# Message from Egyptian Women



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

:eyebrows::eyebrows:ound:


----------



## expatagogo (May 31, 2010)

Comparing the two situations is like comparing apples and oranges; there is a marked difference.

A woman was horribly assaulted. Horribly. Another woman speaks out about it. And both women are wrong. How?


----------



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

I guess you would have to ask an Egyptian woman that question. Personally I feel Monica was a victim just as much as the woman in Tahrir. Different situations, yes, but still victims.


----------



## expatagogo (May 31, 2010)

CatMandoo said:


> I guess you would have to ask an Egyptian woman that question. Personally I feel Monica was a victim just as much as the woman in Tahrir. Different situations, yes, but still victims.


The book that needs to be written: The Englishification of Egypt's Revolution.

Sort of makes one wonder who they're talking to, yes?


----------



## PaulAshton (Nov 18, 2011)

Probably someone's idea of a joke and it's probably a clever photo shop (not done by CatMandoo some third party on the internet )

That poster would have taken great skill and cost money, people are more concerned about food and where the country is headed..

But maybe it's real as the correct spelling is Lewinsky


----------



## ArabianNights (Jul 23, 2011)

I agree with Paul


----------



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

I got the photo from this blog.The sharepoint: From: Egypt's women.... to: Hilary Clinton...

Personally, it looks real to me. But who knows...


----------



## ArabianNights (Jul 23, 2011)

That blog is awesome... and I have read that magazine before. Do you know the person whose blog this is? Its very similar to mine, in some ways!


----------



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

ArabianNights said:


> That blog is awesome... and I have read that magazine before. Do you know the person whose blog this is? Its very similar to mine, in some ways!


No, don't know the author, found it by accident some time ago, and like it too


----------



## expatlady (Nov 25, 2011)

Photoshopped or not; this is an extremely ugly and disgraceful picture.

And no: I do not like the views/policies of ms Clinton, but at least I think that we should argue against_ her _views/policies/actions ...and not use the actions of another person (her husband) against her.

This is sexism at its ugliest, pure and simple.

And it does not become more "pretty" because it comes from Egyptian women.


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

CatMandoo said:


> I guess you would have to ask an Egyptian woman that question. Personally I feel Monica was a victim just as much as the woman in Tahrir. Different situations, yes, but still victims.


Monika a victim????? Hardly! She chose to act like a teenage groupie and probably got a buzz from her actions and made a lot of money out of it. The woman in Tahrir was kicked to within an inch of her life. 

Sorry I can only see one victim, altho Hilary stood by her husband, so maybe she is a victim too, but only of her husbands stupidity

Jo xxx


----------



## MaidenScotland (Jun 6, 2009)

I find it hard to believe.. it would have been all over the newspapers and on television channels.
Plus the Egyptian women are busy enough without worrying or complaining about Hilary Clinton.
Monika was not a victim.. she chased Clinton and whilst he is guilty of taking advantage of the situation comparing that to what happened to the women in the Midan is insulting to that poor victim and indeed to all the victims of sexual abuse at the hands of the ruling force.


----------



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

Fayza Aboul Naga, minister of planning and international cooperation, has slammed comments by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in which she described the treatment of Egyptian women by the military as “shocking.”

Aboul Naga stressed that Egyptian women are capable of defending themselves and do not need Clinton’s support. She added that Egyptian women have a rich history and have proven repeatedly that they are capable of fighting their own battles.

She also added that Egyptian women do not need foreign voices to demand their rights for them.


In my opinion, Bill Clinton was/is a sexual predator and Monica was just one of his victims.


----------



## MaidenScotland (Jun 6, 2009)

CatMandoo said:


> Fayza Aboul Naga, minister of planning and international cooperation, has slammed comments by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in which she described the treatment of Egyptian women by the military as “shocking.”
> 
> Aboul Naga stressed that Egyptian women are capable of defending themselves and do not need Clinton’s support. She added that Egyptian women have a rich history and have proven repeatedly that they are capable of fighting their own battles.
> 
> ...




Ohh he certainly was a sexual predator but Monica was willing and pursued him she was not forced into anything.


----------



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

An especially telling Newsweek survey reported that 45 per cent of the public believes that, if a sexual relationship did occur between Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton, it was her fault for pursuing him. Only 17 per cent accepted a basic tenet of sexual-harassment law: that a person who is in a position of power misuses his authority if he -- or she -- engages in sexual activity with a subordinate.

It is little wonder that the public misunderstands that point. A month of exposure to the tortured logic of Administration officials and lawyers trying to minimize the scandal has demonstrated how easy it is to obscure the patently obvious point: It's the sex that matters. In other words, if the alleged consensual relationship were legally, ethically, and socially acceptable, there would be no reason to discuss perjury, subornation of perjury, or obstruction of justice. If Mr. Clinton lied under oath and attempted to obscure the truth, it was because he understood what many, on campus and off, seem unwilling to admit publicly: Where an imbalance in authority exists, there can be no equality and thus no genuine consent.

The law, assuming that human beings are more than animals enslaved to their passions, demands that those in positions of power behave responsibly and rationally, no matter how immoral, stupid, or lascivious their subordinates might be. That legal mandate seems lost on a public content to dismiss Monica Lewinsky as someone who "asked for it."


http://https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/hschein/www/readings/sexual_harassment/Dziech.html


----------



## MaidenScotland (Jun 6, 2009)

CatMandoo said:


> An especially telling Newsweek survey reported that 45 per cent of the public believes that, if a sexual relationship did occur between Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton, it was her fault for pursuing him. Only 17 per cent accepted a basic tenet of sexual-harassment law: that a person who is in a position of power misuses his authority if he -- or she -- engages in sexual activity with a subordinate.
> 
> It is little wonder that the public misunderstands that point. A month of exposure to the tortured logic of Administration officials and lawyers trying to minimize the scandal has demonstrated how easy it is to obscure the patently obvious point: It's the sex that matters. In other words, if the alleged consensual relationship were legally, ethically, and socially acceptable, there would be no reason to discuss perjury, subornation of perjury, or obstruction of justice. If Mr. Clinton lied under oath and attempted to obscure the truth, it was because he understood what many, on campus and off, seem unwilling to admit publicly: Where an imbalance in authority exists, there can be no equality and thus no genuine consent.
> 
> ...




I certainly do not think that any women asks for it... however comparing what she engaged in to the assault on women protesters just doesn't stand up.


----------



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

MaidenScotland said:


> I certainly do not think that any women asks for it... however comparing what she engaged in to the assault on women protesters just doesn't stand up.


I never compared the two, except to state I felt both are/were victims. You and others disagreed with me.


----------



## hubbly_bubbly (Oct 17, 2010)

CatMandoo said:


> I never compared the two, except to state I felt both are/were victims. You and others disagreed with me.


I agree with you. Victimisation happens in all forms. In Monica's case, she grew/was made into the victim as the world's most powerful man (and his wife) is not going to lose all to an ignorant 21 intern - and he/they didn't! In the case of the Tahrir woman, well it's obvious, but different.

Where is Monica now, anyway? Living with her fabulous millions, jet-setting the world and embracing the red carpet to meet the rich and powerful? Hardly. Where as Bill (and Hillary) on the other hand... 

And food for thought, a quote from the excellent new-ish movie, directed by Clooney, The Ides of March:

"You wanna be the president? You can start a war. You can lie. You can cheat. You can bankrupt the country. But you cannot fck the interns. They’ll get you for that."


----------



## Sonrisa (Sep 2, 2010)

hubbly_bubbly said:


> I agree with you. Victimisation happens in all forms. In Monica's case, she grew/was made into the victim as the world's most powerful man (and his wife) is not going to lose all to an ignorant 21 intern - and he/they didn't! In the case of the Tahrir woman, well it's obvious, but different.
> 
> Where is Monica now, anyway? Living with her fabulous millions, jet-setting the world and embracing the red carpet to meet the rich and powerful? Hardly. Where as Bill (and Hillary) on the other hand...
> 
> ...


I don't see her as a victim (Monica). She had an affair and did get millions for it, and yes she actually embraced the red carpet to meet the rich and famous and jet set the world, for that matter staying in the most exclusive hotels. She got publicity and thriving business out of making her affair public. A best selling Book, TV and magazine interviews, hand bag designing business, you name. All out of agreeing to have an affair with a married man that happened to be the president, and to whom she claimed to be in loved with. 

Victim of what exactly?


----------



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

Sonrisa said:


> Victim of what exactly?


I have already stated why I feel she is a victim. I think Hubbly has also done that. 

What more can I say?:confused2:


----------



## marenostrum (Feb 19, 2011)

I don't think she is a victim at all.

There are many women that will pursue a celebrity for money / power / being famous.

Look at all these footballers scandals that have come up in the last few years ie/ Beckham and Rebecca Loos. These women don't like these guys, they are not even interested in the romp in itself but they sleep with these guys and then spill the beans. Until there will be newspapers willing to pay 100k + for a story like that this trend will not stop.

Maybe when Mr Murdock departs this world the media in general will clear up its act and these affairs will remain private. 

Personally I am not interested what Clinton gets up to, I am more interested to know how he runs the world n1 superpower. Also I must add that if I had the choice between sleeping with monica lewinsky or putting "down there" under lock and gusset plate I would choose the latter.....


----------



## Sonrisa (Sep 2, 2010)

CatMandoo said:


> I have already stated why I feel she is a victim. I think Hubbly has also done that.
> 
> What more can I say?:confused2:


lol sorry, yes you have.


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

CatMandoo said:


> I have already stated why I feel she is a victim. I think Hubbly has also done that.
> 
> What more can I say?:confused2:


A victim of her own greed and stupidy and nothing else. I'm sorry, to put Monika in the same bracket as someone who was treated as that poor woman was shows a total lack of humanitarian concern IMO!


Jo xxx


----------



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

jojo said:


> A victim of her own greed and stupidy and nothing else. I'm sorry, to put Monika in the same bracket as someone who was treated as that poor woman was shows a total lack of humanitarian concern IMO!
> 
> 
> Jo xxx


That's really an ugly accusation, especially coming from a Moderator!


----------



## MaidenScotland (Jun 6, 2009)

CatMandoo said:


> That's really an ugly accusation, especially coming from a Moderator!




Moderators are allowed opinions...


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

CatMandoo said:


> That's really an ugly accusation, especially coming from a Moderator!



I may be a moderator but I also have opinions and this is mine! Monika Lewinski had choices, needs, wishes, desires etc - she wasnt forced by anyone to commit her acts, so therefore wasnt a victim of abuse, not even emotional, other than the embarrassment of being caught - oh, she wasnt caught was she, she sold her story to the press for huge sums of money! She certainly wasnt a victim of life threatening physical abuse. She's no more a victim than I am. 

Jo xxx


----------



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

MaidenScotland said:


> Moderators are allowed opinions...


Hey - We are ALL allowed opinions, it's a matter of how you express them.

EXPATFORUM.COM RULES
Expatforum.com is an interactive site. Please treat others here the way you wish to be treated, with respect, and without insult or personal attack. Personal attacks will NOT be tolerated. Trolling on this site is not tolerated, that being deliberately inflammatory posts, and trolls will be removed from the site immediately.


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

CatMandoo said:


> Hey - We are ALL allowed opinions, it's a matter of how you express them.
> 
> EXPATFORUM.COM RULES
> Expatforum.com is an interactive site. Please treat others here the way you wish to be treated, with respect, and without insult or personal attack. Personal attacks will NOT be tolerated. Trolling on this site is not tolerated, that being deliberately inflammatory posts, and trolls will be removed from the site immediately.


Exactly! So respect my opinions and I'll respect yours. However, that doesnt mean we have to agree!! I guess what needs to be established is the definition of the word "victim". Someone who does what Monika did, doesnt warrant the title a victim in my opinion. Someone who's beaten, dragged thru the streets being kicked and punched to within an inch of her life is!

From hereon we will have to agree to disagree

Jo xxx


----------



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

jojo said:


> Exactly! So respect my opinions and I'll respect yours. However, that doesnt mean we have to agree!! I guess what needs to be established is the definition of the word "victim". Someone who does what Monika did, doesnt warrant the title a victim in my opinion. Someone who's beaten, dragged thru the streets being kicked and punched to within an inch of her life is!
> 
> From hereon we will have to agree to disagree
> 
> Jo xxx


I've never shown any disrespect for your opinions.

I just don't appreciate being told I lack any kind of humanitarian concern because you have a different opinion than mine.

Nothing could be further from the truth!


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

CatMandoo said:


> I've never shown any disrespect for your opinions.
> 
> I just don't appreciate being told I lack any kind of humanitarian concern because you have a different opinion than mine.
> 
> Nothing could be further from the truth!


again I repeat; A victim of her own greed and stupidy and nothing else. I'm sorry, to put Monika in the same bracket as someone who was treated as that poor woman was shows a total lack of humanitarian concern IMO!

I guess you're assuming that Monika was forced against her will to carry out such acts on several occasions on the President of the USA (a not too repulsive looking man, with some esteem), that she was forced against her will to alert the media and forced to take huge sums of money - to within an inch of her life?? I'm sorry, that to me doesnt sound bad - women do such things for much less with much less. To be beaten relentlessly......... !!! 

Maybe its a western thing, but Monica is western, with western values. In which case I'm sorry that you feel that a chosen, relatively short lived, and minor event for Monica makes her a victim of some kind!!?? 

Jo xxx


----------



## CatMandoo (Dec 16, 2011)

jojo said:


> again I repeat; A victim of her own greed and stupidy and nothing else. I'm sorry, to put Monika in the same bracket as someone who was treated as that poor woman was shows a total lack of humanitarian concern IMO!
> 
> I guess you're assuming that Monika was forced against her will to carry out such acts on several occasions on the President of the USA (a not too repulsive looking man, with some esteem), that she was forced against her will to alert the media and forced to take huge sums of money - to within an inch of her life?? I'm sorry, that to me doesnt sound bad - women do such things for much less with much less. To be beaten relentlessly......... !!!
> 
> ...



and again I will repeat:
Only 17 per cent accepted a *basic tenet of sexual-harassment law: that a person who is in a position of power misuses his authority if he -- or she -- engages in sexual activity with a subordinate.*

Under the law, of the United States of America, she IS a victim. 

Now I didn't need to be rude to you, or insinuate rude things about you, to make a point.

That's the point! 

Enjoy your day, I am off to shop and enjoy dinner out.


----------



## xabiaxica (Jun 23, 2009)

CatMandoo said:


> and again I will repeat:
> Only 17 per cent accepted a *basic tenet of sexual-harassment law: that a person who is in a position of power misuses his authority if he -- or she -- engages in sexual activity with a subordinate.*
> 
> Under the law, of the United States of America, she IS a victim.
> ...


she's only a victim if she didn't agree to it - if she was co-erced in some way - and I think very few would believe that she was, judging by her subsequent actions


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

CatMandoo said:


> and again I will repeat:
> Only 17 per cent accepted a *basic tenet of sexual-harassment law: that a person who is in a position of power misuses his authority if he -- or she -- engages in sexual activity with a subordinate.*
> 
> Under the law, of the United States of America, she IS a victim.
> ...


 She was having an affair with him - she wanted to do what she did! Thats no more being a victim than any other woman having an affair!! In fact I'd go as far as to say that poor old Bill was the victim - afterall men are ruled by their "tinky winkies" LOL

Jo xxx


----------



## Sonrisa (Sep 2, 2010)

CatMandoo said:


> and again I will repeat:
> Only 17 per cent accepted a *basic tenet of sexual-harassment law: that a person who is in a position of power misuses his authority if he -- or she -- engages in sexual activity with a subordinate.*
> 
> Under the law, of the United States of America, she IS a victim.
> ...


I'd love to see a copy of that law, if anyone has it, admitely I am clueless about US legislation . But since many long lasting, happy , consensual relationships have started in the work place (often involving boss/subordinate) that will put many under legal scruitinity.
.


----------



## hubbly_bubbly (Oct 17, 2010)

Who would have thought that would yet another thread basting a woman, instead of the man, by women?

Woman beaten in Tahrir = victim of violence. Granted.

Moinca Lewinsky = political victim of powerful and life changing circumstance, let alone the full weight of the Republican and Democratic parties and law enforcement agencies to every person who can read a newspaper digging their claws into her as well - yes, she had choices but she was only 21 for god's sake - and is still a social pariah. 

That favourite bastion of British journalism sums it up here:

Lonely Monica Lewinsky is still trying to play down the Bill Clinton affair | Mail Online

American (voting) public = victims of political genius as Bill end up even more powerful, more wealthy and one of the most popular U.S. presidents ever - because he didn't keep his "twinkie winkie" his pants. 

Go figure.

Anyway, this topic has been taken way out of hand as it was a merely passing statement by Cat, which has then been backed up with constructive opinion _and_ evidence to support the statement/belief. (Not lots of exclamations and question marks to make a point.) 

With no less than three moderators weighing in on the conversation in some way shape or form, I don't see anything to the contrary from anyone else, other than just opinions.

IMHO the thread should (have been) be closed.


----------



## hubbly_bubbly (Oct 17, 2010)

Some quick research and this article comes up as the most fair in the analysis of the scandal, finishing with this final thought.

_"... No amount of money can buy back what has been taken forever from Monica Lewinsky: the chance to work out her personal problems in privacy and lead a half-way normal life. I say this as a feminist, a woman and a plain old human being."_

The article was published in 1998 and whilst being honest about intricacies of all the players in the scandal, in the broad day of reality, the rationale is that Monica is a victim.

If you have time, it's a good read.

Monica Lewinsky is more victim than vixen - SFGate

I'm off for dinner too.


----------

