Terrorist mass-murder in Pakistan leaves out critical detail

Submitted by Matt on Wed, 2014-12-17 04:16

Story here. As always, when boys/men die on a large scale, they're ID'd by their occupation or other status title/position. If these had been female students, there'd be immediate demands for invasion to stop the evil fiends (which may well cause more probs. than fixing) if not one in fact. Excerpt:

'By the time the hours-long siege at Army Public School and Degree College ended early Tuesday evening, at least 145 people -- 132 children, 10 school staff members and three soldiers -- were dead, military spokesman Gen. Asim Bajwa said. More than 100 were injured, many with gunshot wounds, according to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province Information Minister Mushtaq Ghani.

The death toll does not include the terrorists who attacked the school, bursting into an auditorium where a large number of students were taking an exam and gunning down many of them within minutes, Bajwa said.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

I could not find where it said that most, or all, of the victims in this attack were male. Most of the people in the video appeared to be male, although it was hard to tell as some were covered up. This is all I could find in the written article pertaining to gender of the victims:

"On a typical day, the Army Public School and Degree College is home to about 1,100 students and staff, most of them sons and daughters of army personnel from around Peshawar, though others attend as well"

All that being said, "YES," the misandrist mainstream media rarely, if ever, fails to point out when women are victims to any degree.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by MR on Wed, 2014-12-17 05:47

Matt,

When this story first appeared yesterday, the CNN page specifically stated that the first 45 bodies brought to the hospital were ALL male.

Now that line has been deleted.

I know what I read. I know I read that.

So this is a curious issue.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by ThomasI on Wed, 2014-12-17 11:37

The Pakistani Army runs more than 100 schools across the country. Most are mixed sex but separate the classrooms by sex. In the case of this particular school (in Peshewar), it was a boys' school. See:

http://www.facebook.com/ArmyPublicSchoolCollegeBoysPeshawar

The principal was female (who with the courage of a CMH earner went back into the school after being rescued from it to see if she could help the boys still inside, only to become another victim of the murdering a$$holes) as undoubtedly were others. At least in her case, she was also killed. But all the children would be boys since it was a boys' school (unless for some reason, there were girls present that day). But even if that were the case, the point is that the MSM is ignoring, and I think quite deliberately, the "gendered" nature (as feminists may say) of the attack. The level of outrage is great, but not nearly as great had the victims been girls at a girls' school. The UN by now would be demanding funding for yet more special programs exclusively for females, perhaps demanding Pakistan take stronger measures vs. associated groups or people, etc. Thus far, nary a peep. Obama would already have been at the podium 50 times by now denouncing the attack and committing further to helping Pakistan in any way possible w/ their dom. terrorism problem, etc. Instead? Crickets chirping. Nothing from our do-nothing president (unless it's a speech to raise money or pander to feminists) and the money-sucking UN (which used to be good for something like what it was created to do).

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Wed, 2014-12-17 15:37

In the confusion, CNN may well have thought that all the victims in the hosp. were boys. That'd be a natural presumption. But later, they may have gotten word that female school staffers were also among the victims being treated. Who can say for sure.

But I agree w/ the general observation that if all victims, or even most, of anything bad that happens are female will be reported as such by the MSM. If they're all or almost all male, their maleness gets ignored and they're referred to by their occupation or status in society. Failing that, they're generically referred to as "people".

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Wed, 2014-12-17 15:48