Clinton, Merkel and me.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1227006/Clinton-Merkel-global-war-sexism-Harriet-Harman.html

Harriet Harman has spoken of her ambitions to sit alongside Hillary Clinton and Angela Merkel in a global crusade against sexism.

Labour's deputy leader wants to establish a group of high-ranking women, including the U.S. Secretary of State and the German Chancellor, who would meet regularly to fight for equality.

Her announcement, in a speech to EU leaders, also appeared to be an attempt to burnish her credentials as a future Labour leader.

Miss Harman, the minister for women, said: 'There is, as yet, no international architecture which serves effectively to bring together women leaders who are working for progress along the same lines in each of our own countries. We need to look at how this could be done.'

She made clear she sees herself as a pioneer to rank alongside Mrs Clinton and Mrs Merkel.

She said: 'In the UK we have a new Government Office for Equality - of which I am in charge. Germany has its first woman Chancellor - Angela Merkel - and half the Spanish cabinet are women.

'The U.S. has a woman heading the State Department, Secretary Hillary Clinton, and Hilda Solis as Secretary for Labour. For the first time, the House of Representatives has a woman speaker, Nancy Pelosi.'

Miss Harman said she would seek to enlist the 140 female ministers throughout the EU in a bid to push women's issues.

She said: 'By doing this we can ensure the concerns of the 250million women in the EU are taken into account when decisions are made.'
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on her way to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Ministerial Meeting Retreat Session in Singapore on 11 November 2009
German Chancellor Angela Merkel makes the first speech of her new term as chancellor to the Bundestag (Lower house of parliament) in Berlin on November 10, 2009

She also plans to fight to set up a new UN 'consolidated gender entity body to progress issues concerning women'.

Tory spokesman Theresa May accused Miss Harman of putting her personal ambitions ahead of the interests of British working women.

She said: 'We want to ensure that issues affecting women are not forgotten but we all need to concentrate on the job in hand if we are to tackle Labour's jobs crisis and mend our broken economy'.

Aika huoletta voidaan ennustaa että miesten tasa-arvokysymyksiä ei tuossa komiteassa juuri käsitellä. Paitsi ehkä muutamaa poikkeusta, joissa primaarivaikutus on kuitenkin naisten asemaa parantava ja sekundaarivaikutus miesten asemaan liittyvä. Eräs tällainen esimerkki on mielestäni isien perhevapaiden lisääminen. Ellei sillä uskottaisi olevan naisten asemaa työmarkkinoilla parantava vaikutus, sille tuskin löytyisi suurtakaan kannatusta.

Tässäkin artikkelissa tulee hyvin esiin yksi keskeinen asia, missä feministinen ajattelu menee vikaan: Tarvitaan erityinen naispäättäjien yhteisö, jotta naisten asiat tulevat huomioiduksi, koska yleinen politiikka on oletusarvoisesti miesten tarpeiden mukaan tehty. Todellisuudessa parlamentaarinen päätöksenteko ottaa huomioon huomattavasti vähemmän miesspesifisiä asioita kuin puhtaasti naisten etuun vaikuttavia asioita.

Sisäsiittoinen Suomi

Tyly arvio: Sisäsiittoinen Suomi ei houkuttele ulkomaisia osaajia

Suomi on huomattavasti vähemmän kansainvälistynyt kuin mitä usein ajatellaan, ja selvästi enemmän sisäänpäin kääntynyt kuin esimerkiksi muut Pohjoismaat. Tämä uhkaa kansantalouden selviytymistä tulevaisuuden haasteista.

Näin toteaa 18 asiantuntijasta koottu kansainvälinen arviointiryhmä, joka julkisti keskiviikkona laajan selvityksensä Suomen innovaatiojärjestelmän ongelmakohdista.

Paneelin mukaan Suomi ei houkuttele ulkomaisia tutkijoita tai asiantuntijoita eikä ulkomaisia, osaamisintensiivisiä yrityksiä saati niiden tutkimustoimintaa. Näin ollen Suomessa on hyvin vähän globaalisti suuntautunutta yrittäjyyttä.

Maailmantalouden kilpailu kiristyy ankaralla vauhdilla. Näin ollen Suomen kilpailukyky riippuu yhä kriittisemmin siitä, kuinka hyvin innovoimme eli viemme omia läpimurtoja maailmalle.

Tutkijat havaitsivat, että tutkijoiden liikkuvuus Suomeen ja Suomesta on viime vuosina peräti pienentynyt, vaikka maailma menee aivan toiseen suuntaan. Kansainvälistymistä pitäisikin raadin mukaan edistää voimakkain kannustein.

Ongelma liittyy läheisesti Suomen hajanaiseen korkeakouluverkostoon. Raadin mukaan yliopistouudistuksessa pitäisikin siirtyä pikaisesti seuraavaan vaiheeseen. Yliopistojen laitoskokoa pitäisi suurentaa selvästi, mikä tarkoittaa koko verkoston karsimista.

Ammattikorkeakoulujen rooli pitää täsmentää äkkiä.

Suomen usein kehuttu innovaatiojärjestelmä saa muutenkin kovaa kyytiä asiantuntijajoukolta. Tutkijoiden huolellinen selvitys muun muassa osoittaa, että aluepolitiikka on piiloutunut innovaatiokoneistoon, vaikka asia on tähän saakka kiistetty. Kasvukeskusten ulkopuolelle on jaettu helpommin tai enemmän Tekesin tutkimus- ja kehitystukia.

Kaiken lisäksi tukialueille syydetyt innovaatiorahat näyttävät heikentävän tuottavuuskasvua.


No kuinkas nyt näin ? Eikö Suomen pitänyt olla peräti maailman menestyvin maa ?

Huonosti käyttäytyvät miehet

NOW's new president takes on men behaving badly

By DAVID CRARY (AP) – 16 hours ago

NEW YORK — Men behaving badly. It wasn't a topic that Terry O'Neill expected to find high on her agenda as new president of the National Organization for Women, but she's tackling it with zest and determination.

Elected as NOW's leader in June, O'Neill had plenty on her plate already — notably trying to gauge the impact on women, for good or ill, in the multiple proposals for health care overhaul. Then along came the Roman Polanski and David Letterman controversies, and she charged briskly onto a new front.

Polanski "is a convicted criminal pedophile" and making excuses for him is "dangerous talk," O'Neill declared earlier this month after some luminaries in Hollywood and Europe questioned a move by Swiss authorities to detain the film director for possible extradition to the U.S. He faces a charge dating from 1978 of having unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl.

Four days after the Polanski statement, O'Neill fired another salvo after Letterman's on-air revelation — prompted by an alleged extortion attempt — that he had sex with women working under him on his "Late Show."

"As 'the boss,' he is responsible for setting the tone for his entire workplace — and he did that with sex," O'Neill said. "In any work environment, this places all employees — including employees who happen to be women — in an awkward, confusing and demoralizing situation."

The decision to speak out about Letterman prompted a surge of e-mails to NOW headquarters, many commending O'Neill and many criticizing her. One message accused O'Neill of "man-hating," while another praised her for raising the workplace issue on behalf of daughters and their parents.

Despite her other priorities, O'Neill doesn't see the two incidents as a distraction and views her statements as part of "an important conversation to have."

"Men behaving badly is exactly the problem in this country," she said in a telephone interview. "It's not a diversion — it's at the core of why women are unequal, why they are kept in second-class citizenship."

O'Neill didn't drop the topic after issuing her statements. NOW urged its supporters to rally outside movie theaters in support of victims of rape and sexual assault, and O'Neill wrote to the president of CBS, which airs the "Late Show," requesting a meeting and urging the network to appoint more women to its board of directors.

CBS declined to respond publicly to O'Neill, but noted that women are presidents of several of its key divisions, including CBS Entertainment, CBS Films, CBS Sales and Simon & Schuster.

O'Neill also wrote to Letterman's production company, Worldwide Pants, Inc., which replied on Thursday.

"As an employee of David Letterman's since 1985, I have personally found the work environment on his shows to be fair, professional and entirely merit-based at all times," wrote Worldwide Pants CEO Rob Burnett, who said Letterman has never been the target of a sexual harassment claim.

Burnett also noted that women hold numerous high-level executive posts in the company.

O'Neill linked the Polanski and Letterman controversies to a broader trend that has troubled her in recent years — nasty, gender-based attacks on women in public life, such as Hillary Rodham Clinton, Sarah Palin, Michelle Obama and new Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

"We're living in a time when women who put themselves forward as leaders are subjected to vicious misogynistic attacks — it's very analogous to sexual harassment in the workplace," she said in the interview. "The message to other women is, 'Stay in your place.'"

O'Neill said her dismay with Letterman didn't hinge on the legality of his conduct.

"The question is whether the atmosphere in that workplace was poisoned by that lord of the manor, where everybody is made to understand that the women are there for sex and the men are there for work," she said.

O'Neill, 57, was somewhat of a surprise winner in NOW's leadership election in June, beating a 33-year-old NOW vice president who'd been endorsed by outgoing president Kim Gandy.

O'Neill, a former law professor, vowed in her campaign to reinvigorate NOW's grass-roots activism and deploy tougher tactics to convey its views.

On the job for four months, O'Neill has found the work intense — particularly trying to keep up-to-date on how the evolving health care proposals might affect women.

She worries that the eventual plan might lack a public option allowing the government to sell health insurance in competition with private companies, and that such a result would dismay many women.

"It breaks my heart," she said, expressing fears that many progressive women would be so disheartened that they wouldn't vote in 2010 and thus create an opening for "dreadful, anti-women candidates to win."

Polanskin kohdalla en voi olla kauheasti eri mieltä. Lettermanin suhteen en voisi juuri olla enempää eri mieltä. Miksi naisjärjestöjen johtoon valitaan aina kaikkein fanaattisin aines? Now on järjestö, joka on jo vanhastaankin aivan riittävän yksisilmäinen.

Naiset (ja lapset) ensin

Minun piti postata tämä jo silloin kun se oli ajankohtainen, mutta se unohtui. Julkaisen sen nyt joka tapauksessa. Hassua miten tasa-arvo ja perinteisten sukupuoliroolien purkaminen tarkoittaa aina vain naisten tasa-arvoa, ja sukupuolirooleista roskakoriin päätyy ainoastaan naisten velvollisuuksiksi miellettyjä ja miesten oikeuksiksi miellettyjä asioita. Miesten perinteiset velvollisuudet, kuten itsensä asettaminen alttiiksi vaaraan naisen puolesta, saa jäädä. Tasa-arvoa, mutta naiset ensin!

http://jezebel.com/5133007/flight-1549-survivors-lets-talk-about-women-and-children-first

Tradition!
Flight 1549 Survivors: Let's Talk About "Women And Children First"
By Sadie, 1:00 PM on Fri Jan 16 2009, 30,597 views (Edit, to draft, Slurp)

Copy this whole post to another site
Slurp cancel
sending request

After the near-tragedy of a US Airways crash-landing in the Hudson, some people were surprised to learn that, in evacuating, some of the passengers and crew held to the mandate of "women and children first."

We got a bunch of emails in asking us to address this issue. It's probably not something that often comes up nowadays: after all, most plane crashes don't allow time for evacuation, and it's a testament to the pilot's incredible skill, the crew's efficiency and the quick response of rescue workers that we even have the luxury of discussing this protocol, rather than mourning several hundred deaths. But it did ring strangely quaint — and to some, problematic — to hear such old-fashioned words amidst the setting of a very modern disaster.

First, a few words on the whole "women and children first" thing. It's not a tradition as ancient as the navy; in fact, it can be dated to the 1852 wreck of the British warship HMS Birkenhead. The ship was filled mostly with soldiers and sailors, but also carried 20 women and children on its voyage to South Africa. When the ship ran into a rock that hew the hull in two, the captain shouted, "Every man for himself." However, the soldier's commanding officers, Lieutenant-Colonel Alexander Seton, drew his sword and ordered his men to stand fast — to rush the lifeboats might mean that the women and children aboard the boats would be swamped and would perish. Only about 200 people — of 600 — survived the wreck. So, this was a case in which you literally had exclusively soldiers - and then some incidental women and children, who, obviously, were going to take priority. The implementation of the protocol was regarded as a tribute to Seton's bravery, interestingly enough, rather than as a piece of gallantry. Of course, in addition to ingrained notions of protection, there were practical concerns: women's clothing was harder to swim and move in, and if there were children, it was considered preferable to keep them with their mothers.

To a degree, the latter is probably still part of the rationale: as with helping a neighboring child with an oxygen mask, kids need carers: most often, this will be the mother. I doubt anyone would argue that in cases of disaster, children's safety should be a priority. I'd assume too that the old-fashioned protocol serves as some means of organization: someone needs to go first, everyone's panicking - why not women and children? Of course, it doesn't really make sense — and does "women" include the flight attendants? Why, after all, should an able-bodied woman get help before an infirm older man, because of the residual perception of inherent weakness? I'd guess it's probably mostly just unexamined tradition - a lot of pilots are ex-military, and the military is, shall we say, fond of tradition. Yes, it's ludicrous: women and children first down the big slide? If people hadn't been worried about, you know, dying, probably a few of them would have chuckled at the incongruity of hearing those words on an air bus.

But that's the point, isn't it: people almost died! And they didn't die! And as interesting as semantics are, and as much inherent patriarchal nonsense there is in the fabric of society coming out all the time, I for one am not going to get exercised about something someone said — maybe off the top of his head — in an effort to successfully save several hundred lives. I agree that if this is indeed the airline protocol it bears questioning, or at least cogent, non-anachronistic explanation beyond some hoary gallantry. But yesterday what could have been a tragedy, wasn't. We know women and children were evacuated first because they — and the men who followed — lived to talk about it. I would be curious to hear what the women on that flight have to say about it — maybe in, say, a week. But, as Ecclesiastes and the Byrds would have it, for everything there is a season.

Kommentteja:

**********
@samethingwedoeverynightpinky: I was thinking the exact same thing. I travel with my cat quite a lot, and there is absolutely no fucking way I'd get off that plane without her.

As for women & children first, there is one minor practical thing, though I don't think it's relevant in a plane evacuation b/c of the space limitations. Children are smaller, and so are women, on average, and thus are more likely to hinder evacuation or be trampled if they don't go first...
**********

**********

01/16/09

@Raspberry Swirl: Dance Party Coordinator: I agree. I kinda hate debating this sort of thing that seems unnecessary when REAL sexism, like on purpose, exists in this world.

Women and children first doesn't strike me as an insult. It just seems right to allow children first, and if the kid is with his/her mom, then allowing them to go together seems logical.
*********

*********

01/16/09

Oh for God's sake, it's about practicality, specifically the bigger people not crushing the smaller people in a stampede.
*********

*********
@Cerridwen: I think the major thing is to speed up the process. Having women and children evacuated first would go much more quickly than trying to seperate who traveled with whom and which adult should go with which child. The children should have an adult presence, and unless there is a system worked out beforehand, this way, archaic as it may be, could streamline the process and save lives.
**********

Tilastovahti

Tarvittaisiin joku sellainen taho, jolla olisi resursseja tutkia tilastokikkailua valtamediassa. Joku jolla olisi ensinnäkin aikaa tutkia mitä väitettyjen prosenttien takaa oikeasti löytyy, ja joka systemaattisesti esittäisi korjatut luvut samaisissa medioissa. 1. Hesarissa julkaistaan uutinen palkkaeroista. 2. Ko. taho tarkistaa luvut. 3. Tekee tarvittavat korjaukset, jotka julkaistaan samaisessa lehdessä. Avainsanoina välitön reagointi.

Tällä hetkellä aika naiivia ajattelua. Tiedän. Vaikea löytää riittävän koulutettua ihmistä, jolla on aikaa tai halua omistautua näinkin epäkiitolliseen tehtävään. Ja se on kahdesta ongelmasta se pienempi. Suurempi kysymys on missä ne voisi julkaista, kun valtamedia Suomessa on mitä on.

Lähin realistinen ratkaisu mielestäni voisi olla, että tilastoja syynäisi joku valtion ikeestä riippumaton (lue: ei virkamies) ja miesasiaa kannattava taho, joka ammatikseen tutkii samoja asioita, vaikkakin eri tarkoituksessa.

Entä julkaisuongelma? Kansanedustajalla voisi ajatella olevan riittävästi vaikutusvaltaa, jotta suurien medioiden julkaisukynnys ylittyy. Tarvittaisiin miesasiaan vihkiytynyt kansanedustaja. Sellainen olisi painonsa arvoinen kullassa, vaikkei onnistuisikaan em. tehtävässä. Jo eduskunnan sisällä tapahtuva työ olisi arvokasta."Arvoisa puhemies. Ministeri XXXX XXX:n luvuissa ei ole huomioitu konaistyöajan vaikutusta...".

Tällä hetkellä tuntuu täysin utopistiselta ajatukselta, mutta täytyy muistaa että feministitkin ovat onnistuneet luomaan oman koneensa. Meidänkin pitäisi pystyä luomaan omame.

Sukupuoliroolit vaihtoon Britanniassa

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1192720/Feminist-thinks-men-bring-babies-new-Labour-family-guru.html

Brittihallinto nimittää hallituksen perheasiain pääasiantuntijaksi (chief spokesman on families) tohtori Kathrehine Rake:n. Nykyinen brittihallinto on vasemmistovetoinen, jota johtaa työväenpuolue Labour, tai hieman kriittisemmin ilmaistuna: nu-labour, tai vielä kriittisemmin un-labour. Un-labour selittyy sillä että monet ihmiset eivät enää pysty näkemään yhteyttä työväen etujen puolustamisella ja puolueen toiminnalla. Vähän sama on nähtävissä Suomessakin, kun perinteiset työväenpuolueet menettävät kannatustaan, ja erityisesti työväenluokkaiset miehet siirtyvät äänestämään muita puolueita.

Uusi perheasiain pääasiantuntija dr. Kathrehine Rake on tunnettu radikaalifeministi, joka haluaa muuttaa sukupuoliroolit käänteisiksi. Siis kirjaimellisesti, eikä vain tyytyä poistamaan rooleja tai lieventämään niitä. Miehet vaihtamaan vaippoja ja naiset pääasialliseksi perheen tulonhankkijaksi. Jos naisista tulee enemmistö tulonhankkijoista, se Raken mukaan ratkaisee Pay-gap:in, eli ns. naisen euron.

Tosin palkkaerojen tiedetään johtuvan suurimmaksi osaksi eri aloilla työskentelemisestä. Suomen tilanne on tässä asiassa pitkälti saarivaltion kaltainen, eli iso naisvaltainen julkinen sektori. Sen takia en ole erityisen vakuuttunut että Raken vision toteutumisella olisi suurta vaikutusta palkkaerohin. Miesten jääminen pidemmille hoitovapaille tuskin nostaa naisvaltaisten alojen palkkatasoa. Ei myöskään ns. house-husband -kulttuurin syntyminen. Verotuloilla rahoitettavien alojen mahdollisuus kilpailla yksityisen sektorin ansiotasosta ei ole siltikään todennäköistä.

Miesten jääminen kotimieheksi sen sijaan vaikuttaisi perinteisten miehisiin aloihin. Joko a) alat naisistuisivat, ja mm. rakennusalasta tulisi enemmän naisvaltainen (Raken arvio), jolloin naisten palkkataso kasvaisi. B) Miesvaltaisia aloja kohtaisi työvoimapula, joka aiheuttaisi korotuspaineita alan palkkoihin, mutta naisten osuus ei silti merkittävästi kasvaisi (Mortimerin arvio). Rake ilmeisesti kuuluu sen koulukunnan feministeihin, jotka uskovat pääasiallisen syyn siihen että naisia on niin vähän mm. rakennusalalla johtuvan syrjinnästä. Ei esimerkiksi työn fyysisyydestä, likaisuudesta, terveyshaitoista tai vaarallisuudesta. Toinen ongelma on biologinen. Isät eivät toistaiseksi pysty imettämään lapsia, tosin tottakai korviketta on saatavissa, mutta synnyttämiseen ei löydy edes vippaskonsteja. Naiset joutuvat siis joka tapauksessa tekemään uhrauksia urastaan.

Kathrehine Rake istuu hyvin nu-labourin tyyliin. Hän on "työväenluokkainen" joka tienaa 3-4 kesiarvoduunarin verran. Hän vastustaa avioliittoa, koska se on niin patriarkaattinen, mutta on itse naimissa. Akateeminen järjestöihminen, Fawcet Societyn puheenjohtaja ja 2. aallon feministi. Hänellä ja perinteisellä työväenliikkeellä, kuten esim. metallityöläisten liitolla on tuskin käytännössä mitään yhteisiä intressejä.

Työväenpuolueelle luulisi löytyvän tällä hetkellä työsarkaa ja mahdollisuuksia kääntää kannatus nousuun. EU-parlmentissa kiistellään työaikadirektiivistä, joka läpi mennessään voi tarkoittaa lakisääteisen maksimityöajan korottamista 60 tuntiin viikossa. Lama jyllää ja ihmisiä jää työttömiksi. Etc. Jostain syystä Labour kokee tärkeämmäksi radikaalin perhepolitiikan, kuin kiinnittää huomiota työväestön asioihin. Vasemmistoeliitti tuntuu kokonaan unohtavan, että enemmistö vasemmistoa äänestävistä suosii edelleen perinteistä perhemallia. Suurin osa vasemmistolaisista äänestäjistä haluaa työväenpuolueen, joka keskittyy työväen kannalta oleellisiin asioihin. Työolot, kohtuulliset työajat, minimipalkka, sosiaaliturva: Eikö vasemmisto voisi vain yksinkertaisesti keskittää tarmonsa näihin asioihin?

Feminist who thinks men should bring up babies is new Labour family guru

By Steve Doughty
Last updated at 12:18 AM on 13th June 2009

A hardline feminist has been chosen as the Government's new chief spokesman on families.

Dr Katherine Rake, who wants to see men bring up babies, will head the Family and Parenting Institute, a heavily state-financed organisation set up by Labour to speak for parents and children.

The Institute boasts that it 'brings alive the real issues for families' and 'listens to parents and carers across the country'.

But critics said the appointment of Dr Rake, currently director of the women's equality campaign group the Fawcett Society, showed the Institute was out of touch with the concerns of ordinary families.

The organisation was set up in 1999 by then Home Secretary Jack Straw to shore up family life and encourage parents.

Last year it received nearly £8million from Ed Balls's Department for Children, Schools and Families towards its declared mission of 'supporting parents in bringing up children'.

Dr Rake, who will take over from the Institute's founding chief executive Mary MacLeod, has long declared her intention is not to support parents as they are, but to revolutionise their lives.

Writing in The Guardian three years ago, she said: 'We want to transform the most intimate and private relations between women and men.

'We want to change not just who holds power in international conglomerations, but who controls the household budget.

'We want to change not just what childcare the state provides, but who changes the nappies at home.'

Dr Rake added: 'It is only when men are ready to share caring and work responsibilities with women that we will be able to fulfil our true potential to form equal partnerships in which we have respect, autonomy and dignity.'

Under the direction of Dr Rake, a former London School of Economics lecturer, the Fawcett Society has campaigned for a 'changing role' for men.

The group, which is chaired by prominent gay rights campaigner Angela Mason, says the role reversal should be backed by longer paid parental leave, official encouragement for men to apply for flexible work hours, and the opening of mother and toddler groups to stay-at-home fathers.

It has complained that women will never achieve equality with men at work without 'challenging the traditional roles of homemaker and breadwinner'.

Fawcett has also condemned Tory plans to give tax breaks to married couples, complaining that 'it penalises all those children living with unmarried parents or with one parent'.

The appointment of Dr Rake, who is likely to earn £60,000 a year, comes at a time of growing pressure on mothers to go out to work.

Despite overwhelming evidence that a majority would prefer to stay home to bring up young children, ministers have piled pressure on them to take jobs and warned that those who fail to do so, and who rely on the income of a husband or partner, are likely to face poverty.

Only two million mothers now bring up their children full time. Official figures show that two out of three children aged three and four now spend at least part of their week in nurseries.

Jill Kirby, of the centre-right think-tank Centre for Policy Studies, said: 'This appointment to a body which is supposed to speak for the interests of ordinary parents and families shows how out of touch the leadership of the organisation is with real life in Britain.

'Katherine Rake's agenda is more about reversing sex roles than helping parents.'

The chairman of the National Parenting Institute is Fiona Millar, long-term partner of Tony Blair's former spokesman Alastair Campbell.

She said that Dr Rake 'has a strong track record in research, policy and campaigning and will be a great asset to the organisation at a time when the recession is putting extra pressure on families up and down the country'.

Because she was a woman

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090601/pollitt

On May 6 Johanna Justin-Jinich, a Wesleyan University student, was gunned down in the school's bookstore, almost certainly by 29-year-old Stephen Morgan. My daughter is a senior at Wesleyan, and so I got to see part of the aftermath close up: young people stunned, scared, in tears, confined to their rooms because Morgan was still loose. News accounts make Justin-Jinich seem outstanding in many ways: altruistic, brilliant, full of life, much loved. But in one way, she was far from unusual. She was a woman killed by a man because she was a woman...

Case: Häiriintynyt mielisairas mies tappoi naisen.
Feministitoimittaja: Mies tappoi naisen koska hän oli nainen.