Feminism and Islam

Our Swedish correspondent Mårten Gantelius returns with a brief look at the parallels between feminism and Islam.

Feminism and Islam
by Mårten Gantelius

The word “feminism” is dezinformatsiya just as ”socialism” and “communism” are. The words imply that these ideologies represent women, weak people and the working class respectively. They don’t!

Feminism Islam
Not equal under the law Sharia
Placing themselves as victims Same
Stealing from men Stealing from infidels
“Woman-hater” “Islamophobe”
Threats Same
Lying Taqiyya
Collectivists. No facts, please. Same
Brutality Same
Aggrieved women Blasphemy
Exterminate men Caliphate
In the best interests of children Religion of Peace
Reprisals Fatwas
Schools of Social Work,
Social Authorities,
MSM, Women’s Refugees etc.
Men that are feminists Dhimmis
Hate Same
Infiltration, affirmative action Same

The Swedish Feminist leader Gudrun Schyman said “Men are animals” and got away with it. If a man were to say “Many single mothers are criminals” — which is true — he would be sued for discrimination.

The Muslims slaughter thousands of Christians and Jews. A Muhammad cartoon causes a fatwa.
If women were to start a company “exclusively for women”, it would be regarded as “a worthy initiative”. If men were to do the same, they would be convicted of discrimination.

Maybe this is off-topic, maybe not. In 1977 or ’78, I saw a performance entitled “Ditto Daughter” at a small theatre in Copenhagen. The author was the well-known Elsa Gress Wright, married to the American painter Clifford Wright.

In the play, two women were speculating about how things were 500 years ago when there were still men on the planet. The only male individuals now were castrated slaves to be used for necessary physical work.

Among other things, they quoted Lord Byron and D.H. Lawrence, but they had big trouble catching the point. A thought-provoking and very witty performance.

This vision won’t come true. Paradoxically, Islam is the guarantee of the survival of the male sex.

Previous posts by Mårten Gantelius:

2013   Nov   16   “American Betrayal”: A Swedish Perspective
2014   Feb   4   The Swedish Model
    Mar   3   The True Merchandise

46 thoughts on “Feminism and Islam

  1. I completely disagree with your interpretation of ‘feminism’. Maybe normal women who appreciate equal rights need to reclaim the term.

    Mårten, quite simply: do or don’t you believe that women and men should have equal rights before the law? If you do, then in my book you are a feminist. If not, then this site is giving space to a misogynist.

    I am a feminist, which means I appreciate the work former feminists have done to ensure women’s equality before the law. I love my male partner and appreciate my male friends. I oppose islam in part because it is misogynist and violent against homosexuals.

    Regarding Women’s Refuge – it has saved lives! How can you not want a beaten women be able to find a safe place to live? Women’s Refuge exists for all women abused in a relationship, including lesbians, so it’s not ‘anti-male’.

    I’m commenting here to ensure people see that not all readers of this site agree with anti-feminist statements.

    • Feminsm ……………. Islam

      Women are more compassionate ……. the religion of peace and goodness
      Working the system, welfare, courts $$$ …….. Same
      Everything is white men’s fault …… Everything is the non-Muslims fault
      Us first (everyone else out of the way) …….. Same
      Dish it out but can’t take it ….. Same
      Hysterical ……… Same
      Unscientific ………. Same
      “Equal to men” but can’t prove it …. The Greatest Civilization/can’t prove it
      Invariably vote leftist …….. Same

      (I really like lists, so clean and to the point, Mårten.)

      Feminists are self-blinded to the harm they cause. Hey, just like the Muslims!

      Chivalry is dying away as the old feminists ignore the effect of their terminal self-absorpsion. Mother Nature don’t care about no feminists; she will always have her way.

      • Women are more compassionate ……. I don’t claim that
        Working the system, welfare, courts $$$ …….. Wrong, whoever does it
        Everything is white men’s fault …… I don’t claim that
        Us first (everyone else out of the way) …….. I’ve never demanded that
        Dish it out but can’t take it ….. What’s ‘it’? If you mean violence, wrong either way.
        Hysterical ……… Haven’t seen much of it.
        Unscientific ………. ? No idea what you even mean?
        “Equal to men” but can’t prove it …. Equal rights before the law doesn’t mean equal in every quality and field.
        Invariably vote leftist …….. I don’t

      • You New. Thank you. The list was only a first rough draft, ment to be built on, which you immediately understood.

        I will go on working on the comparison, and I can use your supplementary points. Thank you.

  2. I’m a feminist of the Margaret Thatcher – Sarah Palin school. Women are awesome, but then so are men.

  3. “The only male individuals now were castrated slaves to be used for necessary physical work.”

    As usual, as as in reality, women existing off the blood, sweat and tears of men.

    Even in a stage play, even set 500 years in the future, the truth still stands, even in the minds of “wymin”.

  4. Thank you, Guest. You saved me the trouble of writing the same comment. I’ll just add that real feminism changed my life for the better. Before things changed, women of my generation were routinely harassed in the workplace and everywhere else. Feminism happened because it was needed.

    It’s tragic that feminism morphed into its opposite later on, almost as if a parasite had digested and become it. It’s also tragic that so many otherwise pro-freedom people don’t remember or care how bad things used to be for women who wanted to live in public without the low-level sharia we used to have even in the West.

    IMO, the best society is one in which men and women try to live in balance with one another and don’t try to “win” at the expense of the other. Recently, this win/lose struggle has become an internet thing, with young men with little social experience blaming their lack of dates on women. Then they expand their theory to blame literally every problem on women.

    The irony is that the aspie Game cult is the mirror image of the faux feminist cult. They deserve each other, but unfortunately, these trendy ideologies take attention away from the real conversation.

    • Thank you for this post. Sorry to say there are some mysognistic attitudes lurking around this site. Women had to literally fight to get the right to vote in many parts of the world, feminism in its early role, was to make inroads towards parity under the law. Why I be paid less than a man for doing exactly the same kind of work.

    • It was never bad to live as a woman in Western society, not as good as it is today, but certainly never worse then being a man in the same timeperiod. Western women have become quite undateable, what those mra’s do on the internet, is only a verbal expression of what men do in real life, men who marry women in lower numbers, and prefer to stay single in relationships and marriages where the natural power balance and equality handed down to us from our traditions have been replaced with an understanding of relationships in which men are given duties but no rights.

      As soon as I notice a lady believes feminist propaganda, I prepare to tune out. This propaganda is omnipresent, in commercials feminist propaganda is used quite frequently. An example i saw yesterday concerned an add by an ngo, who stated that ‘women don’t need to fight wars to change the world’, which claims male moral inferiority.

      • It was never bad to live as a woman in Western society, not as good as it is today, but certainly never worse then being a man in the same timeperiod.

        Bless your heart.

        As a girl raised by a single mother who was underpaid, who could have her home mortgaged out from under her by her husband anytime he felt like showing up to do so, and couldn’t get a divorce bec of the laws in place, I have to tell you, Oz, you have no idea what you’re talking about. None.

        I was a “battered” woman who didn’t dare leave – after he developed whatever disorder he eventually presented with and then turned to alcohol to relieve the pressure, I was stuck. He finally left of his own accord for a newer model but I didn’t feel safe for years afterward.

        Marriage is a lottery. You can look carefully but still not know. The person I thought I married the first time wasn’t safe but by the time I knew that it was too late to exit safely. With the same qualities minus the head disorder and alcohol, the Baron *did* turn out to be what I’d wanted/needed the first time.

        Having counseled about three thousand battered women, the law considered me an “expert” in court cases. On that authority, Oz, I can tell you the sentence I copied out from your comment is so very very wrong it almost made me cry in frustration. How can anyone live in the world and believe what you said??

        I don’t hate men; I rather like them. In fact, despite my own experience at the hands of male misuse and rage, I’d rather hang with men since the normal ones are easier to get along with – FOR ME.

        But I know had I been born a man the chances I’d have had it easier *in many respects* are as obvious to me as anything I know. That’s not to say I ever wanted to be a man; especially nowadays – they have a hard row to hoe.

        I suggest you volunteer at a woman’s shelter to get a broader view on this subject. Their kids could use the experience of interacting with a man who doesn’t hit women and children. The shelters not run by the p.c. mavens would welcome you.

        If such a usually reasonable person as you could say something like that, I don’t dare look at the other comments here. I’m going to tiptoe out and calm my heart…

        • Thanks for these truths Dymphna. So do you consider feminists normal women who appreciate equal rights, or see them as the article states as extremists who actually want inequality? If we let ueberfeminisers take the name ‘feminists’ what’s left for normal women?

          • It depends on the individual woman.

            And just because emasculators take a name, it doesn’t mean they get to own it exclusively. I am a feminist, so are many women I know. But that doesn’t mean women ‘rule’ or whatever is the latest silliness. The tension that exists between men and women will always be there because it’s hard-wired in utero.

            Ghettoes of “Women’s Studies” in academia are sad when they’re not risible. What the fems did to Larry Summers at Harvard was disgusting, but so was his lack of manly demeanor in the face of their viciousness.

    • I was pro feminism when I didn’t get any dates and more anti feminism as I got more girls. I believe it’s because it started to dawn on me, as my self confidence went up, that I too had some value as a human being even though I had been taught indirectly all my life that I was worthless because I’m a man.

  5. Thatcher and Palin are examples of Feminists? That is some nice taqiyya you are cooking up, girwulls. If you are Feminist, bottom line, you just disrespect men and have man problems…just as Muslims are contemptuous of non-Muslims. Me, I respect women, but not counterfeit men.

    Strong conservative women are not and never will be Feminists. Feminists are indistinguishable in thinking from other Cultural Marxists (as are Muslims). Feminists are power hungry (see Islam again), Thatcher and Palin are/were libertarian and for individual freedoms and markets, traditional values. Equality is nought but in the Eye of God.

  6. One of the inherent weaknesses of Western Judeo-Christian culture was its misogyny, picked up from the Garden of Eden.

    But look closely, somebody told the woman the wrong thing, he told her not to even touch the tree!, the women then confesses to having been deceived; she is forgiven under Torah.

    The man however has no excuses, he is arrogant, he blames the woman and Yahovah; he gets thrown out of the garden (you will note the the woman does not).

    The misogynist reinterpretation has the Woman tempting the Man; and thus justifying the lower status accorded to women, likewise Paul is misunderstood, too.

    Early feminism was out to fix this, and quite rightly so, but the meme was highjacked when the feminisation of men (and boys) became an objective; this was very damaging in the same way that homosexual-ism has moved away from being an mere equality movement to being an aggressively evangelical movement.

    The feminization of boys could be regarded as a variation of FGM, as it comprises a mutilation of the immature male mind; at this point feminism becomes obnoxious.

  7. Southern Cal Bill makes a male supporting statement, Guest shrieks foul.
    Yes, I said shriek. Maybe she can get a penalty call against the men from the official.
    Latte is worried about “winning at the expense of the other” but somehow I don’t think she is too worried about Billy.

    Now, if you are having trouble like me, trying to figure out what that is supposed to mean, remember it is only an imaginarily purposeful communist conundrum. “Winning at the expense of others.” Is someone enslaved I don’t know about, because if so I will stop laughing.

    Let’s get back to it Latte, Who does this Bill think he is?!

    (Latte Island is a classic GOV commenter from long ago. Wave.)

    Girwulls high five on Feminism. Latte Island high fives.
    Latte Island says how bad it USED TO BE before feminism.
    Latte Island says how bad it is NOW because feminism has “morphed into its opposite”

    Wha? “Feminism morphing into its opposite”? Why is it that I have this nagging feeling that this problem once again is somehow not your fault, oh girwulls? Perhaps the fault of some other non-womenly phenomenon, like sea otters?

    Maybe this is exactly what happens when you do that thing you insist on doing: Feminism, girwulls. Maybe “morphing into it’s opposite” is nothing but the outcome of applied Feminist thinking when it blends into the real world. I believe it is.

    • I’ll just ignore the ‘shrieks’ claim. Whatever, dude.

      Just answer me this: Do you want women and men to have equal rights before the law, be paid the same for the same work, have the same educational opportunities?

      If yes, we’re all on the same side here.

      • You speak of “equal rights before the law”. If you’re an American, can you give me an example within the past 45 or so years where women have not enjoyed equal rights before the law, apart from Family Court? I’m excluding Family Court because there the mother’s rights have been and continue to be considered far superior to the father’s, a terrible injustice that it seems feminists are happy to ignore.

        • Actually, based on WHO commits the vast majority of rapes and physical abuse, it is the MORAL choice to prefer mother custody of children in the absence of contrary evidence – just like, based on WHO commits pedophilia, it is the MORAL choice to prefer to mother-father adoptions instead of lone male, male-male, lone female, female-female, or LGBT-LGBT adoptions.

          • I don’t have the U.S. statistics, but I’m perfectly willing to concede that fathers abuse their children much more often than mothers. But that’s no reason to give the mother preferential treatment as concerns child custody where the father has been a responsible father and wants to continue in that role until the children reach adulthood, and where the children have no well-founded objection (referring specifically to situations where mothers turn their children against the father). Of course, if there’s evidence that the father has been or is likely to be an abuser, the nod must go to the mother. But for as long as America has existed — and probably for hundreds of years before that under English common law — individual cases have not been decided on the basis of population statistics.

          • “But for as long as America has existed — and probably for hundreds of years before that under English common law — individual cases have not been decided on the basis of population statistics.”

            First, thanks for a level-headed reply.

            Second, from its founding, America discriminated and decided cases for and/or against sexes, races, and classes based ONLY on their membership in certain populations.

            Women were NOT accorded equal rights to men.

            Indians and blacks were NOT accorded equal rights to whites.

            Poor men were NOT accorded equal rights to rich men (i.e., landowners).

            Fast forward to today and we now have ‘protected’ groups where the interests of some ‘protected’ groups outrank the interests of other ‘protected’ groups – who, in turn, outrank all ‘unprotected’ people.

            I cannot speak to the personal situation of Marten Gantelius. To me, it is concerning when a pseudo-communist state denies fathers (or mothers) a role in their children’s lives.

            But, with an eye towards my personal experience and extensive knowledge of the depth and breadth of child abuse, it is even MORE concerning when mothers are denied the opportunity to fight for the physical, emotional, and spiritual safety of their children under the FALSE premise of ‘parental alienation’ against fathers.

            ““I see parent after parent after parent punished for raising good-faith allegations in court in order to get the authorities looking at the same evidence they’ve seen,” he says. In all but one of the 20 to 30 cases Jacob has handled over the last 13 years, the accused abuser opted for the same defense: She’s trying to alienate me from my child. “It’s what I would do if I was an attorney representing an abuser,” he says.”

            Read it and weep: http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/1/24/does-a-controversialdiagnosishelpfathersdodgeabusecharges.html

        • SyB. Good point. And I know what I’m talking about. I refer to my video at vimeo.com: “Institutional violence against children in Sweden during recent decades”

        • I’m not American. I think equal rights are important, and am on this site because I fear that islam wants to take them away. If women are getting custody of children when clearly the man is the better parent, that’s wrong. I know a couple where the opposite has happened: the man has custody, because he’s considered the better parent.

          • Also, feminism to me doesn’t mean that there are huge inequities in the West we have to fight (your point re last 40 years). To me feminism means: we now have a pretty good balance, let’s keep it that way!

            Perhaps some tweaking at the edges (including, if you are correct, custody issues).

            This site, to me, is about showing where islam wants to destroy our equal rights.

          • Darn! I was spoiling for a fight, but it now seems that you’re a reasonable human being who happens to be female, and not a feminist who (according to my personal definition) regards her gender as superior to the other, which would be me.

  8. Forgot to mention women’s innate urge to marry up – and feminists just *love* the state. Sound familiar?

    And the oh-so tiresome feministic defense: “not all woman/feminists are like that” (nawalt/nafalt). Sound familiar? I guess we can coin the acronym “namalt”, now we’re at it.

    Dear ‘moderate’ feminists: you have failed to stand up and protest against the injustices of the radicals. This includes the emasculation of generation after generation of boys, and the introduction and implementation of a socialistic nannystate. And when everything comes tumbling you *will* be rallying to *us* to pick the rubble.

    Oh, you are like ‘that’ alright.

  9. The early women’s movement addressed the existence – and societal acceptance – of significant physical abuse of women and children by their husbands and fathers. The idea behind the American temperance movement was to prevent men from getting drunk – and beating women and children – and failing to provide food and shelter for their families due to alcoholism.

    “Temperance and Woman Suffrage were about much more than prohibition and the vote; they were powerful early expressions of what has become the continuing concern of the women’s movement for the social well-being of children and families and for the right of women to the same opportunities as men.”

    “The temperance women, often thought of in caricature as priggish, narrow-minded souls who abhorred alcohol, were largely motivated by the desire to eliminate the ill health, poverty, violence against women and children, and broken homes that resulted from its abuse.”


    The idea behind ‘quick and easy’ divorce – and mother child custody – was that women and children would be able to leave abusive relationships. The idea behind equal pay was that women would be able to support children – if needed – without abusive men.

    To wit, if abusive men had acted morally towards their dependents, then ‘feminist’ reforms would have been unnecessary.

    Modern relationships seem to have given men the ‘right’ to years of sex without the duty of commitment. It is rather obvious that more men would get married if more women would wait until marriage to have sex.

    The idea of marriage as a holy sacrament or joining of two souls – to be consummated upon marriage – to raise children in a happy God-fearing home – has been abandoned by ‘modern’ men and women. There is plenty of blame to go around.

    • Pleased to agree with you on most of this, Egghead, except the last paragraph; the fear of God was used to pressure women into staying in abusive relationships by “Christians”, and would be again if we had a theocracy- Christian, Muslim or whatever. The current situation is not ideal either, but does give people more options to exercise the free will which I daresay you would say God gave us.

      • Hi Mark,

        I understand your point, but I still stand by my last paragraph. 🙂

        A healthy fear of God is necessarily different than an unhealthy fear of spousal abuse.

        Where a spouse has a healthy fear of God, then spousal abuse is precluded from occurring in the first instance.

        Best regards to you. 🙂

  10. From Edith Clarke:

    “The temperance movement was made up of a lot of women, but there wasn’t a woman’s group until Susan B Anthony tried to speak at a Sons of Temperance meeting-and was told that women were suppose to listen and learn. So Anthony created the Woman’s State Temperance Society of New York, the first women’s temperance group. They wanted to outlaw drinking as they saw women and children left without food when their male provider drank away the family earnings. Susan B Anthony: http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1083.h

    “Stanton created the National Woman Suffrage Association after not being allowed to participate in the World Antislavery Convention in London-abolitionists refused to seat female delegates-Anthony became a major speaker and campaigner for the Women’s Suffrage movement. The women’s suffrage movement focused primarily on getting women the vote, but many people became involved in the suffrage movement after working with both the temperance and abolitionist movements. Women’s Rights Movement: http://www.answers.com/topic/women-s-rights-movement


    Interesting political cartoon:


  11. Gantelius apparently neglected to mention two additional factors of strange-bedfellowship between feminists and Muslims:

    1) a disordered degree of puritanism about sex (which Muslims have as one half of their sexual schizophrenia — the other half being demonic depravity)

    2) the tendency of too many feminists to bend over backwards to defend Muslims as some kind of Minority Underdog against the Evil White (Male) West.

  12. And immediately all the “feminists” are out gacking like hens.

    Seriously, why so thin skinned? I am a woman, I have power, I love the skin I am in.

    But this post has not caused me to take anything personal what so ever. I am one of the most emancipated women you could ever meet, yet, this article? It leaves me with nothing but the true message that the author has very effectively conveyed.

    Why are feminists always on their heels waiting for an insult so they can jump and yack about? Seriously, I sometimes wonder about women…

    • Interesting, ’emancipated’ instead of ‘feminist’. Some would see that as pretty much the same thing. All a matter of definitions.

      This is why I responded to the article: I don’t want emancipated women, moderate feminists, normal women – whatever we call them – driven away from this site and from the main issue: that islam does not allow women equality. I just want readers to understand that liberal people who see themselves as feminists also hang out here.

      ‘Hens’? Whatever, LOL…

  13. There are no ‘moderate’ feminists in my experience. The ‘moderate’ ones’ are all just fence sitters, and you know what happens when you sit on a fence, sooner or later you’ll fall off, and it’s always on the wrong side of it.

  14. In 1991, I started an organisation in Sweden, Mullvadarna (=The Moles), whos aim was to protect children from all kinds of physical and psychological violence.

    One day in 1992, I got a call from a local Women Refugee organisation north of Stockholm. She wanted to warn us about a woman that had told her she would contact us. I thanked her very much for her friendly initiative, but I could ease her that it didn’t take me many minutes to reveal the woman as a liar, only trying to get miney out of us (As if we had any!).

    The Refugee Woman told me about the huge problems she had with the local Social Authority. Could I agree with her more?!!!

    I told her that the Women Refugee organisations I had experienced were simple, criminal terror organisations. “I know”, she sighed, “They have totally taken over the entire organisation. It’s only a question of very short time before women like me are thrown out. And then the women that REALLY are beaten up by men will have nowhere to go. Those bastards only want to get their hands on the subsidies.”

    These are the feminists.

    • Sounds bad, and good for you if you’re working to really help battered women. I’m still a feminist, by my definition. If you’re for equality and helping battered women, then you are, by my definition, too.

      What are we by your definition?

  15. When the Swedish “Feminist leader” Gudrun Schyman in the very beginning of this post said: “Men are animals” – she, together with some sisters in faith, as the born and chick epigons theyare, quoted the SCUM Manifesto (Society for Cutting Up Men) by Valerie Solanas from 1967, which is said to be a ruthless diagnosis of patriarchy.

    A furious utopia for women who feel ready to rule the universe. A ferocious and original diagnosis of patriarchy. The man is in the twilight zone between ape and man. The man is obsessed with power, money and death; getting devastate and to get laid. For “civilized women” remains only to overthrow the government! – eliminate the economic system and destroy the male sex. “SCUM is a condition, an attitude, a way of thinking. An organization with an unknown number of members.”

Comments are closed.