[Fwd: [Fwd: Re: Prof. combats ignorance about Islam, women]]

[Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxx>]

If Katha wants to fire back on this post it seems to me that m-fem
would make a better locus than femecon-l. Hence my forwarding
of this post.

Carrol

--- Begin Message ---

• To: femecon-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Prof. combats ignorance about Islam, women]
• From: Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 12:58:01 -0500

Katha Pollitt wrote:

> I am disturbed when people try to make islam seem more
> woman-friendly than it is.
>  I chalk it up to third-worldism.

I'm not quite sure what all "third-worldism" implies, but it *can* mean
that U.S. activity outside its own borders is always destructive.

Anyhow, most religion is pretty obnoxious, and even liberation
theology is ultimately unsatisfactory though at present a progressive
force. But distinctions need to be made in terms of the battle in
front of one. Whatever their unpleasant features, Islam and Hinduism
(for example) have the advantage, from a U.S. perspective, of not
being the enemy *here*. Were I living in India or Iran Christianity
would have a similar advantage for me. But I live in the U.S.
and choose to keep my attention on Christianity as the enemy.
It is after all Christianity and not Islam which is the main
carrier of "family values" here. And the RCC holds
rather more property in the U.S. than Islam does.

I don't like U.S. communists who try to dictate revolutionary
tactics to COSATU. I'm suspicious of U.S. critics of religion
who look too far afield for their targets.

Carrol

--- End Message ---