When discussing the suffering of refugees in Africa, she noted, with great emphasis on how much more women and girls suffer than men and boys, especially in poor and war torn areas, that “80% of refugees are women and girls”.

This of course raises the question of what happens to the men and boys in the villages from which all the women and girls are fleeing? Somehow I don’t think they stay behind and play nintendo and watch movies.

Does anyone want to guess?

Not a peep out of the audience.

She then describes a woman who escaped with her daughters to a refugee camp where she was raped by guards repeatedly, but how she eventually made her way to the U.S. where she and her children are now thriving. She points out that when she was driven from her village, attackers killed her husband in front of her.

Her anecdote provided the answer to the question left hanging in the air, and still, not a peep out of the audience.

Simply amazing.

I’d write something incisive, but I’m rather lost for words.

Lifeboat Feminism is a great term to describe what many feminists are advocating; I found this article about it.

Pelle, do you remember when you said you hadn’t noticed the way that feminism appropriated Marxist tropes?

This whole thing just reeks of hypocrisy - they denounce patriarchy and chivalry on on hand and haveno shame about invoking all of it for their own benefit. Classic case of Lifeboat Feminism.

Yes, I wonder where the line is drawn between being a boy (which is equivalent to being an honorary female), and a man (which is equivalent to being a demon)?

Sorry, I just needed to vent there for a moment…

Yeah isn’t that just irritating to say the least. Let’s compare men to maggots when it comes to war… that’s a great idea. Children and women are innocent, pure and special.

By the way, wouldn’t it be logical to distinguish between boys and girls? Why lump them together and label them children? The boys sometimes fight in wars, they have guns and they are thus responsible… just as much as ALL the white old men are.

This may well be true, but I haven’t verified the facts.

What I do know is that nowadays the media is fond of stating that women get the worst deal in a war. That’s exactly what they did when Israel recently attacked the Gaza Strip, but when the actual figures arrived - 89 percent of the casualties in Gaza were men.

We’re still more upset when women get killed, which is likely a combination of our heritage and feminism.

I also don’t understand why women and children are bundled together? Well, I do understand… but it contradicts a lot of other things that feminists are saying.

Another way to measure is to find out what the consequences are. What happens to the people who survived the war. Perhaps they die soon after. If we take that into account then we might have a different story.

It seems logically, to me, that if we look at history, women must have been valued higher than men (for obvious reasons) and men probably fought to keep them safe. So that sort of speaks against what Allende says. On the other hand, if you really want to hurt other societies then of course it’s a “good thing” to attack the women. They are valuable, and they often don’t shoot back.

Anyway we look at it, war is messy and a disaster for everybody involved. We know this beyond the shadow of a doubt. Then to say that if only the old men would die it will become better… jesus…. this sounds like some fundamentalist talking. What an absolutely horrible and disgusting thing to say!