Three feminists share Nobel Peace Prize

[arildno]

Three women were awarded jointly the Nobel Peace Prize:
1. Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, President of Liberia, and instrumental in improving the conditions of women.

2. Leymah Roberta Gbowee
A West African grass roots activist

3.Tawakkul Karman
A Yemenite woman who has been instrumental in her work for the position of women in the deeply conservative Yemen before, and during the ongoing Arab Spring.

Congratulations to all of them!

 

[daveb]

If you want to see the whole story of the Liberian women, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pray_the_Devil_Back_to_Hell" movie chronicles the struggle, and I highly recommend it (especially if like me you enjoy documentaries).

 

[DoggerDan]

Is there some importance to using the word "feminist" in the title? Wouldn't the word "women" have worked equally well?

 

[Evo]

Is there some importance to using the word "feminist" in the title? Wouldn't the word "women" have worked equally well?

And what's wrong with feminist? Do you know what the definition is?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism

 

[DoggerDan]

And what's wrong with feminist?

I don't know, Evo. Pray, tell us what's wrong with feminist? Better yet, tell us what's right with it.

Do you know what the definition is?

Evidently not, Evo. Please enlighten us.

 

[DaveC426913]

DoggerDan is asking why someone who is awesome enough to Hey! win a Nobel prize can't be seen to stand their merit alone, but must have a label to qualify their achievement. He, like many, looks forward to the day when women do not need the qualifier "and she's a woman too!"

On the other hand, Dan, considering the the women's achievements, the feminist aspect does play a relevant role. They are in particular fighting for women's rights.

 

[DoggerDan]

DoggerDan is asking why someone who is awesome enough to Hey! win a Nobel prize can't be seen to stand their merit alone, but must have a label to qualify their achievement. He, like many, looks forward to the day when women do not need the qualifier "and she's a woman too!"

That's a pretty fair assessment!

On the other hand, Dan, considering the the women's achievements, the feminist aspect does play a relevant role. They are in particular fighting for women's rights.

I hear you. In some countries it's a non-issue. In others, it's a very serious issue.

I re-read Al's charter: "The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way: the capital, invested in safe securities by my executors, shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind. The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: <break> and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." From: http://www.nobelprize.org/alfred_nobel/will/short_testamente.html

Reviewing the list of laureates (http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/laureates/) I see that most appear to have met the intent of Nobel's will. Can't say that I think all of them have.

This year's three recipients seem to be a good choice. I especially like what Tawakul has done: "Tawakul Karman created the human rights group Women Journalists Without Chains (WJWC) in 2005 for promoting human rights, "particularly freedom of opinion and expression, and democratic rights." From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tawakel_Karman#Women_Journalists_Without_Chains

 

[Evo]

I don't know, Evo. Pray, tell us what's wrong with feminist? Better yet, tell us what's right with it.

There's nothing wrong with it. It's a positive description.

Evidently not, Evo. Please enlighten us.

I gave you the link so you could enlighten yourself. You didn't read it?

 

[Evo]

DoggerDan is asking why someone who is awesome enough to Hey! win a Nobel prize can't be seen to stand their merit alone, but must have a label to qualify their achievement. He, like many, looks forward to the day when women do not need the qualifier "and she's a woman too!"

Did you read what they did to achieve rhe Nobel Prize? They worked for feminist causes. Feminist, as I'm sure you know, is not a derogatory word except maybe in the minds of male chauvinists.

 

[DaveC426913]

Feminist, as I'm sure you know, is not a derogatory word except maybe in the minds of male chauvinists.

I think that's kind of Dan's point too. In reading the title of the article, it can be interpreted as using a hot button such as feminism to give the article some amount of spin. Dan wondered why it needed to be spun to get people's attention.

At least, that's my interpretation of Dan's posts.

 

[Evo]

I think that's kind of Dan's point too. In reading the title of the article, it can be interpreted as using a hot button such as feminism to give the article some amount of spin. Dan wondered why it needed to be spun to get people's attention.

At least, that's my interpretation of Dan's posts.

I don't see how anyone reading arildno's post could have taken the title negatively, do you? Arildno praised the women, and used the word correctly. Dan mistakenly took things out of context and gave it a negative connotation.

 

[DaveC426913]

I don't see how anyone reading arildno's post could have taken the title negatively, do you?

I do. Interpretation is intrinsic in communication.

Dan mistakenly took things out of context and gave it a negative connotation.

He read a negative connotation from it, yes.

I think his suspicions have been allayed. Is there still a problem?

 

[rootX]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_Nobel_laureates" points out "Following the awards of 2011 (other than the 2011 Economics Prize), the Nobel Prize has been awarded 807 times to men and 44 times to women (there have also been 23 awards to organizations)."

When I first read the article I wondered if committee was trying to address the gender inequality issue.

However, those three women indeed deserved the prize!

 

[DoggerDan]

I gave you the link so you could enlighten yourself. You didn't read it?

Evo, if you honestly think of me as being that base, I would not presume to think of a way out of this cesspool.

On the other hand, if you might possibly ascribe some intelligence to what I may have to offer...

Bluntly, I don't need to "enlighten myself." I'm enlightened. You're casting judgement unnecessarily and undeservingly.

I ask you embrace understanding in lieu of condemnation.

Regardless, I'm just passing through (I've only been here a month, and have already received serious flak), if people can share what they've learned, who they are, here, hopefully based on science and hard evidence, all the better! If you're running off good people left and right, then you'll be left with nothing but those whom bow and pay homage.

If that's your goal, you're succeeding. If your goal is the truth, then perhaps a different course of action awaits...

 

[arildno]

I used the word "feminist" because a central, unifying theme in Mr. Jagland's reasoning for awarding the prize to the three was their work towards empowerment of females, in particular in peace-building work.

If that doesn't make the three ladies into hard-working feminists, I don't know who would qualify.

they are not feminist theoreticians, but approach the obstacles women face on the daily level in their local societies.

Leymah Gbowee for example, focused on the cynical abuse and rape of women in Liberia's civil war, and staged mass demonstrations to turn people into more constructive activities than continued armed, demeaning struggles.

Mrs. Kamran has focused for years on the difficult sirtuation for women journalists in particular, and women in general in Yemen.

Shockingly radical in her society, she has thrown away her niqab (face veil), urging other women to do same, and she has worked for criminalization of marriage with minors (below the age of 17).
The last point is particularly important in a country where, in accordance with the tradition of the Prophet, 9-year old girls can be married off.I think it would have been MORE unintentionally patronizing towards women with a title, like: "Three WOMEN won the Nobel Prize!" than with the one I chose, where I focused on the reason why they got the prize, i.e, their feminist activities.

 

[disregardthat]

To me "being feministic" sounds much better than "being a feminist". The former sounds like a description of their values, the latter sort of a description of their personality.

Congratulations to the ladies, and dare I say they deserve it far more than the two previous prizes

(had it gone to wikileaks as speculated upon in the media i would have dug myself a hole in the ground)

 

[arildno]

What I particularly like with this year's award is that it is NOT given to hopeful promises in the future, but honoring achievements of several years' standing.

Although only 32 years old, Tawakul Kamran has fought for her causes for 7 years, and been an outspoken critic of Ali Abdullah Saleh for the last 4.

She has also tackled Islamist hard-liners within her own party, the al-Islah, in particular on their vehement opposition to raise the marriageable age for girls above the 9-year threshold sacralized by the Prophet's own behaviour.

 

[DoggerDan]

I think that's kind of Dan's point too. In reading the title of the article, it can be interpreted as using a hot button such as feminism to give the article some amount of spin. Dan wondered why it needed to be spun to get people's attention.

At least, that's my interpretation of Dan's posts.

Correct.

I don't see how anyone reading arildno's post could have taken the title negatively, do you? Arildno praised the women, and used the word correctly. Dan mistakenly took things out of context and gave it a negative connotation.

Incorrect.

May we please rejoin the topic at hand?

I used the word "feminist" because a central, unifying theme in Mr. Jagland's reasoning for awarding the prize to the three was their work towards empowerment of females, in particular in peace-building work.

I understand, and it's obvious by the commission's choice of all three that work towards righting some of the wrongs against women is on the minds of the commissioners. The term "feminist," however, holds both positive and negative connotations in our society so it's use is divisive, rather than peace-building. It's counter-productive considering the efforts of these women and Nobel's Peace Prize directive.

What I particularly like with this year's award is that it is NOT given to hopeful promises in the future, but honoring achievements of several years' standing.

I like that, too! This is in keeping with Alfred Nobel's will establishing the prizes.

 

[arildno]

I couldn't care less about the "consequences" of some crazy people's private language&interpretation habits.

Sure, we ALL have, by necessity such personal eccentricities in our language perception, but since I am the only one who could reasonably know what MY eccentricities are, it is an obligation upon ME as a reader to try and find out if I let them interfere with thwe intended meaning of the writer, not the other way around.

The writer should, of course, merely be obliged not to use meanings he knows exists primarily within his own head.