The accounts of horrific sexual assaults against women in Cairo have been accumulating in the last weeks on social media and garnered a lot of attention by users of twitter and facebook. Reports of women attacked by mobs - sometimes up to a hundred - of sexually crazed men, ripping off the women's clothes in public places, raping them with fingers and tearing at them to a point where the victims believe they will die, are hard to bear - both in their description of an unimaginable amount of aggression as in their conveyance of utter helplessness and anxiety on behalf of the victims. Reading such accounts can be a harrowing experience and is an emotional challenge to say the least.
Perhaps this is the reason for reactions that - to put it mildly - are hard to take for the victims on top of the horrors they experienced. When Natasha Smith, a British freelance journalist and documentary film maker living in Cairo, published the account of an unbelievably horrid and aggressive sexual attack on her by hundreds of men during the celebrations of the outcome of the presidential elections in Egypt, the social media world was in shock. Comments of disgust and true compassion made the rounds and her blogpost describing her ordeal was posted and reposted in huge numbers.
Not long after the blogpost got viral however a reaction set in that seems to become typical in such cases: the questioning of the credibility of her account. Was it true what she told us? Could this have happened in the way she described it? Was the account logical and coherent or were things missing, unclear, incomprehensible? Was she in fact just making all of this up to be in the limelight, get attention and become famous?
Apparently there are not few who think that writing in detail about how you get gang raped is a pleasurable way of garnering attention and becoming famous. The numbers of those who seemed to think so and started questioning the credibility of Natasha Smith rose after the first tweet started to tip off the wave. As with a rumour that spreads, the discussions in minutes flushed across social media platforms, now concentrating on the questions "who is she?" - "has she ever done something credible before?" - "is she lying?" - "does she want to makes us believe...?" - and away from the actual thing that needed discussing: the indisputable gross sexual aggression against women rampant on the streets of Cairo.
Often women deny it happened
While it is always good to not immediately fall for every story that is posted on the net the willingness to suddenly flatly reject the possibility of this sexual assault happening came close to denial. And the most troubling - and this I have not seen for the first time - was the fact, that it was almost only women who quickly jumped on board and called out that this female not necessarily had to be trusted. Not because they know her personally - but because ... - Yes, because of what?
Why is it that women much more than men so often in such cases resort to insinuating the story of sexual assault by a woman is fabricated, is a lie, is only made up to garner the attention of the world? Why are women not naturally inclined to take the side of the female victim that after all represents them as possible target of another assault tomorrow? Wouldn't this be the natural reaction and not the opposite?
Psychologists have studied for decades the reactions of humans on emotionally charged and troubling accounts of victims and found several reasons why one of the reactions almost always is to deny the victim's credibility. There are reasons that both genders have and reasons that are specific to women when it comes to accounts of sexual assaults and rape. In both cases it would be good to reflect on them.
It didn't happen, so I have nothing to fear
One of the main reasons in both genders for denial is the urge for 'self-protection'. By discrediting the victim's account one can brush it off with no fear to become victim oneself one day. Humans need a feeling of safety to live and continue to do what they are doing without the constant fear that all this could - as in the case of the victim of the accounted assault - break into pieces within minutes and shatter their lives. By looking away and denying this truly happened, lives can continue trouble free. And apparently this urge is so intense that inflicting hurt on the victims by discrediting them or questioning their credibility is willingly accepted.
It didn't happen, so I don't have to get emotionally involved
Another reason is the emotional self-protection many feel in need of. Getting emotionally engaged in what horror has happened to another human is energy draining to say the least and can seriously jeopardize being able to continue a happy, contented life. Empathy, showing sympathy for a victim, almost always needs a lot of emotional power that people are not willing to sacrifice for someone they do not know. There seems to be the belief that resources on this per person are limited and one better be stingy. And the easiest way to do this without feeling remorse for being selfish or cold hearted is by doubting that there is any story that would need such an input in the first place. If the victim's story is fabricated, no emotions, no empathy is needed, no energy must be put up and now power sacrificed. There is nothing to be empathetic about because there is no assault that happened. The human mind is full of tricks when it wants to get off the hook and shy away from personal responsibility and the urge to emotionally protect oneself and not get involved seems to be intense in many.
It didn't happen, so men are not as bad after all
While these reasons are common in both male and female they do not satisfactorily explain why so many women especially dispute the credibility of sexual assaults recounted by other women. There must be additional reasons for this reaction that surprisingly is quite the opposite of the solidarity one would have expected to find.
One reaction that one encounters is the unwillingness to accept the other gender as potentially dangerous and harassing as it often is. As one female tweep wrote to me on one such occasion a few weeks back when I was criticizing men for assaulting women: "You are not allowed to speak like that of men! I like men! And I want to love men!"
Fine. But what if they don't love you back? Is that too hard a truth to take? Apparently so, for the amount of energy put up in defending the men - be it in an isolated incident or as a gender - is often remarkable to read. In denying the victim's story the attempt is clearly made to rehabilitate the men that are accused in the account, men as such, men women need, men women don't want or cannot be without. A natural reaction, one would say, as there is only one other gender for any one of us to have (leaving out those for a moment who find more inventive ways to solve the drawbacks of this minimal variety on offer).
Of course, if women would have to concede that men are sexually assaulting animals the idea of bonding with them for partnership would seem less tempting. Yet hormones do not care, so for reasons of hidden forces steering the gender through life, the urge to acquit men of blame is going strong in women. Men must be likable, lovable for partnerships or marriages to work. In blaming men, this dream many women have of men - the most intense version is of course the famous knight in shining armour - would be crushed. Then what? - As this is not allowed to happen - acquitting it is.
But if men are not to blame, the victim surely must be the one to take responsibility. The easiest way for this is discrediting her credibility. If she told a lie, if this horrific report is untrue, it only proves what we have known all along - that men would never do such things to women, that some, few women only make this up. - And women would find peace of mind that life with a man is yet possible and something to strife for. No questions asked. Mission accomplished.
If it happened, it was probably her, so it can't happen to me
The other only method of reaching acquittal of the men is to acknowledge the incident happened - where witnesses attest to it so that the truth of the story cannot be denied - but immediately asking questions if not the victim is to blame for this in the first place. "Why did she have to be there at such a time?" is a common question posted on social media, basically saying nothing else but that no decent, acceptable woman would have gone to a place like that at such a time and therefore would not have been attacked. As - for all to understand - undoubtedly the author of such a line only proves too well. She didn't go to such a place so she didn't get assaulted. So clearly it is the victim's own fault if something goes wrong - which also relieves of the task to ponder on the men's behaviour that is part of this story. In more blatant versions one can even read a "well, some men are like that" - which is usually accompanied with a shrug of a shoulder ("such is life") - and the pointing out that everyone knows this and who doesn't act accordingly has to blame only herself.
A remarkable way to get the attacking men out of the limelight and an astonishing lack of solidarity. And that for a good reason that once more is embedded in the wish to self-protect. If as a woman I have to admit to myself that vicious attacks by men on women actually happen and - worse - can happen anytime to any women, I as a woman will have no peace of mind anymore. If however I pinpoint the blame for this assault on this one particular woman (aka "slut" in worst versions) then of course I myself will not ever get into this trouble and can wholeheartedly be both denying such incidences for myself and thereby be at peace of mind. A famous example of this is the Muslim Brotherhood MP Azza El-Garf who pointed out to the stunned Egypt that there was no sexual harassment on the streets of Cairo, as she herself had never been harassed. A flawed logic taken up by others who now point out that they too were in Tahrir joining the celebrations on presidential election and - take note - it did not happen to them! So clearly, again - was Natasha Smith making this up or doing something wrong? Was she perhaps to blame?
Men would not do it if women would not tempt them
Often the attacks by women on female victims of sexual assault are clear and outspoken. She dressed wrong. She walked wrong. She did not wear a veil (which as experience shows does not protect from sexual attacks). She was blonde. She looked foreign. She wore high heels. She looked men in the eyes. - The possibilities are innumerous and all boil down to the same: it was her that was at fault to produce this reaction in men. She alone is to blame, so I - as a women dressing rightly, covering up, lowering my eyes - will never have to fear such an attack (oh please, dear God, please!).
The almost unbearable extreme of this thinking - powered by fear the story could be true after all - is to blame the victim of such an assault to make the streets more dangerous "for all of us" by inciting men to think along the lines of attacks. Which - clearly - men do not do on their own if women do not make them. An even more flawed logic that perfectly blends in with the identical conviction of men in patriarchal societies who do not tire to point out that women are an evil temptation that make men do what they would never otherwise do. Hence the covering up, the shutting out, the keeping them in the house. Women who echo this logic resemble people handing the key to their prison cells to the warden asking them to shut them away. One would think this impossible but unfortunately one reads more of this on social media than is imaginable.
To the victims of sexual assault this is impossible to bear, because the collaboration with the attackers feels as if the rest of the women condone what happened and leave her, the victim, with the guilt. And psychologically it boils down to another attack on top of what was endured already. It will leave even more scars on the victims souls that will need years - if ever - to heal. Inflicted this time not by the men that sexually attacked but by the women that pretend to find fault in this only with the female victim and not with her attackers.
For the egotistic urge to have peace of mind and be at peace with men these women sell off their sisters who are in pain. And thereby too allow these gross human rights violations against women to continue.
Telling of sexual assault to become famous?
But blaming the female victim for apparent misconduct is usually only done when all else fails, when for reasons of witnesses present the incident as such cannot be denied. Where this is not the case, the easiest way yet to get out of the fix remains to dispute that a sexual assault as described in a testimony ever happened. For this, any argument will often do. As someone with regard to questioning Natasha Smith's account wrote on twitter yesterday: "I'm not suggesting she's making it up but people lie. Gay Girl in Damascus anyone?"
A not too convincing argument, for if one points out that people lie one is of course already short of suggesting "she's making it up". Why else would one doubt her credibility and point out that "people lie"?
The comparison to the Gay Girl in Damascus - which was in fact a 46 year old idiotic American male obviously lacking all comprehension of what empathy and human feelings are about - is in addition flawed, because it ignores the fact, that as much as the Gay Girl in Damascus wrote fantastical stories, 'she' never pretended to recount a story of a sexual assault on herself with vivid details of her genital zones.
That's where the thinking once more goes wrong trying to ward off the horror, a victim of sexual assault could actually tell the truth. A truth one would have to face, which apparently is harder for many women to do than to spread doubt it ever happened.
The insinuation that a victim only tells such a story to become famous and interesting shows an astonishing lack of understanding what telling such a story for the victim actually means. It is not like telling some story of everyday life or political pressure, as the Gay Girl of Damascus did. Telling of a sexual attack is like stripping yourself in public, giving people insights into the worst happenings to your private parts, which doesn't come easy to anyone. It's for a reason we call them 'private' parts, because out of shame we do not expose these voluntarily in public. To tell the story however how men groped and shoved their fingers into your private parts, these become public. And it feels like you might as well stand on the market square and rip off your clothes for all to see and watch you naked - knowing well, all will. No one wants to be stared at, but in recounting such a story of sexual assault this will happen, if only in the minds and imagination of the readers.
That is a very unpleasant knowledge the victim has and is anything but easy. To imply anyone would do this just for getting attention or becoming famous shows that the critics - luckily - have never experienced sexual assault personally and do not know what goes on inside a victim when it takes the courage to tell the world.
To recount a sexual assault is a horror relived
A few months ago one night on twitter a hashtag suddenly sprang up called #IDidNotReport. With starting their tweets with this hashtag women suddenly began to recount what happened to them days or years ago with regard to sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual abuse and even rape. "I did not report", they said, and went on to explain what it was they did not report and why they didn't and why now they thought it was time to let it out. The accounts that were coming in suddenly with the force of a tidal wave were harrowing and innumerous and tweeps I followed started to open up and tell stories I would never have imagined happened to them. I was stunned, shocked - and paralyzed. For I too did not report many years ago and had promised myself never to tell.
As I saw a wave of testimonials sweep across my timeline and women showing an unbelievable bravery in speaking out what had happened to them, I began to realize the importance of not hiding what happened, of not pretending it didn't, which obviously - see above - is so much easier for society to bear.
It took me a while and I first confided silently in a woman friend, but then I took up my courage so as not to fail these brave women speaking out and I started to tell my story. I thought it was important, that a man too admits that this happened to him because especially men think such assaults are 'unmanly' and are convinced that they should never tell. As did I.
It took seven or eight 140 character tweets only in which I described that I did not report the sexual attack on me many years back on a trip home in a sleeper from Luxor to Cairo, when I was seriously ill with high fever and the elderly tourist in the bed below made use of my incapacitation and assaulted me in my sleep. Due to my illness and very high temperature I could hardly fight him off, battled what felt like hours until he seemed to give up and I fell asleep again exhausted. When I woke up the next morning he was gone from the compartment and so was my necklace. He had been at me once more at night and to this day I don't know what else he did after I had fallen asleep again.
Telling this story in those few lines on twitter without going into any more detail was sheer horror. I had always imagined to have put off this unpleasant incident long ago and never felt it had in any way interfered with my sexual well-being or self-confidence. I worked this out for myself, classified it as an unfortunate incident that I could not prevent - wrong place, wrong time, wrong circumstances - but not as something that could easily happen again any day to come. That probably made it easier for me to put it aside. So much more surprised and shocked I was to see that when that hashtag appeared on my timeline and I started to read all the reports from others, this long settled story came up like a wave of hot and cold hitting me and the idea of telling the world what had happened - 26 years after the assault occurred - seemed impossible to do.
After I had pulled myself together and had told my story in those few tweets, a wave of positive reactions set in with tweeps - both female and male - praising me for my courage and telling me how undoubtedly strong and brave I was. Only to the woman friend from before did I confess that I was neither, but that I was in fact and literally shaking, trembling and sweating to such an extent that I had to take a shower at 2 o'clock in the morning to get back into normal life. Sweating like this, feeling dirty, abused, disturbed, hurt and confused on an incident that had happened so long ago - only because I took it upon me to finally speak about it. And only in a few tweets.
There is nothing more hurtful than to encounter disbelief
If this personal experience is anything to go by, I can assure you that telling the story of how you were sexually assaulted - and that even in detail and only a few days after it happened - is anything but easy, is anything but something you would do for fun or to get attention or to get famous. You would more than gladly miss out on such fame, thank you very much, if only it didn't happen or if it did you could keep quiet about it. Anyone taking up the courage to tell his story however to alert the world that these attacks happen, that sexual assaults must be taken seriously and not ignored or put off as figments of the imagination, suffers hugely inside and will encounter an anxiety that compares to the initial horror experienced.
For this reason the attempt to discredit victims of sexual assault - be they female or male - by insinuating they only tell such a story to become famous and garner attention borders on the malicious. It blatantly ignores the pain inflicted by recounting such an attack and the emotional stress a victim is going through when it tells of what happened, knowing only too well what images the account will invoke in the readers. The private parts will become public parts, the readers will visualize what you tell, you will thus become the victim again to what happened - only this time it seems in front of everyone's eyes. And what after that? Will you still be able to hold your head up high now that everyone sees you as a "sexual victim", sexualizing you in every aspect as if this was what you were made up of, the only thing that mattered about you?
It is incredibly difficult to do. And if Natasha Smith told her story the way she did - and others did before her too - then partly due to still being severely traumatized but also because with every detail you describe you know that the imagery in readers minds will begin to tick like a clock gone wild. And these images will stick to you - and it will be difficult to rid yourself of this knowledge.
To whoever picks up the courage nevertheless to tell the story of sexual assault in order to shake up the world and say: Hey listen! This happens! - there is nothing more hurtful than to encounter disbelief, discrediting, ignorance of the pain inflicted. The worst that victims of such crimes report when going to police stations is having to face officers who shake their heads in disbelief, disinterest, disregard and show willingness to believe the accused more than the victim - is to be treated like a liar, not taken seriously - left in the end alone with the horror one barely survived.
There is no excuse for this at all. In all statistics done on women reporting sexual crimes the number of fabricated stories turned out to be insignificantly low. And yet disbelief rather than belief seems for many the initial name of the game. Apparently it still makes more sense to doubt the credibility of a victim than to trust that no one in her sane mind would make up such a horribly story - which once told excessively burdens the victim and her sexual privacy. Not only after surviving such an assault but too after telling about it, nothing for the victim will ever be the same. To imply a women would do this easily, is baseless and inexcusable. If not malicious, it can only result from the sheer ignorance of what truly goes on in a victim after a sexual assault.
With denial the victim is assaulted a second time
With all the stories we find on the internet, posted and reposted via social media tools, it does make sense to be cautious and awake and to think twice when hearing a story that is unpleasantly bold. However in the case of sexual assault testimonials this has become an automatic reaction for many, and sadly many women. The shying away from the horror told and the wish not having to acknowledge the truth about such attacks leads into denial mode and starts to discredit the victim. With that nothing is gained. The situation - for all women believe it or not, not only for the 'liar' or worse the 'slut' - will stay like it is, but above all the victim will be hurt even more.
And if you find out Natasha Smith did not lie about the assault but told it as it is - will you then let the horror of what happened to her reach you or will you find another reason to not let it touch you? - And will you then apologize to her for inflicting even more pain on her by doubting her credibility? - Or will you just pretend your public doubting never happened and look away? - How decent is this then? Is it truly her story you worry about or not much more your own?
Even if the urge is felt to go into denial mode for reasons shown above, the victim will seriously feel that it is assaulted a second time - on top of what it already had to endure. Out of of fairness, compassion and responsibility it would therefore be vital and wise to tread softly. If you are in doubt, wait and watch and do research if you must but don't discredit publicly, creating wrongs that cannot be undone. And don't think it is cool - when others show empathy - to go against the wind and openly question the victim's credibility. There is nothing cool about being in denial and the issue at hand is too serious to use it for playing games.
It would be better to first give the victim the benefit of the doubt and not the culprit. Otherwise, whether you like it or not, you become unwillingly the collaborator to such horrific, inexcusable attacks on women. And then, as much as you deny it to yourself now, the next victim could be you after all.
Showing posts with label sexual abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sexual abuse. Show all posts
April 25, 2012
Men Do Hate Women, Dear Dima!
In the newest edition of "Foreign Policy" the columnist Mona El-Tahawy wrote an article with the title "Why do you hate us?" describing the problems women face at the hands of oppressing men in the Arab world. In the last 24 hours the article has ignited a firestorm on social media with people heatedly debating the issue and many lashing out at the author for the things she wrote. Many blogposts were written attacking her for supposedly being anti-Islam, depicting men in a bad light, shaming the Arab region in front of the western world and much more. Most blogposts transport the old thinking that the truth should not be told openly - most often considered a taboo - and that men aren't the way Mona describes them. The journalist Dima Khatib now too replied to Mona's article in a blogpost named "Love, Not Hatred, Dear Mona" - it is the first blogpost I find respectable, although I do not share her views. But I encourage you to read her post - and here is my reply to her.
-------------------------
Dear Dima Khatib,
though I do not agree wholly with your euphemistic view of the situation of Arab women it can be said that this is undoubtedly the most sincere and constructive post dealing critically with the article of Mona.
Unfortunately Dima, I - as a man - have to tell you that the 'hate' you all get so heated up about and don't want to believe exists is very much inherent in many men around the globe. While you all naturally would love to see us men in a good light so as not to rob you of hope it has to be noted that very many men in the world - not only in MENA - are not only afraid of women but truly hate them. Why?
Because you make our blood boil, you make us lose our head, you incite us to do things we normally wouldn't do, you make us skip our friends over you and fall out on their friendship, you get us to show emotions (we hate that the most), you tick off a process in us that we cannot control, a sex urge that leads us to a point of no return - which we hate, because we men always want to be in control. And then we awake from the orgasm - which in men other than in women can be like cooling down high temperature in seconds - and suddenly we are back to our normal self. And then many men say: What was this? Why did I do this? Why did I react this way? Why did I lose my head, my control, my composure? I, a man who is always in control? What did this evil woman do to me?
Bewitched me, tempted me (shame on her), transformed me into a person without own will (hate you for that).
If it hadn't been for Eve then Adam would never have stumbled, would never have been expelled from paradise. It is women who cause all the trouble, because they lure us into sexuality where we do not know anymore what we are doing.
Grossly exaggerated? You wish. - I am not saying that every man reacts this way. Many in fact have learned to control themselves or to let themselves go in relationships, to even show emotions without dying from it - yes, to even learn to enjoy enjoying sex and not just working off an urge that needs to be removed from the system.
The sad fact - and I know more intimate details of men's thinking on this then any woman will ever want to learn - is that many men who do react uncontrollably fear you women like the devil - worse indeed hate you for producing such reactions within us.
And it is at this point that the whole critique at the word 'hate' Mona used is running empty. The salafis show in every inch of their behaviour that they do indeed hate women and for that reason suppress them. And if you want to know why - see above. Because they have a huge issue with sexuality that they do not enjoy but see as something devilish that drives them into an uncontrollable state. They don't want to ever lose control of themselves - you come and make it happen. They don't want to show emotions - you come and demand just that. They hate to not know what they are doing - you are the reason they get into such a miserable state.
I've been following up on the discussion about this article now for 24 hours and all I can say - it is a bitter truth, but swallow it. Many men - and many men in the Arab world (that is what Mona talked about) - do hate women and show it in all their contempt - starting from condoning female genital mutilation (if she does not feel something, he can finish quicker and won't lose control), encouraging teenage marriages (treat the young already as possession then they won't get ideas), denying fundamental rights so all will be in control. In the male control. Stuff the women who only cause trouble.
Then there are those you talk about - nice men, respectful, perhaps even worshipping women. But those are not the issue - neither in the article nor in the real life oppressing women. Mona talked about those men that DO oppress you. And she said bluntly and truthfully what is behind that oppression.
If you don't believe men can hate women, just go to Iran and see what happens there in forcing 9 year old girls into marriage, watch women get lashed 90 times in Saudi - for having been raped -, check teenage girls getting forced to marry rapists in Morocco, or acknowledge young women getting honour killed for having been abused by soldiers in Libya. You call all this love, and love will solve all problems?
What unfortunately you and all other women will have to accept is that it is hatred that is behind that and that men who torture, rape, beat, oppress and even kill women do this out of hate, not out of love. Obvious one should think, but apparently so hard to bear for women who would love to see the world be so much better.
Sorry for the truth, but it does not help oppressed women if we deny what cannot be denied. I am grateful to Mona she had the guts to say how it is. And I wish more women would have the courage to face the truth - and start thinking about ways to change from there. It would help you all a lot more than remaining in a state of wishful thinking - quoting you: "If only we could learn how to love again, so that men learn to love women without controlling them, and women learn to love men instead of loving to please men. How about we start from love, Mona, instead of hatred?" - and idealizing those men that lash, beat, force, deny and do even a lot worse to you wonderful women.
They don't talk love, they talk hate, Dima. That is a fact that must be faced. It's not easy and it needs courage, I know. But in overcoming oppression facing facts is a must.
-------------------------
Dear Dima Khatib,
though I do not agree wholly with your euphemistic view of the situation of Arab women it can be said that this is undoubtedly the most sincere and constructive post dealing critically with the article of Mona.
Unfortunately Dima, I - as a man - have to tell you that the 'hate' you all get so heated up about and don't want to believe exists is very much inherent in many men around the globe. While you all naturally would love to see us men in a good light so as not to rob you of hope it has to be noted that very many men in the world - not only in MENA - are not only afraid of women but truly hate them. Why?
Because you make our blood boil, you make us lose our head, you incite us to do things we normally wouldn't do, you make us skip our friends over you and fall out on their friendship, you get us to show emotions (we hate that the most), you tick off a process in us that we cannot control, a sex urge that leads us to a point of no return - which we hate, because we men always want to be in control. And then we awake from the orgasm - which in men other than in women can be like cooling down high temperature in seconds - and suddenly we are back to our normal self. And then many men say: What was this? Why did I do this? Why did I react this way? Why did I lose my head, my control, my composure? I, a man who is always in control? What did this evil woman do to me?
Bewitched me, tempted me (shame on her), transformed me into a person without own will (hate you for that).
If it hadn't been for Eve then Adam would never have stumbled, would never have been expelled from paradise. It is women who cause all the trouble, because they lure us into sexuality where we do not know anymore what we are doing.
Grossly exaggerated? You wish. - I am not saying that every man reacts this way. Many in fact have learned to control themselves or to let themselves go in relationships, to even show emotions without dying from it - yes, to even learn to enjoy enjoying sex and not just working off an urge that needs to be removed from the system.
The sad fact - and I know more intimate details of men's thinking on this then any woman will ever want to learn - is that many men who do react uncontrollably fear you women like the devil - worse indeed hate you for producing such reactions within us.
And it is at this point that the whole critique at the word 'hate' Mona used is running empty. The salafis show in every inch of their behaviour that they do indeed hate women and for that reason suppress them. And if you want to know why - see above. Because they have a huge issue with sexuality that they do not enjoy but see as something devilish that drives them into an uncontrollable state. They don't want to ever lose control of themselves - you come and make it happen. They don't want to show emotions - you come and demand just that. They hate to not know what they are doing - you are the reason they get into such a miserable state.
I've been following up on the discussion about this article now for 24 hours and all I can say - it is a bitter truth, but swallow it. Many men - and many men in the Arab world (that is what Mona talked about) - do hate women and show it in all their contempt - starting from condoning female genital mutilation (if she does not feel something, he can finish quicker and won't lose control), encouraging teenage marriages (treat the young already as possession then they won't get ideas), denying fundamental rights so all will be in control. In the male control. Stuff the women who only cause trouble.
Then there are those you talk about - nice men, respectful, perhaps even worshipping women. But those are not the issue - neither in the article nor in the real life oppressing women. Mona talked about those men that DO oppress you. And she said bluntly and truthfully what is behind that oppression.
If you don't believe men can hate women, just go to Iran and see what happens there in forcing 9 year old girls into marriage, watch women get lashed 90 times in Saudi - for having been raped -, check teenage girls getting forced to marry rapists in Morocco, or acknowledge young women getting honour killed for having been abused by soldiers in Libya. You call all this love, and love will solve all problems?
What unfortunately you and all other women will have to accept is that it is hatred that is behind that and that men who torture, rape, beat, oppress and even kill women do this out of hate, not out of love. Obvious one should think, but apparently so hard to bear for women who would love to see the world be so much better.
Sorry for the truth, but it does not help oppressed women if we deny what cannot be denied. I am grateful to Mona she had the guts to say how it is. And I wish more women would have the courage to face the truth - and start thinking about ways to change from there. It would help you all a lot more than remaining in a state of wishful thinking - quoting you: "If only we could learn how to love again, so that men learn to love women without controlling them, and women learn to love men instead of loving to please men. How about we start from love, Mona, instead of hatred?" - and idealizing those men that lash, beat, force, deny and do even a lot worse to you wonderful women.
They don't talk love, they talk hate, Dima. That is a fact that must be faced. It's not easy and it needs courage, I know. But in overcoming oppression facing facts is a must.
June 20, 2011
A man's view on sexual harassment
Sexual harassment of women in Egypt has become a horrible plague. The reports of cat calling, whistling, grabbing, groping to really getting violent and tearing at clothes in Cairo's streets is shocking to say the least. It seems all control of a male dominated society is lost if women are harassed to this extent while just walking through the streets of their city. In broad daylight mind you. It does not even have to be dark for harassers to do what they think is their right - the verbal or physical attack on a woman they see walking by.
While it would be interesting to know how much women are harassed in Assiut, Minya, in Beni Suef, Asswan or Hurghada, it is definite that in Cairo at least the sexual harassment of women escalates above all bounds. And men let it happen. That is the problem.
Because if men would not let it happen, harassers would not stand a chance and the attacks on women would stop. So why do men not interfere knowing this phenomena is prevalent all over town?
To find this out, one has to take a look at the men that are behind this ugly practice. There are three groups of men contributing to harassment in Egypt, each in its own special way.
Firstly there is the uneducated, primitive group that simply thinks women are there for their common pleasure, men that fail on empathy and understanding and just let themselves be guided by their very simply urges (how can a man be guided by brains when the guidance deep below is stronger!). Those men actively harass and in their private thinking find excuses for their behavior by stating women want it this way, women actually crave for it, women can't do without it (and without men) and women dress accordingly thus sending out signals of willingness (that no man can resist).
You don't have to be a psychologist to know these guys urgently need help.
Then there is the second group of men, fairly educated but strongly conservative and mostly religiously blinded that dare perhaps not to harass themselves, but if not encourage it excuse it for almost the same reasons as the first group. They suppress their women in their homes, declare themselves the masters of everything feminine in their family and condemn any woman that chooses to walk on her own - be it in society or on the street.
This group is dangerous because it gives the attackers of the first group a mental backing, a shielding behind which to attack. Through their suppressing, women-hating stance they create a social environment in which the attacker-group does not have to feel guilty. After all they are just carrying out what the others support too.
The third group of men is educated, calls itself liberal and says it is against harassment of women - mostly anyway - and accepts that women even take part in a revolution. As long as they don't steal the show and are willing to return to their places once the battle is successfully won and the gravy pots are being dished out and the booty is distributed. There of course they don't necessarily find women should partake. They don't all openly say it, but if you look close enough you will find their attitude is not as woman-friendly as they like you to believe.
This group allows harassment to happen because its men do not actively show solidarity with women when they are treated as minor, as inferior, as less important - to a revolution, to politics, to society. Under the shroud of liberalism basically hides a pretty paternal and chauvinistic attitude and when women really need help, these guys won't budge - later saying: I wasn't asked loud enough - I was busy running politics - I wasn't the center of the action (as a man!) - so how could I possibly know you wanted my support?!
Fail. One can only say.
It is these three strong groups in Egypt's society that make sexual harassment of women possible. It is the harassing man on the street - single or in a group - that gropes, it is the cab driver that looks away, the family father that laughs when his son misbehaves, the revolutionary that does not actively protect because his own interests are higher rated than those of a woman molested in his vicinity. If all these men would not partake, women in Egypt would be safe. They are not.
Well, for the first group the remedy is clear: Working and living conditions that allow for a decent life combined with education, education, education. As long as poor living conditions are combined with illiteracy leaving young men stranded with a defunct ego and bulging sexual urges - the harassment of women will never stop. The foremost task of every government therefore must be to improve the living conditions of the poor, to better educational standards and ensure children get an education in the first place, to work together with NGOs and trusts to curb illiteracy as fast as possible. In a society where almost half of the population is illiterate it is almost impossible to get any sense into (male) heads.
The second group can only be reached if in society awareness is raised that the suppressing of women in homes must stop, that the belief is wrong that women are only half as much worth as a man - no matter what any old religious book might say about this - that women have to obey their male masters, that only males are allowed to decide on the future of female family members, that woman cannot be allowed to shape their own country for various most idiotic reasons that are best not even repeated here.
Again this can only be achieved by education, education, education. But this time not only in form of schooling to curb illiteracy. The teaching that is needed here must come from imams at the mosques, must come from the priests in their sermons just as much as from ministers, politicians, journalists, judges - society as a whole. Only if the atmosphere of suppression in the country is curbed and women are allowed to breath freely will there be a chance that the harassement-allowing male will vanish into oblivion.
More than half the Egyptian society is below the age of 25. Don't tell me there isn't a true chance to make this happen if the young only take things in their hands and demand the change in society they said they were initially demanding in Tahrir square.
All this will of course only work if the so called elite of a society plays along, joins in the same tune and is truly willing to change the society - from bottom to top - into a society fair and respectful to women. These elitists are not asked to get their hands dirty or their clothes torn while attempting to rescue women in dark alleys from attacking harasser. Forget it. Nobody asks you to be brave. You say you have brains? That is enough. Use it - and leave the rest to those who know how to work with their hands.
But use your brains you must. Just bathing in the glow of a revolution, in the memories of bullets flying that you stopped virtually with your determination and vicious glances will not be good enough. That is not helping women in this country at all. In fact it is rather shocking to see that some of the most disturbing comments failing on women's rights and solidarity come from literate, well off-to-do, young revolutionaries dreaming more of having sex as a reward for their heroic fighting than understanding the real issue at hand. While in those 18 days in Tahrir the sexual harassment commonly known on the streets of Cairo was not prevalent, now too in revolutionary circles of young men a respectful attitude towards women and their rightful demands is often lacking.
The last of the three groups has to do its job alone. No one can help. While the first needs to be supported by the government and institutions fighting illiteracy, low wages and poor housing conditions - the second needs support from those that shape societies awareness - the religious leaders, the role models, the media - the third has brains enough (or should have) to do the job on its own: Listen to women and their horror stories of what happens to them each and every day on the street; let it sink in just how bad this truly is, how degrading, how disgusting, how hurtful and bad for anyone's self-esteem; show empathy and mean it by using the helpful trick of imagining it could have happened to you (yes it could, there is even male-harassement, so why not on you?) - and stand by the women when they need your support most. In the street, in the office, in the media, in court, in parliament - and in a protest march when women shout out the pain this causes them - and even then have to fear to be attacked by men of the first group - because you of the third group let it happen.
Some men of this third group let it happen because they have witnessed that they themselves could get attacked and verbally harassed. When women demonstrated for their rights on March 8 in Tahrir square, a small number of men stood by them and tried to ward off the attacks from harassing males. Soon came the ultimate dreaded horror question, uttered with a low growling voice: "Why do you defend these women? Are you faggots?"
From what I know, those that were there stood their ground and were undeterred. Others however of the third group pretending to be so open minded, so liberal and understanding, crouched on hearing that word and decided to not get involved. For just imagine someone would say such a ghastly thing to them in public!
Welcome to the club boys! When you crouch on that idea - you finally have unknowingly begun to feel what it is like to be sexually harassed. It happens to women every day. And they still have to go on. And if you feel bad being the recipient of such a verbal attack - then you learn the hard way how a woman feels who crouches just like you, who is hurt just like you, and who has no one to help her in this situation - if you don't get it a grip on yourself!
Don't mess up the revolution and what it achieved by now ducking away in cowardice. Big liberal revolutionary words and postures help no one put an end to women's plight in the streets of Cairo or elsewhere. No story you tell how great you were in the fight for freedom will impress anyone if you don't prove that you understand what freedom really means. Because only if the sexual harassment of women stops can the society truly say of itself: We are proud to be Egyptian!
There's work to be done, men of Egypt, for all of you. Stop fantasizing, stop suppressing, stop dreaming - just go and do it! The women need you. Don't fail them. Half of society is the best half you have. Get that into your heads.
*********************
While it would be interesting to know how much women are harassed in Assiut, Minya, in Beni Suef, Asswan or Hurghada, it is definite that in Cairo at least the sexual harassment of women escalates above all bounds. And men let it happen. That is the problem.
Because if men would not let it happen, harassers would not stand a chance and the attacks on women would stop. So why do men not interfere knowing this phenomena is prevalent all over town?
To find this out, one has to take a look at the men that are behind this ugly practice. There are three groups of men contributing to harassment in Egypt, each in its own special way.
Firstly there is the uneducated, primitive group that simply thinks women are there for their common pleasure, men that fail on empathy and understanding and just let themselves be guided by their very simply urges (how can a man be guided by brains when the guidance deep below is stronger!). Those men actively harass and in their private thinking find excuses for their behavior by stating women want it this way, women actually crave for it, women can't do without it (and without men) and women dress accordingly thus sending out signals of willingness (that no man can resist).
You don't have to be a psychologist to know these guys urgently need help.
Then there is the second group of men, fairly educated but strongly conservative and mostly religiously blinded that dare perhaps not to harass themselves, but if not encourage it excuse it for almost the same reasons as the first group. They suppress their women in their homes, declare themselves the masters of everything feminine in their family and condemn any woman that chooses to walk on her own - be it in society or on the street.
This group is dangerous because it gives the attackers of the first group a mental backing, a shielding behind which to attack. Through their suppressing, women-hating stance they create a social environment in which the attacker-group does not have to feel guilty. After all they are just carrying out what the others support too.
The third group of men is educated, calls itself liberal and says it is against harassment of women - mostly anyway - and accepts that women even take part in a revolution. As long as they don't steal the show and are willing to return to their places once the battle is successfully won and the gravy pots are being dished out and the booty is distributed. There of course they don't necessarily find women should partake. They don't all openly say it, but if you look close enough you will find their attitude is not as woman-friendly as they like you to believe.
This group allows harassment to happen because its men do not actively show solidarity with women when they are treated as minor, as inferior, as less important - to a revolution, to politics, to society. Under the shroud of liberalism basically hides a pretty paternal and chauvinistic attitude and when women really need help, these guys won't budge - later saying: I wasn't asked loud enough - I was busy running politics - I wasn't the center of the action (as a man!) - so how could I possibly know you wanted my support?!
Fail. One can only say.
It is these three strong groups in Egypt's society that make sexual harassment of women possible. It is the harassing man on the street - single or in a group - that gropes, it is the cab driver that looks away, the family father that laughs when his son misbehaves, the revolutionary that does not actively protect because his own interests are higher rated than those of a woman molested in his vicinity. If all these men would not partake, women in Egypt would be safe. They are not.
What possible ways could there be to cure the society of these evils coming in multiple forms of men?
Well, for the first group the remedy is clear: Working and living conditions that allow for a decent life combined with education, education, education. As long as poor living conditions are combined with illiteracy leaving young men stranded with a defunct ego and bulging sexual urges - the harassment of women will never stop. The foremost task of every government therefore must be to improve the living conditions of the poor, to better educational standards and ensure children get an education in the first place, to work together with NGOs and trusts to curb illiteracy as fast as possible. In a society where almost half of the population is illiterate it is almost impossible to get any sense into (male) heads.
The second group can only be reached if in society awareness is raised that the suppressing of women in homes must stop, that the belief is wrong that women are only half as much worth as a man - no matter what any old religious book might say about this - that women have to obey their male masters, that only males are allowed to decide on the future of female family members, that woman cannot be allowed to shape their own country for various most idiotic reasons that are best not even repeated here.
Again this can only be achieved by education, education, education. But this time not only in form of schooling to curb illiteracy. The teaching that is needed here must come from imams at the mosques, must come from the priests in their sermons just as much as from ministers, politicians, journalists, judges - society as a whole. Only if the atmosphere of suppression in the country is curbed and women are allowed to breath freely will there be a chance that the harassement-allowing male will vanish into oblivion.
More than half the Egyptian society is below the age of 25. Don't tell me there isn't a true chance to make this happen if the young only take things in their hands and demand the change in society they said they were initially demanding in Tahrir square.
All this will of course only work if the so called elite of a society plays along, joins in the same tune and is truly willing to change the society - from bottom to top - into a society fair and respectful to women. These elitists are not asked to get their hands dirty or their clothes torn while attempting to rescue women in dark alleys from attacking harasser. Forget it. Nobody asks you to be brave. You say you have brains? That is enough. Use it - and leave the rest to those who know how to work with their hands.
But use your brains you must. Just bathing in the glow of a revolution, in the memories of bullets flying that you stopped virtually with your determination and vicious glances will not be good enough. That is not helping women in this country at all. In fact it is rather shocking to see that some of the most disturbing comments failing on women's rights and solidarity come from literate, well off-to-do, young revolutionaries dreaming more of having sex as a reward for their heroic fighting than understanding the real issue at hand. While in those 18 days in Tahrir the sexual harassment commonly known on the streets of Cairo was not prevalent, now too in revolutionary circles of young men a respectful attitude towards women and their rightful demands is often lacking.
The last of the three groups has to do its job alone. No one can help. While the first needs to be supported by the government and institutions fighting illiteracy, low wages and poor housing conditions - the second needs support from those that shape societies awareness - the religious leaders, the role models, the media - the third has brains enough (or should have) to do the job on its own: Listen to women and their horror stories of what happens to them each and every day on the street; let it sink in just how bad this truly is, how degrading, how disgusting, how hurtful and bad for anyone's self-esteem; show empathy and mean it by using the helpful trick of imagining it could have happened to you (yes it could, there is even male-harassement, so why not on you?) - and stand by the women when they need your support most. In the street, in the office, in the media, in court, in parliament - and in a protest march when women shout out the pain this causes them - and even then have to fear to be attacked by men of the first group - because you of the third group let it happen.
Some men of this third group let it happen because they have witnessed that they themselves could get attacked and verbally harassed. When women demonstrated for their rights on March 8 in Tahrir square, a small number of men stood by them and tried to ward off the attacks from harassing males. Soon came the ultimate dreaded horror question, uttered with a low growling voice: "Why do you defend these women? Are you faggots?"
From what I know, those that were there stood their ground and were undeterred. Others however of the third group pretending to be so open minded, so liberal and understanding, crouched on hearing that word and decided to not get involved. For just imagine someone would say such a ghastly thing to them in public!
Welcome to the club boys! When you crouch on that idea - you finally have unknowingly begun to feel what it is like to be sexually harassed. It happens to women every day. And they still have to go on. And if you feel bad being the recipient of such a verbal attack - then you learn the hard way how a woman feels who crouches just like you, who is hurt just like you, and who has no one to help her in this situation - if you don't get it a grip on yourself!
Don't mess up the revolution and what it achieved by now ducking away in cowardice. Big liberal revolutionary words and postures help no one put an end to women's plight in the streets of Cairo or elsewhere. No story you tell how great you were in the fight for freedom will impress anyone if you don't prove that you understand what freedom really means. Because only if the sexual harassment of women stops can the society truly say of itself: We are proud to be Egyptian!
There's work to be done, men of Egypt, for all of you. Stop fantasizing, stop suppressing, stop dreaming - just go and do it! The women need you. Don't fail them. Half of society is the best half you have. Get that into your heads.
*********************
June 02, 2011
Please Poke Now!
I have a confession to make: I am not a virgin anymore. I think it is better to say this right out loud so that if one day the Egyptian military should get their hands on me, they won't have to take the trouble to poke their fingers into dark spaces to find out anything that some might think is none of their business. No, I confess it right here and now to spare them the trouble. So please take it down in your files, dear army: no virginity left - so nothing to test.
You know of course that to the army of Egypt knowing the virginity of a revolutionary is of vital importance. Because - no doubt about it - you're either a virgin or a direct threat to the national security. In fact, if you get caught sharing a tent at Tahrir square virginity is basically erased automatically. It must have something to do with the poles they use to prop these tents up or something. I am no expert in this, but the army knows. And they know too - for this is what their accusation ran into - that if you're not a virgin you're automatically a whore, a prostitute. What else could you possibly be?
To me this is of course troubling. Not being a virgin and not being a whore leaves me somehow in limbo, a place no one really likes to be in. And what I find even more irritating as to my status is - that I am a boy, And boys never get checked on their virginity by the army. That really sucks.
Because why are we treated differently to girls? Why do they get the caring special attention by army officers in their most private crevices while we are simply ignored? Don't we have a dignity that can be molested? Is there no sexual privacy ours that can be attacked? Don't we too hold openings that can be used for the first time and after that are undisputedly reduced to proof of looseness, western decadence and the sure travel ticket to hell?
Truly, the way the army handles the matter clearly shows that gender inequality is on their minds. I hate that! I want to be equal to women. I don't want to be discriminated just because of my sex! So please, Supreme Council of Armed Forces, see to it that your military officers respect this. Instruct them accordingly and - now that one of your Generals admitted to this - make sure next time we guys get the same treatment you gave to the girls: the goggling soldiers standing by, the windows letting in the stares of strangers, the open door to the corridor holding spectators while a male what-ever-he-is pokes two fingers into us. We would just love that, and the times when you ignore us coldly shutting us out from this ritual must end once and for all.
I mean: Are you trying to tell us that our virginity is of no interest to the security of the country? Are you trying to insinuate that if WE lost 'it' that's ok, it's only the girl's loss that shakes the ground of Egypt? If so, you are saying nothing less than that women are more important to the country than men!
Dare you say something like that. WE are the heroes of the world! WE are the ones that make Egypt's ground shake! So for God's sake, will you please poke your fingers in us next time so that we know - you are taking us seriously!
Oh - and while we are at it: You dear fellow revolutionaries, good hearted brave warriors for a new Egypt - how could you let this happen? How come you just ignored all those testimonies from the girls that had been telling us about this gross violation of gender equality since March 9 already? Why did you not protest to having been ignored so violently by the arresting army officers? And why are some of you still even now in doubt whether this is true and the army actually did this to the girls?!
Yeah, I know. You simply can't take it that your virginity is of no importance to the country, that it is ignored, thought nothing of. I know, that hurts. But then - don't just stand there damn it and be in denial! Get your bottoms (sure you're virgin? - let's check) up and voice your protest!
From now on - if the army thinks it is in the national interest to assess the virginity status of arrested protesters - WE want to be the ones tested! Poke US, dear army officers! Because then at least you might find out something that so far you haven't noticed: Checking on virginity can really get you into shit!
Yours sincerely
Unmolested, unchecked - truly heart broken
*********
You know of course that to the army of Egypt knowing the virginity of a revolutionary is of vital importance. Because - no doubt about it - you're either a virgin or a direct threat to the national security. In fact, if you get caught sharing a tent at Tahrir square virginity is basically erased automatically. It must have something to do with the poles they use to prop these tents up or something. I am no expert in this, but the army knows. And they know too - for this is what their accusation ran into - that if you're not a virgin you're automatically a whore, a prostitute. What else could you possibly be?
To me this is of course troubling. Not being a virgin and not being a whore leaves me somehow in limbo, a place no one really likes to be in. And what I find even more irritating as to my status is - that I am a boy, And boys never get checked on their virginity by the army. That really sucks.
Because why are we treated differently to girls? Why do they get the caring special attention by army officers in their most private crevices while we are simply ignored? Don't we have a dignity that can be molested? Is there no sexual privacy ours that can be attacked? Don't we too hold openings that can be used for the first time and after that are undisputedly reduced to proof of looseness, western decadence and the sure travel ticket to hell?
Truly, the way the army handles the matter clearly shows that gender inequality is on their minds. I hate that! I want to be equal to women. I don't want to be discriminated just because of my sex! So please, Supreme Council of Armed Forces, see to it that your military officers respect this. Instruct them accordingly and - now that one of your Generals admitted to this - make sure next time we guys get the same treatment you gave to the girls: the goggling soldiers standing by, the windows letting in the stares of strangers, the open door to the corridor holding spectators while a male what-ever-he-is pokes two fingers into us. We would just love that, and the times when you ignore us coldly shutting us out from this ritual must end once and for all.
I mean: Are you trying to tell us that our virginity is of no interest to the security of the country? Are you trying to insinuate that if WE lost 'it' that's ok, it's only the girl's loss that shakes the ground of Egypt? If so, you are saying nothing less than that women are more important to the country than men!
Dare you say something like that. WE are the heroes of the world! WE are the ones that make Egypt's ground shake! So for God's sake, will you please poke your fingers in us next time so that we know - you are taking us seriously!
Oh - and while we are at it: You dear fellow revolutionaries, good hearted brave warriors for a new Egypt - how could you let this happen? How come you just ignored all those testimonies from the girls that had been telling us about this gross violation of gender equality since March 9 already? Why did you not protest to having been ignored so violently by the arresting army officers? And why are some of you still even now in doubt whether this is true and the army actually did this to the girls?!
Yeah, I know. You simply can't take it that your virginity is of no importance to the country, that it is ignored, thought nothing of. I know, that hurts. But then - don't just stand there damn it and be in denial! Get your bottoms (sure you're virgin? - let's check) up and voice your protest!
From now on - if the army thinks it is in the national interest to assess the virginity status of arrested protesters - WE want to be the ones tested! Poke US, dear army officers! Because then at least you might find out something that so far you haven't noticed: Checking on virginity can really get you into shit!
Yours sincerely
Unmolested, unchecked - truly heart broken
*********
May 23, 2011
SCAF - It's time to deliver!
Sure, there was no instruction manual coming with this Egyptian revolution. Neither for the revolutionaries, nor for the army. But if you look at both parties, you cannot help but feel that one of them so far failed heftily - and it isn't the revolutionaries.
When Mubarak stepped down, this was not a voluntarily decision. The power of the people on the streets of Egypt was too strong to withhold - both for him and the military. For, if the army would not have seen that this cannot be won, they would not have agreed to what happened on February 11 - Mubarak resigning and handing over the presidential powers to the Supreme Council of Armed Forces under Marshall Tantawi.
Wham! Before they knew it they were in charge of running the country, and with all due respect to their attempt to make it look in their press conference as if they knew what they were doing, anyone could tell they stepped on slippery ground. The army was not in charge these last 30 years. They did assist Mubarak - yes, but run the country - no.
Now what do you do, when you get such a big assignment and the instruction manual is nowhere to be found? You try to wiggle through by using the techniques you know. That was the problem. Because running a country of 80 million civilians is not quite the same as running a military show. It sometimes seems, the army is the only one that didn't know this. And from the experience of the last three months one has the feeling, the way the Egyptian military is running its show leaves much to be desired. You would have thought that with all the money they've been getting from the U.S. all these years (1.3 billion per anum) some knowledge of how to deal with a crisis without resorting to brutal force would have accumulated. - But then... No, that's another story. Not now.
Now is the time to focus on the SCAF, because this is the day one should worship the military. So let's see how they fared these last 100 days since the dictator was toppled.
1. Arbitrary arrests and military trials of civilians
There is a history of arbitrary arrests of protesters by the military by now that is scary. Scary, because it shows no other behavioral pattern as what could be seen from security forces before Mubarak stepped down. What many after the revolution have already forgotten are the days before Feb 11, when the dictator finally was defeated. In those days from Bloody Wednesday, Feb 2, to the victory on Feb 11 hundreds of protesters were arbitrarily arrested by the military, dragged into the Egyptian Museum and beaten and tortured. Human rights groups, both national and international, cried out about this. But the army kept a lid on it, denied as much as it could and the arrested vanished into military jails, many not ever heard of again to this day! Currently it is estimated that since January 25 more than 7.000 people have been arrested and are somewhere imprisoned. In most cases the families do not know where they are. All this common under Mubarak. But we are talking SCAF here - the "the demands of the people will be met"-SCAF. Then who ever demanded such arrests and imprisonment? No one in Tahrir, so much is certain.
After Mubarak stepped down and handed over power to the Armed Forces, it was clear to see they were in a fix. They obviously wanted it this way, or they would not have played along, but at the same time the revolution that made it possible scared the hell out of them. And so, edgy and nervous as they were, they continued in their line of arrests.
On Feb 26 they arrested unarmed, peaceful protesters at Tahrir at night - among them (see below) the young Amr El Beheiry who is still in prison! - many were beaten, tasered and even sexually abused.
On March 9 it got violent at Tahrir with the army arresting more than 150 people - again dragging them into the Egyptian Museum, beating them heavily for hours, insulting them (N.B.: the army is allowed to insult the people, the other way round is a crime!), even sexually abusing women and finally convicting them in a joke of a military trial held in the kitchen basement of the military compound, where the accused where held.
On April 9 the army once again moved into Tahrir in the middle of the night and - together with thugs ("one hand"!) - tore up tents of protesters, beat protesters, shot hundreds of bullets into the air - and some into protesters (at least two dead) - before arresting 41 protesters and taking them away.
All these arrests were without reason - but for the nervousness of the army - the treatment of those arrested a hideous crime, not to speak of the joke-trials that mocked any judicial standard. For weeks, for months even and up to this day the SCAF has played foul in correcting the mistakes it made in all this time. It is true that in the wake of growing unrest amongst the revolutionaries and seeing another Million-Man-March coming up on May 27 all those arrested on March 9 have finally been set free two days ago - but if you think, now all is well, you are wrong.
What about all those, that are still held in in military prisons no one can access - the estimated more than 7.000? We are talking about people here that have been abducted by the army even already as early as February and still have not surfaced again! Human rights groups and families have searched for them without end but the military is simply refusing to answer questions (as in fact it never is willing to play with open fair cards even at their military trials).
As long as these detainees are not released every promise of the SCAF is void, every action taken to appease is of no value.
Watch this video of families of detained and see what those arbitrarily arrests do to innocent, hard working Egyptians, how families are destroyed and young people's lives torn apart, to know how cruel the SCAF is dealing with its own people - from whom it expects to be respected. Respect for what? For this?
The tragedies of destroying families is continuing to this day. And even 200 that have been released do not alter the fact that thousands still are detained and the SCAF is not letting them go! And when you hear the accounts of those now freed about what they experienced at the hands of the army at military prison, you are shocked. No one in Egypt should be subjected to such humiliating, violating treatment of prisoners! Any army that treats the people like this, insulting the people, calling them names, abusing them, beating them, should be held accountable. It has no place in a free democratic society. Clearly the standards taught in the army all the years that Mubarak ruled were remote of any respect for human rights. Or all these arrests and mistreatments would not be possible.
Therefore it must be clear:
The SCAF, whether it likes it or not, will have to get this message and get it quick! Or the fury of the people will not end.
2. Amr El Beheiry
The lack of sound thinking, logic and respect for justice was proven brilliantly by the SCAF in handling the case of Amr El Beheiry, who was arrested on Feb 26 at night at Midan Tahrir. Although - as is proven by many witnesses - Amr was peaceful and unarmed, he was arrested by the military because of possession of weapons. They beat him severely - then had to notice that in fact he was not having any weapons on him. Bruised and battered Amr was released. Bad luck to be victim to such a mistake.
Shortly after his release the protesters decided to leave Tahrir for home. Amr with others got into a car but they did not get far. Still within looking distance of those they had just parted from, the car was suddenly busted by another group of army personnel, the occupants dragged out and arrested. Amr - who clearly had done nothing - again was in the hands of the military.
At the military court - in one of those notorious quick trials that no one was allowed to attend - he was sentenced to 5 years in prison although he had done nothing and no arms existed that he was said to have carried. The testimonial from Prof. Leila Soueif, who had been at Tahrir and had witnessed the abuse against Amr and could prove that he was abducted from the car, had no weapons and not done anything, went into the trash. Because - who at a military trial is remotely interested in the truth? No one.
So the injustice began and has not stopped ever since. While the verdicts against protesters arrested on March 9 were held back and not ratified and those protesters now came free, the verdict against Amr El Beheiry was for unknown reasons ratified in the beginning of this week. That shut the door for him, for now the military could not release him like the others without losing their face.
There is no justification for such an act of injustice as this. If other protesters could be set free that were just as peaceful as Amr El Beheiry, there is no reason in the world why this young man must serve a 5 years sentence! Just so the SCAF can keep its face?
Amr Beheiry has been imprisoned now since Feb 26 - that is three months almost to the day! - and he is still in prison although he is as innocent as the other protesters that have now been released!
SCAF - how long is this unbearable injustice supposed to continue?
3. Torture, Virginity tests, sexual abuse in prisons
With the arbitrary arrests of peaceful protesters being appalling enough already, the army did not hesitate to make things even worse. Harrowing accounts of torture and even sexual abuse appeared after protesters arrested on March 9 were released from military detention. The Egyptian Museum basically was turned into a dungeon with protesters being chained to walls and fences and beaten ruthlessly for hours by army officers clearly not in their right state of mind. The most gruesome acts were committed against young women who were accused of being whores as they had spent time with male protesters on Tahrir (it is so obvious, why didn't we think of it?). As the young women rejected the accusation, the army decided to "check for themselves", and several young women were forced to undergo "virginity tests" to prove they were no whores. Should the test fail, they were told, it would mean immediate trial for being a whore. As no woman doctor could be found, the "virginity tests" were performed by a male doctor of the army in a room with windows and an open door to the corridor! No privacy was given to the harassed women and their dignity was humiliated at its worst.
The SCAF, confronted with these atrocities, flatly denied them, stating all this was fabricated lies. When the testimonies became too detailed and could not be ignored any longer, the SCAF announced in a statement that it would have the accusations checked. That was almost two months ago.
To this day the SCAF has done nothing to hold those accountable that touched on the dignity of these young women protesters!
Does the SCAF truly respect the Egyptian people? How so?
Protesters that have just recently been released from military detention - both from the arrests of March 9 as of the arrests of protests at the Israel Embassy a week ago - have already testified too of sexual harassment and abuse in prison. Anyone wearing long hair and a beard was denounced a homosexual (for people with a clear mind = human beings, for some in the army = clearly something else) or "faggot", detainees were stripped naked and beaten and abused. This more than two months after the first chilling accounts were made public, giving the SCAF enough time to conduct inquiries into the allegations and ensure that sexual harassment and abuse would not happen again.
The SCAF did nothing. The detainees were left without protection against such atrocities and too suffered badly at the hands of the military staff in the prisons.
If the SCAF wants any form of respect from the people it first has to ensure the respect towards the people! To just ignore the testimonies of those that suffered and refrain from the promised serious inquiries into these allegations is nothing less but a capital failure. More so it does nothing to ensure that this form of violation in the treatment of arrested and detained will not occur again!
Whether the SCAF likes it or not: The mistakes made by the military have to be corrected.
As long as this is not happening, the people and the army will never be "one hand"!
4. Freedom of press and expression
That bloggers were arrested in Egypt was not uncommon in the times of Mubarak. Anyone critical and voicing his criticism publicly was in danger of being arrested, quick-tried and locked away. In 2007 it hit Kareem Amer who was sentenced to four years for expressing his opinion - an opinion that was clearly not the one of the Mubarak regime.
After the fall of Mubarak it should have been clear that this would be a thing from a very dark past. But for some odd reasons the SCAF did not get the message from Tahrir and the rest of the country that freedom of expression was a fundamental demand that had to be met.
On March 28 at night the army arrested blogger Maikel Nabil for blogging about the army and documenting the atrocities against peaceful protesters. Two weeks later and against all international appeals and outcries Nabil was sentenced to three years imprisonment with hard labor and a fine of 200 L.E. for "offending the army". No appeal by human rights groups or even the U.S. government - a firm ally of the Egyptian army - could alter this and he was immediately transferred to Tora prison where he is held now in a cell with two criminal convicts under extreme conditions that can only be called appalling.
Human Rights Watch called the sentence "the worst strike against free expression in Egypt since the Mubarak government jailed the first blogger for four years in 2007".
Yet the SCAF finds no fault with this, sending a clear signal that it couldn't care less about freedom of expression in Egypt. Amazing, as it is the same SCAF that put up a Constitutional Referendum to vote on, containing explicitly freedom of expression and opinion. In a press conference with General Mamdouh Shaheen and General Ismail Etman it was pointed out that the Constitutional Interim Declaration that resulted from the referendum prevents arrests or detentions without legal basis and ensures freedom of the press as well as freedom of belief and opinion.
Does the SCAF not read its own declaration? How then fits the arrest and sentencing of a blogger into their own declaration?
Only a few days after Nabil was sentenced, Human Rights Watch exposed a letter by Gen. Etman to the media in Egypt, dated March 22, in which the General - in the name of the SCAF - "advises" the media to not publish anything about the army in any possible printed, audible or visible way without contacting the SCAF and getting its approval first! An appeal, that sadly but expectedly caused immediate anxiety amongst many journalists especially at state run papers and TV, resulting in them not daring to cover any violations of the army against peaceful protesters.
It took not long for the letter to surface physically and it was quickly distributed over the internet. While the SCAF surely was not pleased about this, the Generals at the same time were totally unfazed regarding the content. Gen. Etman declared without a shadow of guilt that the army encouraged critical reporting in the new Egypt - as long as no one "offended the army". Aha.
Presidential candidate and first women ever to run for this post, Buthayna Kamel, a clear minded person known for her critical views under Mubarak, too took the Interim Constitutional Declaration to be valid and in the beginning of May spoke on State TV critical of the army (if you check above there might be a hint of an indication that criticism could be founded). The reaction was astounding. The director of State TV himself called to order the program stopped. The shaken TV presenter announced that the show was being pulled off the air. And Buthayna Kamel was charged with the crime of “insulting the army” and was summoned to appear before the military prosecutor who interrogated her for more than two hours before she was - temporarily - let go.
Let's cite Gen. Etman again: "The Constitutional Interim Declaration prevents arrests or detentions without legal basis and ensures freedom of the press as well as freedom of belief and opinion."
It is fairy tale time again at the SCAF. If there is someone in Egypt who has no clue what freedom of expression means and who cares nothing about freedom of the press - no matter how much it is laid down in an Interim Constitution - it is the SCAF. The paranoia shown by the Generals, who do not even shy away from charging a presidential candidate for expressing critical views on the army, is nothing short of pathetic. For an upcoming democracy however it is fatal.
The SCAF made the people to vote for the Interim Constitution - now it is the job of the SCAF to see it implemented and not violated! Especially not violated by the SCAF itself!
Therefore the demands must read:
If this is not secured, all talk of the SCAF of respecting the will of the people and the Interim Constitution is invalid and can not be taken seriously.
5. Tell the truth - don't fabricate stories.
A clever man once said: "I never trust statistics I haven't forged myself." To a certain degree you could think this was the attitude of the SCAF as well, because they clearly don't trust a truth they haven't fabricated themselves. And fabricate they do with all might.
When peaceful protesters were arrested at Tahrir on Feb 26 the army showed them on State TV shortly afterwards declaring them publicly to be "thugs".
When there was truly no evidence to thuggery from protesters arrested on March 9, the army brought in masses of weapons from its depot, laid them on a table, made protesters stand next to them and took photos to prove the protesters had been armed. Looking at the masses of weapons on the table, the protesters each would have had to drive a lorry across Tahrir to be able to have so many knifes and guns in their possession. (Hint to the army: If you fake, don't overdo it!).
When protesters where run over by the army and real thugs - (remember: "one hand" theory) - on April 9, rounds of ammo were shot to such an extent that one could hardly bear the sound when watching a video the next day, secretly taken from a balcony above Tahrir. Yet when the speaker of the SCAF had to respond to the protests against this, he found the invaluable words: "No shots were fired."
Watch this little jewel and learn what it means if the SCAF says, no shots were fired. (Caution: Please turn down the volume of your speakers or it will blast you away).
The fabrication of stories and the distortion of the truth seems to be a running thing in the SCAF family.
When the blogger Maikel Nabil was sentenced to three years prison with hard labor and a fine on April 10, none of his lawyers were present. For the court had told them and Nabil in the session that day that no verdict was going to be handed down and that the court was adjourned to April 12. When the lawyers arrived at court the next morning on other cases, they had to learn from the papers published there that Nabil had in fact been convicted on the evening of April 10 in his and the absence of all his lawyers. The lawyers protested strongly against this violation of judiciary conduct.
A few days later General Etman, speaker for the SCAF, had to answer questions in a talk show of ON TV. When asked about this violation, Gen. Etman never even flinched. "All lawyers were present when the verdict was handed down", Etman said and repeated it even after talk show host Yosri Fouda got visibly confused, knowing very well, that six independent lawyers had testified to the opposite. But "No shots were fired"-Etman stuck to his story come rain, come shine. Not only the talk show host was stunned at this performance.
It is not, that Gen. Etman is lying. Someone who lies is deliberately not telling you the truth. But that is not what Gen. Etman does. Etman does not not tell you the truth - instead he tells you a fictional story that has nothing to do with reality. He is like a man standing in front of a 10-story brick building waving his arms in excitement and telling you: "The SCAF has made all this into a nature reserve. No buildings, no obstructions. As you can see - only green meadows with butterflies and birds!" You'd look at the man and you wouldn't say he is lying. You would think instead: Get a doctor. Quick. The man needs help. And its urgent!
How someone who actually needs a doctor comes to speak for the SCAF and disclose a reality of meadows with trees and birds - when in fact and clearly for everyone but him to see he is standing in front of a 10-story brick building - is beyond comprehension. And is this not an insult to the intelligence of the army to let someone tell such fiction discrediting the army by this? Is Gen. Etman not in fact "offending the army" with this behavior and should the SCAF not therefore immediately have to be brought in front of the military prosecutor with three years jail sentence at least? - Well, from the logic of the SCAF, yes. To represent the army with such fabricated stories is nothing short of an "insult to the Armed Forces of Egypt".
But more so - and this the SCAF does not understand - it is an insult to the people of Egypt. Because clearly in letting Gen. Etman recount such fictional tales as reality the SCAF sends out the message that it deems the people of Egypt to be stupid enough to buy these stories, stupid enough to believe the tales of green meadows and birds and trees while everyone is in fact standing right in the middle of high-rise buildings. The only one who does not (want?) to see the buildings, is Gen. Etman and the SCAF. The people - take note - see the obstructions clearly. And nothing Gen. Etman can invent, will ever change that.
6. No transparency
The basis of any democratic system is transparency. Anyone in power is in power only by the will of the people. They vote, they decide - it is to them any politician or public servant in the end is accountable. Hey ho. In comes the army, not remotely connected to such frivolous thinking, holding a strong lid on all of its doings - be it in their courts (no public allowed), be it in their compounds (no public allowed), be it in the military controlled areas of the country (any offender goes to jail). Tell them about democratic transparency and all you will get is blank faces.
That too is the problem with the SCAF. They never heard of such things and clearly do not want to either. Transparency to the army is a no-go area and no forces it seems will get these Generals to even contemplate on the matter.
That has serious consequences for those vanishing within their prisons (see above) or - as bad or even worse - getting into serious conflicts with superiors. From the treatment civilian prisoners and detainees are getting at the hand of the army one can only guess what this means for those army officers and soldiers who do not dance to the tune of the SCAF.
Bringing us once more to April 9, when eight army officers in uniform defied the orders of their superiors and openly mingled with the civilian protesters at Tahrir square, openly too even calling for the downfall of General Tantawi.
There can be no doubt about it that this - within an organization as an army - is a serious breach of conduct. However it cannot justify being abducted, removed out of sight for ever, or in the worst case even killed.
When the army - again see above - stormed Tahrir square at night on April 9, they managed to arrest at least four to six of those officers that were hiding amongst the protesters. One even is supposed to have been shot. The arrested were taken away by army police and are supposed to have been tried in military court.
Fact is - they vanished from the sight of the earth. The SCAF does not feel obliged to inform anyone in this country and especially not any civilian (please puke now!) about what exactly happened to these men after they were finally arrested. The SCAF thinks it has no obligation to explain this to anyone - as the army is a state in the state and in their conviction above the law.
If Egypt is to have any real democracy ever, the SCAF will have to learn that it is part of the country and not above it, that it has to abide by the law of the country and not just make its own, that there will soon be a civilian parliament and government chosen by the people of Egypt that will demand answers to questions and will not just sit back and accept that Egyptians are abducted, tried in secrecy, executed perhaps even without anyone knowing.
True - those officers were part of the army and had to be tried in front of military court. But true too - and miserably ignored by the SCAF - these officers were foremost Egyptians. Egyptian citizens with a right to a fair trial, to a defense by their choosing and to transparency of procedures to ensure their life and there safety.
What has become of these officers? Life-sentences? Executions? How is it possible that no one in Egypt outside of the army knows and that the SCAF thinks it has not to account for the lifes of these Egyptian men?
Transparency is badly missing from the SCAF because they were taught by Mubarak that they have only to report to him. Well here is news Marshall Tantawi: The times have changed. Mubarak is gone. The army from now on will be held accountable by the people of Egypt. And without essential transparency the army will face harsh times in the democracy implemented soon. The army is not a state within a state - it is a part of the state and has to bow to the laws of the state it serves. Because yes - the army serves the people. Not the other way round.
What happened to the officers arrested at Tahrir on April 9?
7. Curfew and Emergency law
Emergency law has been part of Egyptians lives for decades, ever since Mubarak decided that he was far more secure if he kept the people at bay at all times. It worked for 30 years, then all hell broke loose.
Now the dictator is toppled and the SCAF took over. This would be an ideal time to lift the curfew - but above all the status of Emergency Law. Yet nothing happens. The SCAF is simply not getting the hang of it, promises, Emergency Law will be lifted "before the parliamentary elections" to be held in September. - and leaves it at that. What, one would like to ask the Generals, do they believe will be different in September than now in May? Lifting the Emergency Law would send a clear signal to the Egyptian people that the end of oppression has truly come to an end. But #noSCAF, you clearly do not have the guts to commit to it really.
Even Syria - not speaking of its hideous crimes - has lifted the Emergency Status. But Egypt doesn't make it. That shows, the SCAF does not trust the people and still wants to control them at all times. Mubarak revisited in uniform.
The curfew too is not lifted. Installed by Ex-President Mubarak in January to curb the protests that he found dangerous to his power-hunger, the SCAF to this day has not found the courage to dispose of it. It merely prolonged or shortened the curfew according to what the army thought necessary, Egyptians are still left with the grotesque situation, that from 2am to 5am they are not allowed to be on the streets of their own country, cannot go out to party, meet friends, come home late from a night out. Egypt, to put it bluntly, does not belong to the Egyptians from 2am to 5am. They are confined to their homes, and only the army and the police are allowed to venture through empty streets claiming them to be their own.
They are not, SCAF. And they never will be. They belong to the people, and a curfew is a violation of their rights the people will no longer accept!
8. Sectarian issues
It is true - the army rebuild the church at Sol Atfih that was attacked and damaged by radical Muslims and the result is stunning, no doubt about it. But the behaviour of the SCAF on this issue is not consistent. Why was Mokattam allowed to happen with 13 people dead? Why where the unbelievable interruptions at Qena for four days allowed to happen - resulting in millions of loss due to the cutting of the railway lines from Luxor to Cairo? Why did the army only turn up at Imbaba when the clashes were already so heavy and the church was burning? Many that were eyewitnesses - activists, journalists, bystanders - testify to the effect that the army came too late and when they came, for far too long just looked on without interfering. Only because of this did it all escalate. The first news on aggressive marching on the church in Imbaba was coming in already in the afternoon. Yet the army only turned up hours later. Any idiot could see this was going to turn violent. The SCAF did not. The bitter conclusion: Only the army does not make it to the church on time!
The army under the guidance of the SCAF, take note. These are no two different entities. It is the SCAF that will have to answer the questions and it is the SCAF that must realize that such actions only fuel the rumors that abound in Egypt: that the army sides with Salafis and actually let's them go ahead with attacks against Copts, that the army in fact is "one hand with Salafis" and not "one hand with the people". This is in no way proven. Yet not taking actions against violent attacks against Copts makes you wonder if there is something to these rumours. It is for the SCAF to prove by their actions that these rumours have no ground.
After all, the rumours did not fall from the sky. They are a result from what people witnessed when the army did not in time intervene and prohibit the attacks on minorities. And the rumours will not go away with yet another tale by Gen. Etman about the beauty of the birds and the bees. These rumours can only be stopped by decisive, consistent action by the SCAF that minorities can truly rely on, by showing clearly by action not words, that the army is willing to protect all Egyptians, of which - as everyone should know - the Copts are an important and valuable part.
16 churches are to be reopened this Wednesday according to the Ministry of the Interior. It will be the litmus test to show if the army is really "one hand" with the people and not with radical fundamentalists like the Salafis, as many think. It is vital that this comes accross, because if the SCAF is not free of this suspicion it will never ever have the trust of the people it says it wants to protect.
The SCAF will deny this rumor right out loud for certain, but words are not enough to calm the fear in many hundred thousands of Egyptians thinking otherwise. Who also have learned from Salafis, that according to their belief any criticism of those in power is an act against God, must be suppressed under all circumstances, must never ever happen and be allowed. Strange as it seems - in this point the SCAF seems to think absolutely along the lines of the Salafis. The SCAF too rejects the right of criticism in the strongest terms and demands instead obeyance from the people. Read it as you want - no matter whether you believe the rumours to be true or not - the attitude of both Salafis and the SCAF smack of anything but fundamental human rights. And isn't it odd that they both have the same failed understanding of democracy? Makes you think.
Summing it up
Summing it up - it does not look too good for the SCAF after 100 days. Ok, there was no instruction manual coming with this revolution. But a lot of the failures could have been avoided by adhering to simple standards of human rights, decency and judicial respect as is customary in civilized countries. The track record of the SCAF on this so far however is horrid.
When the army said: "The demands of the people will be met" - they somehow did not listen even to themselves. They must start now. It is time to listen, SCAF. It is time to deliver. Meet the demands of the people. And you better get going before the anger of the people knows no bounds.
*********
When Mubarak stepped down, this was not a voluntarily decision. The power of the people on the streets of Egypt was too strong to withhold - both for him and the military. For, if the army would not have seen that this cannot be won, they would not have agreed to what happened on February 11 - Mubarak resigning and handing over the presidential powers to the Supreme Council of Armed Forces under Marshall Tantawi.
Wham! Before they knew it they were in charge of running the country, and with all due respect to their attempt to make it look in their press conference as if they knew what they were doing, anyone could tell they stepped on slippery ground. The army was not in charge these last 30 years. They did assist Mubarak - yes, but run the country - no.
Now what do you do, when you get such a big assignment and the instruction manual is nowhere to be found? You try to wiggle through by using the techniques you know. That was the problem. Because running a country of 80 million civilians is not quite the same as running a military show. It sometimes seems, the army is the only one that didn't know this. And from the experience of the last three months one has the feeling, the way the Egyptian military is running its show leaves much to be desired. You would have thought that with all the money they've been getting from the U.S. all these years (1.3 billion per anum) some knowledge of how to deal with a crisis without resorting to brutal force would have accumulated. - But then... No, that's another story. Not now.
Now is the time to focus on the SCAF, because this is the day one should worship the military. So let's see how they fared these last 100 days since the dictator was toppled.
1. Arbitrary arrests and military trials of civilians
There is a history of arbitrary arrests of protesters by the military by now that is scary. Scary, because it shows no other behavioral pattern as what could be seen from security forces before Mubarak stepped down. What many after the revolution have already forgotten are the days before Feb 11, when the dictator finally was defeated. In those days from Bloody Wednesday, Feb 2, to the victory on Feb 11 hundreds of protesters were arbitrarily arrested by the military, dragged into the Egyptian Museum and beaten and tortured. Human rights groups, both national and international, cried out about this. But the army kept a lid on it, denied as much as it could and the arrested vanished into military jails, many not ever heard of again to this day! Currently it is estimated that since January 25 more than 7.000 people have been arrested and are somewhere imprisoned. In most cases the families do not know where they are. All this common under Mubarak. But we are talking SCAF here - the "the demands of the people will be met"-SCAF. Then who ever demanded such arrests and imprisonment? No one in Tahrir, so much is certain.
After Mubarak stepped down and handed over power to the Armed Forces, it was clear to see they were in a fix. They obviously wanted it this way, or they would not have played along, but at the same time the revolution that made it possible scared the hell out of them. And so, edgy and nervous as they were, they continued in their line of arrests.
On Feb 26 they arrested unarmed, peaceful protesters at Tahrir at night - among them (see below) the young Amr El Beheiry who is still in prison! - many were beaten, tasered and even sexually abused.
On March 9 it got violent at Tahrir with the army arresting more than 150 people - again dragging them into the Egyptian Museum, beating them heavily for hours, insulting them (N.B.: the army is allowed to insult the people, the other way round is a crime!), even sexually abusing women and finally convicting them in a joke of a military trial held in the kitchen basement of the military compound, where the accused where held.
On April 9 the army once again moved into Tahrir in the middle of the night and - together with thugs ("one hand"!) - tore up tents of protesters, beat protesters, shot hundreds of bullets into the air - and some into protesters (at least two dead) - before arresting 41 protesters and taking them away.
All these arrests were without reason - but for the nervousness of the army - the treatment of those arrested a hideous crime, not to speak of the joke-trials that mocked any judicial standard. For weeks, for months even and up to this day the SCAF has played foul in correcting the mistakes it made in all this time. It is true that in the wake of growing unrest amongst the revolutionaries and seeing another Million-Man-March coming up on May 27 all those arrested on March 9 have finally been set free two days ago - but if you think, now all is well, you are wrong.
What about all those, that are still held in in military prisons no one can access - the estimated more than 7.000? We are talking about people here that have been abducted by the army even already as early as February and still have not surfaced again! Human rights groups and families have searched for them without end but the military is simply refusing to answer questions (as in fact it never is willing to play with open fair cards even at their military trials).
As long as these detainees are not released every promise of the SCAF is void, every action taken to appease is of no value.
Watch this video of families of detained and see what those arbitrarily arrests do to innocent, hard working Egyptians, how families are destroyed and young people's lives torn apart, to know how cruel the SCAF is dealing with its own people - from whom it expects to be respected. Respect for what? For this?
The tragedies of destroying families is continuing to this day. And even 200 that have been released do not alter the fact that thousands still are detained and the SCAF is not letting them go! And when you hear the accounts of those now freed about what they experienced at the hands of the army at military prison, you are shocked. No one in Egypt should be subjected to such humiliating, violating treatment of prisoners! Any army that treats the people like this, insulting the people, calling them names, abusing them, beating them, should be held accountable. It has no place in a free democratic society. Clearly the standards taught in the army all the years that Mubarak ruled were remote of any respect for human rights. Or all these arrests and mistreatments would not be possible.
Therefore it must be clear:
Military trials for civilians must stop!
All detainees in military prison since the revolution
must be freed immediately!
All detainees in military prison since the revolution
must be freed immediately!
2. Amr El Beheiry
The lack of sound thinking, logic and respect for justice was proven brilliantly by the SCAF in handling the case of Amr El Beheiry, who was arrested on Feb 26 at night at Midan Tahrir. Although - as is proven by many witnesses - Amr was peaceful and unarmed, he was arrested by the military because of possession of weapons. They beat him severely - then had to notice that in fact he was not having any weapons on him. Bruised and battered Amr was released. Bad luck to be victim to such a mistake.
Shortly after his release the protesters decided to leave Tahrir for home. Amr with others got into a car but they did not get far. Still within looking distance of those they had just parted from, the car was suddenly busted by another group of army personnel, the occupants dragged out and arrested. Amr - who clearly had done nothing - again was in the hands of the military.
At the military court - in one of those notorious quick trials that no one was allowed to attend - he was sentenced to 5 years in prison although he had done nothing and no arms existed that he was said to have carried. The testimonial from Prof. Leila Soueif, who had been at Tahrir and had witnessed the abuse against Amr and could prove that he was abducted from the car, had no weapons and not done anything, went into the trash. Because - who at a military trial is remotely interested in the truth? No one.
So the injustice began and has not stopped ever since. While the verdicts against protesters arrested on March 9 were held back and not ratified and those protesters now came free, the verdict against Amr El Beheiry was for unknown reasons ratified in the beginning of this week. That shut the door for him, for now the military could not release him like the others without losing their face.
There is no justification for such an act of injustice as this. If other protesters could be set free that were just as peaceful as Amr El Beheiry, there is no reason in the world why this young man must serve a 5 years sentence! Just so the SCAF can keep its face?
Amr Beheiry has been imprisoned now since Feb 26 - that is three months almost to the day! - and he is still in prison although he is as innocent as the other protesters that have now been released!
SCAF - how long is this unbearable injustice supposed to continue?
Retry Amr El Beheiry
and set him free!
3. Torture, Virginity tests, sexual abuse in prisons
With the arbitrary arrests of peaceful protesters being appalling enough already, the army did not hesitate to make things even worse. Harrowing accounts of torture and even sexual abuse appeared after protesters arrested on March 9 were released from military detention. The Egyptian Museum basically was turned into a dungeon with protesters being chained to walls and fences and beaten ruthlessly for hours by army officers clearly not in their right state of mind. The most gruesome acts were committed against young women who were accused of being whores as they had spent time with male protesters on Tahrir (it is so obvious, why didn't we think of it?). As the young women rejected the accusation, the army decided to "check for themselves", and several young women were forced to undergo "virginity tests" to prove they were no whores. Should the test fail, they were told, it would mean immediate trial for being a whore. As no woman doctor could be found, the "virginity tests" were performed by a male doctor of the army in a room with windows and an open door to the corridor! No privacy was given to the harassed women and their dignity was humiliated at its worst.
The SCAF, confronted with these atrocities, flatly denied them, stating all this was fabricated lies. When the testimonies became too detailed and could not be ignored any longer, the SCAF announced in a statement that it would have the accusations checked. That was almost two months ago.
To this day the SCAF has done nothing to hold those accountable that touched on the dignity of these young women protesters!
Does the SCAF truly respect the Egyptian people? How so?
Protesters that have just recently been released from military detention - both from the arrests of March 9 as of the arrests of protests at the Israel Embassy a week ago - have already testified too of sexual harassment and abuse in prison. Anyone wearing long hair and a beard was denounced a homosexual (for people with a clear mind = human beings, for some in the army = clearly something else) or "faggot", detainees were stripped naked and beaten and abused. This more than two months after the first chilling accounts were made public, giving the SCAF enough time to conduct inquiries into the allegations and ensure that sexual harassment and abuse would not happen again.
The SCAF did nothing. The detainees were left without protection against such atrocities and too suffered badly at the hands of the military staff in the prisons.
If the SCAF wants any form of respect from the people it first has to ensure the respect towards the people! To just ignore the testimonies of those that suffered and refrain from the promised serious inquiries into these allegations is nothing less but a capital failure. More so it does nothing to ensure that this form of violation in the treatment of arrested and detained will not occur again!
Whether the SCAF likes it or not: The mistakes made by the military have to be corrected.
Those responsible for torture and sexual abuse
must be held accountable in court!
As long as this is not happening, the people and the army will never be "one hand"!
4. Freedom of press and expression
That bloggers were arrested in Egypt was not uncommon in the times of Mubarak. Anyone critical and voicing his criticism publicly was in danger of being arrested, quick-tried and locked away. In 2007 it hit Kareem Amer who was sentenced to four years for expressing his opinion - an opinion that was clearly not the one of the Mubarak regime.
After the fall of Mubarak it should have been clear that this would be a thing from a very dark past. But for some odd reasons the SCAF did not get the message from Tahrir and the rest of the country that freedom of expression was a fundamental demand that had to be met.
On March 28 at night the army arrested blogger Maikel Nabil for blogging about the army and documenting the atrocities against peaceful protesters. Two weeks later and against all international appeals and outcries Nabil was sentenced to three years imprisonment with hard labor and a fine of 200 L.E. for "offending the army". No appeal by human rights groups or even the U.S. government - a firm ally of the Egyptian army - could alter this and he was immediately transferred to Tora prison where he is held now in a cell with two criminal convicts under extreme conditions that can only be called appalling.
Human Rights Watch called the sentence "the worst strike against free expression in Egypt since the Mubarak government jailed the first blogger for four years in 2007".
Yet the SCAF finds no fault with this, sending a clear signal that it couldn't care less about freedom of expression in Egypt. Amazing, as it is the same SCAF that put up a Constitutional Referendum to vote on, containing explicitly freedom of expression and opinion. In a press conference with General Mamdouh Shaheen and General Ismail Etman it was pointed out that the Constitutional Interim Declaration that resulted from the referendum prevents arrests or detentions without legal basis and ensures freedom of the press as well as freedom of belief and opinion.
Does the SCAF not read its own declaration? How then fits the arrest and sentencing of a blogger into their own declaration?
Only a few days after Nabil was sentenced, Human Rights Watch exposed a letter by Gen. Etman to the media in Egypt, dated March 22, in which the General - in the name of the SCAF - "advises" the media to not publish anything about the army in any possible printed, audible or visible way without contacting the SCAF and getting its approval first! An appeal, that sadly but expectedly caused immediate anxiety amongst many journalists especially at state run papers and TV, resulting in them not daring to cover any violations of the army against peaceful protesters.
It took not long for the letter to surface physically and it was quickly distributed over the internet. While the SCAF surely was not pleased about this, the Generals at the same time were totally unfazed regarding the content. Gen. Etman declared without a shadow of guilt that the army encouraged critical reporting in the new Egypt - as long as no one "offended the army". Aha.
Presidential candidate and first women ever to run for this post, Buthayna Kamel, a clear minded person known for her critical views under Mubarak, too took the Interim Constitutional Declaration to be valid and in the beginning of May spoke on State TV critical of the army (if you check above there might be a hint of an indication that criticism could be founded). The reaction was astounding. The director of State TV himself called to order the program stopped. The shaken TV presenter announced that the show was being pulled off the air. And Buthayna Kamel was charged with the crime of “insulting the army” and was summoned to appear before the military prosecutor who interrogated her for more than two hours before she was - temporarily - let go.
Let's cite Gen. Etman again: "The Constitutional Interim Declaration prevents arrests or detentions without legal basis and ensures freedom of the press as well as freedom of belief and opinion."
It is fairy tale time again at the SCAF. If there is someone in Egypt who has no clue what freedom of expression means and who cares nothing about freedom of the press - no matter how much it is laid down in an Interim Constitution - it is the SCAF. The paranoia shown by the Generals, who do not even shy away from charging a presidential candidate for expressing critical views on the army, is nothing short of pathetic. For an upcoming democracy however it is fatal.
The SCAF made the people to vote for the Interim Constitution - now it is the job of the SCAF to see it implemented and not violated! Especially not violated by the SCAF itself!
Therefore the demands must read:
Secure Freedom of Expression as guaranteed
in the Interim Constitutional Declaration!
Lift the sentence against blogger Maikel Nabil!
Assure the press that it is free and must not
fear retributions by the army!
If this is not secured, all talk of the SCAF of respecting the will of the people and the Interim Constitution is invalid and can not be taken seriously.
5. Tell the truth - don't fabricate stories.
A clever man once said: "I never trust statistics I haven't forged myself." To a certain degree you could think this was the attitude of the SCAF as well, because they clearly don't trust a truth they haven't fabricated themselves. And fabricate they do with all might.
When peaceful protesters were arrested at Tahrir on Feb 26 the army showed them on State TV shortly afterwards declaring them publicly to be "thugs".
When there was truly no evidence to thuggery from protesters arrested on March 9, the army brought in masses of weapons from its depot, laid them on a table, made protesters stand next to them and took photos to prove the protesters had been armed. Looking at the masses of weapons on the table, the protesters each would have had to drive a lorry across Tahrir to be able to have so many knifes and guns in their possession. (Hint to the army: If you fake, don't overdo it!).
When protesters where run over by the army and real thugs - (remember: "one hand" theory) - on April 9, rounds of ammo were shot to such an extent that one could hardly bear the sound when watching a video the next day, secretly taken from a balcony above Tahrir. Yet when the speaker of the SCAF had to respond to the protests against this, he found the invaluable words: "No shots were fired."
Watch this little jewel and learn what it means if the SCAF says, no shots were fired. (Caution: Please turn down the volume of your speakers or it will blast you away).
The fabrication of stories and the distortion of the truth seems to be a running thing in the SCAF family.
When the blogger Maikel Nabil was sentenced to three years prison with hard labor and a fine on April 10, none of his lawyers were present. For the court had told them and Nabil in the session that day that no verdict was going to be handed down and that the court was adjourned to April 12. When the lawyers arrived at court the next morning on other cases, they had to learn from the papers published there that Nabil had in fact been convicted on the evening of April 10 in his and the absence of all his lawyers. The lawyers protested strongly against this violation of judiciary conduct.
A few days later General Etman, speaker for the SCAF, had to answer questions in a talk show of ON TV. When asked about this violation, Gen. Etman never even flinched. "All lawyers were present when the verdict was handed down", Etman said and repeated it even after talk show host Yosri Fouda got visibly confused, knowing very well, that six independent lawyers had testified to the opposite. But "No shots were fired"-Etman stuck to his story come rain, come shine. Not only the talk show host was stunned at this performance.
It is not, that Gen. Etman is lying. Someone who lies is deliberately not telling you the truth. But that is not what Gen. Etman does. Etman does not not tell you the truth - instead he tells you a fictional story that has nothing to do with reality. He is like a man standing in front of a 10-story brick building waving his arms in excitement and telling you: "The SCAF has made all this into a nature reserve. No buildings, no obstructions. As you can see - only green meadows with butterflies and birds!" You'd look at the man and you wouldn't say he is lying. You would think instead: Get a doctor. Quick. The man needs help. And its urgent!
How someone who actually needs a doctor comes to speak for the SCAF and disclose a reality of meadows with trees and birds - when in fact and clearly for everyone but him to see he is standing in front of a 10-story brick building - is beyond comprehension. And is this not an insult to the intelligence of the army to let someone tell such fiction discrediting the army by this? Is Gen. Etman not in fact "offending the army" with this behavior and should the SCAF not therefore immediately have to be brought in front of the military prosecutor with three years jail sentence at least? - Well, from the logic of the SCAF, yes. To represent the army with such fabricated stories is nothing short of an "insult to the Armed Forces of Egypt".
But more so - and this the SCAF does not understand - it is an insult to the people of Egypt. Because clearly in letting Gen. Etman recount such fictional tales as reality the SCAF sends out the message that it deems the people of Egypt to be stupid enough to buy these stories, stupid enough to believe the tales of green meadows and birds and trees while everyone is in fact standing right in the middle of high-rise buildings. The only one who does not (want?) to see the buildings, is Gen. Etman and the SCAF. The people - take note - see the obstructions clearly. And nothing Gen. Etman can invent, will ever change that.
6. No transparency
The basis of any democratic system is transparency. Anyone in power is in power only by the will of the people. They vote, they decide - it is to them any politician or public servant in the end is accountable. Hey ho. In comes the army, not remotely connected to such frivolous thinking, holding a strong lid on all of its doings - be it in their courts (no public allowed), be it in their compounds (no public allowed), be it in the military controlled areas of the country (any offender goes to jail). Tell them about democratic transparency and all you will get is blank faces.
That too is the problem with the SCAF. They never heard of such things and clearly do not want to either. Transparency to the army is a no-go area and no forces it seems will get these Generals to even contemplate on the matter.
That has serious consequences for those vanishing within their prisons (see above) or - as bad or even worse - getting into serious conflicts with superiors. From the treatment civilian prisoners and detainees are getting at the hand of the army one can only guess what this means for those army officers and soldiers who do not dance to the tune of the SCAF.
Bringing us once more to April 9, when eight army officers in uniform defied the orders of their superiors and openly mingled with the civilian protesters at Tahrir square, openly too even calling for the downfall of General Tantawi.
There can be no doubt about it that this - within an organization as an army - is a serious breach of conduct. However it cannot justify being abducted, removed out of sight for ever, or in the worst case even killed.
When the army - again see above - stormed Tahrir square at night on April 9, they managed to arrest at least four to six of those officers that were hiding amongst the protesters. One even is supposed to have been shot. The arrested were taken away by army police and are supposed to have been tried in military court.
Fact is - they vanished from the sight of the earth. The SCAF does not feel obliged to inform anyone in this country and especially not any civilian (please puke now!) about what exactly happened to these men after they were finally arrested. The SCAF thinks it has no obligation to explain this to anyone - as the army is a state in the state and in their conviction above the law.
If Egypt is to have any real democracy ever, the SCAF will have to learn that it is part of the country and not above it, that it has to abide by the law of the country and not just make its own, that there will soon be a civilian parliament and government chosen by the people of Egypt that will demand answers to questions and will not just sit back and accept that Egyptians are abducted, tried in secrecy, executed perhaps even without anyone knowing.
True - those officers were part of the army and had to be tried in front of military court. But true too - and miserably ignored by the SCAF - these officers were foremost Egyptians. Egyptian citizens with a right to a fair trial, to a defense by their choosing and to transparency of procedures to ensure their life and there safety.
What has become of these officers? Life-sentences? Executions? How is it possible that no one in Egypt outside of the army knows and that the SCAF thinks it has not to account for the lifes of these Egyptian men?
Transparency is badly missing from the SCAF because they were taught by Mubarak that they have only to report to him. Well here is news Marshall Tantawi: The times have changed. Mubarak is gone. The army from now on will be held accountable by the people of Egypt. And without essential transparency the army will face harsh times in the democracy implemented soon. The army is not a state within a state - it is a part of the state and has to bow to the laws of the state it serves. Because yes - the army serves the people. Not the other way round.
What happened to the officers arrested at Tahrir on April 9?
7. Curfew and Emergency law
Emergency law has been part of Egyptians lives for decades, ever since Mubarak decided that he was far more secure if he kept the people at bay at all times. It worked for 30 years, then all hell broke loose.
Now the dictator is toppled and the SCAF took over. This would be an ideal time to lift the curfew - but above all the status of Emergency Law. Yet nothing happens. The SCAF is simply not getting the hang of it, promises, Emergency Law will be lifted "before the parliamentary elections" to be held in September. - and leaves it at that. What, one would like to ask the Generals, do they believe will be different in September than now in May? Lifting the Emergency Law would send a clear signal to the Egyptian people that the end of oppression has truly come to an end. But #noSCAF, you clearly do not have the guts to commit to it really.
Even Syria - not speaking of its hideous crimes - has lifted the Emergency Status. But Egypt doesn't make it. That shows, the SCAF does not trust the people and still wants to control them at all times. Mubarak revisited in uniform.
The curfew too is not lifted. Installed by Ex-President Mubarak in January to curb the protests that he found dangerous to his power-hunger, the SCAF to this day has not found the courage to dispose of it. It merely prolonged or shortened the curfew according to what the army thought necessary, Egyptians are still left with the grotesque situation, that from 2am to 5am they are not allowed to be on the streets of their own country, cannot go out to party, meet friends, come home late from a night out. Egypt, to put it bluntly, does not belong to the Egyptians from 2am to 5am. They are confined to their homes, and only the army and the police are allowed to venture through empty streets claiming them to be their own.
They are not, SCAF. And they never will be. They belong to the people, and a curfew is a violation of their rights the people will no longer accept!
8. Sectarian issues
It is true - the army rebuild the church at Sol Atfih that was attacked and damaged by radical Muslims and the result is stunning, no doubt about it. But the behaviour of the SCAF on this issue is not consistent. Why was Mokattam allowed to happen with 13 people dead? Why where the unbelievable interruptions at Qena for four days allowed to happen - resulting in millions of loss due to the cutting of the railway lines from Luxor to Cairo? Why did the army only turn up at Imbaba when the clashes were already so heavy and the church was burning? Many that were eyewitnesses - activists, journalists, bystanders - testify to the effect that the army came too late and when they came, for far too long just looked on without interfering. Only because of this did it all escalate. The first news on aggressive marching on the church in Imbaba was coming in already in the afternoon. Yet the army only turned up hours later. Any idiot could see this was going to turn violent. The SCAF did not. The bitter conclusion: Only the army does not make it to the church on time!
The army under the guidance of the SCAF, take note. These are no two different entities. It is the SCAF that will have to answer the questions and it is the SCAF that must realize that such actions only fuel the rumors that abound in Egypt: that the army sides with Salafis and actually let's them go ahead with attacks against Copts, that the army in fact is "one hand with Salafis" and not "one hand with the people". This is in no way proven. Yet not taking actions against violent attacks against Copts makes you wonder if there is something to these rumours. It is for the SCAF to prove by their actions that these rumours have no ground.
After all, the rumours did not fall from the sky. They are a result from what people witnessed when the army did not in time intervene and prohibit the attacks on minorities. And the rumours will not go away with yet another tale by Gen. Etman about the beauty of the birds and the bees. These rumours can only be stopped by decisive, consistent action by the SCAF that minorities can truly rely on, by showing clearly by action not words, that the army is willing to protect all Egyptians, of which - as everyone should know - the Copts are an important and valuable part.
16 churches are to be reopened this Wednesday according to the Ministry of the Interior. It will be the litmus test to show if the army is really "one hand" with the people and not with radical fundamentalists like the Salafis, as many think. It is vital that this comes accross, because if the SCAF is not free of this suspicion it will never ever have the trust of the people it says it wants to protect.
The SCAF will deny this rumor right out loud for certain, but words are not enough to calm the fear in many hundred thousands of Egyptians thinking otherwise. Who also have learned from Salafis, that according to their belief any criticism of those in power is an act against God, must be suppressed under all circumstances, must never ever happen and be allowed. Strange as it seems - in this point the SCAF seems to think absolutely along the lines of the Salafis. The SCAF too rejects the right of criticism in the strongest terms and demands instead obeyance from the people. Read it as you want - no matter whether you believe the rumours to be true or not - the attitude of both Salafis and the SCAF smack of anything but fundamental human rights. And isn't it odd that they both have the same failed understanding of democracy? Makes you think.
Summing it up
Summing it up - it does not look too good for the SCAF after 100 days. Ok, there was no instruction manual coming with this revolution. But a lot of the failures could have been avoided by adhering to simple standards of human rights, decency and judicial respect as is customary in civilized countries. The track record of the SCAF on this so far however is horrid.
When the army said: "The demands of the people will be met" - they somehow did not listen even to themselves. They must start now. It is time to listen, SCAF. It is time to deliver. Meet the demands of the people. And you better get going before the anger of the people knows no bounds.
*********
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)