|Latest||First||Next||Previous||About This Site (and me)||Home page||Table of Contents||Contact|
Equal opportunity occupation
Being a child of the times, I consider women as equals. I don't believe anyone should be considered exempt from anything just because they belong to any given group. For example, if a job requires strength, then you can not employ a given woman because she happens to not be strong enough, but you cannot not employ just because she is woman and on population averages woman are not as strong as men.
I'm sure most of my readers would accept this point. There are woman who are just as capable as men at a range of tasks, from map reading to building, from remote control operation to terrorism. This is basically a given in modern Western society.
Given the equality of women in society, what, then, do we make of the appalling patriarchial chauvinism shown by the BBC in describing "innocent civilians" as "women and children", while the targets of the strikes are "militants". Children: fine, I will accept that people below a certain age can be described as innocent (even if active combatants), but women? Women have acted as suicide bombers. As queens and prime ministers. As generals. As soldiers. Women are no more automatically innocent civilians any more than men, even in an occupied country like Iraq, are automatically militants (or combatants or terrorists).
Women are as capable as men of terror, and hence are as justified in being indiscriminately killed as men. So next time you hear about "women and children" being killed in a military action, you should protest at the sexism in the language. The killing is bad, too.
My favourite procrastinations
The Head Heeb - Jonathan provides a balanced view on various Israeli and (former) colonial states in less developed regions of the world.
The Bladder - a sports satire site. Well worth a look.