I'm you're your spelling/grammar nemesis. I like that.

Don't get all emo about it. Everyone misspells occasionally. Even westy.
In reply to this comment by blankfist:
Damn you! I'm always so good about that too. Man, my writing has gotten lazy in the past couple of months.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Well, we could do this the NPR way by having a thoughtful discussion like they did today on this very topic...

...but I'd rather take this opportunity to point out that it's "your", not "you're".
In reply to this comment by blankfist:
I liked that. I always thought NPR was user supported until just the other day. Seems a bit disingenuous to call yourself "user supported" when you're costs are also subsidized with tax dollars. Shall I go on, or is this a good place to end that discussion?

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Did you notice that I'm part of the NPR crowd? Essentially I wrote that whole comment just for you.

Damn you! I'm always so good about that too. Man, my writing has gotten lazy in the past couple of months.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Well, we could do this the NPR way by having a thoughtful discussion like they did today on this very topic...

...but I'd rather take this opportunity to point out that it's "your", not "you're".
In reply to this comment by blankfist:
I liked that. I always thought NPR was user supported until just the other day. Seems a bit disingenuous to call yourself "user supported" when you're costs are also subsidized with tax dollars. Shall I go on, or is this a good place to end that discussion?

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Did you notice that I'm part of the NPR crowd? Essentially I wrote that whole comment just for you.

Well, we could do this the NPR way by having a thoughtful discussion like they did today on this very topic...

...but I'd rather take this opportunity to point out that it's "your", not "you're".
In reply to this comment by blankfist:
I liked that. I always thought NPR was user supported until just the other day. Seems a bit disingenuous to call yourself "user supported" when you're costs are also subsidized with tax dollars. Shall I go on, or is this a good place to end that discussion?

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Did you notice that I'm part of the NPR crowd? Essentially I wrote that whole comment just for you.

I liked that. I always thought NPR was user supported until just the other day. Seems a bit disingenuous to call yourself "user supported" when you're costs are also subsidized with tax dollars. Shall I go on, or is this a good place to end that discussion?

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Did you notice that I'm part of the NPR crowd? Essentially I wrote that whole comment just for you.

Did you notice that I'm part of the NPR crowd? Essentially I wrote that whole comment just for you.

>> ^blankfist:
Why do you exclude Hermes, Jerry Seinfeld and the X-Men? Probably because we weren't talking about them.

No need to be silly. Your statement "Yeah, I don't think this kind of journalism is the kind of thing for a woman" implies that you think it is the kind of thing for some men. If you hadn't meant to except men you would have said something like "Yeah, I don't think this kind of journalism is a good idea".

It's cool if you want to defend your point, or even change your mind. But if you REALLY didn't mean to exclude men, I hope you can see that's how you worded it anyway.

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^BoneyD:
To tar and feather all Egyptians as being more accepting of rape is quite unfair. This was a crime like any other, but as one Redditor put it "The Middle East does not hold a monopoly on misogyny". (Click on the title link in the post to see the reference)

This isn't about tarring and feathering them...no one suggested that. I suggested the only thing we can do now is turn their entire country into Glass via multiple nuclear strikes...You Don't Fuck With Our Hotties World!!!


And the twenty or so Soldiers who saved her? Or the women who helped? And me wonders if this is sacasm or seriousness. Glass-ify a whole nation based on differences and subjective "hotness?"

>> ^entr0py:

>> ^blankfist:
Sad. Yeah, I don't think this kind of journalism is the kind of thing for a woman. More power to them to do it if they wish, but it just seems like a bad idea, especially in those more misogynistic social and political climates.

Why do you exclude the male journalists who covered the revolution and were beaten or killed? Surely that was horrific for them and their families, dispute the lack of sexual assault.

Why do you exclude Hermes, Jerry Seinfeld and the X-Men? Probably because we weren't talking about them.

>> ^blankfist:

Sad. Yeah, I don't think this kind of journalism is the kind of thing for a woman. More power to them to do it if they wish, but it just seems like a bad idea, especially in those more misogynistic social and political climates.


Why do you exclude the male journalists who covered the revolution and were beaten or killed? Surely that was horrific for them and their families, despite the lack of sexual assault. Perhaps this sort of journalism isn't for journalists.

They make reporters go out and stand in hurricanes, not because it's safe or smart or adds anything to the reporting, but because the genuine danger makes the footage more dramatic. This seems along those lines. Paying the protesters themselves to take some footage, or taking it from a safe distance then reporting from a studio, would have been just fine.

>> ^Deano:
Honestly jail time for these freaks would be too good for them. Attacking a woman is one of the lowest things you can do.


This view is antithesis of an egalitarian society. Is woman man's equal, or is woman not? I ask this in a philosophical manner--not as some prick who thinks women should be hit, or that if they are not hit then they are not equal to man... I do view man and woman as equals--but I keep that to a strict definition...

A side point; I personally find it far more reprehensible for a woman to hit her husband, then hide behind the "beaten woman" laws (False domestic violence reports.) Happened to my brothers (One who returned the favor in kind,) brother in laws X2, my friends and distant relatives. From friends and family, I know far more women who have done this than the reverse. Sad, but it seems it will only get far worse before it gets better.

Kind of like when I would yell at people who cussed in front of children. Of course, when I heard kids cussing far worse than the adults, I gave up caring for the "right side..."

Your video, Reporter Lara Logan sexually assaulted and beaten in Egypt, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^BoneyD:

To tar and feather all Egyptians as being more accepting of rape is quite unfair. This was a crime like any other, but as one Redditor put it "The Middle East does not hold a monopoly on misogyny". (Click on the title link in the post to see the reference)


This isn't about tarring and feathering them...no one suggested that. I suggested the only thing we can do now is turn their entire country into Glass via multiple nuclear strikes...You Don't Fuck With Our Hotties World!!!

Here's an excerpt from an interview Neal Conan did today on Talk Of The Nation with NPR foreign correspondent Jamie Tarabay, about the attack on Lara Logan:

CONAN: And were you surprised to hear of this attack on Lara Logan?

TARABAY: Unfortunately, I was not. I want to begin by adding my concern and my sympathy to Lara and her family, and my best wishes for her at this time. But I do want to say that when it comes to the Egyptian government and Egyptian demonstrations, this is not the first time this has happened. There's a long history of the national ruling party sending out security forces or plainclothes policemen, no matter how you want to describe them, and with specific instructions to actually target women. And there have been well-documented instances, you know, even from the last presidential election in 2005, when they have, you know, described men tearing off the shirts of women, sexually molesting them, humiliating them to kow(ph) protests. This is not something that is new, unfortunately, but it's also nothing that's restricted to Egyptian demonstrations.

CONAN: Where else have you encountered this?

TARABAY: Well, you know, this is something that happens to, you know, female reporters, and not just reporters, but obviously women who are active in politics. And it happens - you know, there have been countless instances of female reporters being sexually harassed and, in some cases, gang raped - everywhere, from places like Pakistan to Angola.

CONAN: So clearly, not just a problem in the Middle East.

TARABAY: It's obviously a problem where security is bought and paid for, and there is very, very little respect for women rights. I mean, this is always an issue in a lot of these places.

So attacks like these are more likely in countries, anywhere in the world, where there is little respect for women's rights, but it also must be remembered that this was a targeted attack by government thugs rather than a random sexual assault by lecherous Arab mob members. I'd also like to point to the fact that it wasn't just women who saved Ms. Logan, but also a group of (male) soldiers. This type of behavior is not just an Arab thing. And every country with a good record on women's rights now doesn't have to go back too far in its history to see its shameful record then.

While rape exists everywhere there are men, and singling out Arabs as being naturally inclined towards rape is wrong, there is no other culture on earth that, upon telling the police that she has been raped by her brother-in-law, a woman then is charged with adultery and stoned to death by her own community... or at the very least has her nose and lips cut off.

Humans can be pretty horrible to each other, but modern Islam is pretty much the front-runner for atrocities against women.
>> ^tsquire1:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture
To look at this situation and say, "see! The Arabs are naturally inclined towards rape or violent treatment of women is ludicrous. You are attributing a social phenomenon with a half-assed biological determinant analysis. Such an analysis lends itself readily to racism, as you are saying that this particular 'type' of human being has a natural inclination towards a specific behavior. Condensed, you are saying, "Arabs are all X". You get where this logic leads to?
We have to see this in the context of history, economics, class, gender, etc. We have to see the way that men treat women as a result of continued struggle to equate Woman with Human, i.e. on par with Man. We have to understand the series of transformations Egypt, as well as the entire world have gone through, i.e. the progression of class struggle to reach this current moment. To ignore all of this an simply say it is because they are Arab is, emphasized, half-assed and racist.
What about the treatment of women in Western society? http://www.childrensmediaproject.org/photos/woman-in-cage.gif
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80%93female_income_
disparity_in_the_United_States
"in 2004, women's wages were 76.5% of men's wages"
There comes a point where you are presented with such consistent and abhorrent disregard for human life that we are left to say that this entire system and world we have inherited is wrong on a fundamental level.

I wasn't talking about how women were treated in the past, or will be treated in the future. I'm talking about the current mentality towards women in most arabic countries.

Sure there's still a lot of discrimination against women in almost every country in the world. But in arabic countries it's particularly bad.

>> ^Reefie:

>> ^EMPIRE:
yeah... arabic mentality is not exactly the most respectful towards women (surprise, surprise!).

Wasn't always like that so it's not fair to generalise. Take a look at how women used to be treated in Afghanistan, they were worshipped and were easily the equals of men (worth also pointing out that the Koran classes men and women as equals). It's only since the end of the second world war when religions such as Christianity and Islam worked to change the perceived role of women in Afghan society so that the last half a decade has radically altered the standing of women in that country. King Amanullah worked very hard to promote women's empowerment in the early 20th century, but all his work has been undone, and from a historical perspective we only need to look towards the Christian and Taliban influences at work in that country to understand how it all got fucked up.