Horrendous abuse of Moslem women by their husbands and other male relatives

Muslim feminist fights for women's rights in Italy

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Silvia Aloisi
ROME - Reuters

They may have hoped for a better life in a rich European country, but many Muslim women migrating to Italy suffer abuse by their husbands and live isolated from the rest of society, a Muslim feminist leader says. "We are not integrated at all. Many of the women who came here 15 years ago have not moved one inch forward, they live in a ghetto, they do not speak Italian, they do not go to school and often they do not work," Souad Sbai told Reuters. "Worse, they are often beaten up and abused by their partners: and I do not mean a slap in the face. I mean broken bones, knife wounds and burns with boiling-hot oil," she said.

Unlike in France or Britain, many Muslim immigrants in Italy come from rural regions of the Maghreb, where conservative views about women rights prevail: "Once in Italy, men adopt a do-it-yourself vision of Islam that completely marginalises women."

Sbai, who is 45 and has lived in Italy for 27 years, is the head of the country's Moroccan women's association, a moderate Muslim group campaigning for women's rights and giving legal advice to victims of abuse. Along with other Muslim leaders she helped the Rome government draw up guidelines for immigrants. The so called "Charter of Values", published last week, states that Muslim women should not wear veils that cover their face and reiterates that forced marriage and polygamy are banned in Italy.

More than 1 million Muslim immigrants live in Italy, mostly from North Africa, and about 40 percent of them are women who often joined their husbands a few years after they came to start a new life. But while the men in the family usually find a job and learn at least some Italian -- moving up the integration ladder -- their wives tend to stay at home and look after the children. Many end up depending entirely on their partner who may have conservative views on whether they should go out or find a job.

Statistics show that the percentage of legally registered Muslim women in Italy is much lower than that of men. In the case of Moroccans, the biggest group of Muslim immigrants in Italy, 86.5 percent of those who registered to live and work legally here were men against 13.5 percent of women. Among Tunisians, the percentages were 95.4 for men against just 4.6 for women.

"INVISIBLE"

"Many women become the property of their husbands, who often take their documents or don't get them residence permits, so they do not legally exist in Italy and they cannot go back home," said Sbai. "To the rest of society, these women are invisible. You will not see them dining in a restaurant, or queuing up at the doctor or going to the hairdresser. You will not see them doing the kind of stuff that would be normal in their own country."

She takes the example of Najat Hadi, a 46-year old Moroccan who sought Sbai's help after her Egyptian husband, beat her up repeatedly, including lacerating her breast with a spiked club, because she rebelled against his authority and did not accept the second wife that he brought home one day. The husband has since disappeared with two of Hadi's children.

Shocking statements from presidential candidates

The 2008 presidential race is off to a roaring start. Can you believe that during last week's debate, when asked if the day when Roe v. Wade is repealed would be a good day for America, Rudy Giuliani replied that "It would be OK to repeal" Roe?

I can. It was only three weeks ago that Giuliani and the other major Republican presidential candidates applauded the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Federal Abortion Ban.

The Court's decision is a perfect example of why next year's presidential election matters so much. An anti-choice president and Congress pushed this ban all the way to the Supreme Court. And now President Bush's appointees to the Court have rolled back protections for women's reproductive rights.

But we have a chance to stop this backward trend by sending a pro-choice president to the White House in 2008. NARAL Pro-Choice America supporters like you are already working hard to do just that.

During last week's debates alone:

• An estimated 5,000 supporters attended more than 400 house parties around the country.
  
  
• 15,255 supporters signed our petition thanking the Democratic Party for maintaining its pro-choice platform and encouraging it to support the Prevention First Act.
  
  
• 15,127 supporters signed our petition telling the Republican Party to change its platform opposing legal abortion and to support a Prevention First plank.

We need you to add your voice to these petitions to help us send a strong message to the Democratic and Republican Parties - please click here to sign the petition to the Democratic Party and then click here to sign the petition to the Republican Party.

We have had an incredible start to the 2008 election season, and, rest assured, NARAL Pro-Choice America will continue to research the candidates' positions on a woman's right to choose and keep you informed. You can keep learning more by reading what several of the candidates had to say about the Supreme Court's decision last month. We will also work hard to keep women's reproductive rights in the center of the 2008 debate.

There is much at stake in 2008, but, by working together, we will elect a pro-choice president!

Sincerely,

Nancy Keenan
President, NARAL Pro-Choice America

A formula that works | Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | News: Education

A formula that works | Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | News: Education

A formula that works

DISD school has competitive admissions, high test scores - and no boys

12:00 AM CDT on Sunday, May 13, 2007

By TAWNELL D. HOBBS / The Dallas Morning News
tdhobbs@dallasnews.com

Round any corner at the Irma Rangel school for girls, and you'll find evidence that learning is a serious mission.

JIM MAHONEY/DMN

Teenage girls swarm the halls at the Irma Lerma Rangel Young Women's Leadership School, DISD's only single-sex school. Opened in 2004, the high-performing school is unusual for reasons other than the absence of boys: Student activities include a lacrosse team and a handbell choir.

Student artwork – from paper quilts depicting different eras to student-made books to intricate drawings – is displayed throughout. A bulletin board is packed with college information. Teachers' academic credentials are posted on classroom doors. Another bulletin board provides information on famous "women of science."

And the girls at the Dallas school district's first single-sex school – turned out in their plaid uniform skirts and white blouses – exude confidence. They don't miss the pressures common at traditional schools – mainly those involving boys.

JIM MAHONEY/DMN

From left: Irma Rangel students Laura Payne, 16, Jennita Warren, 16, and 15-year-old Rosalina Tovar carry life-size baby dolls during their Spanish class as part of a two-week health-class project designed to reinforce the responsibilities of motherhood.

"You get to be yourself," said 13-year-old Adela Sanchez, taking a break from a robotics experiment using Legos. "When you're in a school with guys, you worry about what guys think."

The Dallas Independent School District opened the Irma Lerma Rangel Young Women's Leadership School in 2004 to try out the concept. It's now part of a growing trend. The number of single-sex schools across the country is still small, but it has more than doubled in just a few years. And last year, the U.S. Department of Education issued rules that will make it easier for school districts to create single-sex schools and classes.

Texas has three single-sex public schools – Irma Rangel and two schools in Houston for boys, according to the National Association for Single Sex Public Education. At least one other district, Austin, is adding a school.

Irma Rangel's early successes have led some DISD trustees to suggest that the district consider opening an all-boys school, though no one has made a formal proposal.

Rangel, which is near the Women's Museum in Fair Park, has grown from 126 seventh- and eighth-graders when it started three years ago to 329 students in grades six through 10. A grade is being added each year until the school reaches 12th grade in 2008-09.

Kennedy May Be Key to Abortion Limits

Kennedy May Be Key to Abortion Limits

Kennedy May Be Key to Abortion Limits

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Legal efforts to further restrict access to abortion will depend, in the short term, on whether Justice Anthony Kennedy is willing to go along.

The majority opinion he wrote upholding the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act offers hope both for those who think the impact of Wednesday's decision will be limited and for those who think it will be profound.

While Kennedy adopted some language favored by abortion opponents — "life of the unborn,""abortion doctor,""respect for life" — he also carefully distinguished the controversial procedure that was the focus of the Supreme Court case from a more common abortion method used after 12 weeks of pregnancy. The latter was unaffected by the ruling.

There was widespread agreement that the court's ruling was important, upholding for the first time a nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure. The key difference from earlier rulings was in personnel, with Justice Samuel Alito replacing Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

The majority — Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Clarence Thomas, Alito and Kennedy — consists of five Catholics who were appointed by Republican presidents who believed Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and should be overturned.

For the moment, though, Kennedy holds the balance of power. He has written key decisions on both sides of the long-standing divisive issue.

Particularly since O'Connor's retirement last year, what he thinks probably is where the court will come out when asked to consider new abortion restrictions enacted either by states or Congress.

Ed Whelan, a former law clerk to Scalia and later an official in the Bush administration Justice Department, said the decision most likely would invite new state laws banning the same procedure covered by the federal law and requiring that women seeking abortions be given detailed warnings about the dangers of terminating their pregnancies.

"Those regulations seem to me far more likely to be sustained," Whelan said.

But David Garrow, a Cambridge University historian who has written about the court, said the prospect of reducing the availability of abortion is remote, based on Kennedy's opinion.

"I not only don't think that the Kennedy opinion illuminates a path towards doing that, I actually think it creates obstructions, serious obstructions," Garrow said.

By contrast, Roger Evans, public policy director at the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said Kennedy opened the door to wide-ranging restrictions and, perhaps as importantly, signaled abortion opponents that they should test the limits of the constitutional right to an abortion that the court established in 1973.

Evans pointed to the court's about-face regarding the necessity of carving out an exception if the procedure is necessary to protect a woman's health. In past decisions, medical uncertainty on this topic was resolved in favor of allowing the procedure to be performed.

Kennedy changed that standard Wednesday. "Where there is medical disagreement, the tie no longer goes to protecting women's health," Evans said. "That's a troubling green light."

Prominent abortion opponents also suggested the door was open to more aggressive action.

Troy Newman, president of the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue in Wichita, Kan., said: "This is a new day in the abortion battle. After 34 years of innocent children dying throughout the country we now have a new court, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, that has a plan to end abortion in America."

Evans, an abortion-rights supporter, said the most salient common trait of the five-justice majority is that they were chosen by GOP presidents who oppose abortion.

Whelan, an abortion opponent, said the majority deferred to a democratically elected Congress. "They were not imposing their own views," he said. "It would seem to me that their religious faith was irrelevant."

The Christian Chronicle - Mary Winkler's state of mind key for jury now deciding her fate

The Christian Chronicle - Mary Winkler's state of mind key for jury now deciding her fate

News - Mary Winkler's state of mind key for jury now deciding her fate

News - Top StoriesBy Tamie Ross
The Christian Chronicle

Mary Winkler killed her husband.

But which Mary Winkler?

The answer could convict or vindicate the 33-year-old preacher's wife and mother of three.

After hearing more than a week of testimony and arguments, a Tennessee jury began deliberating Winkler's fate about 9 this morning. She is charged with first-degree murder in the shotgun slaying of her husband, Matthew Winkler, minister of the Fourth Street church in Selmer.

Deliberations continue at this hour, with word that jurors have asked court officials one question and have eaten lunch. It is not known when they will reach a verdict, which must be unanimous.

Prosecutors depicted a financially desperate woman characterized by thousands of dollars in overdrafts, fraudulent deposits and check-kiting scams at multiple banks. This Mary Winkler was so desperate to hide her money problems, prosecuting attorney Walt Freeland said, that she shot her 31-year-old husband. The day of the shooting, the Winklers were to appear at a bank meeting to discuss her financial schemes, bank officials testified.

Defense attorneys painted a different portrait of their client. This Mary Winkler was physically, mentally, emotionally, verbally and sexually abused, they claimed. Still reeling from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder caused by the loss of her handicapped sister 20 years earlier, she internalized this abuse until she could stand it no more, the defense said. Provoked by Matthew Winkler placing his hand over the mouth and nose of the couple's toddler, they argued, she confronted him with a gun in hopes it would force him to talk. Instead, the 12-gauge shotgun accidentally misfired, killng him within minutes, the defense begged the jury to believe.

As 10 women and two men deliberate her fate, Mary Winkler is waiting at the home of a friend in Selmer, Tenn., for word of a verdict. And a host of other interested parties — among them women's rights advocates, trial watchers and Church of Christ members — wait as well.


Judge Weber McCraw told the jury that they may decide Mary Winkler is guilty of first-degree murder or a lesser charge, or they may decide she committed no crime. If the jury doesn't think the prosecution proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, then second degree murder can be considered, as can voluntary manslaughter, reckless homicide or negligent homicide. Each carries its own burden of proof for the prosecution, as well as maximum sentence.

Six days of testimony gave those in the courtroom — and around the globe, thanks to live, streaming video — a glimpse into the family life of the Winklers.

Matthew Winkler grew up attending Churches of Christ from birth. So did Mary Carol Freeman. Each was raised in a conservative home with parents who expected them to do well in school, obey their elders and conduct themselves as Christian young people.

Each attended a university affiliated with Churches of Christ. Matthew Winkler enrolled at Freed-Hardeman University in Henderson, Tenn., upon graduating from high school. Mary Carol Freeman chose Lipscomb University in Nashville, Tenn., then transferred after two years to Freed-Hardmeman to pursue a teaching degree in special education.

They met at Freed-Hardeman, enjoying a three-month, whirlwind courtship before Matthew proposed. They were married on April 20, 1996 — 11 years ago Friday.

Trial testimony followed the couple through job-related moves, the births of three daughters and other life events. Family members, friends of the couple, fellow church members and Mary Winkler testified about other kinds of events and exchanges.

Mary Winkler delved into the couple's home life. She testified that Matthew Winkler began to intimidate her to the point of domination early in their marriage. She drew a timeline over the years where that turned into — according to her allegations — him belittling her, alienating her from others she loved, physically harming her and forcing her to perform sexual acts that embarrassed and hurt her against her will. She described the allegations in detail to the court under direct testimony.

Mary Winkler asked Matthew Winkler for a divorce in 2002, she said, and he refused. She said she never tried to leave, citing threats against her as the reason why. She told no one about details of her life, she said. No witnesses corroborated her testimony. No one who testified saw injuries that Mary Winkler confirmed to them were abuse either, according to testimony.

Matthew Winkler's parents, Dan and Diane Winkler, told jurors they knew nothing about their son and daughter-in-law struggling with their finances or their marriage. Dan Winkler, pulpit minister of the Huntingdon, Tenn., church, said his son made the decision to become a fifth-generation preacher without pressure from his parents. They said they never saw signs of abuse.

Both parents testified for the prosecution. Both sat in the courtroom listening to testimony afterward. Both cried. They went home each evening to care for their three granddaughters, Patricia, Allie and Brianna, whose custody can't help but be affected by the outcome of their mother's murder trial.

The Winklers were among at least 10 witnesses in the case who identified themselves as members of a Church of Christ. Six of those were prosecution witnesses. The other four — including Mary Winkler — were called by the defense.

Witnesses' personal beliefs about their faith became the subject of questioning and commentary at times. Women were often asked by defense attorneys about gender-assigned roles or responsibilities within Churches of Christ. Men were asked about their roles as head of the household, and whether that meant they were the "boss" of a family.

Support Network for Single Moms

I can tell you this ... it's not easy being a single mom. 

I'm not a single mom myself, but I have recently had a taste of it as my husband
is a truck driver and has been gone for days at a time.

I quickly found which areas are my 'weak' spots in parenting,
housework and life in general. 

If it hadn't been for the fact that I already had a support system in place,
I know I would have had a much harder time of it.

I believe a support system is definitely a must for every single
parent because it can sustain you on those days when you just
feel like giving up.

Also, it really helps to hear another person's perspective on your most current challenge.
They might have actually gone through this challenge themselves and can give you great
advice or they can be there for you and encourage you as you walk through it.

For that reason, I like Bethany Davis' The Single Mom's Survival Guide because one of the
first things she mentions in her inexpensive ebook is forming a support network.  She knows
how important this step is to single moms.

If you're a single mom, I'd encourage you to also enlist the help of others around you - form a support network for yourself and get that extra help and encouragement that will help you be a great mom.

Glass ceiling still exists

   Even though women constitute 40% of all executives and administrative posts

(up from 24% in 1976), they are still restricted mostly to the middle and lower

positions, and the senior levels of management are almost entirely male domains.

A 1990 study of the top Fortune 500 companies by Mary Ann Von Glinow of the

University of Southern California, showed that "women were only 2.6% of

corporate officers (the vice presidential level up)."  Of the Fortune Service

500, only 4.3% of the corporate officers were women - even though women are 6l%

of all service workers.

     Even more disturbing is that these numbers have "shown little improvement

in the 25 years that these statistics have been tracked". (University of

Michigan, Korn/Ferry International). What this means is that at the present rate

of increase, it will be 475 years - or not until 2466 before women reach

equality with men in the executive suite.

     This scenario is not any better on corporate boards. Only 4.5% of the

Fortune 500 industrial directorships are held by women.  On Fortune Service 500

companies, 5.6% of corporate directors are women.  The rate of increase is so

slow that parity with men on corporate boards will not be achieved until the

year 2116 - or for 125 years.  (The Feminist Majority Foundation News Media

Publishing Inc., 1995)

     In 1980, only one woman held the rank of CEO of a Fortune 500 company. This

woman came into the top management by inheriting the company from her father and

husband.  In 1985, this executive was joined by a second woman who reached the

top - by founding the company she headed.

     Even though the newspapers are reporting that women have come a long way

and are successful in the corporate world, women are banging into a "glass

ceiling" that is "so subtle that it is transparent, yet so strong that it

prevents women from moving up the corporate hierarchy".  (Ann Morrison, The

Feminist Majority Foundation and News Media, Inc, 1955) Women can see the high-

level corporate positions but are kept from reaching the top.  According to

Morrison (http//www.feminist.org/research/ewb glass.ntml.) and her colleagues,

the glass ceiling is not simply a barrier for an individual, based on the

person/s inability to handle a higher-level job.  Rather, the glass ceiling

applies to women as a group who are kept from advancing higher because they are

women.

     Just as the overall labor market remains sharply segregated by sex, women

executives are concentrated into certain types of jobs - mostly staff and

support jobs - and these offer little opportunity for getting to the top.  The

highest ranking women in most industries are in non-operating areas such as

personnel, public relations. or, sometimes finance specialties that rarely lead

to the most powerful top-management positions.  It seems that women are shut out

of jobs in the route that is taken by CEOs and presidents and even when they do

get a line job it will more than likely not be in the significant part of the

business or the type of job that can stamp them as leaders.

     It seems to be that the biggest barrier to women in top management levels

is the bunch of boys sitting around a table making all the decisions.  In other

words when a decision has to be made concerning who should be promoted to

management, male corporate leaders are inclined to select people as much like

themselves as possible - so there is no astonishment that women are often not

even considered at promotion time.   The guys at the top look at their former

colleagues and old school ties.   Women executives are often left out of social

activities because they do not fit into the "boys club".   Even on a more

traditional level, women report there are "certain kinds of meetings" they do

not get invited to because they are not seen as policy makers.

     In a Wall Street Journal//Gallup study 80% of the executive women stated

they believe there were disadvantages to being a woman in the business world.

They stated that men did not take them seriously, they have been mistaken for a

secretary at business meetings, they have been prevented from moving up the

ladder because of male attitudes towards women and they believed they are paid

less than men of equal ability.   Many corporate environments tolerate sexual

harassment which intimidates and demoralizes women executives.  However, many

women hesitate to speak out, fearing it will jeopardize their careers.

     In conclusion, many women have been discouraged from going to the top by a

set of myths suggesting women are not suited for top management and that any

problems are being solved gradually.  (E.g.  conflicts with family and home

responsibilities, women at the top are frequently single, divorced or have no

children, proving how difficult it is to combine family and career, women

executives cost the corporation more because they must divide their attention

between career and family, women are not as serious about their careers, women

are not suited for top management because they are not aggressive enough and

lack the self confidence required for the top jobs - to mention a few.) These

myths seem  work to keep women in their place and to justify the lack of

progress for women.  Worse yet,  these myths often place blame on women rather

than on sex discrimination.

     Men in corporate management tend not to perceive discrimination as a real

problem, thereby making it virtually impossible to implement effective remedies.

White men have ranked problems encountered by women executives as insignificant

compared to how women ranked them.  Therefore, without constant pressure from

the outside and strong legal remedies, the very real problems of race and sex

discrimination in the executive suite may never be adequately addressed.  Even

though feminists have fought to establish and vigorously enforce guidelines and

laws prohibiting sex discrimination in employment, women feel they are a long

way from equality in the ranks of American business.  They feel that further

gains depend on getting more feminists into decision-making positions and

creating new strategies for change.