RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


vincentML -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 11:04:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

Women's brains are wired differently. Men tend to think in boxes and they compartmentalize things. Women think more broadly and we tend to see/find connections that men wouldn't even identify much less consider, and those subtle influences, if acknowledged and addressed, can make the difference between long- term success or failure. So in that respect, i can definitely see the advantage to having women at the table.

Yes, good point.
[:)]




Musicmystery -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 12:17:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

there are thousands of links to the womens rights as national security issues.
That no one is researching how it works, is just more proof of their ignorance.

I've yet to see a cogent argument for it, though.

Just a lot of saying so.




bounty44 -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 12:28:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

theres that, but also, im failing to see the essential link (that is, the evidence) between the nonetheless important issues of women's lives that got quoted above, and national security.

Vincent, id be happy to be enlightened; the article doesn't quite do it for me.



Helping to make the world more politically tranquil is in our national security interest, don't you think? Especially since we are globally linked to resources and markets.


to an extent, sure, but someones going to have to make the case that women's rights in countries that sponsor terrorism have a meaningful result on politically tranquility.

and then theyre going to have to make the subsequent case as to how that politically tranquility leads to less terrorism.



Bounty, the opinion piece claims a decade of research in support of the thesis. International diplomacy often requires subtle and long term strategies.

The UAE is an example of progress and tranquility


there is nothing in the link of the original post that provides evidence for the thesis that women's rights are a national security issue. you'll excuse me if I just don't take the fella's word for it.

while interesting reading, there is also nothing in the link in this post that touches on the matter either.





bounty44 -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 12:31:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44


quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

If the women aren't happy... ain't nobody going to be happy... just sayin'.


this really only applies in situations where there is equality between the genders, or men care what women think.

and again, someones going to have to make the case between that, and terrorism.

Bounty, international relations, even individual relations, are not hard science.
You cannot really apply the scientific method. Lyndon Johnson went to war over ghost ships in the Tonkin Gulf.

As for trying to influence troubling societies perhaps it is necessary to till the soil and spread some manure in order to bring in a desired crop.


im sorry, that's a nonsensical statement. you cannot on one hand say "women's rights are a national security issue" and then in good intellectual conscience not be able to answer the question as to how that is so.




BoscoX -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 12:40:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Seventh Century CE.

Again, which older religions are you referring to?

I'll wait . . . .

[sm=modxiiswatching.gif]



Only 1400 years. Judaism, 3000 years

In only 1400 years, Muslims have enslaved all of the lands, destroyed countless untold souls in so many places others once thrived in

And in terrible ways. Terrorism is a tool taught by Mohammad himself, and it is still employed today by the cult members who still carry his mantle




respectmen -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 2:37:53 PM)

quote:

there is nothing in the link of the original post that provides evidence for the thesis that women's rights are a national security issue. you'll excuse me if I just don't take the fella's word for it.

while interesting reading, there is also nothing in the link in this post that touches on the matter either.


I'm guessing it would probably be about things like sexist air conditioning, fart rape, tampon tax, manspreaidng. The usual feminist claptrap.




vincentML -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 2:52:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Seventh Century CE.

Again, which older religions are you referring to?

I'll wait . . . .

[sm=modxiiswatching.gif]



Only 1400 years. Judaism, 3000 years

In only 1400 years, Muslims have enslaved all of the lands, destroyed countless untold souls in so many places others once thrived in

And in terrible ways. Terrorism is a tool taught by Mohammad himself, and it is still employed today by the cult members who still carry his mantle

Collective responsibility was the hallmark of the Nazi final solution of the Jewish "problem."

Obviously, that perverted concept still has a healthy life in your condemnation of an entire religion.

Despicable [:'(]




vincentML -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 2:59:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44


quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

If the women aren't happy... ain't nobody going to be happy... just sayin'.


this really only applies in situations where there is equality between the genders, or men care what women think.

and again, someones going to have to make the case between that, and terrorism.

Bounty, international relations, even individual relations, are not hard science.
You cannot really apply the scientific method. Lyndon Johnson went to war over ghost ships in the Tonkin Gulf.

As for trying to influence troubling societies perhaps it is necessary to till the soil and spread some manure in order to bring in a desired crop.


im sorry, that's a nonsensical statement. you cannot on one hand say "women's rights are a national security issue" and then in good intellectual conscience not be able to answer the question as to how that is so.


I have given you answers, Bounty. You have simply refused to accept anything short of scientific certitude. Very disingenuous of you.




vincentML -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 3:01:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: respectmen

quote:

there is nothing in the link of the original post that provides evidence for the thesis that women's rights are a national security issue. you'll excuse me if I just don't take the fella's word for it.

while interesting reading, there is also nothing in the link in this post that touches on the matter either.


I'm guessing it would probably be about things like sexist air conditioning, fart rape, tampon tax, manspreaidng. The usual feminist claptrap.

A clueless manchild.

[8|]




tamaka -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 3:49:26 PM)

The OP has a link to this book, Sex and World Peace, and the description i guess describes what the OP is getting at. I don't know if it's true or not, but this is what it says anyways...

Sex and World Peace unsettles a variety of assumptions in political and security discourse, demonstrating that the security of women is a vital factor in the security of the state and its incidence of conflict and war.

The authors compare micro-level gender violence and macro-level state peacefulness in global settings, supporting their findings with detailed analyses and color maps. Harnessing an immense amount of data, they call attention to discrepancies between national laws protecting women and the enforcement of those laws, and they note the adverse effects on state security of abnormal sex ratios favoring males, the practice of polygamy, and inequitable realities in family law, among other gendered aggressions.

The authors find that the treatment of women informs human interaction at all levels of society. Their research challenges conventional definitions of security and democracy and shows that the treatment of gender, played out on the world stage, informs the true clash of civilizations. In terms of resolving these injustices, the authors examine top-down and bottom-up approaches to healing wounds of violence against women, as well as ways to rectify inequalities in family law and the lack of parity in decision-making councils. Emphasizing the importance of an R2PW, or state responsibility to protect women, they mount a solid campaign against women's systemic insecurity, which effectively unravels the security of all.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Valerie M. Hudson is professor and George H.W. Bush Chair at The Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University. Her research concerns foreign policy analysis, security studies, gender and international relations, and methodology, and her articles have appeared in such journals as International Security, Journal of Peace Research, Political Psychology, and Foreign Policy Analysis. She is the author or editor of several books, including, with Andrea Den Boer, Bare Branches: The Security Implications of Asia's Surplus Male Population, which won the American Association of Publishers Award for Best Book in Political Science and the Otis Dudley Duncan Award for Best Book in Social Demography. She was named one of Foreign Policy's Top 100 Global Thinkers of 2009.


Bonnie Ballif-Spanvill is professor emeritus of psychology at Brigham Young University and the last director of its Women's Research Institute. She is a fellow in both the Association for Psychological Science and the American Psychological Association. Her research focuses on interpersonal violence and peace. She is a coauthor of Peaceabilities: Compelling Stories and Activities That Develop Abilities of Children to Live Peacefully with Others and coeditor of A Chorus for Peace: A Global Anthology of Poetry by Women.


Mary Caprioli is associate professor and director of international studies at the University of Minnesota Duluth. She pioneered a new line of scholarly inquiry between the security of women and the national and international behavior of states and confirmed the link using quantitative methodology. She is an associate editor for Foreign Policy Analysis, an editorial board member for the Peace and Conflict Report, and an advisory board member for the Minorities at Risk Project. She is also a member of the International Group of Experts for the UNSCR 1325 Research Group of the government of Sweden.


Chad F. Emmett is an associate professor of geography at Brigham Young University focused on researching the peaceful sharing of space between Israelis and Palestinians, Christians and Muslims, men and women, and other supposedly opposing groups. He is the author of Beyond the Basilica: Christians and Muslims in Nazareth.




bounty44 -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 4:21:59 PM)

you have given me absolutely no answers that address the question of how women's rights are a national security issue.

and then you have the temerity to say im being disingenuous??









bounty44 -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 4:26:19 PM)

in the little blurb you shared there, there is no cause and effect in the direction being promulgated, that is, if we work to take care of women's rights, there will be less terrorism. as if the women's rights themselves are the impetus behind its reduction.

the rendering of the situation is, in governments that recognize women and grant them rights (that we are accustomed to in the west), that is a state that also has less terrorism in it.

id be happy to be wrong here---just show me.






tamaka -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 4:30:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

in the little blurbs you shared there, there is no cause and effect in the direction being promulgated, that is, if we work to take care of women's rights, there will be less terrorism. as if the women themselves are the impetus behind its reduction.

the rendering of the situation is, in governments that recognize women and grant them rights (that we are accustomed to in the west), that is a state that also has less terrorism in it.


Yes i agree. If the men are of the sort that respect women and don't mistreat them at home, that behavior carries out to how the men think and behave in greater society. Kind of like whether they are 'tamed' or 'Wild'.




bounty44 -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/27/2016 4:39:30 PM)

i suspect some worthwhile reading here (ive not done any) would have to do with middle east backlash against women's rights.




vincentML -> RE: Women’s Rights Are a National Security Issue ~ NY Times (12/28/2016 6:13:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

in the little blurb you shared there, there is no cause and effect in the direction being promulgated, that is, if we work to take care of women's rights, there will be less terrorism. as if the women's rights themselves are the impetus behind its reduction.

the rendering of the situation is, in governments that recognize women and grant them rights (that we are accustomed to in the west), that is a state that also has less terrorism in it.

id be happy to be wrong here---just show me.

The same is specifically established in the article I linked:

Over a decade’s worth of research shows that women’s advancement is critical to stability and to reducing political violence. Countries where women are empowered are vastly more secure, whether the issue is food security, countering violent extremism or resolving disputes with other nations peacefully.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875