"Many of these "sex-specific violations are sexual and reproductive" including rape, sexual murder, battery, 'honor killings,' suttee, dowry burnings, Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), prostitution, forced abortion, sterilization and motherhood and sexual violence of any kind."

So now motherhood is a sex-specific violation?

By the way, where do forced labour and forced payments come in your catalogue of violations of human rights?

The author likes to use the words "men" and "women" a lot.

Perhaps the author could give a definition of who is male and who is female, so everyone knows exactly who the author is talking about.

peter,

You should have read enough of these 'women's issues' posts now to realise that these sort of women suffer from a narcissism disorder.

I remember reading hprror stories from the Balkan's war where men and boys were reportedly hanged upside down by their feet, castrated and had their testicles shoved down their throats so that they died by either bleeding to death or choking on their own testicles. I also seem to remember something in the media about 5000 men and boys being executed.

But of course none of these stories mattter because they are males and in the narcissistic world of feminists only females are considered fully 'human' and the suffering of males just doesn't matter.

Instead, we hear more whining about a man's world. Ms Goldstone should get out a bit more; maybe she would realise we have a female PM, and G-G and until recently we had a female premier and still have a female G-G here in NSW.

These women are just never happy. It was a mistake for men to think that women are as fair minded as us.

Thank You for this thread. I've just read an interesting article by the Human Rights Watch that covers abuses in countries like -
Sierra Leone, Kosovo, The Democratic Republic of Congo, Afghanistan, Rwanda, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine, Moldova, Nigeria and son on.
You've raised an interesting question regarding International Law and Human Rights violations. Is the problem too politically "sensitive,"
I wonder?

Anyway, here's the link if anyone's interested:

http://www.hrw.org/en/category/topic/women

The article is under the heading:

Women's Rights Division.

I struggled with this, much seemed to be focussed on acts's committed in other part's of the world. There appeared to be a belief that women suffering the same fate as men had a different right violated.

There is the usual clarity about rape in marriage but no mention of other ways people try an control someone elses sexuality - is threatening someone to say yes really any worse than threatening them to say no?

I do agree that much of the legislation was framed by men, I'd agree that there could be scope for improvements. What I don't agree with is the obsession on gender or what seems to be the suggestion that women's suffering is somehow more important than men's. I don't agree with what seems to be an desire to reinforce gender divisions rather than lessen them.

R0bert

Some of the above comments are really out of order. Women and men can be violated in similar ways as the author clearly demonstrates.

The author is not inviting men be violated in the same way or arguing that human rights abuses against men is not equally abhorrent, just that women's experiences are different depending on the cultural context.

Sheesh...you really have to wonder about the mentality of some posters. Does your hatred really run that deep? It is not whining to campaign for better conditions for women in those countries where women have little influence, where human rights are constantly abused and where many in those countries think it is perfectly reasonable.