What if we offered refugee visas to basically all Afghan women?
-
Features
A thought on Afghanistan
- Thread starter Loren Pechtel
- Start date
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 50,487
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
Great idea. But first we need to invent a way to transport millions of women in a month.
thebeave
Contributor
Sounds a bit sexist to me.
Keith&Co.
Contributor
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2006
- Messages
- 22,444
- Location
- Far Western Mass
- Gender
- Here.
- Basic Beliefs
- I'm here...
I think Mao's offer to export 10 million women to the US in 1973 was sexist, telling Kissinger women have 'a way of doing things' and thast China would be better off without the excess of females. Also thry would 'harm' the US.
Offering an escape to those who are or will be threatened by the Taliban's rule is only sexist if you're an incel and think Islam has it right, women don't deserve education, choices, the vote, etc.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 50,487
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
No it doesn’t.
thebeave
Contributor
Holy Strawman, Batman! Men are threatened by the Taliban too. That was my point. Nice try labeling me as an incel though. Better luck next time.
Keith&Co.
Contributor
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2006
- Messages
- 22,444
- Location
- Far Western Mass
- Gender
- Here.
- Basic Beliefs
- I'm here...
Well, speaking of strawmen, i did not see anything in the initial proposal that said men could not get refugee visas if we implement this plan. But that's where you jumped to, "What about the guys!?"
Unless i missed a side discussion where someone asked this, and was told the guys can fuck off? If not, you're jumping pretty quick to that strawman...
thebeave
Contributor
Dude, reread the OP. He specifically said women with bolding. If he wanted to include men, don't you think he would have worded it differently?
Including men, along with the women, is the humane thing to do. The Taliban is already going door to door and executing those who are known to have been allied with the US. Likely most of those are men. I will never understand the scorn leveled against those who care about the lives of men as well as women.
I took the OP to mean continue as we are with current programs, like those protecting interpreters, most of whom were men, and ADD protection to all women.
I feel like there is a lot to be said for that, ideologically. The women really are at greater danger at higher rates than men. Logistically, however, not sure how we would do it. But I do like the idea of ackowledging that all women will be oppressed by the taliban. And those who object to it and want to leave, I would be open to them.
Those who care about the men are already being helped by the “you helped the US, we’ll try to help you” actions, and again, the majority of those are men and no one complained about that…
I feel like there is a lot to be said for that, ideologically. The women really are at greater danger at higher rates than men. Logistically, however, not sure how we would do it. But I do like the idea of ackowledging that all women will be oppressed by the taliban. And those who object to it and want to leave, I would be open to them.
Those who care about the men are already being helped by the “you helped the US, we’ll try to help you” actions, and again, the majority of those are men and no one complained about that…
TSwizzle
I am unburdened by what has been.
That’s very old fashioned. The blokes just need identity as “women” and they are in. You couldn’t bar them for fear of the LGBQWERTY mob. And besides, isn’t it illegal to have your gender stated on passports these days ?
Jayjay
Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2002
- Messages
- 7,173
- Location
- Finland
- Basic Beliefs
- An accurate worldview or philosophy
Perhaps some sort of covert paramilitary operation, disguised as locals, could go from door to door and grab the women, then wrap them from head to toe in black or blue garbs (for their own safety), and smuggle them out of the country. Of course, to avoid any suspicion, they would be forbidden from listening to music or flying kites while being rescued. Maybe they could help their rescuers by preparing their food and such.
If we let in the men we have a big problem with Islamists coming in. The women are basically just victims, though, letting them in will help them and hurt the Taliban.
laughing dog
Contributor
So?
Harry Bosch
Contributor
A little. But the Taliban are wildly sexist. They don't deserve the company of women.
barbos
Contributor
Yeah, you would have to kidnap most of them to implement this now. And then most of the women have husbands and children.
Keith&Co.
Contributor
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2006
- Messages
- 22,444
- Location
- Far Western Mass
- Gender
- Here.
- Basic Beliefs
- I'm here...
i think if he wanted to exclude men, he'd have said so.
thebeave
Contributor
Read Loren's post above, #12.
thebeave
Contributor
I don't think its quite that simple. Do the women bring their children with them or leave them behind? I assume they have to come too, as separating parents from their children is a bad thing (see US border crisis). And some of these families are huge! Not to mention, of course, men love their children and children love their dads, so separating them is kind of big deal, is it not? And where do these women and children go to live, and how will they support themselves and their brood without a breadwinner in the family? Lots of things to figure out.
Elixir
Made in America
I am not as scared of “Islamists” as I am of “Christians”, who are responsible for the most and the worst Terrorist attacks in recent years. And they’re already here. Bring on the Islamists. And Hindus, Buddhists and Zoroastrians. Most of all, we need more atheists and agnostics.
TomC
Bless Your Heart!
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2020
- Messages
- 11,234
- Location
- Midwestern USA
- Gender
- Faggot
- Basic Beliefs
- Agnostic deist