NYT’s take on Iraq: It’s definitely sexist, but is it… true?
February 24, 2009
The New York Times daily e-mail highlighted a shocking quote from their article on the growing humanitarian crisis of Iraq’s war widows:
The article manages to provide a reminder of the crisis that will exist long after the war and insurgency end (wishful thinking, on my part?). And also the broader issues that condemn Iraqi women to continued subjugation.
The desperation that accompanies the loss of the family’s patriarch, in addition to the damanged national economy, leave war widows especially in untenable — and downright disturbing — circumstances:
“Officials at social service agencies tell of widows coerced into “temporary marriages” — relationships sanctioned by Shiite tradition, often based on sex, which can last from an hour to years — to get financial help from government, religious or tribal leaders.”
The only way I can interpret that statement is that widows have been forced into a form of blessed prostitution for survival in the absence of their husbands.
As horrible as Mr. al-Shihan’s comment may seem (and the NYT’s choice to include his laughing before the comment in the article makes it clear that the sexism and callousness of Mr. al-Shihan’s remarks was intentionally passed on), one wonders if the sexism that appears to permeate the culture (though I’ve heard that the sexism pre-war existed to a smaller degree in Iraq than many other mideastern nations) has left thousands of Iraqi women uanble to fend for themselves and their families in absence of their patriarch?
As easy as it would be to simply condemn Mr. al-Shihan’s remarks, I clearly cannot rival his knowledge of the situation and would be loath to make claims contending such. But if he is in fact speaking truth — and not just being an asshole — then the humanitarian crisis taking shape in Iraq’s war widows will outlast the war by years if not decades.
[And this may seem minor but is frankly the most shocking information I found in this article:
"Efforts to increase the government stipend for widows — currently about $50 a month and an additional $12 per child — have stalled. By comparison, the price of a five-liter container of gasoline, used for cars as well as home generators, is about $4."
The paltry stipend is not a surprise at all. But why is one of the most oil-rich countries in the world charging more for a liter of gasoline than Canadian gas stations (approximately $0.80/L CDN now, or roughly $0.64/L USD)? How does that make any sense?]
… and the cow goes moo
