Gender discrimination?

by teejay 38 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  teejay

  Sixty Minutes covered this story a month ago and Meet the Press brought it up again this morning when Rumsfeld was interviewed...

  When stationing troops in foreign countries, the U.S. military tries to abide by the rules of the country. In Saudi Arabia, the custom for women in public is that they wear an abaya, a floor-length, long-sleeve, loose-fitting garment that covers everything but the face. Air Force Lt. Col. Martha McSally filed a lawsuit against the Pentagon, arguing that the policy was discriminatory because men are not required to dress in traditional Muslim garments.

  When interviewed on Sixty Minutes, McSally was so offended by the garment that she would not put it on just to demonstrate what it looked like. When reporter Leslie Stahl took the eight or ten seconds to wrap the abaya around her own shoulders and hair, McSally looked awfully petty.

  A lawsuit because you don't won't to wear what is essentially a loose fitting shawl? Give me a physical break.
• 

  Gopher

  This raises a couple interesting points.

  Yes McSally and all who serve in the military should abide by the rules. She shouldn't go in there and try to make all her own rules. That seems like a part of the assignment to me.

  However, she does raise an interesting question. What WOULD the changes be for American military men if they too were required to wear local garb? Would it be too much to ask? Or are the American men not asked to do so, only because the locals don't impose the same penalties on men for violating dress codes than they do on women?

  J.R.Why shouldn't truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense.
  Mark Twain (1835-1910)
• 

  Imbue

  Why don't you wear it? It's just a loose fitting shawl.

  NO, it's a symbol of male domination. And I believe she was the only one required to wear it because of her rank. I'm not sure but that's what I heard from someone.MEN!

  How do you make those little smiley faces?
• 

  larc

  LET THE FLAMES BEGIN!
• 

  Bodhisattva

  I've wanted to hear more detail on this situation (I still haven't). My understanding is that she also must be accompanied by a male at all times. Not a bad idea in some cities for any man or woman to not be alone, but that doesn't mean imposing it is justified. Also, I got the impression that she did indeed follow orders, even while challenging the validity of them. In both instances - follow orders as a member of the military despite finding them odious, and calling attention to orders that do not seem to be appropriate - she is doing her duty.
• 

  Joyzabel

  pst, IMbue, I've been practicing my faces!
  :D = big smile
  :) = smile
  but since they don't turn into smiley faces here, you can just do
  :-) = smile
  ;-) = wink
  j2bf
  ps, when you are in chat, help (by logoff) shows you how to make all the faces.
• 

  think41self

  Interesting point Teejay,

  If she were an ambassador or diplomat, and part of her duties were to actively abstain from offending residents of the country she were in, then I would say, yes it's just a shawl, put it on.

  But she's not. And it is a symbol of male domination to them. When we send troops to another country, of course they should not actively seek to offend the general population, which they may have no complaint with. But when we send troops in, why should we have to adjust to their standards and social schisms? If the women should have to do it, then so should the men.

  think41self

  If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself!
• 

  think41self

  Imbue,

  When you post a reply, look at the bottom of the reply window. You will see Add emotions to your message. Click on that and a window will pop up with details. You have to include brackets [] around the symbols in your post. Hope this helps.

  think41self

  If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself!
• 

  JT

  Actually the uSA could care less about the oufit

  you see it boils down to the OIL

  YES IT'S ALL ABOUT THE OIL

  the US gov had 2 choices sorta like the JW Org.

  1. If it benifits or hurts the the country or the org
  OR
  2 it benifits or hurts the indiviual

  WELL just like in the Org if a choice must be made between you and the org or her and the country YOU LOSE and that is why at this point she lose-

  the difference is of course she can take her issue to court both legally and in the court of opinion like yours and mine

  the USA gov doesn't want to piss off the Saudia's and if they had to choose between her rights as a free person and the right of
  Exxon to keep the shipping lanes open WELL WE SEE WHAT HAPPENED

  ONE OF THE most interesting things in ray;s book dealt with the discssion on the formation and operation of ORGANIZATIONS and how the ranka and file person becomes secondary to the interest of the org
  and that is the exact thing they are telling her

  FOR THE GOOD OF THE ARMY FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY is what they are tellling her and others

  and there are many who are pissed at the fact that she would HAVE THE NERVE TO REQUEST to have her "RIGHTS RESPECTED-- HOW DARE HER

  I hope Homegirl wins and wins big

  her point was the same as black men in the army during WWII they went to Europe to free folks and then came home and got the Shaft

  so i hope she wins big
• 

  Imbue

  teejay,

  I really think the point of the law suit was that only she had to wear it because of her rank. Other female soldiers didn't have to wear the garment.

  This is just a test and only a test so don't take it seriously.

  If the head be corrupt, so also must be the members — The Two Babylons Alexander Hislop