10

14 comments

As german woman: bring in the daughters, the single women, the widows, mothers with one digit age sons. Bring them in, educate them. Let them learn the language and find jobs. (Here comes the over-idealistic part) Bring them in touch with ex-muslim women, with non-veiled women.

Germany is not the golden place refugees think (or are told?) it is, but women can work here, make money, have more rights than in Afghanistan.

Dont bring in the men. Dont bring adult sons, brothers, uncles, husbands, teenage sons. Make special classes for the young boys - if they harm a woman, any woman, any girl, commit any crime, act against the german constitution in any way -> back to their wartorn homecountry it is.

The last chancellor said, Islam belongs to germany but this is wrong.

German and agreed. We have enough aggressive lying unemployed loser males, we do NOT need to import even more males and especially not from countries where the males are even worse than ours.

After we let in millions of them in 2015, Germany was not the same anymore. I remember suddenly being harassed in the most inocuous places that used to be safe. Now only safe with male companionship, because not only are these types perverted misogynists, they're also pathetic cowards. Cologne on NYE should have been enough to prove what we are letting into out country.

And yes the comparisons with Ukraine are so disingenuous. Why yes, i actually DO prefer genuine refugees who are mostly women and children whose men stayed behind to bravely fight the Russians over a bunch of aggressive highly sexist males with zero assets for our country who cowardly left their women behind and who have a burning hatred for our way of life. And it has ZERO to do with their skin color 🙄

Amen Schwester. It's the religion and culture, not the skin color. Otherwise there wouldn't be any white muslims, born and raised in germany who sound exactly like their immigrant counterparts. And I'm tired to explain that it is not "either or". Religion and culture go hand in hand - thats why we still have protestant towns and cities which dont celebrate Carnival and catholic ones where LGB still get the side eye. Until now, no islam-fan was able to tell me which religions were prominent in the middle east pre-islam and how islam is related to to judaism.

And yeah, I'm not afraid to say I am anti-islam. If it was buddhism which came with its own legislation into this land, I'd be against that. If it was idk rainbow-unicorn-ism which granted women fewer rights than males, i'd be against that. I am also very against the power the church still holds in this country despite germany being a secular nation.

Western countries spent a two decades in Afghanistan, lost thousands of men and women, and spent billions training the Afghans to resist the Taliban and other terrorist organizations. All for nothing. Afghanistan fell within days. We basically trained and armed the Taliban. The vast majority of men had zero interest in fighting, they threw down their weapons and readily installed their current regime. Contrast that to the fight Ukrainians put up against Russia.

The refugees that have been pouring into Europe for the past decade have been mostly fighting-age men. They left their women and children to die or to be enslaved. Many have no compunction about lying about their identities, posing as children even. They struggle to integrate, many commit crimes against women of their host country. Most struggle to find work and good housing, so all they end up doing is finding trouble and fostering resentment. Yes, we can accept female refugees...but most will not come without their men. And with the men come an entire slew of dangers and tensions that our officials REFUSE to talk about, REFUSE to acknowledge.

I think until citizens of the sponsoring countries can honestly and openly talk about the impact of refugees and difficulties of integrating their religion and cultural practices, all should stay in their home countries and fight their own battles.

Yep. We definitely do not want these scrotes coming into our countries. The women, however, have never done anything wrong and all deserve to be freed. There should be a female-only immigration policy.

Wait why are the women being framed as the problem for "bringing violent men in tow"? And it's always islamophobic when anyone calls out the male refugees who come to other countries and rape and kill the women there. Suddenly when it's a nonviolent woman it's not islamophobic anymore?

Wait why are the women being framed as the problem for "bringing violent men in tow"?

Yeah, I noticed this too. Rules of misogyny #1: women are responsible for what men do.

[–] BlackCirce 🔮🐖🐖🐖 4 points

Many women, especially from more collectivist cultures, see themselves first and foremost as daughters, sisters, wives, and mothers—not individuals in their own right the way so many Westerners do (perhaps to our detriment).

This glosses over the global problem. A daughter is a woman. Every woman is a daughter. A sister is a woman, a wife is a woman, a mother is a woman. It’s not a choice between individual and collective, it’s a choice between collectives: men or women. Identifying more with our chattel status among men of our own kind is THE problem. It is essentially the only problem women have. Men the world over make their choice: men. When men get together and gang rape or traffic women in sex slavery, they are choosing men. It doesn’t matter if they’re Muslim men, or western men, or Chinese men, or Russian men or an Olympic team of men from every country. Even if a man is an individualist, he chooses a man, himself. There is no difference between women in this regard. We keep choosing men and we suffer for it. If women are going to meet with each other as representatives of the men who own us, then we must meet on those terms and not make a pretense of meeting as women who mean to act as a group against a common enemy. Otherwise it’s just one woman taking advantage of another woman’s lack of self preservation instincts/pity/empathy/guilt in order to do for her men what her men would never do for her.

No, I don't think that harboring male refugees from any country is acceptable. For refugee situations, women, children, disabled, sick, wounded, and extremely old people first should be an enforced rule. In any society, excess displaced able bodied men with no purpose are always sources of violence and social decay.

Overall, that would mean deporting and turning away most refugees, since the majority are male.

Harsh.

I suppose focus on the single/widowed who have no sons...

Were Western boots on the ground, which ensured women’s educational and professional development, an entirely misguided colonial or imperial undertaking?

How is that even a question? Of course it was an imperialistic enterprise all along. The only thing is was not is misguided. The US and its allies knew exactly what they were doing when they launched the War on Terror, which is still going on, by the way. The US supported the jihadists in the 80s in order to bleed the Soviet Union. When this move backfired years later, George W. Bush used the terrorist attack on 9/11 as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and destroy the country for 20 years, commiting many war crimes. Because the US is above international law and has not worries about being sanctioned for their many wars (and then they have the nerve to lecture the world about the "rules based-order"). And once American troops were witdrawed last year, Joe Biden decided to wave an economic warfare on the country, worsening the humanitarian crisis.

Improving women's rights on Afghanistan was NEVER a aim of the invasion, not in practice nor in rethoric. It was only years later that Americans started rationalizing the war through women's rights.

Taliban's misogyny is a tragedy, but I don't think that is a excuse to whitewash American imperialism. Seriously, the American establishment doesn't give a dam about American women; I don't know why so many American feminists try so hard on convincing themselves that it gives a dam about foreign women.

The fact is women refugees will probably still emigrate with male family members, because without an education, work experience, etc. these women won’t be employable anywhere and they and their children will be at the complete mercy of social programs to keep them in housing, fed, and healthy. Multiply that by thousands.

Some people in this thread keep babbling on about how it’s about “culture and religion” and “not at all about the color of their skin” but culture and religion is deeply ingrained in these females as well and they have no issues enforcing it. Just be honest. It’s the brown men that gross you out because you do see them as being wholly different than your pasty German counterparts who were raised by families who all collectively turned a blind eye to genocide not too long ago. It’s absolutely about the color of their skin for you.

Yeah no those immigrant women aren't going around raping and attacking women in the host country. They may share the same values as the men but at the end of the day they're not enacting them to the same degree.

When German male immigrants start doing that at unprecedented levels and the government refuses to acknowledge it, maybe you'll have a point.

[–] loren -1 points Edited

When German male immigrants start doing that at unprecedented levels and the government refuses to acknowledge it, maybe you'll have a point.

Nazis. You had, and have literal Nazis to this day. Your men are no more benevolent than the brown men “raping and attacking”. Your men are the same because all men are the same. Or are your white men somehow different and above feminist criticism?