I'm curious. How can eliminate rape (especially in war) if we can't eliminate the rape that occurs in stable places (more stable than war zones or politically charged places, anyway)? Unless she's referring to enforcing rape as a crime against humanity...how could the U.N. do THAT when it's so prevalent and there'd be so many defendants?
Not that rape shouldn't be treated as a serious crime, especially in the war zone, where the incidence is even more frequent than usual. But is the goal of eliminating RAPE in war any more likely than eliminating militarized conflict itself?
I'm reading "Justice on the Grass" by Dina Temple-Raston about the Rawandan war crimes trial (it's excellent, I recommend it) I just finished a chapter entitled "The Rape Babies Arrived in the Spring." It breaks my heart.
I always think after each terrible attrocity, people will realize how much women are affected, particularly when rape is used as a weapon. I am really glad Secretary Clinton is making this a priority.
@eadubbs: Oooh. Is it about the international tribunals or the Gacaca courts? We screened "My Neighbor My Killer" at my place of employment recently and it was so interesting so I'm trying to read up more on Rwanda: its past and how it has moved on since the genocide.
until people stop seeing women as "the weaker/fairer sex," property, inherent victims, and start seeing them as human beings due basic dignities there will be no safe place for womankind anywhere. period.
"There are people who say, 'Well, women's issues is an important issue, but it doesn't rank up there with the Middle East or Iran's nuclear threat or Afghanistan and Pakistan.' I couldn't disagree more."
Thank you, Secretary Clinton for stating that so unequivocally.
@curiousgeorgiana: Few things make me as angry as the suggestion that the world's ills be somehow ranked, and that those which fall lower on some man's list be put off until those ranking higher are addressed first. As if it would be possible to address with finality something as multi-faceted and vague as "the Middle East." Would someone like to tell that young woman in the camp that until there's peace in Gaza, she'll just have to keep facing rape??
@JerseyGrrrl: And also, if we, as a nation want to call ourselves members of the U.N. than we need to actually uphold the values it stands for (World Peace, human rights) and not just when it's convenient for us to do so.
@youarewhatyoulove: It's true. Our government has shown, now as in the past, that it's willing to mortgage global women's rights in order to keep a dialogue with other nations. I understand the rationalization such as it is, but I hate it nonetheless.
@curiousgeorgiana: Security analysts (well, at least, the ones who know which way the wind is blowing) are paying more and more attention to "women's security" precisely because it is such an indicator of stability in a society. Safe women mean stable families, stable communities. And thank god we've got Hilary to say these things for us.
@nerdycellist: We'd then be splitting up families. Yes, it might be safer for men and women to be separated, but I'd then worry about disparities between their resources.
@inabook: Fair enough. But what I'm seeing in this article is that people working for these camps are doing the raping. So how about men don't get to work at these places? It's a shame that a couple of bad apples spoils the whole barrel, so to speak, but that's how it is.
09/30/09
Not that rape shouldn't be treated as a serious crime, especially in the war zone, where the incidence is even more frequent than usual. But is the goal of eliminating RAPE in war any more likely than eliminating militarized conflict itself?
09/30/09
I always think after each terrible attrocity, people will realize how much women are affected, particularly when rape is used as a weapon. I am really glad Secretary Clinton is making this a priority.
09/30/09
09/30/09
09/30/09
Thank you, Secretary Clinton for stating that so unequivocally.
09/30/09
09/30/09
09/30/09
10/01/09
09/30/09
09/30/09
09/30/09
09/30/09
09/30/09