Ayaan hirsi ali…first time I’ve heard of her

The point she makes about refugee women needing to learn how to manage money comes from her experience that women are escaping from families where they've had no control over money. Her books are fantastic.

She makes the really good point that refugee women including those raised Muslim should be required to learn the language of the countries they settle in, as a condition of receiving benefits. She also says such women should have to learn how to manage money. Unless women are made to do these two things they will be forever stuck in the restrictive ghettoes of their original religions cultures and languages and unable to benefit from Western opportunities for education and work etc.

The film is on YouTube. Starts in Dutch but continues in English.

It's 20 years since Theo van Gogh - yes, family of the painter - was murdered cycling along in Amsterdam after leaving his son off at school in the morning.
All because he made a film - he was a writer, film producer and provocateur, he once stood outside Van Gogh Museum shouting "We want our paintings back!" LOL-

Made the film with Ayan Hirsi Ali. Called Submission. Cost him his life, cost her the fear for her life. Thank fuck that killer will never be released!

Theo van Gogh was brilliant, Ayan Hirsi Ali is brilliant for standing up to a mysoginist (sp?) culture that hates women who won't toe the line.

I love her. I mean, honestly, how many of us would be that brave?!

Submission (2004 film) - Wikipedia

This is the recent thread I mentioned. The latter part of it goes into much depth around some of the issues discussed ITT.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5244795-absolutely-shit-scared-about-the-future-in-the-uk?page=19&reply=141125756

Some western feminists seemingly dislike her for the reasons I mentioned previously - i.e. that she calls them out for being afraid to challenge VAWG in situations where they fear being seen as intolerant, claiming that they often choose to defend Islam over women's rights when the two are in conflict.

I don't think it's about picking sides. I've also argued previously that the left sometimes drive people towards the right. But in cases like the Rotherham scandal and the widespread sexual assaults by middle eastern immigrants, etc, the left will often choose to downplay transgressions against women rather than challenge certain cultures for fear of being seen as intolerant - one of Hirsi Ali's arguments.

There are some instances where you have to almost pick a side. In this instance it's arguably the choice to criticise certain elements of Islam and risk backlash against innocent Muslims in the process, or alternatively stay quiet and allow these crimes against women to go unchallenged.

Following Rotherham and the aforementioned sexual assaults on NYE and other similar events, the authorities actively downplayed the things that happened, later admitting it was for fear of escalating racial tensions. The flipside of that is that the victims don't receive justice and a certain message is given.

She is a brilliant and brave writer and thinker. Her books (eg. "Heretic") about her own experiences of being born into a very oppressive muslim culture and undergoing FGM, escaping while en route to an arranged marriage she did not want, getting asylum in Holland, learning about ideas for the first time, becoming a Dutch MP - are must have reading for all women. To acknowledge her because of her marriage to Niall Ferguson, and not because of her achievements is insulting, and frankly the sort of approach many men would take.

This Madeleine Albright?

Hope the bitch is rotting in hell

Look at Valerie Solanas's life though. If I had, had her life I would probably think all men should die as well. That doesn't make it factually true that all men should die however.

Its not about "support" really. I mean, I support her rights to live freely, have freedom of speech, have physical safety (and would be happy for my taxes to go towards police protection, those that threaten violence). I would support the rights of men, even misogynistic men, even total arseholes who I hate actually to the exact same degree but no further.

But if support means agreeing with her views then no. I also think the idea that there are 2 teams in this world and you need to pick the least evil is a bit flawed. Otherwise you start by sensibly arguing against enforced pronouns and end up going mad talking to Tommy Robinson about chaos dragons. Its also how really dangerous extremists (not Ali) win through. So if you think "your people" aren't committed/extreme enough you attack the other side. When they retaliate, people move over to your extreme for protection. You force everyone to pick a team basically. Lots of extremist groups deliberately do this. But it means you miss a lot of nuance, and find it a lot harder to see things clearly. e.g. parts of the left, especially in America, became noticeable more nuts post 2016. I do think it was a response in part to Trumps nuttiness- but some of the baby was thrown out with the bathwater. And some of the leftwing nuttiness then drove other people into much more extreme right wing views/writing everything off as "woke mind virus". Its not helpful.

She’s a heroic woman who risks her own life by defending women’s rights against people who think women shouldn’t have any. Except the right to remain silent.

And it's not like there weren't a fair share of proper nutters amongst the famous 2nd wave feminsts. I raise you Valerie Solanas et al.

Agreed.

I'm just saying she's possibly the lesser evil of the two. You'd think feminists would support a flawed feminist over flawed misogynists.

Just wanted to say also... whether or not someone is in the "victim demographic", or if they are championing someone who is in that demographic doesn't have a direct bearing on how right their opinion is. Its a trap!!!

Thats why its not fair to dismiss her outright! Its easy to say that because one part of someone's views go too far, then everything they have to say is worthless. In some cases actually yes. But in her case she very clearly has valid, personal experience of the worst religion and Islam in particular has to offer. Her description of what it was like growing up in a patriarchal religion and then leaving it is valid. It is different to the views of a woman who is still a Muslim (though they might also well have criticisms to make of some Muslim men its not either/or). Its like the gay friend I mentioned. Their experiences of the worst of far right extremists/homophobia is really worth hearing. But I don't need to agree with their interpretation that JK Rowling is far right. Its where actual first hand experience meets opinion/personal interpretation of the wider meaning of that experience.

Otherwise you very quickly end up with everyone shouting at each other or trying to use other people's experiences as a reason you can't disagree with them. Not that this is something Ayaan Hirsi Ali herself is doing.

SchoolDilemma17 · 11/01/2025 21:09

First time you have heard of her 😳

Im 60, keep fairly up to date with news. I’ve never heard of her, either?

Do you really compare yourself and your views to Ayaan Hirsi Ali?

No. HTH.

I think you could be right, although I've not read enough of her stuff to really be able to say. But in balance I'd say the people she champions (Muslim women) are probably more in the victim demographic than those she criticises (Muslim men) even if the latter are also sometimes discriminated against.

But it's certainly odd to see western feminists centering men immigrating from cultures where it's acceptable to stone women to death for unproven accusations of infidelity (whilst sometimes having three wives themselves). Feminists are often extremists themselves tbf and it's a very similar dynamic to the outlook people are suggesting Hirsi Ali displays - e.g. they have overly extreme views/prejudice against men as a result of suffering at their hands. I'm talking about the sort of feminists that think imposing a curfew on all men is a reasonable suggestion etc.

2 things can be true at the same time. A person can have been heavily victimised for their beliefs, and then been further criticised/left unsupported by the left for talking about it. And themselves have quite extreme views of their own (quite probably caused by being victimised by Muslims and then "the left"). Its understandable but it isn't right. Its like a male gay friend of mine who suffered really horribly from homophobia in school and was then physically assaulted as a young man by right wing thugs. So he has an entirely understandable mistrust of anything labelled far right/right wing or homophobic/trnasphobic. Hence we had a big argument about JK Rowling and had to agree to disagree in the end. I can understand why he feels the way he does. But I can't agree. Thats how I feel about Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She has useful information re her own experiences. But she is an extremist.

Once again Mumsnet doesn't let me down. This is a woman who has been victimised under the name of being an Islamophobe. Despite being attacked for her beliefs as an ex-mulslim in a country where leaving the faith (apostasy) is punished by death according to the Koran. She lives under continual death threats because she has the audacity to study and dissect the Koran. And I just wish that every Mumsnet reader would please read it for themselves. Go to the source. I'm just bloody tired of explaining and telling people I know and love that they need to understand things like taqiyya (look it up for yourselves if you have children). If every so called feminist on Mumsnet took the time to understand Ayaan Hirsi Ali they should lobby their MP's to support her. Forget the mainstream media feminist puppets, she is the real deal.

The far right cite her because of her anti refugee, anti immigrant, anti Muslim views. She believes those jailed for inciting violence during the riots were unjustly jailed, that Muslims are colluding with Starmer and we should come out of the ECHR to stop asylum seekers from coming here.

You'd have thought that being a Muslim refugee herself, she'd have some empathy for others fleeing FGM or forced marriage but apparently not. She didn't think Trump went far enough when he banned Muslims from coming to the States.

She's a poster girl for people like Tommy Robinson and Elon Musk. You keep banging a drum for her.

She explained most of that in her book Infidel. You'd know if, if you'd read it. She's not a liar.

Anyway, an amazing woman. Coincidentally, I just finished her book Heretic yesterday. She's an inspiration and talks perfect sense. She also often writes about people like above, who disagree with her (perfectly valid and evidenced) points and stoop down to personal attacts in order to shut her up. But she never 'shuts up', even after she had fatwa issued for her, multiple death threats, a collaborator on her film and a friend murdered in the street with a note (for her) essentially saying 'you're next' fixed to his chest with a knife, she keeps on writing and speaking. Love her.

AHA's books and articles offer a must-read insight of life under Islam for women.

I read both of her books - Infidel describes her family background in Somalia, her experience with FGM, moving to Kenya and Saudi, her association with the Muslim Brotherhood, and her eventual escape to NL and the USA.

When asking Muslim people what they think of her, the reaction is one of disgust and anger.

She's one of the bravest women alive who lives with the constant threat of death, and I value her views far above those of any Internet fool.

She has recently become a Christian after feeling there to be a spiritual vacuum in her life.

Did you mean to be so bloody patronising?