Evacuation form Afghanistan- women?

[Aprilinspringtimeshower]

So saw this article and the accompanying photo www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/17/afghanistan-striking-image-appears-to-show-640-people-fleeing-kabul-in-packed-us-military-plane?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

This is what concerns me- where are the women? The overwhelming majority of people on that plane are men, adult males. There are a few women and some children.
Yet it is the women who are in greatest danger. Young girls, older women. Single women who won’t be able to support themselves once stopped from going outside unaccompanied, professional women who will be banned from working .

Everyone said that the war was about women’s right and way of life. And that what is happening now is a danger to the rights and well-being of women.

Surely it is women who are the ones that need to get out of the country safely and be offered asylum- so where are they? Why wasn’t that plane full of mostly women or even equal amounts of women and the men that accompany them.

I don’t hear the government saying anything to target protection and refuge for women specifically. And to young girls and women who are in real danger

AIBU that it is always the men that get the preference, and that really no one cares enough to actually provide proper protection to the women and girls ..it’s just all sound bites and noble words

I thought the same op. See also migrant boats. I am in no way doubting that those people (mostly men) have come from the most appallingly desperate circumstances. But where are the women? Who is helping them?

Everyone said that the war was about women’s right and way of life.

Who said this? This was never what the war was about. Do you really think that men go to war to secure women's rights?

It's a total disgrace.

I got flamed on here for asking the same regards the migrat boats. Regards the flights, it was a physical fight and stamped to get on those flights

The children and women should have been the priority as they are the ones in greatest of danger. 💔

The men will be thise who have worked for the international organisations - the interpreters, drivers etc.

They are more numerous than women employees simply because of the nature of the employment market there and the huge under-representation of women in most roles.

When people say we have a moral duty to rescue those who are at risk of execution because we employed them, this is what it look like.

Those who have been employed by foreigners are the highest risk if left behind. It's not like the risk men v women amongst those who have not worked for foreign organisations.

Remember that plane was well after the civilian side of the airport had closed. It wasn't for thise who just turned up

Op Don your hard hat.
The truth is, it's still a society that oppresses women even though in the towns they had more than "freedoms".

Many leading authorities know its every single woman and child, who will suffer the most hour by hour, day by day from life under the taliban so yes... It should be women and children first.

All those who want to leave should be allowed to leave and those, male or female who actually worked for us should be given priority to get out.

Apparently taliban are ripping up passport of people on the way to the airport.

I would assume most of them are linked with the US/UK military. Visas were getting processed slowly, some of them may have had them in hand.

There was no plan in place to protect women and children at all.

@GCAcademic

Everyone said that the war was about women’s right and way of life.

Who said this? This was never what the war was about. Do you really think that men go to war to secure women's rights?

gaps-uk.org/about/campaign/women-in-afghanistan/

As far I am concerned I never heard this cited until after the war phase ended, but has been discussed at length as one of the key reasons to keep troops there and for the frameworks in setting up democratic government . I think it has just been empty words as a moral excuse retrospectively as to why they had to intervene.
I have heard Boris use it as a reason on the news not that long ago

@Whatafustercluck

I thought the same op. See also migrant boats. I am in no way doubting that those people (mostly men) have come from the most appallingly desperate circumstances. But where are the women? Who is helping them?

I think it is often the case (with the migrant boats) that the men make the dangerous journey so they can find somewhere safe and then bring their family over in a safer way once they have been granted asylum. I'm not an expert, but that is what I have read. Also in many places, the men are in greater immediate danger than the women although in the longer term it is awful for the women too.

@RoseAndRose

The men will be thise who have worked for the international organisations - the interpreters, drivers etc.

They are more numerous than women employees simply because of the nature of the employment market there and the huge under-representation of women in most roles.

When people say we have a moral duty to rescue those who are at risk of execution because we employed them, this is what it look like.

Those who have been employed by foreigners are the highest risk if left behind. It's not like the risk men v women amongst those who have not worked for foreign organisations.

Remember that plane was well after the civilian side of the airport had closed. It wasn't for thise who just turned up

So they just abandon their wives? Their teenage daughters? Their young children? Hmmm…

@GCAcademic

Everyone said that the war was about women’s right and way of life.

Who said this? This was never what the war was about. Do you really think that men go to war to secure women's rights?

This. The war was about terrorism and drugs.

There does seem to be more men than women and children in that picture. The chaos on the tarmac beforehand makes me wonder if women, many carrying or dragging their children along, trying to keep them together, just didn’t get much of a look in as just getting to a point they’re on a plane must have been exhausting- the mass of desperate people literally fighting for their lives, all pushing and shoving.

I hope all those on that plane are safe now and go on to lead as happy lives as they can- women, children and men.

Aren't they the people who helped Americans? So they are being helped in return.
They would be executed which I'm pretty sure is more dangerous than not being allowed to go to work or school

They were discussing this on David Lammy’s radio show this morning (he’s in for James O’Brien on LBC) and people with a better knowledge of these things than me said it’s very likely that that plane was filled with people who’d worked for the US and U.K. as interpreters etc. Equally, they were talking about how men are more likely to travel out first to scope out a country/area and get a job before sending for their dependants (whether you believe that or not is a matter for the individual but this was apparently the case during Windrush etc very often).

The clinging to the wheels/stairs thing was because civilians had broken down a fence and broken through to the part of the airport controlled by the US, evacuating those workers. It was two different groups.

I think the comparison to migrant boats is interesting- that is illegal entry and risky long journeys, so yep, I can see why women wouldn’t be undertaking it in large numbers. But, this is refuge by governments..that was a US plane, and it is our government talking about resettlement. That is different. I would certainly expect to see men accompanied by women and children at least.
I would also say that past immigration has not been led by men. Vietnam “boat people “ was families, plenty of women travelled on their own on during the Windrush immigrations.

So no I don’t buy that, it’s more dangerous for the men excuse

@araiwa

Aren't they the people who helped Americans? So they are being helped in return. They would be executed which I'm pretty sure is more dangerous than not being allowed to go to work or school

They aren’t just preventing girls going to school

They are going into towns demanding names of all unmarried girls and women over 12 to take as sex slaves. I’m sure their forced “husbands” will be ever so kind to them 🤦‍♀️.

They stoned women to death for sex outside marriage even in rape
They blew up girls schools- including a certain noble peace prize winner who had a number of attempts on her life when a child
Women stopped from working- even when there is no male breadwinner in the family
Taliban rules: “women can only been seen by female doctors. Women cannot work ( or be doctors)- how many women died because they had no medical care? Exactly we don’t know but I’d lay a wager that with poverty, poor hygiene etc it isn’t exactly rare.
Women’s poverty and lack of education is a sure way of keeping a country improvised. That has been seen again and again- educate women and provide them with means to earn an income will reap benefits for whole communities

April at most other huge migrations have had plenty of women along as well.
Of course they have.

Isn't it rather sexist to assume women can't flee?

But confusing because people flee from terror, but some people claim women are too weak to also flee the terror but they are strong enough to stay and face the terror that men flee from?

Doesn't make any sense.

Don't men always escape first? Isn't the 'women and children first' thing bollocks? I'm sure I read, probably on here, that it was mainly men who survived the titanic, as they were stronger and could push their way to the front. There was a stat on here yesterday too about how many men (percentage) survive boats sinking, compared to women.

Equally, little kids hold you back, they really do. Presumably even if women had been at the airport, they'd have had hold of at least one child. How much running and shoving can you do, when holding a small child and hampered by clothing?

Women’s poverty and lack of education is a sure way of keeping a country improvised. That has been seen again and again- educate women and provide them with means to earn an income will reap benefits for whole communities

Not if a country’s economy is based on opiates. As Afghanistan’s was in the past and will be again now.

So no I don’t buy that, it’s more dangerous for the men excuse

So you don't think there should be priority for those who have worked for UK/US/other foreign governments?

At present they are very much at the head of the queue for evacuation, and most commentaries I have seen support the idea that we do owe it to those whose lives are additionally at risk because they worked for us.

They may have wives and children, and I hope that they can also leave, once the people whose lives are directly in danger are in safety. I'm well aware of how tough ther lives could be if we do not get the families out as well.

But I don't think we can leave behind some of those who will certainly be executed as a direct result of our employing them. It's bad enough knowing that you might not be able to take them all even when filling every available seat and space with just them, no families. Leaving a further 3/4 behind because each person took an average of one spouse and two children as well) does not seem justifiable to me

The flights were to evacuate the people who had helped the Americans, the majority of whom were men (common sense tells you that if girls only started to be able to get educated 20 years ago, more men will have been educated overall to be able to work as translators and so on).

The flights weren't free for all Afghans who wanted out, that's why some of them were clinging to the outside of planes that were taking off - because they weren't allowed inside.

We said the same, watching the news last night.

A horde of men, leaving their women and kids behind to face whatever.

@Slipperfairy

Don't men always escape first? Isn't the 'women and children first' thing bollocks? I'm sure I read, probably on here, that it was mainly men who survived the titanic, as they were stronger and could push their way to the front. There was a stat on here yesterday too about how many men (percentage) survive boats sinking, compared to women.

Equally, little kids hold you back, they really do. Presumably even if women had been at the airport, they'd have had hold of at least one child. How much running and shoving can you do, when holding a small child and hampered by clothing?

I don’t think that’s true about the Titanic survivors. The first thing I found suggested women were much more likely to have survived www.icyousee.org/titanic.html