- Thread starter BEER
- Start date
Paranoid Phantom
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2011
- Messages
- 107
Read what this goof said
Read what this goof said
Read what this goof said
All women who become war correspondents are putting themselves in harms way, to an extent that men do not share. The same is true of female soldiers in combat or close support roles. The fact that they are fully aware of this doesnt diminish the danger. Does it make them more courageous I cant say.
I assume this was a choice she made to cover this story not an order, but it is a catch 22, if she didnt jump at these stories it would negatively influence her career.
Occupational hazard? yes. Tragedy? yes. Predictable or maybe inevitable consequence of the stories she wanted to follow? maybe. Preventable? Perhaps.(depends on how much choice she has in when and what to pursue as a story)
Being attractive may well be a disadvantage in some ways, a career advantge in others and maybe this attack had nothing to do with her beauty but was simply a case of her gender being sufficient for this form of attack to occur.
sorry kinda ranting a bit. Hope she recovers, and I expect she will be right back at it when she can.
I assume this was a choice she made to cover this story not an order, but it is a catch 22, if she didnt jump at these stories it would negatively influence her career.
Occupational hazard? yes. Tragedy? yes. Predictable or maybe inevitable consequence of the stories she wanted to follow? maybe. Preventable? Perhaps.(depends on how much choice she has in when and what to pursue as a story)
Being attractive may well be a disadvantage in some ways, a career advantge in others and maybe this attack had nothing to do with her beauty but was simply a case of her gender being sufficient for this form of attack to occur.
sorry kinda ranting a bit. Hope she recovers, and I expect she will be right back at it when she can.
C
Cycleguy007
Guest
I thin k I heard somewhere that she used to be a swim wear model... 
And didn't she have some kind of sex scandal a few years back? :shock:
Sad story though... :frown:
And didn't she have some kind of sex scandal a few years back? :shock:
Sad story though... :frown:
K
KathrynBardot
Guest
While what happened to Ms Logan was horrible, sexual assault can happen any place, any time. The risks in covering wars extend to all in that field - a male journalist was killed while filming near the square. Does that mean we should stop sending men, too? Come on.
And rating her sexual attractiveness in the same thread that discusses her sexual assault? Really?
And rating her sexual attractiveness in the same thread that discusses her sexual assault? Really?
K
KathrynBardot
Guest
Thanks, Bubba :great:
KathrynBardot said:
No it doesnt. I think its a bit naive not to acknowlege that women face unique dangers on top of those faced by men. In particular the situation that occured to Ms Logan.
This seems even more likely when one realises that not all cultures and situations may appreciate a woman in a non traditional role. That in fact,being present might make her more of a target.
Im not saying that she didnt have a right to be there. Just that she faces more and in some cases different dangers than I might.
I agree with you scotty and one cannot ignore the fact that women DO face the sexual assault hazard on top of the physical danger that both male and female journalists experience.
Something EVERYONE here has to realize is that while we enjoy an enlightened society that accepts women as equals, not every other society is the same as ours and to say "they should be..." is just being naive. Plus putting yourself into the middle of a riot? I should think a physical assault is to be expected........
I kind of equate this situation to people who "thrill seek" and do things like bungee jumping, swim with sharks, mountain climb and then when they get injured, they look for sympathy. I don't buy it. If you go into a situation knowing the risks, and end up getting hurt, well, I'll (once again) reserve my sympathy for those more deserving ie: a woman walking home from work getting assaulted. Now one could argue that soldiers etc are no different but in that case, they take precautions to minimize their exposure (ie: flak jackets, body armor, helmets) and in this case, if there was a distinct danger due to her appearance, she should have been travelling with a protection detail.
I think if you put yourself into a dangerous situation you shouldn't be surprised when something happens......
Something EVERYONE here has to realize is that while we enjoy an enlightened society that accepts women as equals, not every other society is the same as ours and to say "they should be..." is just being naive. Plus putting yourself into the middle of a riot? I should think a physical assault is to be expected........
I kind of equate this situation to people who "thrill seek" and do things like bungee jumping, swim with sharks, mountain climb and then when they get injured, they look for sympathy. I don't buy it. If you go into a situation knowing the risks, and end up getting hurt, well, I'll (once again) reserve my sympathy for those more deserving ie: a woman walking home from work getting assaulted. Now one could argue that soldiers etc are no different but in that case, they take precautions to minimize their exposure (ie: flak jackets, body armor, helmets) and in this case, if there was a distinct danger due to her appearance, she should have been travelling with a protection detail.
I think if you put yourself into a dangerous situation you shouldn't be surprised when something happens......
K
KathrynBardot
Guest
Oh yes, we certainly enjoy an enlightened society, where members of the US government are trying to take away reproductive rights, and where Toronto police tell university students "don't dress like a slut" in order to avoid rape. ()tboy said:
Even you, tboy, contribute to this bullshit by comparing a woman you don't find attractive to a can of dog meat.
Yes, it's not as bad here, but neither is it perfect. And the question raised was "if you are the boss would you not think twice knowing full well the odds are against her?" - well, if we start telling women they can't do that job because they might be sexually assaulted, then what else are we going to tell them they cannot do? They can't be ambassadors to these countries, or they can't serve in humanitarian efforts like Doctors Without Borders, or hell, they can't be police officers or social workers here, because we all know those prison folk like to assault women? Well hell, let's just keep the womenfolk at home because they certainly wouldn't be assaulted in the safety of their own home, right?
If you believe that no sympathy should be afforded to people who thrill seek and then are injured, or to those who choose jobs that put them at risk, then what do you think of the sex worker who is sexually assaulted on the job? Or of the policeman who is shot in the line of duty? Or of the health worker who contracts a virus from a needle stick? Are they less-deserving of our sympathy because "they knew the risks"?
A
Art Mann
Guest
+ 1
Well said, Kathryn.
Sad that women still have to demand respect.
And sad that men still blame victims rather than accepting responsibility for their actions.
Well said, Kathryn.
Sad that women still have to demand respect.
And sad that men still blame victims rather than accepting responsibility for their actions.
Maurice Boscorelli
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2010
- Messages
- 19,322
If you don't think that we live in an enlightened society then maybe you should try living in the middle east or Asia and then you could see first hand the difference.Ka said:
As for the cop and his advice well it's not politically correct but one thing is for sure that if you dress provocatively in public you are going to draw attention.I for one would not want to be drawing attention of a sexual nature out in the public where who knows what type of predators are waiting. I know that lots of rapes happen to women that dress from head to toe so that advice means nothing in those cases but still what the cop was saying is that this one measure that can be taken out of many to and keep women safe. I've personally heard a female cop give the same advice to another female civilian once but somehow that was okay.
Regarding the comments rating the girls in the Sun. Just Gen and a few others before you girls on here seem to have a problem with some of the critiques. Here's the thing this is an Escort Review Board, so members are going to have varying opinions of the women on here and if one is called a dog then guess what that's his right to do so. That's the beauty of a free society.
"That's the beauty of a free society."^
This is always the problem when the desire for a free society/freedom of speech conflicts with political correctness. I just had ths debate over breakfast with my brother at our local greasy spoon.
He has a point as do you Maurice. No one is saying that dressing provocatively is the sole cause of sexual assaults, but if one is trying to reduce the chance of such a thing happeneing then it simply makes sense not to act in certain ways.
For example, dressing to attract attention will attract all kinds of attention desired or not, getting fall down drunk or stoned in a university party setting IS risky behaviour.
Perhaps there is or will be a utopia where man has overcome his base instincts and mental illness, confused religious beliefs and neandrethal social norms have been extinguished. In this world men and women will be equal, skin colour of no consequence, wealth and poverty abolished, religious differences overcome. Until such time, this is the world we live in, flawed as it is and to act surprised when bad things happen to people who place themselves in risky situations
is as I said before naive, or simply means one has been blinded by a desire see the world as an ideal rather than the way it is.
The officer in the letter made the mistake of using a politically loaded word in an obviously liberal setting. I dont agree with his choice of words as it meant that the message he was trying to convey became lost in his choice of words. The message itself on one of many ways to reduce risk was valid. Call me a cave man if you choose, but if a woman walks down the beach in a skimpy bikini she is fully concious that her choices will attract attention, if someone oversteps social boundaries and harasses her they are in the wrong but she must accept some degree of responcibility for her own actions.
sorry rant rant rant
This is always the problem when the desire for a free society/freedom of speech conflicts with political correctness. I just had ths debate over breakfast with my brother at our local greasy spoon.
He has a point as do you Maurice. No one is saying that dressing provocatively is the sole cause of sexual assaults, but if one is trying to reduce the chance of such a thing happeneing then it simply makes sense not to act in certain ways.
For example, dressing to attract attention will attract all kinds of attention desired or not, getting fall down drunk or stoned in a university party setting IS risky behaviour.
Perhaps there is or will be a utopia where man has overcome his base instincts and mental illness, confused religious beliefs and neandrethal social norms have been extinguished. In this world men and women will be equal, skin colour of no consequence, wealth and poverty abolished, religious differences overcome. Until such time, this is the world we live in, flawed as it is and to act surprised when bad things happen to people who place themselves in risky situations
is as I said before naive, or simply means one has been blinded by a desire see the world as an ideal rather than the way it is.
The officer in the letter made the mistake of using a politically loaded word in an obviously liberal setting. I dont agree with his choice of words as it meant that the message he was trying to convey became lost in his choice of words. The message itself on one of many ways to reduce risk was valid. Call me a cave man if you choose, but if a woman walks down the beach in a skimpy bikini she is fully concious that her choices will attract attention, if someone oversteps social boundaries and harasses her they are in the wrong but she must accept some degree of responcibility for her own actions.
sorry rant rant rant
Maurice Boscorelli
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2010
- Messages
- 19,322
Prone to hyperbole much? Listen there is no way in hell i'm letting a female employee of mine go into a situation as volatile as what the journalist in question was put into. There's to many obvious variables that could go wrong and unfortunately this happened in this case. If she was aware of the risks then i have less sympathy for her than if she didn't. I get the feeling that things got to a point which she had no idea they could go. For I don't believe any female would take the risk of what happened to her just for a story or byline.At least I hope not.KathrynBardot said:
I know plenty of cops and they all say the same thing they know the risks and they accept it as part of the job. Two close friends on the NYPD once told me that they were adrenaline junkies who were getting paid to get their fix and if they bought it they wanted no sympathy from anyone.KathrynBardot said:
As for SP's that get sexually assaulted well that's contentious isn't it. You meet a client for the first time and your really rolling the dice and hoping it doesn't come up snake eyes. Of the three that I have known more than professionally 2 were assaulted in the course of working. Both told me that they knew this was a risk as they had chosen a high risk job. Strangely they both blamed themselves for putting themselves in the situation they were in.
