THE CORNELL DAILY SUN | Thursday, September 4, 2014 7
OPINION
Eric Pesner |
P
Dems Discuss
Where Are the Women in Congress?
olitically speaking, what happened this summer was fairly ordinary and unsurprising. Republicans got mad at President Barack Obama. Democrats got mad right back. Vladimir Putin was a bully towards Russia’s neighbors. There was an uptick in extremist violence in the Middle East. And, the Republicans were annoyed that a bunch of kids fleeing violence didn’t have the right papers. But, somehow, the least surprising revelation of the summer — even less surprising than the Israelis and Palestinians shooting rockets at each other — was that sexism is still prevalent in the political sphere. This sexism was articulated most clearly by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand in her new memoir. Senator Gillibrand, one of the most ardent fighters against sexual harassment in the military, opened up about the sexual harassment that she herself faced in the halls of Congress. Even today — in what has been called the world’s greatest deliberative body — a woman can be treated as nothing more than a sexual object. Do her fellow Senators really respect her opinions when they say things like, “Don’t lose too much weight now. I like my girls chubby.” While these comments should be utterly shocking and disappointing, can anyone really be surprised? In a body where four out of five members are men and the average member is 62 years old, it might actually be too much to expect a 21st century belief in women’s equality from them. And it’s doubtful that anything will change until more women are elected to Congress.
The relative scarcity of women in political how women should get access to contraceplife has a profound impact on our country. tion shows how backwards we really are. Looking at the policies passed by Congress Access to affordable contraception is a fundaand at the state level, it’s obvious that women mental part of any national healthcare policy, get the short end of the stick. Organizations but, for at least one political party, the certainthat provide critical health care to women, ty of that fact is in doubt. When conservative particularly Planned Parenthood, are targeted politicians and commentators call contracepand shut down because of exaggerated conser- tives “dangerous” and call the women who use vative histrionics about abortion. Women are them “sluts,” it’s no wonder that women vote forced into uncomfortable and unnecessary the way they do. A critic of my view on Hobby Lobby medical procedures in attempts to dissuade them from making personal decisions about would say that Justices Ginsburg, Kagan and their medical care with their doctors. Sotomayor ruled as they did not because they’re women, but because they’re liberals, Maternity leave and paid but I think family leave are that those two almost non-existent anywhere in the Even though most women propositions not entirecountry. And though identify with and vote for the are ly indepen60 percent of miniDemocratic Party, they are still dent. Eighty mum wage workers are women, the minheavily underrrepresnted. percent of women in the imum wage remains Senate and 76 far too low. Despite all of these pressing issues and percent of women in the House are more for women’s rights, the most discussed Democrats. In 2012, President Obama won women’s issue of the summer was about birth women voters by 11 points. Women have control. In a five-to-four decision in the broadly rejected the Republican Party, and the Hobby Lobby case, the Supreme Court said Republicans have no real strategy to win back that the religious beliefs of corporate owners their votes. But even though most women identify are more important than female employees’ access to the medications that they and their with and vote for the Democratic Party, they doctors want them to take. And in an entirely are still heavily underrepresented within the predictable course of events, all of the women Party structure. About 30 percent of on the Court sided with the healthcare rights Congressional Democrats are women, which isn’t great, except when compared to the paltry of women. The fact that our country is still debating eight percent of Congressional Republicans
who are women. But things are looking up. About 150 women won either the Democratic or Republican nomination for the House or Senate this year, and the number of women in Congress will likely be higher next year than now. President Obama has appointed the most women as judges out of any President. And, in just over two years, it’s very likely that a woman will be elected as President of the United States. But in order to finally free the halls of Congress from the sexism that Senator Gillibrand experienced, more women have to get involved. Women need to stand up and make their voices heard, by running for office, by making sure that they vote, and by working and volunteering for the candidates that they support. I spent my summer working for Martha Robertson who is running for Congress this year to represent the district that includes Ithaca. And should she win in November, Congress will gain a powerful voice, not just for the women of this country, but for everyone. And there’s no better time to get involved than while here at Cornell. There are so many organizations to be involved with, whether general political groups or any of the dozens of issue-based groups on campus. Making a difference begins with stepping up, and I hope that everyone will take that first step this fall. Eric Pesner is a senior in the College of Arts and Sciences. He may be reached at erp55@cornell.edu. Dems Discuss appears alternate Thursdays this semester.
THROWDOWN THURSDAYS Julius Kairey |
I
Always Right
Islamophobia and Racism
n the United States, to be termed a racist is to be shunned from the arena of respectable debate, and for good reason. History has repeatedly shown the dangers of racist argumentation, and few of us wish to entertain the types of arguments that have proven so harmful in the past. Yet, some groups have become quite aggressive in branding critics of Muslims and Islam as racists. Organizations like the Council on American Islamic Relations seek to name and shame these “Islamophobes” and limit their access to the public airwaves. But is Islamophobia truly racism? The answer depends on how the term is defined. If it is defined narrowly as degrading and hateful attacks on Muslims, it is. But when the term is used to cover well-grounded criticism of Islam as a religious ideology simply because such criticism seems to portray Islam in a negative light, it ceases to describe racist behavior. Indeed, the term “Islamophobia” in the latter sense seems to demand that Islam not be critically examined like other value systems. We rarely use terms like “conservative-phobia” or “liberal-phobia” to describe aggressive criticism of conservatism and liberalism, respectively, and we never consider such criticism to be the equivalent of racism. Why? Because we believe that critical examination of ideas is essential in a free and democratic society. We should not pretend that all values — including values associated with religion — are created equal. If they were, we would never have a basis for preferring any one value to any other. We could not prefer democracy to autocracy, or freedom to slavery. As it happens, there is a lot to legitimately criticize about the goings-on in the Islamic world today, and I do not just refer to the actions of fringe groups like ISIS, al Qaeda and Boko Haram. Mainstream values in Muslim countries are in sharp contrast with those in the West on some very important issues. Consider polling data from organizations like the Pew Research Center and the Anti-Defamation League. When it comes to women’s rights and status, more than 85 percent of Muslims in countries like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Malaysia believe that a woman “must always obey her husband.” The percentage of Muslims who view
homosexuality as morally acceptable is below 15 percent in nearly every major Muslim country. Support for the implementation of sharia — or Islamic law — as official law is often above 70 percent. Additionally, the data shows that age-old religious intolerance is alive and well in the Muslim world. Less than 20 percent of Egyptian, Jordanian, Pakistani, Indonesian and Turkish Muslims view Jews favorably. In countries from Iran and Iraq to Malaysia and Kuwait, Holocaust denial is widespread, and most Muslims agree that “Jews are responsible for most of the world’s wars.” From harmful beliefs flow harmful practices. In Iran, women can legally be stoned to death for adultery and other “crimes against chastity.” In Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and a number of other Islamic countries, converting from Islam is
Even those Westerners who aggressively criticize their own civilization ... can do so only because the West permits criticism of itself. punishable by death and “blasphemers” can be killed for religious insult. Most Muslim-majority countries prescribe a penalty of imprisonment or death for homosexuality. Under Islamic rule, granting only limited exceptions, freedom of thought and expression is stifled, sexual freedom is restricted and democracy is non-existent. We should stop pretending that our notions of fundamental human rights do not conflict with the beliefs and practices of much of the Islamic world. The deplorable views and practices I described above are not limited to a few extremists with radical interpretations of Islam. Let me be clear that I am not in any way suggesting that all Muslims believe in such values and practices (many risk their lives to oppose them), or that all Muslims should be held responsible for the behavior of Muslim countries or that Islam
is an essentially bad religion. I would similarly not suggest that we hold all Christians responsible for the actions of Christian countries or all Jews responsible for the behavior of Israel. There are over one billion Muslims in the world, and they do not all believe exactly the same things. That being said, I believe the frequent use of the term “Islamophobia” is symptomatic of a more fundamental problem: We have become much too apologetic about our own culture, and far too willing to adopt a relativistic framework when comparing ourselves to others. I do not consider the West’s core values — consisting of things like freedom of speech, frequent elections, equality of rights, rule of law, pluralism and secular government — to be merely different from the authoritarianism and theocracy that predominates in the Muslim world. I consider our values to be better. Is that a form of Islamophobia? If it is, then we are all Islamophobes. I suspect that few of you would want to spend the rest of your lives in most of the world’s Muslim countries. Is it because you hate Muslims? Or is it because you appreciate the range of freedoms available in the West but not in Islamic countries? Even those Westerners who aggressively criticize their own civilization (but, tellingly, seldom leave it) can do so only because the West permits criticism of itself. Living in the West, you are free to doubt the value of freedom and democracy. Living in an Islamic country, you could face severe punished for questioning fundamental Islamic tenets. Even the West’s staunchest self-critics, therefore, implicitly demonstrate what is so great about our civilization. To call critics of Islam racists is to strip the term “racism” of its true meaning and limit the term’s ability to properly shame despicable behavior. It is a mistake to confuse criticism of ideas with demeaning the people who hold those ideas. We should either shelve the term “Islamophobia” or restore its proper, narrower meaning so that we can have an open debate about what values our society ought to hold most dear. Julius Kairey is a senior in the College of Arts and Sciences. He may be reached at jkairey@cornellsun.com. Always Right appears alternate Thursdays this semester.