UN loves you - NOT: "Women suffer the most when men are killed" revisited

**Rebadow** · 8th-March-2007

Taken from article here:

And worse still, cautioned the UN chief, women dilemmas usually go unchecked.

"Most societies prohibit such violence -- yet the reality is that too often, it is covered up or tacitly condoned."

This guy is obviously not living on a planet Earth. Women dilemmas usually go unchecked? For god's sake, for the last few decades we get nothing but women's dilemmas non-stop!

Wartime

Women in Iraq are bearing the brunt of the war and the deadly sectarian violence.
As activists around the world call for advancing women empowerment and gender equality, the sufferings of women in war-ravaged Iraq have doubled during the nearly four-year conflict.

"Often, the problems are simply psychological. They come to talk about their husbands who have been killed or being driven out of their neighborhoods," Fatima, a 55-year-old Baghdad gynecologist, told AFP.

It just simply amazes me how someone can come up with such obvious contradiction in one simple passage (notice, that it isn't the gynecologist, who's making this clam, it's that stupid journalist who's using her statement as a proof for his paragraph he wrote above) - Women bear the brunt of the war because their husbands are usually killed?

Could there be any other reason for writing something like this besides total indifference to the plight (and LIVES) of men? Yes, we get the memo: MEN DO NOT MATTER. THEY DO NOT MATTER ONE BIT. THEY ARE NOTHING.

Notice the similarity:
Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat. Women often have to flee from the only homes they have ever known. Women are often the refugees from conflict and sometimes, more frequently in today's warfare, victims.

Here's a retort: Men bear the brunt of rape. They have always been the primary victims of rape because it takes great psychological toll on men when their wives, mothers or daughters are raped.

How about that?

**Dr David Banner** · 8th-March-2007

Rob you said it.
I hope before I die to see the evil UN totally demolished.

**Yan Yan** · 8th-March-2007

No mention of the author. Can anybody enlighten me? American mangina or quasi-Islamic opportunist? Maybe a bunch of them in cahoots?

**taype** · 8th-March-2007

Here's a retort: Men bear the brunt of rape. They have always been the primary victims of rape because it takes great psychological toll on men when their wives, mothers or daughters are raped.

Brilliant response. Exactly how these goons get a way with claptrap of this nature is beyond me. It simply defies logic.

**knight-errant** · 8th-March-2007

Ever feel like you're living on the wrong planet?

**Marx** · 8th-March-2007

Quote from knight-errant

Ever feel like you're living on the wrong planet?

You too? It's not 'just' me?
Thank God!

**knight-errant** · 8th-March-2007

Quote from Marx

You too? It's not 'just' me?
Thank God!

Oh the feeling becomes more and more consant as time passes alas.

**Sir Loin** · 9th-March-2007

"Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat."

Maybe it's just me, but wouldn't the husbands, fathers, and sons who got killed be in a worse position than the women who survive? Sure, it sucks for family members to get killed in a war, but my primary concern is #1. If my town got attacked and I'm the only one who survived, I would consider myself a bit more lucky than all the others who bit the dirt.

**Major Tom** · 9th-March-2007

If women lose their husbands, fathers and sons in combat they are the 'primary victims of war'.

But, if the women themselves die in war, they will still be the 'primary victims of war'.