[Facebook Query on post 26th October 2017]

Context: In context of the MeToo campaign (where initially, women who’ve faced Sexual Harassment were encouraged to voice their experience), there was some debate in the Muslim community about whether men who also faced sexual harassment, should also have their experiences included in the campaign.

You’re right that in practice, due to biological or other reasons, men and women in the West don’t do as the egalitarian Secular Liberals imagine they would do – but that doesn’t mean that this is not the ideological paradigm dominating the West that is trying to uniform society into its desired mold. It’s those theories and formulas about individualism, that actively attempt to treat sex (i.e. gender) as inconsequential as hair colour. To the adherents of this ideology, if they reject our advice and insist on believing it, we simply ask them to at least be consistent when they apply it.As to your second point, the idea behind the MeToo campaign was ‘sexual harassment’, so it was expected that ALL sexual harassment would be discussed no matter what the source (e.g. female perpetrators), or who the target (e.g. men) – especially if the cause is the same (the sexualisation of society).Another example, Breast Cancer awareness campaigns, although being an illness that mostly affects women, but the campaigns are careful to include men – simply because it effects both men and women.Likewise, if there was a Xenophobia awareness month, that only dealt with xenophobia towards Muslims (i.e. Islamophobia), then sure, I’d disagree with that. If there was a ‘history awareness month’ that dealt with only, say Chinese history, then that toowould be odd that it was so focused.

If you counter-argue that ‘well, the reason for black history month, is because English/Western-European history is disproportionally taught in schools’, then sure, that is an understandable reason – but that argument would still work against yours. This is because you’d have to show that the Sexual Harassment of males was so disproportionately focused on to such a degree, that female victims needed a special awareness campaign to draw attention tothem. In fact, the opposite is the case, and I won’t be surprised if Men’s Rights Activists ( or ‘Meninists’, which I deem to be gender sectarian individualists like Feminists – but on the opposite side) make that exact argument.

Furthermore, the research shows that men are less likely toconsider inappropriate sexual comments or advances against them (by women) as ‘sexual harassment’ – again, this is something that the MRA’s probably would use to argue for the more urgent need of an education campaign for that subject.

MRA’s even argue the women dressing with revealing clothing is a form of ‘biological sexual harassment’ [1], and even argue that there needs to be an awareness campaign for this amongst men and women, because the current (Western) culture usually only defines Sexual Harassment if males create a ‘the conduct creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment’ [UK Sexual Harassment law [2]]. In fact, the MRAs use such a definitionto argue that women wearing body revealing clothing in both the workplace and in public constitutes such an environment(!)

However, returning back to the point at hand, because society tends to focus on the common Xenophobias of racism and antisemitism, an Islamophobia awareness campaign is needed toredress the imbalance.

So in conclusion, there is no intellectual justification to focus on one section of victims (or people) if a problem (or topic) effects (or involves) more than one section of people – UNLESS it is toredress an imbalance in society’s previous coverage which had biased one section over another.

I hope that’s clear sister

---

 

[1] http://www.smh.com.au/…/booby-trapped-20120212-1t0hl.html

[2] https://www.workplacefairness.org/sexual-harassment-legal…