A caller on Wednesday, conveying thoughts often heard on liberal talk radio, has inspired the following thought in me: Why is what we know about the thinking of women from other cultures comes from gender activists in this country, and Western-educated women from those cultures seeking to be accepted in the Anglo world? Every day I go to work I see Muslim women from Somalia wearing head scarves and skirts down to their toes working on the ramp. I don’t know what lurks beneath the surface, but I know what I see. I see people who don’t seem to act particularly unhappy or oppressed; they just go about their daily business like their men do, or anyone else for that matter. Yet you can bet your last dollar that there are people who will assume because of their dress that this is symbolic of oppression. Frankly, if the people making that assumption want to dress in dull shabbiness, that’s their business.

The media often reports cases where women are harshly punished or even killed, to avenge offenses against “family honor,” and such cases are clearly examples of cultures whose ideas in that regard have not progressed much since the dark ages. But making assumptions based on that, and what women from other cultures are supposed to think, doesn’t explain why a Muslim woman would strap a bomb under her garments, walk into a crowded marketplace, and kill dozens that include other women and children. Nor does it explain why women in Rwanda joined men in committing genocide, or why the “saintly” Winnie Mandela—even after her soon-to-be ex-husband became president of South Africa—ran her own little mafia operation, deploying her “boys” to beat or kill people she didn't like. Nor does it explain why a woman in this country would put an infant in a plastic garbage bag and toss it in a dumpster (and then we’re supposed to feel sympathy for the “mother,” not the “victimizing” baby).

Nor should it be disregarded that many of these countries where there exists cultural mores we criticize have limited resources and/or harsh environmental conditions, where “opportunity” is largely limited to political and military elites. The fact is that when we judge other cultures by Western standards, we tend to miss such subtleties—if not deliberately ignore them for politics’ sake. Our way is not in every case the “better” way; in Jordan, there are increasing complaints against U.S.-trained police, who like many of their U.S. counterparts are apparently “trained” to beat and kill unarmed people who have not committed a crime.

Just watched a fantastic documentary from the BBC by Adam Curtis (per Thom's advice) Called "The Trap"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7QtzHjj-bg

Tells the whole story about the rise of game theory and it's impact on the Milton Freidman philosophy of free-markets.

It's worth the 3 hours!

Mark, what are you even talking about? Do you expect to see Muslim women sobbing because of their dress as they go about their work? Lots of them like to dress that way because they believe it is proper. Some do not and are forced to do so or they’ll be hurt or killed. THAT is what’s bad. I don’t know how you can make a judgment about what’s going on with a person based on your interpretation of how they appear to you as you head to work. How is that any different from what others ascribe to the treatment of women worldwide? And a few bad women = no such thing as oppressed women anywhere in the world?

Higher education costs in California has set increases in tuition at 32%. This reminds me of the 1920s when only the rich were able to go to college. We are heading back to the 1920s. Thom has continuously said that our higher education should be more like several European countries that view free higher education plan as an investment plan to help educate our citizens. Employed citizens can pay taxes to help stimulate our economy.

True Confession - My friends in high school were either so regularly drunk, high, speeding or you name it while I worked, was on all the extra curriculum, and aced all my classes. So, for my very first presidential vote, I voted for Reagan thinking as exactly Thom's Theorem about the matter, that some structure and discipline and old fashioned morality and pride in workmanship would be brought back into the country. The 70s did get a bit too Cheech and Chongish.

Actually, no, Muslim women wear headscarves because it's part of their religion. Sometimes they have to just put it on their heads, sometimes they aren't allowed to have even one hair show (or else), sometimes they have to cover their entire faces and bodies. Depends on their sect. The more liberal ones, if you can call them that, allow for colored scarves. Others do not. I also highly doubt that shapeless, baggy long dresses will ever become fashionable here. Sounds kind of moo-moo (mu-mu?)-like. Nobody wants to dress like that. And yes, I speak for all women. :)

Mark, can you tell whether a woman who is not wearing a scarf is Muslim or not?

You have an "observer bias" issue here.

Food Fascist,

I did watch the slide show. There were some very pretty photos. But if it was designed to convince me that head scarves are worn for fashion, it didn't work. Females do wear scarves as fashion, but I highly doubt that this is the reason Muslims wear them. We know there's not a whole lot of choice over there. Do secular Iranians wear them? I don't know.

Anyway, what Tom is talking about now is WAY more interesting--Reagan, Bill Casey, hostages, etc.

Yes DDay-

My Tai Chi Master had introduced me to the concept of polarity many years ago. In a purists sense of the concept, for every Mother Theresa on the planet, you have a Charles Manson. This is the balance of the light and the dark. I also read this in a book on Angels where the philosophy is that The Devil himself was that floor of the darkness while the other Angels were the ceiling of good and that we are here sort of bouncing off both as peoples trying to balance each other out.

"The only way Republicans can win is by lying or stealing elections." One of the reasons I love Thom.

The Students Are Revolting

(I really had to hold back bad puns, here...)

No really, college students throughout California's campuses are saying "Enough!" to outrageous increases in college tuition. It would be nice if the "revolt" could go national (video):

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31510813/#34040493

Forget these carbon credits that benefit only the giant guzzlers of oil products.

We must change our lifestyles, create sustainable communities that are contained and aim at being PLANT-BASED. Remember, PLANTS ARE BENEFITTING FROM THE CO2 LOAD AND WE MUST ADAPT TO THAT PHENOMENON. That means fashioning plant-based economies.

I agree with today's caller who told Thom we needed to RATION and control and reduce our uses of oil products. I enlarge that to include the reduction and ending of the use of any class of COMBUSTIBLES. It is time to get tough. Relying of FILTHY Oil was NEVER a good idea in the first place. That's obvious and always has been. Combined with insane predatory capitalism, it has resulted in an ever-increasing rate of OVER-CONSUMPTION to keep up with HYPNOTIC MARKETING (MIND CONTROL) and OBSCENE PROFITEERING.

Many nations have already feverishly consumed their own rich resources (often for imperialistic warfare and adventures); then they scam to attain the resources of the rest of the world. The sooner these nations undertand their greedy, over-consumption lifestyles MUST end and be replaced by sane and simplified lifestyles the better! Right?

And in a refashioned society where everyone is responsible for reducung consumption -- then what the heck would the benefits/motive be to being obscenely wealthy, if by law you could no longer obscenely over-consume?

Special thanks for today's excellent broadcast!