking along one of the main streets I crossed paths with a, presumably muslim, young woman who was wearing a face veil. As we approached each other our eyes met for the tiniest, briefest of moments. The whole episode lasted less than half a second but might as well have lasted many hours! I can say, without exaggeration, that the message I received from the look in that person’s eyes will be with me for the rest of my life. The almost imploring look of pain and suffering told me a lot more that an all-night conversation could ever have! I guarantee, 100% and without even a modicum of doubt, that this woman absolutely DID NOT want to wear that veil! This wasn’t even a burqa – just a face veil attached to headdress and hanging over the nose and lower face like a mask. Why was she wearing it then? If you haven’t figured it out I’ll tell you. She had been ordered by her husband to cover her face because he was worried that she might stray or that some man or other might find her attractive, ignore the fact she was married, and convince her to stray. In other words, her husband didn’t trust her to show her face in public. She might as well have been in prison. Yes - all of that was conveyed by the look in her eyes!

As a result, as far as I’m concerned, the burqa should be placed in the same category as female genital mutilation. I’ve thought long and hard about this and the more I think -and learn - the more I would like to see both practices halted as soon as possible. As a feminist I’d like to see equal rights for all human beings with no exceptions. The people who object to my calling for this ban seem to think I am some kind of extremist, anti religious, nut which I’m not. Neither practice is even religious in origin. They both have their roots in the insecurities of men and the subjugation of women. The “culture” that forces people to wear the burqa is the same type of culture that has parents holding their own daughter down while someone slices off her external genitalia with a blunt, rusty knife (sometimes, if the parents pay extra, a clean razor blade is used – isn’t that good of them)! Girls in the communities where the burqa is worn or genital mutilation is commonplace are brainwashed to believe that men will be whipped up into a sexual frenzy on seeing a woman’s hair or that they won’t be able to find a good husband or be a “proper” woman if their sexual organs are intact. Indeed, in those areas where female genital mutilation is practiced mothers are ostracised for trying to protect their daughter from this disgusting, unbelievably cruel and life-threatening procedure. This is patently ridiculous.

The answer is education. Organisations like the WHO, The Orchid Project and Forward are working hard all over the world to educate people about the health risks involved in genital mutilation and are having some success. I highly recommend supporting these organisations.  For an example of the cruelty involved watch this (warning!  Very distressing).

The burqa is another matter. The indoctrination of girls and young women is very similar but any health risks are difficult to measure. Health risks there certainly are. That young woman I came across in Lancaster is a prime example of someone enduring mental torture because of mens’ insecurities! If the burqa was to be banned in all western countries, and people were properly educated as to the reasons for the ban, then word would, surely, go around the world and women in countries where they have to wear this ridiculous garment (by law!) may start to question why; I’d like to hear the answers they’re given!!

Please sign the petition to raise awareness of the need to end female genital mutilation.

Please excuse the spacing of the paragraphs – my knowledge of websites is limited. Sorry.

This is a subject that makes my blood boil. I’m sure everyone reading this will have seen my actions on facebook and know this already. Really, I could go on for hours and hours on this one. The more I learn the more I want to beat the sh*t out of someone!

I’ve started a petition on gopetitions (1) to bring attention to this despicable and unbelievably cruel practice. I tried to start the petition on the UK governments’ website but all petitions have been suspended – I suspect until after the Pope has visited in September as we don’t want to offend a “Head of State!”

Back to female genital mutilation. This has, contrary to popular misconception, no real roots in religion although a small amount of those who carry out the procedure do believe that it is a religious requirement. The vast majority of the girls who are subjected to the procedure are under the impression that if they aren’t “cut” then they will not be a proper woman, will not find a husband and will be somehow “unclean.” So it’s cultural rather than faith based

There are basically four types of female genital mutilation (I refuse to use the initials FGM as I believe this lessens the impact), classed by the World Health Organisation as follows (warning - some people may find the following upsetting):

1. Clitoridectomy: partial or total removal of the clitoris and, in very rare cases, only the prepuce (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoris).

2. Excision: partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora (the labia are "the lips" that surround the vagina).

3. Infibulation: narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and repositioning the inner, or outer, labia, with or without removal of the clitoris.

4. Other: all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, e.g. pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterizing the genital area. (2)

Immediate complications can include severe pain, shock, [fatal] haemorrhage (bleeding), tetanus or sepsis (bacterial infection), urine retention, open sores in the genital region and injury to nearby genital tissue. Longer term complications include extensive damage of the external reproductive system, uterus, vaginal and pelvic infections, cysts and neuromas, increased risk of Vesico Vaginal Vistula (a degrading condition causing holes between the vagina and other organs like the bladder), complications in pregnancy and child birth, psychological damage, sexual dysfunction and difficulties in menstruation.(3) Sick stuff!

Just try to imagine any of the above happening to your daughter. Any mother, in the communities where this procedure is prevalent, who tries to protect her offspring from this very painful “operation” is ostracised and treated as an outcast. The pressure to comply is such that, even if the family do not want to subject their young girl to a lifetime of pain and infection, they must, because their daughter will be worth less in the eyes of their peers!

The roots of female genital mutilation go back a very long way and are complex and numerous. It predates Islam by a fair bit for a start (indeed, in the parts of the world where people butcher girls, all religions are practiced). Wherever I look I can’t find – anywhere – a reason for anyone to mutilate their daughter in this way. My own opinion is the subjugation of women to satisfy the insecurities of men in the same vein as the wearing of a burqa or veil.

Somewhere between 100 and 140 million girls and women are living with the consequences of this disgusting, degrading, painful and totally unnecessary mutilation. 3 million girls are at risk every year in Africa alone.

I could go on (and on) but I’ll conclude, for now, by saying this: If anyone who has read this doesn’t go on to sign the petition (1) then they must have a swinging brick for a heart!  Please, if enough people sign the we can make a difference.

Apologies for the tardiness – the website has been down over the weekend.

Anyone who has seen the home page will know I have started a petition to have the Pope arrested when he visits the UK in September. The reasons for this – in case anyone was on a desert island for the last 48 years – is to let the powers that be know how people feel about the catholic churches’ cover up of the paedophile priest scandal and in particular the Pope’s own involvement when he was head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (that’s the Inquisition to you and me).

A Papal “Bull” was issued by the Vatican in 1961 with the seal of Pope John XXIII warning Bishops they may be excommunicated if a wall of silence didn’t descend whenever a priest was accused by a member of his congregation of soliciting sex (1).

As Cardinal Ratzinger the current Pope sent out a letter in May 2001 reminding all Bishops that the “Bull” was still valid. Texan Lawyer Daniel Shea: 'These instructions went out to every bishop around the globe and would certainly have applied in Britain. It proves there was an international conspiracy by the Church to hush up sexual abuse issues. It is a devious attempt to conceal criminal conduct and is a blueprint for deception and concealment.' (1)

However, “Rev Thomas Doyle, a US Air Force chaplain in Germany [at the time the story broke] and a specialist in Church law, has studied the document. He told The Observer newspaper: 'It is certainly an indication of the pathological obsession with secrecy in the Catholic Church, but in itself it is not a smoking gun.’”

He does go on to say though: “'If, however, this document actually has been the foundation of a continuous policy to cover clergy crimes at all costs, then we have quite another issue. There are too many authenticated reports of victims having been seriously intimidated into silence by Church authorities to assert that such intimidation is the exception and not the norm.’” (1) And this from a priest who is an expert!

Through the Go Petition website I received the following message last week:

“I don't know if that particular Priest was a pedophile Priest or not. But, my question is, if you seriously think our Beloved Holy Father was in the wrong way back then, why wait so long before you decide to try to do something about it? That's way too far in the past, for one thing.

”Another thing, our Dearly Beloved Holy Father is a good Holy Father!! There are more pedophiles out there than in the Roman Catholic Church. So, go find them instead and leave our Beloved Holy Father, and the Holy Roman Catholic Priesthood, alone!!”

I’d like to address the main points of this message:

The priest in question is a convicted paedophile call Kiesle who pleaded no contest to charges of tying up and molesting two young boys in the seventies. That was a long time ago I agree but that doesn’t mean crimes committed more that a few years ago are no longer worthy of investigation does it? I waited until now to take action because the letter written by the current Pope (again) on this subject only came to light in April this year! For anyone not aware - as Cardinal Ratzinger he wrote to the Diocese of Oakwood in the US urging caution before defrocking anyone!

‘There are more paedophiles out there than in the Roman Catholic Church.’ What? Is this person for real? Nobody is denying this or calling the Pope a paedophile. The problem is the Churches’ covering up of those crimes for all those years! Other organizations would’ve sacked the offender immediately and informed the relevant authorities. Keisle wasn’t defrocked until the late eighties.

So, my devout friend, after doing a bit of searching I have come to the conclusion that the Pope does, indeed, have a case to answer. Not just the Pope of course - every member of the “holy” Roman Catholic Priesthood who has been involved in the cover up of these crimes should be investigated and, if appropriate, charged and tried!

I’d like to follow on from my first blog last week where I mentioned an IM exchange I had with a Facebook friend (who has since blocked me) about homophobia and womens' rights such as abortion.

As a reminder, my friend accused me of “laughing at killing babies” because I supported abortion rights.

Let’s take a closer look.

I have never in my life met anyone who believed abortion should be used as a routine method of contraception and I myself am no different. Family planning and effective birth control should be available to all. One of the problems is that a 100% safe, effective contraceptive (other that total abstinence) doesn’t exist (1) and there are many examples whereby failure of condoms, the “pill” etc and, of course, individual carelessness results in unwanted pregnancies. According to the womens' issues website about.com only 8% of women who have an abortion haven't used any form of birth control. (2) So the accusation of routinely “killing babies” is misjudged at best and downright disingenuous at worst.

There is also the matter of civil rights. Banning abortion altogether is as much an attack on women’s rights as making people wear the burqa. If we were to do this then where would it end? Forced contraception? Selective breeding? Slippery slopes indeed! All women, wherever they are, should always have full control over what happens to their bodies with no exceptions. Nobody in their right mind could possibly disagree with this basic premise.

Another argument used by my friend was that of giving a child up for adoption: “i agree if a women has been raped then yeah, but a life is a life give your baby to a less fortunate family who can't have children of there own, 9 months of labour is nothing to give someone a life.” (sic) This, in my view, is a terrible viewpoint. If you believe that nine months of "labour," with the associated emotional rollercoaster and morning sickness etc, is "nothing" then you either haven’t been pregnant or have been extremely lucky. The fact is that, in the US at least, less than 3% of women choose to give away their children after birth and who can blame them? (2) The statement “You must have that baby you didn’t plan and you must give it away after birth!” Sounds very chilling and dictatorial does it not?

But it’s the situation in the third world that makes me most angry. During the recent G8 summit hosted by Canada the Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, announced that his country would be increasing funding for medical care for women giving birth and caring for young children in the third world. He also urged all other developed countries to do the same. These are commendable ideals and should be applauded – after all 350,000 women worldwide die each year during childbirth and a staggering 9,000,000 (yes nine million) children under five die also. The problem I have is that Harper, a conservative, also said Canada would be withholding funding for abortion services. This is hypocrisy of the highest order - as an editorial in “The Lancet” pointed out: “The Canadian government does not deprive women living in Canada from access to safe abortions. It is therefore hypocritical and unjust that it tries to do so abroad.” (3) Many of those deprived of this desperately needed medical service then go on to have a “back-street” termination. As “The Lancet” points out 70,000 women die each year whilst undergoing an unsafe abortion. Medical abortions have less than a 0.5% risk of serious complications and do not affect a woman’s ability to conceive in the future. (2)

There are also the socio-economic issues. Children born into poverty – especially those that are unwanted – anywhere in the world have very little to look forward to in their lives except misery and more poverty. Effective family planning and access to a safe abortion service would greatly alleviate these problems and improve the lives of everyone concerned.

Killing babies. This is another important argument. At what point does a fertilised egg become a person? Is it as an embryo? Hardly. If an abortion is carried out before a nervous system has developed then no pain is felt by mother or embryo. The fact is that 50% of all pregnancies spontaneously abort on their own anyway - so if god exists he is the biggest abortionist in history (with a nod to Sam Harris for that one).

So, my absolutist ex facebook friend, I will end by saying, after evaluating the evidence and thinking things through properly, that no, I am not laughing at killing babies nor condoning such. I am merely advocating rational thinking, common sense and human rights. Please keep your bigoted, badly thought out, knee jerk reactions to yourself!

I had an instant message exchange on Facebook last week with someone who objected to my posting of anti homophobic links and images and my support of women’s rights such as abortion. My friend, who was mostly reasonable, accused me of “laughing at killing babies” and thought it was “abnormal to shove something up ur arse I’m afraid.” (sic)

Let me explain why I don’t like homophobia. I’ll leave the subject of abortion for another day.

On 10 September 2009 The then Prime Minister of Great Britain, Gordon Brown, made a public apology to the late Alan Turing (http://bit.ly/90lklc).  Turing was one of the most influential men of the 20th century. It is no exaggeration to say that without him the Second World War would have lasted many more years, computer science wouldn’t be as advanced as it is now and his work on reaction-diffusion equations is now central to the field of pattern formation in mathematical biology (http://bit.ly/a3dXIA).  Quite the genius then.

This poor, eccentric, man was convicted in 1952 of “gross indecency” a euphemism for “being gay.” He was offered the “choice” of a prison sentence or chemical castration (the injection of female hormones). He chose the latter. The strain this put on him was so great that two years later he took his own life at the age of 41 by biting into an apple containing potassium cyanide. It is definitely fair to say that the world is a poorer place because of this terrible and sad episode.

“But that was almost sixty years ago! Things have changed now.” I hear you say. Okay, let’s fast forward to the time I myself was serving in the British Army. In 1990 a Sergeant Major, coming to the end of his service was attached to my regiment and was, outwardly, VERY homophobic (funny place the military closet). He happened to be “caught” having sex with another man in the Sergeants’ Mess. He was hauled before a Court Martial, reduced to the rank of Lance Corporal and kicked out of the army on a much reduced pension. He also had the stigma of a criminal record for the rest of his life! It’s been announced that any person convicted in this way will not be receiving a pardon or the full pension they most definitely deserve. The British Army now actively recruit gay people and set up stalls at Mardi Gras’ among other things to facilitate this. There have been no adverse effects on operational ability or morale due to this change in attitude (http://bit.ly/kFczC).

This was still twenty years ago. Let’s look at the present. People from the LGBT community are still facing the death penalty in Iran and other countries for being homosexual. Two asylum seekers, one from Cameroon and one from Iran, who would have faced persecution or even death in their home countries, were told by British authorities to “hide” their sexuality when they were deported after having applications for asylum rejected (http://bit.ly/dgmHLY).  Luckily the high court, applying compassion and common sense, upheld their appeals against this ludicrous judgement.

These are just a few of the many thousands of examples I could give where homophobia is demonstrably obnoxious and dangerous. I’ve used these particular stories because they are examples where the hate is institutional (in the 21st century?) and can easily be proven to be counter productive (as well as downright evil). There are many people in the world suffering because it’s their neighbours, family and colleagues who are perpetrating this insidious practice (these beasts are the ones this piece is really aimed at) so the lines are much more blurred and, as such, it’s much more difficult to deal with.

So, I’ll end by making the following statement: ‘I’ll stop being anti homophobic and shouting “another straight for LGBT rights” when homophobia stops destroying lives and killing people!’