Remember the Women's March on Washington about seven weeks ago on the weekend of Trump's inauguration-- if not refresh yourself with our article Beware the Side of Marches.  A week before the event, our local 'progressive' newspaper trumpeted a group of local 'progressive' women who planned on proudly marching and proudly wearing their 'pussy hats', and proudly recapped their event the weekend after, taking a lot of column inches away from the other usual tripe that makes up their version of our local news. 

There was a lot of odd things that happened in Washington:  Madonna mulling over blowing up the White House, other female celebrities voicing vulgar verse, and a lot of gals dressed up as vulvas and vaginas.  Perhaps the oddest thing in the mix was the commingling of the usual feminist issues with the acceptance of Islamic orthodoxy.  How could they equally justify the ideals of the empowered agnostic American female with the disempowered ideal of womanhood found in all countries where Islam is the dominant religion?  An iconic (and enigmatic) symbol of the march was a woman with an American flag as a hijab. 

On March 8th, another protest was organized by the same group of women who left their signs around Washington DC in January.  It was called A Day Without a Woman

You may have heard that in February there was "A Day without an Immigrant".  Immigrants were encouraged to take the day off work to show others how important they were.  After you read through the various reports on this, it was not so much a celebration of real immigrants who arrived here by going through the legal process, but of those who came here illegally.  I will let one of the most empowered and smartest women on the internet, Tomi Lahren, summarize the event:

Of course, around Michigan in February, the illegal immigrants are few, far between, and likely seasonally unemployed, so the only thing you may have noticed around here is that there were fewer people ahead of you at the store (they were encouraged to not buy anything on the day), and that's a bonus for me. 

The biggest news to come from the "Day Without an Immigrant" were the many illegal alien workers who lost their jobs for taking the day off just to protest.  But enough major media outlets grabbed on to the before and after stories that led to a new day being declared where women would do the same thing.  Take the day off, not spend money, and otherwise pursue the same goals that the Women's March on Washington did.   

Women were encouraged to wear red, and many of the same emblems (pussy hats, flag hijabs, liberal female celebrities, etc.) were on display. 

One of the main organizers for the event was a hijab-wearing woman named Linda Sarsour, an apologetic Muslim woman whose ideas of empowerment involve being true to her faith, converting minds of the unwary into thinking Sharia law and wearing a hijab are the heights of feminism. 

What she won't tell you is that Sharia law only disempowers women into second class citizens.  Under the dicta of Sharia:

1)  Wives can be beaten with impugnity

2)  Marriage and sex with pre-pubescent women (well under what we consider a reasonable age of consent) is permissible

3)  Divorce rights greatly favor the father's ability to divorce and retain the children

4)  Women are considered lacking in intelligence and faith

5)  Raping female infidels is permissible

6)  Women have less legal and human rights as men

Under Sharia, “men are superior to women” (Q 2:228) and “Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they [men] spend their wealth to maintain them [women]” (Q 34:4). Sharia then enjoins upon its adherents a profoundly un-egalitarian ethic, whereby women are deemed inferior to men (for more info). 

Linda Sarsour is not organizing these protests to reform or counter these unequitable facts of her religion; to the contrary, she wants to put these to the forefront of these events with a charming enough façade to deceive the naïve from the truth and infiltrate the popular culture with positive portrayals of her faith, and negative portrayals of Christians and Jews.  What better way to achieve this than allying with the big tent of the fractionalized progressive movement. 

When one looks at the dissociative symbolism and contradictory goals evident throughout the "Day without a Woman" protests, one cannot think that maybe it would be nice to have more than a day without these types of women.  To be sure, the Ludington Daily News trumpets the call that it was for women's issues regarding equal pay, abortion rights, pregnancy care and nonviolence against women, but then it's never explained there or in other liberal media how they can reconcile the tolerance of an Islamic ethos that works against all of those objectives.

But there is hope for those women who research and think for themselves rather than following the latest feel-good cause of the left.  And at the forefront of that hope has to be put a legal American immigrant woman named Nazi (Nah-zee) Paikidze.  Nazi was faced with a decision last year when her dreams of being the best woman chess player in the world were dashed not by a lack of chess fundamentals, but by a poor decision made by the World Chess Federation.  This is her story.

A Chess Queen Sacrifice

This year, the Women's World Chess Championship was held in Tehran, Iran.

Nazi Paikidze did not attend.

As the U.S. Women's Chess Champion in 2016, the 22-year-old earned a spot in the match—a huge accomplishment, and one she's been working toward for years. But she chose to boycott the competition because Iranian modesty laws would force her and all the other female competitors to wear a headscarf during their time in the country. "My rights as a woman would be compromised," she said.

Instead, Paikidze started a petition to urge the World Chess Federation—known as FIDE, for its French acronym—to reconsider its decision to place the championship in Iran, noting that the FIDE handbook rejects discrimination; within 24 hours it had 2,000 signatures. Still, Paikidze's boycott has received mixed reactions in the chess world, with opinions ranging from "You go girl!" to "Suck it up and put the scarf on your head." 

The misogynists at the head of the FIDE chose 'tolerance' over her concerns and had the championship in February and March without her and a few others with similar concerns.  The tournament had controversy coming from its own borders, a female Iranian chess grandmistress, Dorsa Derakshani (pictured below), refused to wear a hijab and was removed from her team.  Her brother Borna had the nerve to play against an Israeli chess player at another tourney, and was removed for that reason.


But Nazi had the most to lose as our country's top woman player and made her decision about a half of a year before the tournament and stuck with her resolve.  Why would she sacrifice her dream when there was such a potential payout in fame and fortune?  Those who would march and sympathize with the "Day Without a Woman" and "Woman's March on Washington" would do well to read her Glamour Magazine interview made last year after she declared her noninvolvement:

Glamour: Tell me about why you decided to boycott the championship.

Nazi Paikidze: When I heard that FIDE awarded the championship to Iran, I was shocked. The first thing I did was check if Iran had recently changed their laws, forced hijab being one of them. After learning that Iran, still to this day, severely restricts women’s rights and all the participants would be required to cover up with a hijab, I found it unacceptable for FIDE to decide on such a venue. This decision by FIDE forces the participants to choose between giving up their rights or their dream of becoming a world champion.

G: Obviously, this is a big sacrifice for you—why make such a bold gesture?

NP: I am honored and proud to to represent the USA in the Women’s World Chess Championship. As one of only 64 players in the world to have qualified, you can understand how important this competition is for me. I’ve been trying to qualify since I was 16 and for the first time, I’ve achieved this goal.

But playing a tournament in Iran comes with some serious strings attached. From the moment I would step off the plane, I would be forced to put on a hijab and my rights as a woman would be compromised in other ways as well. As much as I want to play, it feels immoral to do so and goes against my core principles.

G: What do you hope comes from your activism?

NP: Initially, the main goal that I was trying to achieve with this boycott was to convince FIDE to reverse their decision and protect the rights of players in the tournament. By proving that FIDE is in violation of their own rules, I believe that it’s possible.

The core issue however, being gender discrimination, goes far beyond the chess world and this single tournament. Inequality is a worldwide issue, varying largely from region to region. In Iran, women’s oppression is much more prevalent than in much of the world. I know I am not going to be able to change the Iranian laws alone, but I hope my voice can be heard and help encourage others to unite and push forward. I have gotten a tremendous amount of support from Iranians—endless kind-hearted messages. I can’t begin to describe how much that has meant to me.

G: Sexism has been a hot topic in the chess world lately. Do you think that placing the women's world championship in a part of the world that restricts women's rights is a step backward in the effort to draw more women and girls to the game?

NP: There are open tournaments in which both men and women can play. Separately, women’s tournaments exist to promote women’s chess and encourage girls to play.

If I were a little girl, seeing all of the top women players being forced to cover up at the Women’s World Championship, I would not be encouraged to pursue chess as a career.

G: How would you respond to those who say that boycotting the event or moving it would hurt women in Iran by undermining efforts to promote women’s sporting events there?

NP: I understand that hosting the championship is a great honor and there are many Iranians who are proud to be the host country. My intention is not to undermine any of the efforts that it took to make this happen or any of the progress that has been made thus far. But I strongly believe that it is wrong to host an international tournament in a place that forces all of the competitors to surrender their rights. I wish there was a better and more clear way to help promote women’s sporting events in Iran, one that does not compromise the rights of others in the process.

G: And what about those who say that you shouldn’t mind wearing a hijab about of respect for Iranian culture?

NP: After coming to the United States [from Russia, where I was born], it did not take long to realize that I love it here. The country itself is a product of immigrants from all over the world—a mixture of countless cultures and people living and thriving together. I have great respect for the Iranian people and their culture. But a forced hijab is neither a matter of culture nor religion. It is a law created by the government in 1979 to oppress women. Iranian women have been protesting the forced hijab since then.

I would like to add that my protest is not against any religion, culture, or country. Put simply, I am protesting FIDE’s decision to have its female members forced to choose between surrendering their rights or missing a world championship. I do not believe we should have to choose one or the other.

What profound words come from this chess grandmaster.  This is the proper way to fight for rights, through meaningful sacrifice and grand deeds to achieve incontrovertible advancement of human rights for all.  Nazi has proven herself to be a queen among women, the most far-ranging, powerful and valuable piece on the chessboard.  While most of those who donned their red gear, wrapped their hijab and took a day off of their work and shopping have proven themselves to be mere pawns of a confused movement going backwards.

Views: 154

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

If the Left can convince women that wearing a hijab and that Sharia Law will liberate them then they will only prove that some women cannot even think on the same level as a rock. This almost brinks on mental illness to think that Islam and the U.S. are compatible. Thank heavens for women like Tomi Lahran and Paikidze who use common sense and the brain they were born with. Since Obama took office the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated all aspect of our Government and have been successful in subverting our system. If there ever was a philosophy and life style  that clashes with America's ideals more than Islam then I'm not aware of it. great article X.

Thanks for the great review, Willy.  Your sign is good, but I was thinking that the Orwellian trio is more appropriate to replace her original three phrases: 

"War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength."

Variations of these seem to be extant in the training of our youths when you think about it.

X you missed your calling. You are a natural at investigative reporting. It's to bad local news agencies are not concerned with uncovering the corruption that has made Ludington a haven for what is wrong with government today. Without your dedication and talents nothing about how corrupt Ludington city hall really is would ever see the light of day.

Well put Willy.

It takes a lot of time, dedication and research to do what XLFD does for his city (not to mention many outside of that community).  I find it impressive on many levels.  Talk about being of service to your fellow human/citizens!!!

Willy I beg to differ if I may. X absolutely found his calling but the other local media are running a muck w/o balls apparently! They ALL are afraid to accept his findings as a truth, EVERY time! The current city officials shun him and try to ridicule, proves he is on the right track!

I live in a suburb of Detroit, we have Charlie LeDuff (fox), Maureen Taylor, state chair of the Michigan Welfare Rights Organization, Robert Davis (lawyer/activist), etc....  All oppose these officials and actions in a HUGE way! Difference is the media here ACCEPT them, even employ them!

Sometimes when I think about Ludington and the difference here is the it must be "lead" by the oompa loompas that did not make the cut from Willy Wonka!

Seems that Jack Nicholson in a Few Good Men explained this very well! Started with "the truth, you cant handle the truth......"

All I can say is why would the city not want transparency and embrace this man, must have something to hide or too lazy disrespectful to tell the citizens the WHOLE story?

Being that this is the Ides of March, I worry that all of this bountiful praise and admiration is going to wind up with me seeing a dagger through my chest.  "Et tu, Torcher?" 

Don't downplay your own potentials, you guys are awesome in your own right.


© 2018   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service