Where's the Social Web Revolution for Abused Women and Starving Children? (Boiling Frog Syndrome)

It's worth noting that with all this triumphant talk about the Twitter revolution in Iran -- especially when it's about a lesser-of-two-evils candidate -- we can't summon a fraction of the energy and passion to save abused, raped and battered women across the globe. Nor can we muster the same attention and will to deal with the plight of children who are dying of hunger, deprived of the bare necessities of life.

Here are the brutal facts:

* There are four million new hungry people every week, over a billion total. Every day, almost 16,000 children die from hunger-related causes -- one child every five seconds.

* Millions of women and girls (our mothers, sisters and daughters) endure one or more of the following: intimate partner violence; sexual abuse by non-intimate partners; trafficking, forced prostitution, exploitation, debt bondage, sex selective abortion, female infanticide, and rape.

Perhaps it's boiling frog syndrome, the fact that global hunger and women's rights are ongoing tragedies/travesties without sudden spikes of interest. Or perhaps it's the futility of confronting these intractable issues, a sense that we're powerless to change such pervasive problems.

That's not to say that there aren't many courageous and dedicated people working to alleviate hunger and protect women's rights. There are. But where is the massive outrage, the worldwide focus, the grainy images, the Twitter-mania, the color-coded avatars? Most importantly, where is the urgency, the immediacy?

Clearly, something is happening in Iran with technology that signals a new era in global activism. This is the first period in human history when so many individuals, friends and strangers, can speak to one another simultaneously, on equal footing; there's never been a time when ten million people could converse at once, on the same topic, using the same platform.

That also means they can shout and raise the alarm about injustice together. And as we're seeing with CNN, those millions of impassioned people can pressure the media to get on board, further increasing the level of attention.

So why isn't this happening for oppressed and abused women or hungry and starving children, when their aggregate pain and suffering is far greater and the threat to them more severe than to the (brave) Iranian demonstrators? Where's the intense coverage, the excitement over the potential of Twitter and Facebook to alter the course of history?

I'm not calling for less focus on Iran, but more, much more, on the mortal threat so many women and children face.

I'll conclude with a clip from Channel 4 News in the UK, where I was asked to comment on Gordon Brown's statement that because of the Internet, there will be no more Rwandas. My answer: what about Darfur?

Cross-posted on CTN

Follow Peter Daou on Twitter: www.twitter.com/peterdaou

Comments

[itolduso]

As a society, we seem to have a twisted perspective on poverty & domestic abuse.....far too many believe that those suffering DESERVE it. An abused woman is stalked & murdered by her boyfriend, and often the very first thing out of everyone's mouth is ...."why didn't she leave him?" (fact is, she did- that's why he killed her.) A teenage celebrity is beaten by her boyfriend, and much of the public debate centers on whether or not she STARTED the 'argument' ( fact: a fist in the face is 'assault & battery' - not 'conversation') In advocating for the homeless, I'm often confronted with statements such as "people need to take responsibility to get themselves education & training for good jobs so they can support themselves" or " I work overtime to have a nice home & be able to afford to take vacations, why should I give money to people that won't work?" (fact: more than 60% of those seeking services are employed full-time, many are skilled workers, many of their economic problems are caused by accidents or illness, sudden job loss,- mental health issues- many military service-related, or substance abuse). We respond so well to catastrophies - hurricanes, wildfires, tornados- we mobilize and donate & volunteer and give blood, but we seem unwilling or unable to face that poverty, homelessness & domestic abuse can happen to ANYONE ( because that would mean that we, ourselves are vulnerable) and so we continue to blame the victims.

[grn1]

"So why isn't this happening for oppressed and abused women or hungry and starving children," Old wealthy filthy men think you are silly for this statement, when they are committing illegal wars with millions of victims.

[cvarner]

Ok, since you're right, we aren't doing enough for your pet cause, let's not do anything about any cause. Once again, perfect is the enemy of good. How dare we speak out on Iran when other bad things are happening??

[lcdbsez]

Mr. D. --

As with most issues on this planet, if something doesn't directly affect men (white, black, brown, red, yellow, purple or green), it's not a problem to be dealt with.

Examples: reproduction rights, education, care & feeding of children (and the elderly), health concerns, wage-scale inequalities, employment opportunities, the environment, climate issues -- even something as simple as sharing chores and responsibilities in a marriage/r­elationshi­p . . .

As long as it's not a "guy thing" it's not really that important.

[jcwtts1]

Wow, how about you leave black men, who in America at least, are doing far worse than white women and black women. I have friend, finished up at Temple Law, one guy, 30 black women. How is that for a depiction of reality. The same is true everywhere you go. Black men, Obama aside, are struggling. If you want to talk violence, young black men in urban centers have the life expectancy of a Guatemalan peasant. How about you leave black men off your list. I let others speak to the rest of your rainbow.

J

[lcdbsez]

jcw --

How 'bout YOU back off the caffiene, or whateverrrrr you're so hopped up on . . . geeeezeluizeeee!

Men dominate women -- yes, sorry to burst your little bubble, dear, but it's true . . . and has been for about 50,000 years or so.

Read your history, duhhhhhh. And I don't care what color their skin is.

[yphili184]

Quick answer-- starving poor people tend not to have Twitter account's.

[jmpurser]

Thank you. It's easy to lose the signal in the noise unless someone filters it out and let's us hear the important things.

[RosieLee]

Gordon Brown point: Well said, Peter!

After 12 years in power PM Brown hasn't even dealt with the poverty gap in UK, here the poverty gap is wider since Labour took power than previously, would you believe?

So Brown is hardly an authority of poverty, is he?

[Romulus]

ummm....why don't you start a social networking site for abused women instead of just blogging about it?

[Nancy2008]

I wonder how many abused women have internet access. I think that it is up to us to speak out about this. Of course the issue of starving is completely separate from abused and exploited women and children. Many people arewilling to offer help to the hungry. For women who are locked away by exploitive men, cultures, and religions- it seems like the least we can do is admit the helplessness and hopelessness of their situation.

[jcwtts1]

Further, I would argue that any site created for abused women would lack the security needed to truly help them. A woman writes of her plan to flee an abusive husband or boyfriend and he reads about it when he hacks her password and then kills her. I mean low tech is the way to go. Underground railroad it. I think you would be surprised how many guys would help.

J