Syrian Refugees: 50% Women?

August1991 · November 9, 2015

The Liberal government intends to honour its promise to resettle 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada over the course of the next seven weeks, says newly-appointed Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship John McCallum.

"It certainly remains our objective to get them here by the end of the year," said McCallum during an interview on CBC News Network's Power & Politics Friday.

CBC

How many of these Syrian refugees will be women? Or women at risk?

=====

IMHO, the Syrians we accept should largely be women, or Christians. Or homosexuals.

After all, the Vietnamese we accepted in 1979 were largely Chinese. And the Ugandans we accepted in 1972 were largely Indians.

Edited November 9, 2015 by Charles Anthony
fixed mal-formed quote

Moonlight Graham · November 9, 2015

I think they said they're prioritizing children and women.

August1991 · November 9, 2015

I think they said they're prioritizing children and women.

"Prioritize"? MG, are you a bureaucrat?

Heck, even Trudeau Jnr is better at numbers than you. His cabinet has 50% women.

Moonlight Graham · November 9, 2015

I have no idea what the numbers are. The info is out there, just google, it's been discussed in the last few days in the news.

-1=e^ipi · November 9, 2015

If a human is suffering and is in need, why does it matter what their phenotypical sex is?

To dismiss people who are suffering just because they are male is sexist and wrong.

the Syrians we accept should largely be women

What a joke that someone who uses Voltaire as their avatar would advocate such a position in opposition to equality.

I think the attitudes highlighted in this thread demonstrate what I mean by the empathy gap in this thread: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24911-empathy-gap-male-disposability-reproductive-utility/

poochy · November 9, 2015

If a human is suffering and is in need, why does it matter what their phenotypical sex is?

To dismiss people who are suffering just because they are male is sexist and wrong.

What a joke that someone who uses Voltaire as their avatar would advocate such a position in opposition to equality.

I think the attitudes highlighted in this thread demonstrate what I mean by the empathy gap in this thread: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24911-empathy-gap-male-disposability-reproductive-utility/

it matters because from the particular part of the world it's the men who blow things up, or its the men who ocaisionally get women/cheldren to blow things up, and its the men who benefit from a culture that treats women as chattel. So i say bring all women and children, let them come here and learn a better way.

Edited November 9, 2015 by poochy

August1991 · November 9, 2015

What a joke that someone who uses Voltaire as their avatar would advocate such a position in opposition to equality.

If a human is suffering and is in need, why does it matter what their phenotypical sex is?

To dismiss people who are suffering just because they are male is sexist and wrong.

What a joke that someone who uses Voltaire as their avatar would advocate such a position in opposition to equality.

I think the attitudes highlighted in this thread demonstrate what I mean by the empathy gap in this thread: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24911-empathy-gap-male-disposability-reproductive-utility/

Joke? Yet Trudeau Jnr has decided -Charest, Scandinavian style- to have a cabinet gender 50/50.

=======

My argument for the 25,000 Syrian refugees is different. In the past, from Vietnam or Uganda, we accepted minorities.

Surely Christians are minorities in the Middle East - and even women. So, of these 25,000 Syrians Trudeau Jnr wants to accept, how many are men, and how many are Muslim?

-1=e^ipi · November 9, 2015

it matters because from the particular part of the world it's the men who blow things up, or its the men who ocaisionally get women/cheldren to blow things up

The idea that men have 100% of the agency in society is ridiculous and this sexist myth reinforces traditionalism.

This sexist view, that 100% of the agency is on males, greatly reduces our society's ability to deal with the threat of ISIS and of Islamism. Men and Women are equally capable and believing in crazy religious nonsense, and Islamism is no exception. Many women support or even fight for ISIS, the majority of Saudi Arabian women support the burka and the ban on driving. Yet our politicians in the west primarily view ISIS as a group consisting almost entirely of men and view all the women involved as simply oppressed as opposed to individuals that have the agency to support ISIS. If we do not know our enemy, then according to Sun Tzu we will likely fail.

its the men who benefit from a culture that treats women as chattel.

Do you mean some men or all men?

Edited November 9, 2015 by -1=e^ipi

-1=e^ipi · November 9, 2015

My argument for the 25,000 Syrian refugees is different. In the past, from Vietnam or Uganda, we accepted minorities.

Women make up 49.3% of the Syrian population.

Surely Christians are minorities in the Middle East - and even women.

Being Christian is a choice, being a women, not so much. It makes sense to select Refugees that are most in need. Religious minorities are in greater need than Sunni Muslims because ISIS specifically kills/oppresses religious minorities. Women, not so much. To select refugees on the basis of their sex is sexist and against the ideals of Voltaire.

"All mortals are equal; it is not their birth, But virtue itself that makes the difference." - Voltaire

Bonam · November 9, 2015

Women make up 49.3% of the Syrian population.

Being Christian is a choice, being a women, not so much. It makes sense to select Refugees that are most in need. Religious minorities are in greater need than Sunni Muslims because ISIS specifically kills/oppresses religious minorities. Women, not so much.

ISIS most certainly does specifically oppress women.

-1=e^ipi · November 9, 2015

ISIS most certainly does specifically oppress women.

Choose refugees on the basis of oppression then, don't implement some sort of quota.

And of course it's not as one sided as most people in the west view it as. If you are a Sunni male, you are more expected to go fight and die in a war fighting for Allah compared to if you are female. And if you are a non-Sunni male, you are more likely to be killed compared to a female. Personally, I'd rather be a sex slave rather than killed and given that most sex slaves do not commit suicide I think it suggests most people find sex slavery preferable to death.

kimmy · November 9, 2015

I think it's been established that in Europe, the flood of humanity they're seeing in the name of "the Syrian refugee crisis" is 90% male, and a dubious portion of them are even Syrian.

The guys swarming over fences into Europe aren't real refugees, they're young able-bodied mooks taking advantage of the crisis and the generosity of Europeans to undertake economic migration before people wise up to the scam. They're queue jumpers, and their appalling behavior is already ruining things for legitimate refugees, Syrian and otherwise.

After Justin's guys are done attempting to "prioritize" women and children, we're going to end up with 22,000 twentysomething Muslim dudes wandering around Toronto and Vancouver asking "hey, where's the babes at?" Basically a large number of economic immigrants who wouldn't make the cut if they were trying to get into the country under honest pretenses.

On the bright side, maybe all those Tim Hortons places that were crying after Jason Kenney shut down the Temp Foreign Worker scam will be able to hire cheap-ass foreign laborers again.

-k

Moonlight Graham · November 9, 2015

I think it's been established that in Europe, the flood of humanity they're seeing in the name of "the Syrian refugee crisis" is 90% male, and a dubious portion of them are even Syrian.

The guys swarming over fences into Europe aren't real refugees, they're young able-bodied mooks taking advantage of the crisis and the generosity of Europeans to undertake economic migration before people wise up to the scam. They're queue jumpers, and their appalling behavior is already ruining things for legitimate refugees, Syrian and otherwise.

After Justin's guys are done attempting to "prioritize" women and children, we're going to end up with 22,000 twentysomething Muslim dudes wandering around Toronto and Vancouver asking "hey, where's the babes at?" Basically a large number of economic immigrants who wouldn't make the cut if they were trying to get into the country under honest pretenses.

Ya but I'm sure the Liberals will be able to sort out all those scammers from the legit refugees when they process and bring 25,000 of them over here in the next 7 weeks. OR NOT.

Moonlight Graham · November 9, 2015

If a human is suffering and is in need, why does it matter what their phenotypical sex is?

To dismiss people who are suffering just because they are male is sexist and wrong.

I mean you're right that there shouldn't be specific quotas but we should still bring in the most vulnerable, who are mostly women and children. A lot of Muslim women aren't allowed to work and some aren't even allowed to go to school, so if a man vs a woman is stranded outside their country who do you think is the most vulnerable, who would be able to find some money? Who would be carrying a gun vs not? Let alone a woman's smaller/weaker physical frame which makes them more vulnerable to rape, theft, and other violence.

angrypenguin · November 9, 2015

Threads like this remind me why Trumps men's rights movement is taking hold.

Smallc · November 9, 2015

Ya but I'm sure the Liberals will be able to sort out all those scammers from the legit refugees when they process and bring 25,000 of them over here in the next 7 weeks. OR NOT.

They may follow the example of what they did in Kosovo, and hold them on military bases. I'm not in favour of any of it anyway but we'll have to see what happens.

-1=e^ipi · November 9, 2015

who do you think is the most vulnerable

The religious minorities.

Bryan · November 9, 2015

They may follow the example of what they did in Kosovo, and hold them on military bases. I'm not in favour of any of it anyway but we'll have to see what happens.

That's already happening right now. The first 5000 or so arrived in Manitoba already and are stationed at 17 Wing.

Big Guy · November 9, 2015

The new government seems to be serious about the commitment.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/cabinet-sub-committee-tasked-with-keeping-liberals-refugee-promise-1.2649684

Evening Star · November 9, 2015

And the Ugandans we accepted in 1972 were largely Indians.

This might be because Indians were forcibly expelled en masse from Uganda in 1972 and were therefore the people who were seeking refuge? It's a bizarre comparison whatever one thinks about this issue.

eyeball · November 9, 2015

Whatever we do we shouldn't stop funneling weapons and reasons to use them into the region. That would be the worse thing we could do fer sure.

Moonlight Graham · November 9, 2015

I think this all comes down to this being an irresponsible and overly-ambitious election promise. I don't know why they just didn't see "we'll bring 25k refugees as fast as can be responsibly processed, which will likely be within the first 3-6 months".

The IRB, CIC, and CBSA etc. now have to put all other refugee claims they received prior to this promise to the wayside and have Syrians jump the cue in order to fulfill the Liberal promise simply because of politics and "public outrage", even though there's a lot shitty humanitarian situations around the world, like in central Africa, and of course Iraq. That's not fair to the other claimants.

Moonlight Graham · November 9, 2015

Whatever we do we shouldn't stop funneling weapons and reasons to use them into the region. That would be the worse thing we could do fer sure.

One of the main reasons we and especially the US does this is because it's good for our economies, and politicians also receive campaign donation money (directly or through Super PACs etc) from defense companies. Not to mention politicians feel pressure to keep and create jobs when there's a defense company in their constituency. They're supporting homicide and war for business profits and campaign funds. It's disgusting. Military-industrial complex.

eyeball · November 9, 2015

Refugees are the penalty we pay for suffering our war-hacks gladly.

We probably deserve a lot worse.

scribblet · November 9, 2015

Ya but I'm sure the Liberals will be able to sort out all those scammers from the legit refugees when they process and bring 25,000 of them over here in the next 7 weeks. OR NOT.

Sure they will :rolleyes: