Racism is the belief in the superiority of one race over another, which results in discrimination and prejudice towards people based on their race or ethnicity. The use of the term "racism" does not fall under a single definition; the ideology underlying racism includes the idea that humans can be subdivided into distinct groups that are different due to their social behavior and their innate capacities, as well as the idea that they can be ranked as inferior or superior. Historical examples of institutional racism include the Holocaust, the apartheid regime in South Africa and segregation in the United States, slavery in Latin America. Racism was an aspect of the social organization of many colonial states and empires. While the concepts of race and ethnicity are considered to be separate in contemporary social science, the two terms have a long history of equivalence in both popular usage and older social science literature. "Ethnicity" is used in a sense close to one traditionally attributed to "race": the division of human groups based on qualities assumed to be essential or innate to the group.
Therefore and racial discrimination are used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial. According to a United Nations convention on racial discrimination, there is no distinction between the terms "racial" and "ethnic" discrimination; the UN convention further concludes that superiority based on racial differentiation is scientifically false, morally condemnable unjust and dangerous. It declared that there is no justification for racial discrimination, anywhere, in theory or in practice. Racist ideology can manifest in many aspects of social life. Racism can be present in social actions, practices, or political systems that support the expression of prejudice or aversion in discriminatory practices or laws. Associated social actions may include nativism, otherness, hierarchical ranking and related social phenomena. In the 19th century, many scientists subscribed to the belief that the human population can be divided into races.
The term racism is a noun describing the state of being racist, i.e. subscribing to the belief that the human population can or should be classified into races with differential abilities and dispositions, which in turn may motivate a political ideology in which rights and privileges are differentially distributed based on racial categories. The origin of the root word "race" is not clear. Linguists agree that it came to the English language from Middle French, but there is no such agreement on how it came into Latin-based languages. A recent proposal is that it derives from the Arabic ra's, which means "head, origin" or the Hebrew rosh, which has a similar meaning. Early race theorists held the view that some races were inferior to others and they believed that the differential treatment of races was justified; these early theories guided pseudo-scientific research assumptions. Today, most biologists and sociologists reject a taxonomy of races in favor of more specific and/or empirically verifiable criteria, such as geography, ethnicity, or a history of endogamy.
To date, there is little evidence in human genome research which indicates that race can be defined in such a way as to be useful in determining a genetic classification of humans. An entry in the Oxford English Dictionary defines racialism as "n earlier term than racism, but now superseded by it", cites it in a 1902 quote; the revised Oxford English Dictionary cites the shortened term "racism" in a quote from the following year, 1903. It was first defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as "he theory that distinctive human characteristics and abilities are determined by race". By the end of World War II, racism had acquired the same supremacist connotations associated with racialism: racism now implied racial discrimination, racial supremacism, a harmful intent; as its history indicates, the popular use of the word racism is recent. The word came into widespread usage in the Western world in the 1930s, when it was used to describe the social and political ideology of Nazism, which saw "race" as a given political unit.
It is agreed that racism existed before the coinage of the word, but there is not a wide agreement on a single definition of what racism is and what it is not. Today, some scholars of racism prefer to use the concept in the plural racisms, in order to emphasize its many different forms that do not fall under a single definition, they argue that different forms of racism have characterized different historical periods and geographical areas. Garner summarizes different existing definitions of racism and identifies three common elements contained in those definitions of racism. First, a historical, hierarchical power relationship between groups. Though many countries around the globe have passed laws related to race and discrimination, the first significant international human rights instrument developed by the United Nations
Speciesism is a form of discrimination based on species membership. It involves treating members of one species as morally more important than members of other species when their interests are equivalent. More speciesism is the failure to consider interests of equal strength to an equal extent because of the species of which the individuals are a member; the term is used by animal rights advocates, who argue that speciesism is a prejudice similar to racism or sexism, in that the treatment of individuals is predicated on group membership and morally irrelevant physical differences. Their claim is, it is thought that speciesism plays a role in inspiring or justifying cruelty to trillions of animals per year, in the forms of factory farming, the use of animals for entertainment such as in bullfighting and rodeos, the taking of animals' fur and skin, experimentation on animals, more. An example of a speciesist belief would be the following: Suppose that both a dog and a cow need their tails removed for medical reasons.
Suppose someone believes that the dog and the cow have equivalent interests, but insists that the dog receive pain relief for the operation, but is fine with the cow’s tail being docked without pain relief, remarking, “it’s just a cow.” This belief is speciesist because the cow’s species is being used as an excuse for not taking her interest in not suffering intense pain into account. It is possible to give more consideration to members of one species than to members of another species without being speciesist. For example, consider the belief that a typical human has an interest in voting but that a typical gorilla does not; this belief can involve starting with a premise that a certain feature of a being—such as being able to understand and participate in a political system in which one has a political representative—is relevant no matter the being's species. For someone holding this belief, a test for whether the belief is speciesist would be whether they would believe a gorilla who could understand and participate in a political system in which she had a political representative would have an interest in voting.
There are a few common speciesist paradigms. Considering humans superior to other animals; this is called human supremacism—the exclusion of all nonhuman animals from the rights and protections afforded to humans. Considering certain nonhuman animals to be superior to others because of an arbitrary similarity, familiarity, or usefulness to humans. For example, what could be called "human-chimpanzee speciesism" would involve human beings favoring rights for chimpanzees over rights for dolphins, because of happenstance similarities chimpanzees have to humans that dolphins do not; the common practice of humans treating dogs much better than cattle may have to do with the fact that many humans live in closer proximity to dogs and/or find the cattle easier to use for their own gain. Considering some species superior to others. For example, treating pigs as though their well-being is unimportant, but treating horses as though their well-being is important with the belief that their mental capacities are similar.
The term speciesism, the argument that it is a prejudice, first appeared in 1970 in a printed pamphlet written by British psychologist Richard D. Ryder. Ryder was a member of a group of academics in Oxford, the nascent animal rights community, now known as the Oxford Group. One of the group's activities was distributing pamphlets about areas of concern. Ryder argued in the pamphlet that "ince Darwin, scientists have agreed that there is no'magical' essential difference between humans and other animals, biologically-speaking. Why do we make an total distinction morally? If all organisms are on one physical continuum we should be on the same moral continuum." He wrote that, at that time in the UK, 5,000,000 animals were being used each year in experiments, that attempting to gain benefits for our own species through the mistreatment of others was "just'speciesism' and as such it is a selfish emotional argument rather than a reasoned one". Ryder used the term again in an essay, "Experiments on Animals", in Animals and Morals, a collection of essays on animal rights edited by philosophy graduate students Stanley and Roslind Godlovitch and John Harris, who were members of the Oxford Group.
Ryder wrote: In as much as both "race" and "species" are vague terms used in the classification of living creatures according to physical appearance, an analogy can be made between them. Discrimination on grounds of race, although most universally condoned two centuries ago, is now condemned, it may come to pass that enlightened minds may one day abhor "speciesism" as much as they now detest "racism." The illogicality in both forms of prejudice is of an identical sort. If it is accepted as morally wrong to deliberately inflict suffering upon innocent human creatures it is only logical to regard it as wrong to inflict suffering on innocent individuals of other species.... The time has come to act upon this logic; those who claim that speciesism is unfair to non-human species have argued their case by invoking mammals and chickens in the context of research or farming. However, there is not yet a clear definition or line agreed upon by a significant segment of the movement as to which species are to be treated with humans or in some ways additionally protected: mammals, reptiles, insects, etc.
The term was popularized by the Australian philosopher Peter Singer in his book Animal Liberation. Singer h
Leprosy stigma is a type of social stigma, a strong negative feeling towards a person with leprosy relating to their moral status in society. It is referred to as leprosy-related stigma and stigma of leprosy. Since ancient times leprosy instilled the practice of fear and avoidance in many societies because of the associated physical disfigurement and lack of understanding behind its cause; because of the historical trauma the word "leprosy" invokes, the disease is now referred to as Hansen's disease, named after Gerhard Armauer Hansen who discovered Mycobacterium leprae, the bacterial agent that causes Hansen's disease. Those who have suffered from Hansen's disease describe the impact of social stigma as far worse than the physical manifestations despite it being only mildly contagious and pharmacologically curable; this sentiment is echoed by Weis and Ramakrishna, who noted that “the impact of the meaning of the disease may be a greater source of suffering than symptoms of the disease”. The word'stigma' originated from the Greeks who used it to “refer to bodily signs designed to expose something unusual and bad about the moral status” of a person.
These bodily signs can be thought of as the lesions causing physical deformities in a person's skin in the context of leprosy. American sociologist Erving Goffman defines "stigma" as an attribute, discrediting, it is associated with 1) physical deformities, such as facial plaques, facial palsy, claw hand deformity or footdrop. Stigma itself is constructed based on “historical processes, cross-cultural differences, structural inequalities,” which determine social norms. Leprosy stigma has been universal. In Western Europe, it reached its peak during the Middle Ages, at a time when the disease was viewed as rendering the person "unclean". Many "lazar houses" were built. Patients had to carry bells to signal their presence but to attract charitable gifts; the discovery by Hansen in 1873 that leprosy was infectious and transmitted by a bacterium worsened leprosy stigma. It long became associated with sexually transmitted diseases and during the nineteenth century was thought to be a stage of syphilis.
The stigma of the disease was renewed among Europeans in the imperial era when they found it was "hyperepidemic in regions that were being colonized." It became associated with poor, developing countries, whose residents were believed by Europeans to be inferior in most ways. Since the late twentieth century, with efforts by the World Health Organization to control the disease through distribution of free medication, many international organizations have been working to end the stigma attached to leprosy, they work to educate people and raise awareness of the facts about leprosy, in particular that it is only mildly contagious. Stigma surrounding Hansen's disease favored society and sacrificed the individual rights of those afflicted. Numerous societies in the Middle Ages and nineteenth and twentieth centuries required separation of persons with leprosy from the general population. In some countries, stigma against people affected by leprosy is still widespread. In Japan, the government required segregation of persons with leprosy, a separation that increased the social stigma against them.
In medieval times, leprosy patients lived apart, settling around temples or shrines, where they begged for charity from passers-by. Starting in 1909, the government required leprosy patients to be hospitalized in the leprosy sanatoria, believing this would prevent transmission of the disease. In some cases, patients were forcibly taken to the sanatoria and their houses were disinfected in the presence of neighbors, their families were affected by leprosy stigma. Some patients attempted suicide; the law lasted until 1996. In Kumamoto, Japan, a patient with leprosy named Matsuo Fujimoto was tried on charges of an explosion in 1951 and murder in 1952. During the questioning and trial procedures, he was discriminated against as a leprosy patient, he was convicted and executed in 1962. Kumamoto Prefecture Governor Yoshiko Shiotani reported in 2003 that a hotel rejected reservations of ex-patients of Kikuchi Keifuen Sanatorium who were on the Prefecture's home visit program. Many people protested against the hotel.
When the patients rejected the apology of the hotel, there were violent protests against the patients. The hotel tore down this building in June 2004. In the Japanese drama film Sweet Bean directed by Naomi Kawase the issue of leprosy stigma affecting the character of Tokue turns out to be the main subject of the story and leads to a brief description of an existing community of ex-patients. In Jopling's original report, he quoted Hansen as saying "the Norwegian state has always handled its leprosy victims humanely". Hospitalized patients were free to go out during the day to sell their handwork in the market, were allowed to have visitors. There was little evidence of stigma. Many patients immigrated to the United States, but, because of seeking to escape poverty; the concept of heredity was rooted, when leprosy was thought to be inherited, persons with the disease were shunned. As deformity was considered divine punishment, stigma was associated with it. Evidence of leprosy can be traced as far back as 500-300 B.
C. in Chinese literature, when it was considered punishme
Anti-Masonry is "avowed opposition to Freemasonry". However, there is no homogeneous anti-Masonic movement. Anti-Masonry consists of radically differing criticisms from sometimes incompatible groups who are hostile to Freemasonry in some form; the earliest anti-Masonic document was a leaflet printed in 1698 by a Presbyterian minister named Winter. It reads: TO ALL GODLY PEOPLE, In the Citie of London. Having thought it needful to warn you of the Mischiefs and Evils practiced in the Sight of God by those called Freed Masons, I say take Care lest their Ceremonies and secret Swearings take hold of you. For this devilish Sect of Men are Meeters in secret, they are the Anti Christ, to come leading Men from Fear of God. For how should Men meet in secret Places and with secret Signs taking Care that none observed them to do the Work of GOD. Knowing how that God observeth privilly them that sit in Darkness they shall be smitten and the Secrets of their Hearts layed bare. Mingle not among this corrupt People lest you be found so at the World's Conflagration.
In 1826, William Morgan disappeared from the small town of Batavia, New York, after threatening to expose Freemasonry's "secrets" by publishing its rituals. His disappearance caused some Anti-masons to claim that he had been kidnapped and murdered by Masons. Morgan's disappearance sparked a series of protests against Freemasonry, which spread to the political realm. Under the leadership of anti-Masonic Thurlow Weed, an Anti-Jacksonist movement became the Anti-Masonic Party; this political Party ran presidential candidates in 1828 and 1832, but by 1835 the party had disbanded everywhere except Pennsylvania. In the United Kingdom, anti-Masonic sentiment grew following the publication of Martin Short's 1989 book, Inside the Brotherhood; the allegations made by Short led several members of the British Government to propose laws requiring Freemasons who join the police or judiciary to declare their membership publicly to the government amid accusations of Freemasons performing acts of mutual advancement and favour-swapping.
This movement was led by Jack Straw, Home Secretary from 1997 until 2001. In 1999, the Welsh Assembly became the only body in the United Kingdom to place a legal requirement on membership declaration for Freemasons. Existing members of the police and judiciary in England are asked to voluntarily admit to being Freemasons. However, all first time successful judiciary candidates had to "declare their freemasonry status" before appointment until 2009, when – following a successful challenge in the European Court by Italian Freemasons – Jack Straw accepted that the policy was "disproportionate" and revoked it. Conversely, new members of the police are not required to declare their status. In 2004, Rhodri Morgan, the First Minister of the Welsh Assembly, in Great Britain, said that he blocked Gerard Elias' appointment to counsel general because of links to hunting and freemasonry, although it was claimed by non-Labour politicians that the real reason was in order to have a Labour supporter, Malcolm Bishop, in the role.
Soviet Russia outlawed all secret societies, including Masonry, in 1922. At one of the Second International meetings Grigory Zinoviev demanded to purge it of masons. Freemasonry did not exist in China, or most other Communist states. Postwar revivals of Freemasonry in Czechoslovakia and Hungary were suppressed in 1950. However, Freemasonry in Cuba continued to exist following the Cuban Revolution, according to Cuban folklore, Fidel Castro is said to have "developed a soft spot for the Masons when they gave him refuge in a Masonic Lodge" in the 1950s. However, when in power, Castro was said to have "kept them on a tight leash" as they were considered a subversive element in Cuban society. Fascists treated Freemasonry as a potential source of opposition. Masonic writers state that the language used by the totalitarian regimes is similar to that used by other modern critics of Freemasonry. Considered an ideological foe of Nazism in their world perception, Concentration Camp inmates who were Freemasons were graded as "Political" prisoners, wore an inverted red triangle.
In 1943, the Propaganda Abteilung, a delegation of Nazi Germany's propaganda ministry within occupied France, commissioned the propaganda film Forces occultes. The film virulently denounces Freemasonry, parliamentarianism and Jews as part of Vichy's drive against them and seeks to prove a Jewish-Masonic plot; the number of Freemasons from Nazi occupied countries who were killed is not known, but it is estimated that between 80,000 and 200,000 Freemasons perished under the Nazi regime. The Government of the United Kingdom established Holocaust Memorial Day to recognise all groups who were targets of the Nazi regime, counter Holocaust denial. Freemasons are listed as being among those. In 1980, the Iraqi legal and penal code was changed by Saddam Hussein and the ruling Ba'ath Party, thereby making it a felony to "promote or acclaim Zionist principles, including freemasonry, or who associate with Zionist organizations." Freemasonry has been alleged to hold back its members from committing to their nation.
Critics claim that compared to Operative Masonry's clear denunciations of treachery, Speculative Masonry was far more ambiguous. The old Catholic Encyclopedia alleges that Masonic disapproval of treachery is not on moral grounds but on the grounds of inconvenience to other Masons, it argues that the adage "Loyalty to freedom
Anti-intellectualism is hostility to and mistrust of intellect and intellectualism expressed as deprecation of education and philosophy, the dismissal of art and science as impractical and contemptible human pursuits. Anti-intellectuals present themselves and are perceived as champions of common folk—populists against political and academic elitism—and tend to see educated people as a status class detached from the concerns of most people, feel that intellectuals dominate political discourse and control higher education. Totalitarian governments apply anti-intellectualism to repress political dissent. During the Spanish Civil War and the following fascist dictatorship of General Francisco Franco, the reactionary repression of the White Terror was notably anti-intellectual, with most of the 200,000 civilians killed being the Spanish intelligentsia, the politically active teachers and academics and writers of the deposed Second Spanish Republic. In the communist state of Democratic Kampuchea, the Khmer Rouge régime of Pol Pot condemned all of the non-communist intelligentsia to death in the Killing Fields.
In the 20th century, societies have systematically removed intellectuals from power, to expediently end public political dissent. During the Cold War, the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic ostracized the philosopher Václav Havel as a politically-unreliable man unworthy of ordinary Czechs' trust. Ideologically-extreme dictatorships who mean to recreate a society such as the Khmer Rouge rule of Cambodia pre-emptively killed potential political opponents the educated middle-class and the intelligentsia. To realize the Year Zero of Cambodian history, Khmer Rouge social engineering restructured the economy by de-industrialization and assassinated non-communist Cambodians suspected of "involvement in free-market activities" such as the urban professionals of society and people with political connections to foreign governments; the doctrine of Pol Pot identified the farmers as the true proletariat of Cambodia and the true representatives of the working class entitled to hold government power, hence the anti-intellectual purges.
In 1966, the anti-communist Argentine military dictatorship of General Juan Carlos Onganía intervened at the University of Buenos Aires with the Night of the Long Batons to physically dislodge politically-dangerous academics from five university faculties. That expulsion to exile of the academic intelligentsia became a national brain drain upon the society and economy of Argentina. In support of the military repression of free speech, biochemist César Milstein said: "Our country would be put in order, as soon as all the intellectuals who were meddling in the region were expelled". However, anti-intellectualism is not always violent. Any social group can act anti-intellectually by discounting the humanist value to their society of intellect and higher education. In The Campus Wars, the philosopher John Searle said, he two most salient traits of the radical movement are its anti-intellectualism and its hostility to the university as an institution.... Intellectuals, by definition, are people who take ideas for their own sake.
Whether or not a theory is true or false is important to them, independently of any practical applications it may have. Have, as Richard Hofstadter has pointed out, an attitude to ideas, at once playful and pious. But, in the radical movement, the intellectual ideal of knowledge for its own sake is rejected. Knowledge is seen as valuable only as a basis for action, it is not very valuable there. Far more important than what one knows is. In Social Sciences as Sorcery, the sociologist Stanislav Andreski advised laymen to distrust the intellectuals' appeals to authority when they make questionable claims about resolving the problems of their society: "Do not be impressed by the imprint of a famous publishing house, or the volume of an author's publications.... Remember that the publishers want to keep the printing presses busy, do not object to nonsense if it can be sold."In Science and Relativism: Some Key Controversies in the Philosophy of Science, the epistemologist Larry Laudan said that the prevailing type of philosophy taught at university in the U.
S. is anti-intellectual, because "the displacement of the idea that facts and evidence matter, by the idea that everything boils down to subjective interests and perspectives is—second only to American political campaigns—the most prominent and pernicious manifestation of anti-intellectualism in our time." In the U. S. the American conservative economist Thomas Sowell argued for distinctions between unreasonable and reasonable wariness of intellectuals in their influence upon the institutions of a society. In defining intellectuals as "people whose occupations deal with ideas", they are different from people whose work is the practical application of ideas; that cause for layman mistrust lies in the intellectuals' incompetence outside their fields of expertise. Although possessed of great working knowledge in their specialist fields, when compared to other professions and occupations, the intellectuals of a society face little discouragement against speaking authoritatively beyond their field of formal expertise, thus are unlikely to face responsibility for the social and practical consequences of their errors.
Hence, a physician is judged competent by the effective treatment of the sickness of a patient, yet mi
Persecution of Bahá'ís
Persecution of Bahá'ís occurs in various countries in Iran, where the Bahá'í Faith originated, the location of one of the largest Bahá'í populations in the world. The origins of persecution stem from a variety of Bahá'í teachings inconsistent with traditional Islamic belief, including the finality of Muhammad's prophethood, the placement of Bahá'ís outside the Islamic faith. Thus, Bahá'ís are seen as apostates from Islam, according to some Islamists, must choose between repentance and death. Bahá'í spokespeople, as well as the United Nations, Amnesty International, the European Union, the United States, peer-reviewed academic literature have stated that the members of the Bahá'í community in Iran have been subjected to unwarranted arrests, false imprisonment, torture, unjustified executions and destruction of property owned by individuals and the Bahá'í community, denial of employment, denial of government benefits, denial of civil rights and liberties, denial of access to higher education.
The Bahá'í Faith was established in 1863 by Bahá'u'lláh in Iran. Eighty-nine percent of Iranians adhere to the Twelver branch of Shi'a Islam, which holds as a core doctrine the expected advent of a messianic figure known as the Qa'im or as the Imam Mahdi; the Báb claimed he was the Imam Mahdi and thus he had equal status to Muhammad with the power, which he exercised, to abrogate the final provisions of Islamic law. Bahá'u'lláh, a Bábí who claimed to be the one foretold by the Báb, claimed a similar station for himself in 1863 as a Manifestation of God and as the promised figure foretold in the sacred scriptures of the major religious traditions of the past and founded what came to be known as the Bahá'í Faith. Concerning the historical context of the persecutions, Friedrich W. Affolter in "War Crimes, Genocide, & Crimes against Humanity" writes: Bahá'u'lláh's writings deal with a variety of themes that challenge long-cherished doctrines of Shí'i Islam. In addition to making the'heretic' claim of being a'Manifestation of God,' he suggested that school curricula should include'Western Sciences,' that the nation states should establish a world federal government, that men and women were equal.
Bahá'u'lláh wrote that in this time and age, priests were no longer necessary for religious guidance. Humanity, he argued, had reached an age of maturity where it was incumbent upon every individual to search for God and truth independently; these principles did not only call into question the need for a priesthood, but the entire Shí'i ecclesiastical structure and the vast system of endowments and fees that sustained it. No surprise that in the following decades until the overthrow of the Qájár dynasty in 1925, it was the mullas who instigated attacks against the Bahá'ís in cities or villages where the clerical establishment was influential. In addition to this, the Bábí religion, the forerunner of the Bahá'í Faith had a violent history in Iran. Friedrich W. Affolter writes: Initially, the mullas hoped to stop the Bábí movement from spreading by denouncing its followers as apostates and enemies of God; these denouncements torture of early Bábís. When the Bábís organized to defend themselves, the government sent troops into a series of engagements that resulted in heavy losses on both sides.
The Báb himself was imprisoned from 1846 until 1850 and publicly executed. In August 1852, two deranged Bábís attempted to kill the Shah in revenge for the execution of the Báb; this resulted in an extensive pogrom during which more than 20,000 Bábís – among them 400 Shí'i mullas who had embraced the Bábí teachings – lost their lives. Others have stated that the Bábís armed themselves and prepared for a holy war that became defensive when they encountered state troops in several locations and that two to three thousand Bábís were killed. Bahá ` u ` lláh took a more conciliatory position. Instead, he attempted to engage various governments in dialog. To this day, Bahá'ís are a persecuted minority group in Iran and other predominantly Muslim countries, since they are seen as apostates from Islam, supporters of the West and Israel; the Iranian constitution, drafted during the Iranian Constitutional Revolution in 1906 set the groundwork for the institutionalized persecution of Bahá'ís. While the constitution was modelled on Belgium's 1831 constitution, the provisions guaranteeing freedom of worship were omitted.
Subsequent legislation provided some recognition to Zoroastrians and Christians as equal citizens under state law, but it did not guarantee freedom of religion and "gave unprecedented institutional powers to the clerical establishment."The Islamic Republic of Iran, established after the Iranian revolution, recognizes four religions, whose status is formally protected: Zoroastrianism, Judaism and Islam. Members of the first three minority religions receive special treatment under Iranian law. For example, their members are allowed to drink alcohol, representatives of several minority communities are guaranteed seats in parliament. However, religious freedom in Iran is far from absolute. Conversion away from Islam is forbidden, with both missionaries risking prison; those seeking to start a new religious group face severe restrictions. The Bahá' í Faith faces an technical hurdle. Iranian law recognizes all those who accept the existence of God and the prophethood of Muhammad as Muslims. Bahá'ís accept both of thes
Misogyny is the hatred of, contempt for, or prejudice against women or girls. Misogyny manifests in numerous ways, including social exclusion, sex discrimination, androcentrism, male privilege, belittling of women, disenfranchisement of women, violence against women, sexual objectification. Misogyny can be found within sacred texts of religions and Western philosophy and Eastern philosophy; the inverse is misandry. According to sociologist Allan G. Johnson, "misogyny is a cultural attitude of hatred for females because they are female". Johnson argues that: Misogyny.... is a central part of sexist prejudice and ideology and, as such, is an important basis for the oppression of females in male-dominated societies. Misogyny is manifested in many different ways, from jokes to pornography to violence to the self-contempt women may be taught to feel toward their own bodies. Sociologist Michael Flood at the University of Wollongong defines misogyny as the hatred of women, notes: Though most common in men, misogyny exists in and is practiced by women against other women or themselves.
Misogyny functions as an ideology or belief system that has accompanied patriarchal, or male-dominated societies for thousands of years and continues to place women in subordinate positions with limited access to power and decision making. Aristotle contended that women exist as natural deformities or imperfect males Ever since, women in Western cultures have internalised their role as societal scapegoats, influenced in the twenty-first century by multimedia objectification of women with its culturally sanctioned self-loathing and fixations on plastic surgery and bulimia. Dictionaries define misogyny as "hatred of women" and as "hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women". In 2012 in response to events occurring in the Australian Parliament, the Macquarie Dictionary expanded the definition to include not only hatred of women but "entrenched prejudices against women"; the counterpart of misogyny is the hatred or dislike of men. Misogynous or misogynist can be used as adjectival forms of the word.
In his book City of Sokrates: An Introduction to Classical Athens, J. W. Roberts argues that older than tragedy and comedy was a misogynistic tradition in Greek literature, reaching back at least as far as Hesiod; the term misogyny itself comes directly into English from the Ancient Greek word misogunia, which survives in several passages. The earlier and more complete passage comes from a moral tract known as On Marriage by the stoic philosopher Antipater of Tarsus. Antipater argues that marriage is the foundation of the state, considers it to be based on divine decree, he uses misogunia to describe the sort of writing the tragedian Euripides eschews, stating that he "reject the hatred of women in his writing". He offers an example of this, quoting from a lost play of Euripides in which the merits of a dutiful wife are praised; the other surviving use of the original Greek word is by Chrysippus, in a fragment from On affections, quoted by Galen in Hippocrates on Affections. Here, misogyny is the first in a short list of three "disaffections"—women and humanity.
Chrysippus' point is more abstract than Antipater's, Galen quotes the passage as an example of an opinion contrary to his own. What is clear, however, is that he groups hatred of women with hatred of humanity and hatred of wine. "It was the prevailing medical opinion of his day that wine strengthens body and soul alike." So Chrysippus, like his fellow stoic Antipater, views misogyny negatively, as a disease. It is this issue of conflicted or alternating emotions, philosophically contentious to the ancient writers. Ricardo Salles suggests that the general stoic view was that " man may not only alternate between philogyny and misogyny and misanthropy, but be prompted to each by the other."Aristotle has been accused of being a misogynist. According to Cynthia Freeland: Aristotle says that the courage of a man lies in commanding, a woman's lies in obeying; the Timaeus warns men. The Republic contains a number of comments in the same spirit, evidence of nothing so much as of contempt toward women. Socrates' words for his bold new proposal about marriage... suggest that the women are to be "held in common" by men.
He never says that the men might be held in common by the women... We have to acknowledge Socrates' insistence that men surpass women at any task that both sexes attempt, his remark in Book 8 that one sign of democracy's moral failure is the sexual equality it promotes. Misogyni