The Forum > Article Comments > Life is extra risky for women in immigration detention > Comments
Life is extra risky for women in immigration detention : Comments
By Eva Cox and Terry Priest, published 17/8/2005Eva Cox and Terry Priest argue the welfare of the diminishing population of women in immigration facilities is a problem.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
- 3
-
- All
Posted by HarryC, Thursday, 18 August 2005 1:28:58 PM
| |
None of these people would be in detention centres if they hadn't entered the country illegally, overstayed their visas etc. etc. It's their fault, not ours. Let's concern ourselves with our own people; not with those who shouldn't be here in the first place, no matter what their supporters say. Getting them out the country is all that matters.
Posted by Leigh, Thursday, 18 August 2005 1:31:09 PM
| |
Anomie,
I don’t believe men have a monopoly on mental illness. From the US Surgeon General’s report on mental health:- “Panic disorder is about twice as common among women as men” “Agoraphobia occurs about two times more commonly among women than men” “Generalized anxiety disorder occurs more often in women, with a sex ratio of about 2 women to 1 man” “In the general population, the 1-year prevalence [of post-traumatic stress disorder] is about 3.6 percent, with women having almost twice the prevalence of men” http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/mentalhealth/toc.html Most of these conditions are not organic, with women generally being more fearful or anxious than men. There are people who have learnt to use women’s natural fears and anxieties to manipulate women and other people, and ready evidence of this can be found in women’s media, which uses every trick to play on women’s fears to get them to buy more products. Many feminists will also carry out similar forms of emotional manipulation and playing on fears, and will often suggest that women are being abused or harmed because of male presence, or suggest that males will abuse or harm women. This article does just that. EG:- “The figures show women becoming an even smaller proportion of detainees and this will require careful management to ensure that they are not put at further risks.” “We were concerned that women, who were in the minority, in a locked facility may be facing particular difficulties.” How much these women are at risk is not fully defined, but suggested only, which is quite typical in feminist literature. But when someone avoids the issue of males being abused or denied human rights, or suggests that women should be removed from prisons or detention centres and the men left behind, then I would have to suspect that they are being highly gender biased. While being pro-female, they are not necessarily pro-male also. I can imagine it now :- “Aussie not smart. Just tell Aussie you are woman, have children, are sex worker, and been abused. No need prove anything. Aussie let you go” Posted by Timkins, Thursday, 18 August 2005 4:00:20 PM
| |
Plerdsus delights with his Andrew Boltisms; substitute Piers Ackermanerisms if your from NSW. This time "the left" seamlesly becomes the "bleeding Hearts".
The fact that the policy of mandatory detention was introduced by the labor party and had (now diminshing) wide spread support DOES NOT make it good policy - it is popular policy; and it is a brutal, damaging and poorly implemented policy. It would be far less costly to staff DIMIA so it can process the claims quickly; although they have cornered the market on the brain dead already; so where they get new recruits from is any bodies guess. Incarceration in our semi arid gulags costs squillions. And most of them turn out to genuine refugess any way. AND Puhleeeease enough with the refugess as a source of terror; they come in the front door in suits replete with explosives and credit cards letters of introduction and tickets to the Lion King. The image of Osama sending a carrier pigeon to poor Mohamed in the rubble of Kabul telling him to wrap all his gear in a blanket up root his family travel over land to Pakistan, through India, make his way to Indonesia, pony up a few thousand dollars, float south in a leaky boat, maybe make it to the Australian coast and spend several years in detention, get freed half mad, set up a business importing nuts and dates from the middle east somewhere in Brunswick and then wait patiently for the call to arms - is a joke. And as for keeping people out - we have little right to do so; and yes I hear the sovereign state stuff but I dont really care. Indonesias population density is 107/sq kilometre India 324, England, 243 and the Netherlands 456 - us 2.5 to 4 depending on your source - if we think we can keep all this space to ourselves generation after generation - to paraphrase the father in that great Australian film The Castle " you've got to be dreamin'". We are a very temporary feature on this landscape. Get used to it. Posted by sneekeepete, Thursday, 18 August 2005 5:45:12 PM
| |
Eva Cox has achieved a good living and high profile career from riding on the back of her pet victims of society, women. It never ceases to amaze how these champions of the underdog can find victimization under every rock and behind every door. After all their careers depend on it.
Noticed how few illegal immigrants have arrived in boats since Howard got tough?. Suddenly there's somewhere else to go. Clearly, its Eva and Terry who are biased or lack awareness because they can't or dont want to see past the "All women are victims" show. The problem with this approach is that it is very DISABLING for people to see themselves a victims as the ability to take personal responsibility for their lives is undermined. As people have already said, If you land in another country illegally then you are put into detention until your bona fides have been checked and its a bloody good idea. BTW If you are mentally ill, only speak German, become aggressive and tell people nothing its not John Howard's fault you land in some form of institutional care. This case is one of the most overrated victim stories of our time. And guess what? I can just see someone and their sister putting their had out for some "money" for the whole deal can't you? And that's not capitalism? Posted by Atman, Thursday, 18 August 2005 11:19:07 PM
| |
I would agree there, Atman
The system being proposed seems to be as follows:- I am a woman = I am a victim = Let me go free = Keep males locked up. So the best way for someone to be set free from a detention centre or prison, is to simply say that they are female. Posted by Timkins, Friday, 19 August 2005 8:32:59 AM
|
Some catch you got there, what's the secret?
;-)