European politics: Into the "right" futur

[Sullen]

 

this is what I was referring to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Front_(France)

State interventionism is not something that defines a government as Left or Right, it's something that defines its position either as a Libertarian or Statist entity. By all definitions, the FN would be a statist (relatively) authoritarian right wing party with a serious nationalist streak, I wouldn't go as far as to call it fascist yet, but I can certainly see where people come from when they do so.

In layman terms, the left-right axis is generally defined by their views on the natural order, the right believing that the natural order is fair and just, and in need of conservation, while the left believes it to be unfair and in need of re-balancing (change), in favour of the People. 

Uh, what?

SF support same-sex marriage, are opposed to academic selection in education, are anti-nuclear power, support nationalised healthcare and are pro-immigration. All of these are usually viewed as left-wing social positions. The main exception is abortion, but there are obvious reasons for that. What 'socially right-wing' policies of SF did you have in mind? Or is it just that you are reluctant to accept the idea that nationalist parties can be genuinely left-wing, so insist that it's about 'expedience' or that they're only 'economically' left-wing?

Support for nuclear power is neither left wing or right wing though, environmentalism and nationalism are two beasts that are completely independent from a party's position on the left-right axis, or at least, that's what was taught to me.

[Tijgy]

A little look on wikipedia: 

Jean Marie Le Pen is convicted because he told the Holocaust was a detail in the history of the WWII. 

"Je suis passionné par l'histoire de la Deuxième Guerre mondiale. Je me pose un certain nombre de questions. Je ne dis pas que les chambres à gaz n'ont pas existé. Je n'ai pas pu moi-même en voir. Je n'ai pas étudié spécialement la question. Mais je crois que c'est un point de détail de l'histoire de la Deuxième Guerre mondiale. 

He called the jewish minister Michel Durafoir Durafoir crématoire. He said it is possible to solve the immigration problem by using ebola. 

Donald Trump might be an American version of him. 

However... 

His daughter publicly distanced herself from him. His membership of the party is temporarily suspended and will be discussed later. She is not using the same techniques like her father to shock people, looks moderate and is according to some people considered more dangerous because she does not scare people away? 

 

[mormont]

Support for nuclear power is neither left wing or right wing though, environmentalism and nationalism are two beasts that are completely independent from a party's position on the left-right axis, or at least, that's what was taught to me.

While I would concede that there are left-wingers who are pro-nuclear power, there are relatively few right-wingers who are anti-it in my experience. And traditionally, being anti-nuclear power has been seen as a left-wing policy, not least because of the strong historical association with nuclear disarmament.

[Sullen]

While I would concede that there are left-wingers who are pro-nuclear power, there are relatively few right-wingers who are anti-it in my experience. And traditionally, being anti-nuclear power has been seen as a left-wing policy, not least because of the strong historical association with nuclear disarmament.

I'm my experience as well, but their support of nuclear energy is not something that emerges comes from their right wing ideology, it's simply a position that is coincidentally espoused by a lot of right-wingers. There is not exactly conservative in nuclear energy, as there is nothing especially liberal about environmentalism, despite most of its support coming from liberal-minded individuals. Even pacifism is not a leftist value in itself, after all, extreme libertarians are as right as right goes, and yet they're against any form of outside military intervention without proper cause for it.

The correlation is there, I won't deny that, but not the causation, is what I'm saying. As such, I'm not exactly sure calling nuclear-favorable policies "right-wing" would be exactly appropriate.

[Hereward]

Wanted to have same kind of positiv title, but one can already guess what it is about. The right is winning in Europe big time. And by right I do not mean the conservatives, I refere to nationalists.

Great Britain with Ukip was among the first but I guess thanks to their closed door policy(supported by beeing an Island) it didn't got worse.
 

I have to take issue with this. UKIP are by no means among the first. The FN have been around since the early 70s, made the top two in the presidential election in 2002 and had substantial parliamentary and local representation from the late 1980s onwards. Germany has had groups like Die Republikaner and the NPD, who have had more success than UKIP through the years. Belgium has had the Vlaamse Blok, the Netherlands has had the Party for Freedom and, arguably, Pim Fortuyn's mob. I would also suggest that UKIP, as unpleasant as I find them on most issues, has never been as explicitly extreme as any of those groups, with the possible exception of Fortuyn.

Lastly, Britain does not have a closed door policy. It has dealt with mass immigration longer than any other European country bar France and the Netherlands. Also, it has a percentage of its population born abroad that is comparable with the highest in Europe and, I would argue, has had greater success in adapting to immigration than any other country in Europe. Certainly, educational attainment rates and workforce participation are far higher than in almost every other European country.    

 

[Tijgy]

In the polls actually the Dutch Party for Freedom (Dutch extreme-right) was actually the first party in the Poll last week (39 virtual seats) while the second party (of the current PM I think) only has 20 seats.

I must say the (old) success of Vlaams Belang/Blok depended on two things: their anti-immigration policy which exists from the 80s and their fight for more Flemish autonomy or more exactly a Flemish independent state. But this party do not technically mean that much anymore. However they are coming back in the polls (the second largest party has just 3% more than them). 

And Pim Fortuyn was actually also compared to Mussolini and Hitler? 

In Austia you have also the FPÖ which was already founded in 1950s and is also gaining a lot of votes. 

Edit: And in the Northern Italy you have also the Lega Nord who is also very popular. Like Vlaams Belang, it is a secessionist party who wants more autonomy for the northern Italian region, Italy as a federal state and is anti-immigrant.   

 

 

[Biglose]

I have to take issue with this. UKIP are by no means among the first. The FN have been around since the early 70s, made the top two in the presidential election in 2002 and had substantial parliamentary and local representation from the late 1980s onwards. Germany has had groups like Die Republikaner and the NPD, who have had more success than UKIP through the years. Belgium has had the Vlaamse Blok, the Netherlands has had the Party for Freedom and, arguably, Pim Fortuyn's mob. I would also suggest that UKIP, as unpleasant as I find them on most issues, has never been as explicitly extreme as any of those groups, with the possible exception of Fortuyn.

I guess it depends on what you define as sucess (getting at least 10% of the vote in some regional election or the europeen election would be my line, well I guess the best way is looking at the election of the europeen parliament because the rules are the same in every country.). The NPD was more or less irrelevant as were die Republikaner and they both still are. And yes, FN was quite early on, this is why I wrote among the first.

Really successful they got only under Marine Le Pen. Sorry, I just wrote two sentences for each, obviously this could not cover a comparism to every other one. And even the front national got their first mendate in 1997 and could increase it to 2 in 2012 (in between they drop to 0). Granted I draw quite broad lines, because I only see a real success of right wing politics in europe since about 2005. So Ukip was among the first successful once, the afd is probably the most recent example. Or what you see in Poland right now.

And Britain has been closing the door for some time now. Cameron right now tries to renegotiate a new deal with the EU because of those polish workers. I guess it depends on the timeline your looking at. But I don't think it is reasonable to look at a time where it had not been a problem in the EU. Thats more or less about 2010 actually. And a noticible trend to the right you see starting around 2000 with the socialist loosing. I guess the timetable is the problem with both our disagreements.

 

[The guy from the Vale]

I'd say Austria and Switzerland have to be among the first ones besides France. The right-wing SVP/UDC and it's predecessor BGB has been part of Swiss politics for decades, and the dominant political force in Switzerland for the last 25 years. Similarly, the FPÖ has been aroudn quite some time.

[SeanF]

I'd say Austria and Switzerland have to be among the first ones besides France. The right-wing SVP/UDC and it's predecessor BGB has been part of Swiss politics for decades, and the dominant political force in Switzerland for the last 25 years. Similarly, the FPÖ has been aroudn quite some time.

The FPO was originally a liberal party. Under Haider, it became radical right.

[SeanF]

I guess it depends on what you define as sucess (getting at least 10% of the vote in some regional election or the europeen election would be my line, well I guess the best way is looking at the election of the europeen parliament because the rules are the same in every country.). The NPD was more or less irrelevant as were die Republikaner and they both still are. And yes, FN was quite early on, this is why I wrote among the first.

Really successful they got only under Marine Le Pen. Sorry, I just wrote two sentences for each, obviously this could not cover a comparism to every other one. And even the front national got their first mendate in 1997 and could increase it to 2 in 2012 (in between they drop to 0). Granted I draw quite broad lines, because I only see a real success of right wing politics in europe since about 2005. So Ukip was among the first successful once, the afd is probably the most recent example. Or what you see in Poland right now.

And Britain has been closing the door for some time now. Cameron right now tries to renegotiate a new deal with the EU because of those polish workers. I guess it depends on the timeline your looking at. But I don't think it is reasonable to look at a time where it had not been a problem in the EU. Thats more or less about 2010 actually. And a noticible trend to the right you see starting around 2000 with the socialist loosing. I guess the timetable is the problem with both our disagreements.

FN have been winning 10-15% for years. However, MLP has taken them into a different league, where they're now part of the French mainstream. Broadly speaking, radical right parties have sucked votes away from left as well as right, reducing the left's overall support, but fragmenting the right.

[Prosesskrift]

In reference to the opening post of this thread; I don't think you could make a strong case for Norway moving to the right, or becoming more nationalist. Right now there is a center right minority government consisting of the moderate right wing party (Høyre) and the populist right wing party (FRP). FRP is fairly sceptical of imigration, but is not comparable to for instance UKIP on that issue. Also, FRP has not grown in size and did a fairly poor election compared to some previous ones. They also did very poorly in this years local elections. 

The government is supported by the liberal party (Venstre) and the christian party (KRF), both of which are pro imigration by any standard.  

Norways largest party by a substansial margin is still the Labour party (Arbeiderpartiet). They led a left wing majority government for eight years up until the election in 2013. They also did very well in the local election this fall. The pattern of Norwegian politics since the eighties have been a back and forth shift between Høyre and Arbeiderpartiet.

In addition, by most countries' standards the Norwegian right wing is left wing, and that includes FRP.

[Lyanna Stark]

I find it bizarre that people are surprised there are anti-immigration and racist sentiments in Europe. The only difference between Europe and the US on this point is that in the US it has historically been more accepted in some areas to spout these kind of views openly, while I suppose Europe got some things to think about during and after WW2.

Which, btw, we now seem to have conveniently forgotten.

In any case, it seems to me these views were always there, only it really wasn't accepted in the mainstream to hold them, but now it is. Only this time it's easier, since "muslims" is a group easier to paint as the Other than the jews. If we look at a lot of the other thoughts surrounding the right-wing nationalist movements though, they're very often socially conservative in ways that are reminiscent of the National Socialist movement, even if it's not a perfect match. 9 times out of 10, the view on women is strongly traditionalist and LGBTQ people are victimised. The claim to limit or abolish immigration may be the main driver, but it's not the only thought underpinning these movements.

[Biglose]

In reference to the opening post of this thread; I don't think you could make a strong case for Norway moving to the right, or becoming more nationalist. Right now there is a center right minority government consisting of the moderate right wing party (Høyre) and the populist right wing party (FRP). FRP is fairly sceptical of imigration, but is not comparable to for instance UKIP on that issue. Also, FRP has not grown in size and did a fairly poor election compared to some previous ones. They also did very poorly in this years local elections. 

The government is supported by the liberal party (Venstre) and the christian party (KRF), both of which are pro imigration by any standard.  

Norways largest party by a substansial margin is still the Labour party (Arbeiderpartiet). They led a left wing majority government for eight years up until the election in 2013. They also did very well in the local election this fall. The pattern of Norwegian politics since the eighties have been a back and forth shift between Høyre and Arbeiderpartiet.

In addition, by most countries' standards the Norwegian right wing is left wing, and that includes FRP.

If I am not missinformed norway too closed the border for refugees. So I am not sure where right wing starts, it depends on the definition. I am not saying that this is bad or evil or anything. The point is, that something like that would not be thought of in norway 10 years ago. (In Germany right now the workers party is questionably more to the right on immigration (or at least on a good way ) than the conservativ party, well with the exception of the CSU, maybe. Which is again hard to tell, because the CSU did on the factual level more to help the refugees than any other party. This is part of my point, that right and left seem to realign in europe.

I find it bizarre that people are surprised there are anti-immigration and racist sentiments in Europe. The only difference between Europe and the US on this point is that in the US it has historically been more accepted in some areas to spout these kind of views openly, while I suppose Europe got some things to think about during and after WW2.

Which, btw, we now seem to have conveniently forgotten.

In any case, it seems to me these views were always there, only it really wasn't accepted in the mainstream to hold them, but now it is. Only this time it's easier, since "muslims" is a group easier to paint as the Other than the jews. If we look at a lot of the other thoughts surrounding the right-wing nationalist movements though, they're very often socially conservative in ways that are reminiscent of the National Socialist movement, even if it's not a perfect match. 9 times out of 10, the view on women is strongly traditionalist and LGBTQ people are victimised. The claim to limit or abolish immigration may be the main driver, but it's not the only thought underpinning these movements.

It is an interesting point. But there is quite a dangerous component to it. There was a running gag I heared several times in germany, which pritty much goes like: Well, I am a straight man so why should I have anything against islamisation. Well, more and more women do not find it that funny anymore. 10 Years ago, when nobody would actually believed that and it was more or less to make fun of overstated fear of islamisation, well the situation was different. And thats not as trival as most stuff about women rights used to be (simply because this is affecting at least the majority if not nearly all and not some fringe groups of women or there are two equally big parts of the female population on both sides). If you really lose the mothers, you lose the next generation. And thats actually already happening.  (The youth does not vote left anymore...)

[Prosesskrift]

Biglose, you are misinformed. 

[Biglose]

Biglose, you are misinformed. 

This might be, then the Spiegel missinformed me. Would not be the first time.

It said that Norway would be closing the boarder to Russia for refugees (mainly from afghanistan).

[Lyanna Stark]

It is an interesting point. But there is quite a dangerous component to it. There was a running gag I heared several times in germany, which pritty much goes like: Well, I am a straight man so why should I have anything against islamisation. Well, more and more women do not find it that funny anymore. 10 Years ago, when nobody would actually believed that and it was more or less to make fun of overstated fear of islamisation, well the situation was different. And thats not as trival as most stuff about women rights used to be (simply because this is affecting at least the majority if not nearly all and not some fringe groups of women or there are two equally big parts of the female population on both sides). If you really lose the mothers, you lose the next generation. And thats actually already happening.  (The youth does not vote left anymore...)

 

I don't understand this. The people mostly affected by islamisation are muslims. Which means that the main group targeted by sharia law fanatics, zealots etc. will generally be immigrant women, and maybe more specifically muslim women. White women are generally not the target for sharia law enforcers, neither are white men. Hence I am uncertain why people seem to think "islamisation" is something that will create "Eurabia" within a generation. There is no islamisation happening in society as a whole as far as I have noticed. I may be wrong, but I should think large scale conversions to islam should have been noticed. It also will not effect the mainstream view of equality since it is today mostly the domain of white, middle class women, and this group is not particularly affected by muslim zealots. This is a misdirection.

So the question remains: this concern about equality is baffling to me as a feminist since it appears in people who generally couldn't give a flying fuck about feminism or LGBTQ rights or anything remotely like that. In fact, most of the concern is displayed by groups traditionally opposed to mainstream feminism and LGBTQ activism. Why the sudden concern trolling about equality?

I'll be the first one to voice my dissent with social conservativism, but what I don't understand is where this fear that people arriving her with basically similar views to our own social conservatives will suddenly convert a majority of the population, while everything in progressive direction will also automatically stop. All this also just "happens" and nobody can do anything about it, it seems. It's like something that will happen by default.

I agree that often women are the key to equality, but what better chance to change something than give women who come here education, information and a chance for a better, more equal life, in the name of feminism? To me, it seems obvious that in order to enact real change, we need to act, not just complain. Women are, as stated, often the key to their own emancipation. Why not give them the tools instead of just viewing them as victims? In my view, society doesn't do enough to empower women to get educated, to resist forced marriage, resist genital mutilation, to resist all the conservative pressures that exist, and a lot of the time this is because nobody cares about the women, or see them as infantile victims. In general, immigrant women are a very disenfranchised group, so perhaps instead of complaining about islamisation, we can try and figure out who to empower this group and give them a stronger voice.

 

Further, I find it somewhat amusing to hear someone from Germany complain about immigrants lacking in equality. I would assume the house wife culture among the immigrants would fit perfectly with what is de rigueur in Germany today. The conservatives should be happy, not depressed. I mean sure, women have the right to vote, but that's the case in Saudi Arabia as well, from this year, so that's hardly a huge claim to equality.

[SeanF]

I don't understand this. The people mostly affected by islamisation are muslims. Which means that the main group targeted by sharia law fanatics, zealots etc. will generally be immigrant women, and maybe more specifically muslim women. White women are generally not the target for sharia law enforcers, neither are white men. Hence I am uncertain why people seem to think "islamisation" is something that will create "Eurabia" within a generation. There is no islamisation happening in society as a whole as far as I have noticed. I may be wrong, but I should think large scale conversions to islam should have been noticed. It also will not effect the mainstream view of equality since it is today mostly the domain of white, middle class women, and this group is not particularly affected by muslim zealots. This is a misdirection.

So the question remains: this concern about equality is baffling to me as a feminist since it appears in people who generally couldn't give a flying fuck about feminism or LGBTQ rights or anything remotely like that. In fact, most of the concern is displayed by groups traditionally opposed to mainstream feminism and LGBTQ activism. Why the sudden concern trolling about equality?

I'll be the first one to voice my dissent with social conservativism, but what I don't understand is where this fear that people arriving her with basically similar views to our own social conservatives will suddenly convert a majority of the population, while everything in progressive direction will also automatically stop. All this also just "happens" and nobody can do anything about it, it seems. It's like something that will happen by default.

I agree that often women are the key to equality, but what better chance to change something than give women who come here education, information and a chance for a better, more equal life, in the name of feminism? To me, it seems obvious that in order to enact real change, we need to act, not just complain. Women are, as stated, often the key to their own emancipation. Why not give them the tools instead of just viewing them as victims? In my view, society doesn't do enough to empower women to get educated, to resist forced marriage, resist genital mutilation, to resist all the conservative pressures that exist, and a lot of the time this is because nobody cares about the women, or see them as infantile victims. In general, immigrant women are a very disenfranchised group, so perhaps instead of complaining about islamisation, we can try and figure out who to empower this group and give them a stronger voice.

Further, I find it somewhat amusing to hear someone from Germany complain about immigrants lacking in equality. I would assume the house wife culture among the immigrants would fit perfectly with what is de rigueur in Germany today. The conservatives should be happy, not depressed. I mean sure, women have the right to vote, but that's the case in Saudi Arabia as well, from this year, so that's hardly a huge claim to equality.

I imagine that most Muslim women, like most Muslim men, see their religion as beautiful ; and their values as correct, and have very little desire to change them.

As to why people would fear Islamisation, a big issue is security. The town I live in (Luton) is 25% Muslim. There are repeated arrests and searches in relation to terrorist offences. Fortunately, the authorities seem to be on top of the situation. But, no one likes the feeling of being under siege.

[Biglose]

 

I don't understand this. The people mostly affected by islamisation are muslims. Which means that the main group targeted by sharia law fanatics, zealots etc. will generally be immigrant women, and maybe more specifically muslim women. White women are generally not the target for sharia law enforcers, neither are white men. Hence I am uncertain why people seem to think "islamisation" is something that will create "Eurabia" within a generation. There is no islamisation happening in society as a whole as far as I have noticed. I may be wrong, but I should think large scale conversions to islam should have been noticed. It also will not effect the mainstream view of equality since it is today mostly the domain of white, middle class women, and this group is not particularly affected by muslim zealots. This is a misdirection.

Unless you enforce segregation or you only are talking about a small minority (1-2%) thats simply not true.
There are a lot of factors playing into that. If germany would have a police force like the US, what you are saying would also be closer to the truth. As a simple example in europa, which everybody knows take Rotherham.

Because it is a different level. Look  if I am to be honest the one experiance in the last 4 years where I heard people actually talk about genderstudies and their affect on their life were two women in the bibilothek of a university where one was complaining that she could not find the right bathroom. The other replied in an eyerolling voice "yeah, gendersomething". But do you think one of them would consider themself as less capable as a men or that they should be treated with less respect in their job? No, of course not. It is probably not even been part of their live experiance (granted they were still young) And thats the one incident I can remember hearing people talking around me about gender-anything in the last 4 years outside of special circumstances.

In general, immigrant women are a very disenfranchised group, so perhaps instead of complaining about islamisation, we can try and figure out who to empower this group and give them a stronger voice.

Frankly, I do not really know if that is a good Idea at the moment for it would probably really end in a clash of cultures. Because it would basically mean that all the laissez-faire germany practiced in the last 30-40 years would be totally reversed. Look, two  years ago I would have been totally on board with it and there are a lot of muslim women fighting against honor killings, forced marriages and so on and they have been ignored or even actively fought by the german/austrian mainstream (because they were afraid of clash of the cultures or simply did not care enough). And I never found that to be the right thing to do.

Further, I find it somewhat amusing to hear someone from Germany complain about immigrants lacking in equality. I would assume the house wife culture among the immigrants would fit perfectly with what is

de rigueur

in Germany today. The conservatives should be happy, not depressed. I mean sure, women have the right to vote, but that's the case in Saudi Arabia as well, from this year, so that's hardly a huge claim to equality.

And I guess this attitude is part of the reason why feminism is so in decline in europe...

Look, how people manage their work life balance is not really my business unless I am somehow involved with them personally or we work together. Their attitudes to what consitutes rape personally, their attitude to homosexuality or to transgender people, I simply do not care. Everybody can live by whatever morality the choose to live by. Fine by me. The only problem for me is, if they start dragging their morality into the open. Be it beating up homosexuals or honorkillings or attacks on people they think act immoral or are "demanding it".

So simply put: I am not that concerned about what happens between muslims under the sheets or in their homes, I am concerned what happens in the german ballot box.  Calling the AFD racist has failed, the feminism deflection you used (already heard those arguments) seems to make it worse. (Because think about the two types of women you may hit with your "german housewife culture argument". Well you have housewifes who then feel personally attacked and you have women who are not housewifes and are not planning on beeing and they feel their concerns ridiculed. I do not think this is a good approach)

What probably would be something is stricter ruling on rapes and extending the definition to no means no. But I had been in favor of that anyway... So this might be the opportunist in me.

 

[The guy from the Vale]

I guess we need Crixus to offer the perspective of Muslim women... again. I would have thought her message had caught on by now.

[SeanF]

Unless you enforce segregation or you only are talking about a small minority (1-2%) thats simply not true.

There are a lot of factors playing into that. If germany would have a police force like the US, what you are saying would also be closer to the truth. As a simple example in europa, which everybody knows take Rotherham.

Because it is a different level. Look if I am to be honest the one experiance in the last 4 years where I heard people actually talk about genderstudies and their affect on their life were two women in the bibilothek of a university where one was complaining that she could not find the right bathroom. The other replied in an eyerolling voice "yeah, gendersomething". But do you think one of them would consider themself as less capable as a men or that they should be treated with less respect in their job? No, of course not. It is probably not even been part of their live experiance (granted they were still young) And thats the one incident I can remember hearing people talking around me about gender-anything in the last 4 years outside of special circumstances.

Frankly, I do not really know if that is a good Idea at the moment for it would probably really end in a clash of cultures. Because it would basically mean that all the laissez-faire germany practiced in the last 30-40 years would be totally reversed. Look, two years ago I would have been totally on board with it and there are a lot of muslim women fighting against honor killings, forced marriages and so on and they have been ignored or even actively fought by the german/austrian mainstream (because they were afraid of clash of the cultures or simply did not care enough). And I never found that to be the right thing to do.

And I guess this attitude is part of the reason why feminism is so in decline in europe...

Look, how people manage their work life balance is not really my business unless I am somehow involved with them personally or we work together. Their attitudes to what consitutes rape personally, their attitude to homosexuality or to transgender people, I simply do not care. Everybody can live by whatever morality the choose to live by. Fine by me. The only problem for me is, if they start dragging their morality into the open. Be it beating up homosexuals or honorkillings or attacks on people they think act immoral or are "demanding it".

So simply put: I am not that concerned about what happens between muslims under the sheets or in their homes, I am concerned what happens in the german ballot box. Calling the AFD racist has failed, the feminism deflection you used (already heard those arguments) seems to make it worse. (Because think about the two types of women you may hit with your "german housewife culture argument". Well you have housewifes who then feel personally attacked and you have women who are not housewifes and are not planning on beeing and they feel their concerns ridiculed. I do not think this is a good approach)

What probably would be something is stricter ruling on rapes and extending the definition to no means no. But I had been in favor of that anyway... So this might be the opportunist in me.

I hadn't realised the Rotherham scandal had been reported abroad. But, the common feature in Rotherham, Rochdale and other urban centres has been the willingness of police and local councillors to treat "good community relations" as being more important than child protection, for political reasons, and thus to ignore abuse on the part of Muslim men.