Stand Up, NOW! The National Organization for Women Refuses to Take a Position on Atrocities Against Women

By Farmer Refuted, published Nov 28, 2007
Published Content: 21  Total Views: 5,707  Favorited By: 3 CPs
Rating: 4.0 of 5
Gillian Gibbons is a 54 year old British teacher in the worn-torn country of Sudan. She teaches a class of 7 year old children and decided to incorporate a teddy bear into the lesson plan. Each student would take the teddy bear home for a weekend and then write a journal entry about what they did with it. Now Ms. Gibbons faces up to forty lashes as punishment. Her crime? Allowing her students to vote on the name of the teddy bear. They chose to name it Muhammad. And so the government has charged her with insulting Islam and inciting hatred.

Forty lashes is not a small punishment. It is physically brutal and can be fatal. Women should stand up together in outrage over the unjust treatment of this woman who has put her own life in jeopardy to teach children in a region ravaged by human rights atrocities.

But where is the National Organization for Women? Are they leading the charge to free Gibbons? Are they working to bring attention to this horrible situation? Are they demonstrating and protesting and organizing letter writing campaigns? Nope. None of the above. In fact, NOW isn't doing much of anything about this.

A spokesperson for NOW has stated that the organization that is supposed to be "for Women" is, "not putting out a statement or taking a position." They will not even comment on whether or not they think what is happening to Gibbons is bad. Their silence on the fate of Ms. Gibbons is little better than condoning it.

Former president of NOW's Los Angeles chapter and former NOW board member, Tammy Bruce has criticized NOW saying, "The supposed feminist establishment is refusing to take a position in this regard because they have no sensibility of what is right anymore. They're afraid of offending people. They are bound by political correctness."

Unfortunately, this is not new for NOW. They have recently been criticized for ignoring the plight of a Saudi woman who was sentenced to six months in prison and 200 lashes for being the victim of a gang rape. There is no mention at all of the atrocities this woman is facing on NOW's website, nor has there been any official statement of outrage or call to action.

Stand Up, NOW! The National Organization for Women Refuses to Take a Position on Atrocities Against Women

Gillian Gibbons

Credit: Sky News

Copyright: Sky News

Takeaways
  • The National Organization for Women has done little to help the women under Islamic oppression.
  • NOW does not include any mention of fighting global oppression of women in its top priorities.
Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 8 of 8
 
 
How very, very, sad. I remember the first time I really realized the atrocities that still happen all over the world. It was when I did an in depth presentation on Sexual Terrorism in my master's program. People in this country barely have a clue. What are kids in high school need to learn, is what REALLY goes on this world of ours, not from outdated text books that are candy coated. We need to start raising kids that WILL do something about this type of outrage. Seems like our generation isn't doing too well!

Posted on 12/09/2007 at 1:12:06 AM

 
Kelly, It's the hypocrisy involved of the national groups that should earn the consternation of every reasonable American. They cherry pick the causes to blast. When it's a case involving a glaring abuse of human sensibilities their silence is deafening.......

Posted on 11/29/2007 at 8:11:00 PM

 
I understand you point, Kelly, but even though NOW is a nationally based group, that doesn't mean that they should ignore the trials women face in other parts of the world. They are refusing even to comment on the situations of either of these women. NOW won't even come out and say that they think anything is wrong with what is happening. I know their focus is the US, but does that mean that they should refrain from making any judgements about women outside the US? Even if they take no action, I think that they should at least condemn these two cases if they really believe what they say.

Posted on 11/29/2007 at 11:11:00 AM

 
Agreed, Bob. I guess NOW and the mainstream media just think that being tolerant and multi-cultural is more important than right or wrong.

Posted on 11/29/2007 at 11:11:00 AM

 
I get your point with this article, but NOW is a national, not an international organization. The only international issue I remember them taking a stand on recently was against a death sentence for a northern Nigerian woman who gave birth to a child out of wedlock. NOW supported getting asylum for the woman and does so for many immigrant women HERE. Amnesty International and the Human Rights Campaign are both vocally seeking justice for the British teacher and the Saudi woman, because those are international organizations. Which is not to say NOW isn't politicized and PC much of the time.

Posted on 11/29/2007 at 10:11:00 AM

 
Excellent article, and I was going to mention NOW in my article today about Gillian but it would have been a distractor against my central theme. Both you and Tony have a clear vision of the nonsense being played out in this country. The mainstream media also hasn't held NOW accountable for their lack of action. I suppose if the Sudanese refused to perform an abortion they would don their battle gear and rise to the occasion.

Posted on 11/29/2007 at 10:11:00 AM

 
Thanks! And I agree with you whole-heartedly! I find it shocking that NOW would actually come out and say that they will not take a position about a woman who is about to be unjustly beaten. It's bad enough to simply ignore the situation, but then they admitted to it! They waste all their time criticizing Western culture when the fact is that women who live in Western countries today enjoy more freedoms than anywhere in the world. The S-Ps should stop wasting their time complaining that TV commercials are sexist and start fighting to free people who actually are oppressed. By that would only happen if the S-Ps had values. And if they had values, they wouldn't be S-Ps.

Posted on 11/29/2007 at 9:11:00 AM

 
Excellent article!You can count the ACLU, ADL, and most S-P American movements as not looking out for true victims. Most American S-P movements care more about carrying George Soros' water and devaluing America, than actual human rights. The proof is in the pudding. Most of these outfits cry foul over anything religious, traditional, or any thing furthered in America's interests. Yet these same groups embrace Islamic causes and serve as apologists for the worst despots in power today.

Posted on 11/29/2007 at 12:11:00 AM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 8 of 8
 
Most Commented On