Home | About | Donate

Bombing People Is Not Feminist, No Matter How You Spin It

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/06/29/bombing-people-not-feminist-no-matter-how-you-spin-it

1 Like

Remember that one Suzanne Nossel justified the US attacks on Iraq and Libya as “feminist” attacks as those countries Governments Governments


She also supported the wars in Afghanistan and actions against Syria all under the guise of “feminism”.

Ms Nossel also acted to help suppress the Goldstein report on Israeli warcrimes. Apparently dropping bombs on Palestinian women and children advances the feminist cause.

It these types of people that give “feminism” a bad name. Feminism should not be about “Lets act just like the men” Christopher Hedges resigned from PEN in disgust when Ms Nossel appointed.


Identity imperialism

1 Like

“… … for feminism, which is about the emancipation of billions from an oppressive system that hurts everyone” (quoted from ending sentence)
1 - Assumptions in article: Is that really what feminism is about?
2 - Assumptions: which gender is nice and which is naughty?
It depends on what is expected from women as opposed to expectations of men. Because men have historically been in charge of most anything, in power, and because those in power have so often been oppressive, vicious, cruel and so forth “we” view women so simplistically. Remember this 19th century nursery rhyme?

What are little boys made of?
What are little boys made of?
Snips and snails
And puppy-dogs’ tails
That’s what little boys are made of

What are little girls made of?
What are little girls made of?
Sugar and spice
And everything nice [or “all things nice”]
That’s what little girls are made of

It goes along with assumptions that victims of oppression or prejudice could never be the same bigots, overlords, racists, oppressors, killers and so forth. But again and again that turns out to not be the case. Same with women who supposedly are only kindly, motherly, loving, (on and on). But history (not to mention my own personal job experience) shows women are a similar mixture of the super best (I’ve experienced those kinds of great bosses) and the rottenest (had those kind as well) and most destructive. Both men and women.
It seems the opportunity that comes with power is not unlike too many drinks and you find out who is a nice drunk or a mean drunk.
Then there are the functionaries who take their place in a structure, such as the military, where they take part, directly or in support staff, in following orders without asking themselves why they are killing someone.
Remember the great line at the end of the third movie in the Bourne series when an assassin is assigned to kill Jason Bourne (essentially Bourne’s old job). Because Bourne had not killed the assassin earlier in the movie when he had a clear shot the assassin, now in a reversed position asks Bourne, “Why didn’t you take the shot?” Bourne replies, “Do you even know why you are supposed to kill me? Look what they make you give.”
Then again, maybe this is feminism.
Depends on your view. A real definition has always been hard to pin down, once you think past the starting slogans.
Maybe it is merely sugar coating for “Snips and snails and puppy-dogs’ tails.”
Human beings are not slogans or bumper stickers.
You could also ask how is it masculine to bomb towns and villages. How is it masculine to obey orders to assassinate someone you don’t even know, don’t have any beef with, personal or not, in someplace that never sent any army, navy or air force to your own patch of land.
How is that anything good?


I wrote about this on Commondreams over ten years ago.

So this is progress for women. They have always been supportive, in general, of the warfare state, but now they take a more active role. Wonderful!

Suppose we can no longer use the phrase, “killing innocent women and children.”

Do they think that it is better to now kill only innocent children? Perhaps they should now agitate for the right to give birth in the cock pit of a jet while they bomb other people’s children. Ah, progress.

1 Like

What kind of woman would want to be in the military? Occupation: killer, personal life: none, and meaning: protecting private wealth and Empire.

1 Like

There are no innocent children. Not when dead anyway. If dead they are counted as Viet Cong casualties. Viet Cong? Some accounting methods are forever. A forever enemy means forever funding for the forever Pentagon.
** I’d say /s for sarcasm but /d for disgust would be more like it.

1 Like