The Women’s Revolution
A supporter of candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi protests June 16, 2009 in Tehran. (Getty Images)
CNN has a good piece up about the feminist factor in the Iran situation:
(CNN) — Like thousands of other Iranian women, Parisa took to Tehran’s streets this week, her heart brimming with hope. “Change,” said the placards around her.
The young Iranian woman eyed the crowd and pondered the possibility that the rest of her life might be different from her mother’s. She could see glimmers of a future free from discrimination — and all the symbols of it, including the head-covering the government requires her to wear every day.
Women, regarded as second-class citizens under Iranian law, have been noticeably front and center of the massive demonstrations that have unfolded since the presidential election a week ago. Iranians are protesting what they consider a fraudulent vote count favoring hardline incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but for many women like Parisa, the demonstrations are just as much about taking Iran one step closer to democracy.
“Women have become primary agents of change in Iran,” said Nayereh Tohidi, chairwoman of the Gender and Women’s Studies Department at California State University, Northridge.
The remarkable images show women with uncovered heads who are unafraid to speak their minds and crowds that are not segregated — both the opposite of the norm in Iran, Tohidi said.
She said a long-brewing women’s movement may finally be manifesting itself on the streets and empowering women like Parisa.
Actually, Iran’s feminist movement has manifested itself before, only to be crushed in the wake of the Islamic Revolution. Read this interview in Forbes with Iranian-American journalist Roya Hakakian, who explains the historical background shadowing the current protests:
Forbes: Is this a moment of change for women?
Roya Hakakian: Yes. The feminist movement, which has been ongoing in Iran, has now joined the broader public movement against the regime. This happened in Iran in the late 1970s too, but it had actually a terrible effect on the women’s movement in Iran. Women were somehow “hoodwinked” to think that the veil wasn’t such an important issue, that it was more important to sacrifice for the greater good. So the Shah went and the veil stayed.
Emphasis mine. That hoodwinking thing isn’t just confined to Iran, of course; everywhere and forever, women are enjoined to put aside their own liberation for the “greater good” — said greater good invariably involving whatever is harshing the dudes and, equally invariably, never involving the liberation of women from the oldest oppression on the planet.
But that’s not really the point I wanted to make. Nor did I want to dwell on how the Iranian situation highlights the absurdity of Obama’s pandering on hijab — and by the way, I’m still wondering if Jon Favreau is the one who wrote that speech. Back when Hillary Clinton was the First Lady and not a cardboard cutout at Jon Favreau’s beer-soaked house party, she used her public platform to deliver one of the landmark speeches in the global struggle for women’s rights, asserting memorably that “women’s rights are human rights.” Obama/Favreau, given an even more prominent platform, used it to defend the right of women to wear veils and full-body slipcovers in accordance with the teachings of misogynistic godbags. Thanks, guys.
The point I wanted to make was…well, I forget. Really. This isn’t literary posturing; I really can’t remember what I was going to say. Something about Iran, I guess. Okay, well, never mind.
45 Responses to “The Women’s Revolution”
-
Dark Angel Cryo says:
Wow, way to go Iranian Women! Of course, the real problem isn’t so much Ahmadinejad but rather Ali Khamenei and the Guardian Council and I’m not sure if who wins the election will really change things that much for the better but it’s a start. Of course with luck, this will continue on past the election issue as a new wave of Iranian feminism.
Keep on protesting!June 19th, 2009 at 11:15 pm EST -
Leis says:
According to CNN those feminists are just fine as long as they don’t try to run for president or vice president. Then their just a bunch of diabolical bitches. I fucking hate CNN. But good on those brave women.
-
HeroesGetMade says:
That part about women being the primary agents of change in Iran? It’s not just Iran, it’s everywhere. Just watched an amazing segment on Bill Moyer about the documentary Pray the Devil Back to Hell about how women stopped the war in Liberia and got the first female leader of any nation in Africa. One of the most striking things about making the film was that there was hardly any footage of these women making peace, but more footage than anybody ever needed about men killing everybody. The media didn’t deign to film these women transforming their country into a livable place because they were “pathetic”. So they were made invisible until someone interested in true transformation wanted to document how it’s done. I’ll have to get hold of this one, what a great name, too - Pray the Devil Back to Hell.
-
SYD says:
Interesting that they carry signs etched in English. Clearly, they think we can help them??
Such a sad day for all of us. On both sides of the world.
-
samanthasmom says:
Maybe the signs are etched in English because they want to show us how it’s done.
-
Anna Belle says:
At least you aren’t making the ridiculous assertion that the Iranian protesters are the equivalent of lasts year’s PUMA movement, which I read last night night at the Confluence. I’m still trying to decide if I want to respond with a post. I don’t want to attack RD, but that analogy is bogus as shit. The people in the streets protesting in Iran are like the O-bots, not the PUMA. PUMAs were careful and cautious and worked within the system, because we hated the in your face approach of O-bots. Anyway…
-
Gayle says:
If anyone here hasn’t read “Reading Lolita in Tehran” I highly recommend it.
It depicts a disturbing back story to the Iranian Revolution. Beginning with all the divergent groups who joined together to oust the Shah, the groups turned on each other once he fled the country. The first group targeted? Liberals. The Marxists and the Islamists joined together and murdered them, harassed them, silenced them. Women’s rights went with them.
I’m glad to see women out there protesting and I admire their bravery, but I have little faith they’ll benefit all that much, even if these street protests succeed. Male politicians have a habit of using women, then leaving us behind. But, of course, everyone here already knows this!
On a semi-related note: the kids over at Feministing are now atwitter over France’s decision to CONSIDER banning the Burka. I’m sure their Feminist President will join them in their outrage.
The discussion over there makes me wonder if I actually dreamed the 60 Minutes expose about violence against women caused by self appointed Muslim morality police in France.
While there is general harassment ranging from chasing uncovered girls screaming “whore!” at them to actually grabbing at them, Gang rapes seem to be their preferred method of enforcement.Banning the burka may well rob these young men of their right to rape as they wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between the moral “good” girls and the “whores.” So I’m thinking feminists should seriously discuss and debate it rather than dismiss it outright.
Stunningly, there is a more nuanced discussion about this going on over at Huff and Puff right now.
(Sorry if this is too OT. It seems to dovetail into your Feminists Against Women thread)
-
yttik says:
A while back I came across some old pictures of women in Iran, in miniskirts and go go boots. One thing that gets lost in our perceptions of the ME is that the current status of women in many countries is a recent thing. I was around protesting what happened to the women in Afghanistan during Bill Clinton’s terms, so I have some idea of their history and how quickly their lives changed. Afghanistan had women going to school, working as doctors, women who spoke out and protested the way they were being forced into burkas and kicked out of mainstream society.
As to women’s rights being human rights, and women being the primary agents of change, the significance of women’s oppression and how it’s going to impact our foreign affairs cannot be underestimated. If the oppression of women in Afghanistan had been taken seriously, like the canary in the coal mine, who knows what we could have prevented, perhaps 911 and a war in two countries? Instead, the oppression of half the human race in Afghanistan was viewed as an insignificant side effect, not really our problem, certainly not relevant enough to be taken into consideration and incorporated into our foreign policy.
-
Alwaysthinking says:
There is another subtle wave beneath us that gets in the way of our own revolution. I am trying to sort it out. I picked up on it again recently when a dear relative observed how wonderful it was that we could now see black and white men on television hugging one another after a sports victory. I agreed, but noted that there was one sad element missing from the picture — and that was that many black Civil Rights’ leaders had been sexists and even misogynists and that their prejudices had been brought forth all the way through our current president’s electoral campaign (although his campaign deliberately used the tactics as weapons).
My relative was silent at first but then he answered quietly, “Women in other parts of the world have it much worse.” I agreed, but noted that “We are supposed to be the leaders, and we have been set backwards.”
It quickly dawned on me, however, that this was another way that American men honestly divert American women’s complaints about injustices in our society as being trivial compared to those of women in other parts of the world. Even those men close to women who have experienced sexist and misogynistic treatment most of their lives cannot see their experiences as real suffering. Because, at least, in normal non-violent families and non-violent workplaces, they just don’t recognize, much less feel, the accumulative pain of the subtle abuses. The thousands of little pinpricks are just not visible to them. They clearly grasp the obvious abuses in other countries — the overt gang rapes, stonings, and beheadings — but cannot actually grasp what we as American, or Western, women have to complain about. They can’t feel what we battle against constantly in our life experiences.
How do we make it clear that just because we are not stoned (yet at least) in public places that we really do have legitimate and disabling grievances? Unless we women can get this message across, I’m not sure we can get men to join our very real cause. And if men don’t join the cause, we will not be able to convince some unaware women (or women in denial) that they must unite to fight the inequality and injustices.
-
soopermouse says:
Gayle
Of course they are.Thinkabout it- theer are maybe 10 muslim girls who say that they want to wear theurka. And since there’s not one functional brain amongst all of the antifeministing crew, of course for them those 10 are a lot more important thanthe millions who ae forced. It’s the prostitution debate all over again- 10 women say they want to do it and their rights are mre important than those of the traficked women, dontcha know?
Its not like there are severe and lifethreaening consequencesto not wearing the burka , right? -
sister of ye says:
Alwaysthinking, I hate that response from people. Comparative hurt may be a necessary concept in triage, but when it’s extended to the rest of life, it usually translates as “I don’t want to hear your whining.”
In fact, American women with full equal rights and opportunities would be in a much better position to help other women achieve getting theirs.
It’s like a natural disaster. If you broke your leg and I broke my arm, I’d do my best with my “lesser” injury to get us both out. But the best situation is for rescuers with no injuries to help us both. (Then when we’re both healthy, we can turn around and help others in turn.)
Remember when your parents would try to get you to eat something you didn’t like by citing starving children in some foreign country? They’d just get mad when you offered (quite logically) to pack up your dinner and send it to them. I mean, you eating your dinner wasn’t going to alleviate their starving.
American women accepting not having equal rights does not help women in Iran or anywhere. It’s not like there’s a finite amount, so if we have full rights, it means we’ve taken their share and they have less.
-
SYD says:
Always and Sister…
you are both right on target.
Yet another way in which “intersectionality” has not served our own movement. As long as we can comepare ourselves with someone who has it worse…. we tend to feel that we should just shut up and take a number.
As sister of ye so deftly points out… that is indeed appropriate if I am sitting in an Emergency Room, awaiting medical treatment.
However…. in most of life… my taking less than I need or deserve only sets up a pattern of other women also being expected to expect less. In other words, when it comes to human rights, my acquiescence to less does not mean that others can or will have more.
Excellent discussion!
-
tinfoil hattie says:
Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.
Okay. So … we should not impede Muslim citizens from practicing a religion that tells women what they must wear, because then we’re … dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear? What the hell kind of pretzel logic is this?
-
Alwaysthinking says:
sister of ye and SYD. Amen. As you say, there is a time for triage in actual physical emergencies, but not on a permanent basis. I can attest personally to the physical example, actually. My husband, daughter, unborn son, and I once were in a terrible accident. We all survived, luckily. But I had a bilateral ankle break and a broken pelvis, not to mention scores of bruises and gouges from rocks on my back. The people coming to see me at the hospital immediately pointed out how lucky I was. Even on morphine, I found their comments off-putting. Of course, I knew the situation could be worse in so many ways but when the morphine wore off, the pain was horrible, and I had that added fear of what the trauma was doing to my unborn child; how my husband was doing after his abdominal surgery; and how how my young daughter was managing because at 2 years old she was not allowed to see me. She escaped major injury but who knew what kind of emotional state she was in!
For certain, the belittling of American women by the current American president already has enabled, in my opinion, vile treatment of women in this country and other parts of the world. By trying to stifle our rights and pushing us backwards, he already has weakened our roles as beacons of hope to women everywhere. It just seems so hard for some people — especially men, but also many women — to grasp the reality or the inherent dangers facing us.
-
Violet says:
My relative was silent at first but then he answered quietly, “Women in other parts of the world have it much worse.”
The next time someone tries that, say: “So, does that mean racism in the U.S. was okay because apartheid in South Africa was much worse?”
-
Violet says:
At least you aren’t making the ridiculous assertion that the Iranian protesters are the equivalent of lasts year’s PUMA movement, which I read last night night at the Confluence. I’m still trying to decide if I want to respond with a post. I don’t want to attack RD, but that analogy is bogus as shit. The people in the streets protesting in Iran are like the O-bots, not the PUMA. PUMAs were careful and cautious and worked within the system, because we hated the in your face approach of O-bots.
The analogy is limited, I agree, but I think the point was that the Iranians are also protesting a corrupt election, which is what animated so many PUMAs last year. The Obama team cheated and manipulated their way to the nomination. When the Iranians demand that their votes count, it is a tiny bit reminiscent of last year’s protests. (Not that I’m pursuing the analogy, because the situations are too disparate.)
I would not compare the Iranians to the Obamabots at all. The Iranians who are protesting are incredibly brave people who are risking their lives for democracy.
-
okasha skatsi says:
I’m trying to imagine Obots zipping their pants, setting down their beers and going out on the street to risk their lives for fair elections and the idea that every vote should be counted.
Sorry, can’t do it.
-
m Andrea says:
Er. Ask any of those women, and they will positively screech that their dude — yanno the one chaining them to the kitchen sink — loves them to freaking pieces. My point being, that heterosexual women tend to be a tad confused regarding the actual definition of “love”.
Amazingly enough, the dudes who would refer to me as a man-hating feminazi appear to comprehend the problems with that definition instantly:
Nigel, I wuv you so much I am going to chain you to a plow, recind all your rights and then give you the status of a servant designed solely for my pleasure. Nigel honey, I wuv you enough to do all that, and laugh.
-
Sameol says:
OT, are there any blogs covering the NOW convention? I haven’t found any yet.
-
Violet says:
This one! Check the most recent post.
-
Violet says:
HeroesGetMade, thank you very much for the tip on that documentary. I watched the trailer and read up on it a little. Fascinating.
-
Sameol says:
Lol! I saw it, I’m excited! I meant if any blogger who’s there in person is sharing all the ins and outs going on on the floor. :)
-
Kiuku says:
“Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.”
This is ridiculous. Like Sharia law for those who “accept” it and “agree” to be Muslim? There need to be laws that protect the basic rights of citizens to dictate for themselves, and these laws should not protect any religion, especially one that murders women for honor. What’s next, not impeding on men’s rights to kill women in Islam?
-
Anna Belle says:
I’m sorry, Vi, but I think calling it a corrupt election is premature. According to what I’m reading, the results might be correct. If they are, there is an analogy that works: Russia and communism. This appears to be the same sad tale handed down through the ages, which is that the city mice are in a hurry to run rough-shod over the country mice, and the country mice aren’t having it. As a country mouse, I don’t blame them one bit.
I don’t disagree that Iran is a mess politically speaking, but no one who is speaking about these issues is paying any attention to the salient points, which are that the US has been after Iranian land for a long time now, that the US has positioned itself militarily on either side of Iran in order to help facilitate this (Afghanistan, Iraq), and that corporate interests are driving this agenda.
Even if you can appreciate how the Iranian mostly-male youth are protesting, how can you ignore that support for them equals support for that corporate agenda? Doesn’t that make the supporters of this highly questionable incident corporate tools?
-
Anna Belle says:
okasha, if you recall, last spring Obots were threatening just this kind of revolution unless their votes–and only their votes–counted.
-
okasha skatsi says:
Anna Belle,
There’s a great deal of difference between threatening violence from your keyboard and actually getting out and putting your life on the line.
The Iranian protesters aren’t being herded into “free speech zones.” They’re being shot at, sprayed with caustics and killed. Do you think Obots have that kind of courage? I don’t.
-
monchichipox says:
The son may have to bear the burdens of the father but it’s the daughter that’s left to clean up the mess.
-
okasha skatsi says:
Some of those daughters are dying. Protesters today are carrying pictures of Neda, the young woman who was murdered by a Basij sniper yesterday. Rafsanjani’s daughter and other prominent feminists are being arrested.
Andy Sullivan continues coverage today, with tweets and commentary.
-
Sis says:
Women’s Space, a feminist website, on women in Iran. If “Andy Sullivan” is Andrew Sullivan, no thanks.
-
okasha skatsi says:
Like him or loathe him, and I mostly loathe him, Sully has been doing an excellent job with this.
-
soopermouse says:
Anna Belle
no other sources than the Iranian Government claim the elections were fair. And no offense, but I find putting any trust in them to be … incredibly bizarre in lack of a better word. Seriously, wtf? I can understand your hesitation to take what we see on TV for granted, but I find it a bit presumptuous of you to assume that you know better than the Iranians what’s happening to their own country.Why is it so hard to believe that Iranians migth be against Ahmadinejad? Why is it so damn hard for you to accept that yes, they might not want to live in an insane theocratic state with customs extracted from the 8th century tribalism?
Furthermore, isn’t it a bit, I don’t know, racism and demeaning for you to assume that they are too stupid to want a better life for themselves?
-
Violet says:
Anna Belle, I must say I’m bewildered by your interpretation of the Iranian situation at all. An honest election? Country mice? Corporate tools?
Perhaps it’s because I have Iranian relatives. There is significant discontent with the hardliner administration. It’s not just the younger generation; it’s also my generation and our parents’ generation. The feminist movement and the other liberation movements in Iran are real.
-
Sis says:
I think feminists want feminist sources on women. In fact, I’d go farther and say I think feminists have an obligation to support feminist sources, just like we support women running for office.
WSTM happens to be the best news source on the web for a feminist perspective of women’s issue news. Other sources may even call themselves ‘womens’ news. WSTM delivers.
-
Sis says:
I don’t consider RL a news site–if anyone is puzzled by my previous comment.
-
soopermouse says:
Anna Belle
i don’t think anyone can say that Mousavi and Rafsanjani are angels of democracy. However, and I believe it is incedibly nearsighted to forget it, sometimes the choice for the lesser of two evils is good enough and a lot beter than the evil already in power.
Yeah, it would be nice and lovely to have a new guy win the elections in Iran and do away with all the shit that’s been happening there for 30 years, but if you think that will ahppen overnight you’re an ignorant fool.
Any politician who would pass for a democrat in the west is probably long dead or keeping his mouth firmly shut if alive because he - and in Iran it’s bound to be a he- probably enjoys being alive.
For those of us in the third world, a lesser evil is still worth fighting for at times. these politics of purity that seem to be played in the USA even in feminist circles(see a comment further up by m Andrea that is incredibly insulting and demeaning @My point being, that heterosexual women tend to be a tad confused regarding the actual definition of “love”. @) are all utter bullshit. I tend to stay away from this kind of creature because, guess what- you don’t know my fucking life and you don’t get to comment on it. FU.
You can’t get a honest politician in the USA and you expect the Iranians to find one somewhere in the sand? Be serious.
-
Anna Belle says:
Soopermouse, I’m glad you came with a calmer tone, because I was about to rip into your lazy thinking on this matter. I never said I said I put my trust on the Iranian government and that was a ridiculous, illogical conclusion to come to.
What I am seeing is that the media here is busy-busy-busy- provoking an emotional response in people, and that the American government backs a corporate policy that wants Iranian land. Have you pfolks forgotten about the pipeline, for cripes sake? Yes, that kind of corporate tool, Vi. Anecdotal evidence of your relatives to the side.
I don’t believe either government, and I don’t think it’s smart to take a position one way or the other yet. I think a bunch of people are being triggered emotionally to push for this thing, and I think if we keep doing the work for them, in a couple of years we’ll have an even harder-line Iranian government and a US pipeline. Is that what you want? You think all those men in the streets of Tehran, they want to give women rights? That is the height of naivete. It’s best to be smart and wait and see. For the women.
-
soopermouse says:
Anna Belle
http://hotair.com/archives/200.....dentified/
How’s that for women participating?
-
Kali says:
Anna Belle, I agree those men don’t care one bit about women’s rights. However, in my experience from living in India and having Muslim friends is that the common person on the street, whether male or female, doesn’t like the hardline Islamic position. The mullahs and politicians (in Islamic countries) love it and use it to control the masses, but the person on the street, even men, are oppressed by Islamic fundamentalism. I don’t think for even a second that those men on the streets care about women’s rights, and I agree they will throw women under the bus without any hesitation for personal gain, but they care about their own rights which are also circumscribed by the mullahs and the politicians.
-
HeroesGetMade says:
Violet, you are most welcome. Thanks for blogging and slogging through all the muck and mire left behind by the implosion of feminism during the election. Yours was a sane voice during an intensely insane time. I think Pray the Devil Back to Hell contains some hard-won lessons for the Fourth Wave regarding female solidarity and its potential.
Here’s the link to the interview with the film’s maker and the film’s heroine:
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/jour.....watch.html -
soopermouse says:
“because I was about to rip into your lazy thinking on this matter. ”
Your theory is based on a blurb in Politico whose main argument is that Ahmadinejad won by the same percentage in 2005, so if they say he won by it now then it must mean it’s true. NO evidence, no other data.
“Without any evidence, many U.S. politicians and “Iran experts” have dismissed Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reelection Friday, with 62.6 percent of the vote, as fraud.
They ignore the fact that Ahmadinejad’s 62.6 percent of the vote in this year’s election is essentially the same as the 61.69 percent he received in the final count of the 2005 presidential when he trounced former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The shock of the “Iran experts” over Friday’s results is entirely self-generated, based on their preferred assumptions and wishful thinking.”
I don’t know on which planet is this an argument, but it does not stand any close analysis, because it implies that nothing possibly could have changed since then. It’s poorly argued, badly reasoned and I see no reason why anyone could take it seriously unless they like to feel oh so enlightened and special by subscribing to a conspiracy theory.
It implies that nothing has changed in Iran in 5 years and that the Iranians themselves are so damn stupid they haven’t noticed what is happening in the world, that they enjoy the lack of rights and the fast run to war that Ahmadinejad presides over.
This assumption is racist on many levels- because what YOU are saying, and these two alleged specialists, is that you, and them, know better than the Iranians who are part of it, who have asked for help and whose account is confirmed by each and every source but the Iranian government.
I won’t go further because Violet seems to dislike long comments nowadays or maybe just mine, but the fact that you claim women had no part or a very small one in the Iranian events completely disqualified your whole argument for me, especially in the context in which there is vast video argument to the contrary. Then you went further and asked us to treat your speculation as actual evidence, which , you know, is pretty bad reasoning.
YOu can take your academical deebate and condescenc and shove them as far as I care- people are dying over there and that is what should matter more to any human being than a conspiracy theory with not a leg to stand on.
-
julia says:
I heard Azadeh Moaveni on the radio and she was brilliant: much better than the Wall Street reporter and other sourcezx they had. She wrote Lipstick Jihad and talked about the lack of women’s rights so eloquently and forcefully.
I feel so inspired when I read that people keep taking to the streets in Iran. And sick to my stomach every time I hear our ‘president’ on the news. I wish he’d keep his mouth shut and think before he speaks.
-
Violet says:
I won’t go further because Violet seems to dislike long comments nowadays or maybe just mine
What Violet doesn’t like is your tone and your personal insults directed at Anna Belle. If you can’t make your argument without attacking and insulting people, then you can’t make your argument.
-
Sis says:
Anna Belle and Soopermouse (two posters I admire):
-
soopermouse says:
Violet
@well behaved women don’t make history@ remember? I’m not very good at tolerating selfishness and irresponsibility, and that is exactly what Anna Belle advises in the name of a hypothesis that is farther from reality than the Marquis de Sade was from Andrea Dworkin.
What is happening in Iran and the utter wrongness of what Anna Belle is suggesting hits very close to home for me, because it is what has been done regarding Moldova, earlier this year. Their revolution was ignored, then the EU and USA chose to do nothing about the fact that vast numbers of Moldovans contested the election resuls that purported to keep in power the last communist regime of Europe. People died, were brutally beaten, and nobody helped them.
The result? The people who died and were beaten never got any justice, and the guns and accolytes of Voronin’s regime put the Moldovan Revolution down. Most people in the west didn’t even hear about it because the major media could not give a flying fuck about. Moldova is still the poorest countr of Europe, becase they asked for help and some heartless assholes decided to not give it to them.
-
Violet says:
I understand, but Anna Belle is not making any of this happen. She’s just a person watching events and giving her opinion on a blog in accordance with her best estimation of what’s going on. There is no reason to attack her so personally.
