Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: cloudmountain
Can you imagine the life she's led since being “found” again in 2002? The last thing a woman in that culture would want is to be profiled that publicly. Remember, women have no rights and are open to rape and worse if they have no one to protect them. She's likely an embarrassment to her family, and subject to mistreatment as a result of our crude, ignorant gawking because of a old magazine photo. She was probably trying to find some place of relative safety. If National Geographic has any principle they need to come to her defense. I'm amazed at the shallow, ignorant posts on this thread.
25 posted on 10/26/2016 1:26:35 PM PDT by binreadin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: binreadin

You’re responding to a poster who thinks the Tibetans are better off under ChiCom domination, that a Kurdish woman fighting for her people is a moron and that violations of the 4th Amendment here are wonderful regulations we should be thankful for. Shallow and ignorant don’t begin to cover it.


29 posted on 10/26/2016 2:46:56 PM PDT by TigersEye (~Questionable Hillary thinks Putin made me post this!~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: binreadin
Can you imagine the life she's led since being “found” again in 2002? The last thing a woman in that culture would want is to be profiled that publicly. Remember, women have no rights and are open to rape and worse if they have no one to protect them. She's likely an embarrassment to her family, and subject to mistreatment as a result of our crude, ignorant gawking because of a old magazine photo. She was probably trying to find some place of relative safety. If National Geographic has any principle they need to come to her defense. I'm amazed at the shallow, ignorant posts on this thread.

Women have "rights" if they are rich, smart, nice and beautiful. That is THAT part of the world. Poor, stupid, mean, ugly women are too-away.
National Geographic took her photo BECAUSE she was a young, green-eyed beauty. Do you REALLY think they would have photographed "poor, stupid, mean and ugly"? Chances are that they would NOT.

Also a woman's status is what her family's status is. Women bear the burden of the honor of the family. If SHE is "tarnished" then the entire honor of the family is tarnished. Such is their life.
I think it STINKS but who am I to force them to change?
Women's status in ALL of Asia and Africa stinks. It's only in Christian countries where women have any status earned (Wrong word but I can't think of a substitute.) by Mary.

Truth be known the status of women took a huge leap with the motherhood of MARY. As the mother of God she lifted up ALL women.
Remember, when the Chinese discovered amniocentesis so many Chinese female fetuses were destroyed that the poorer men had no wives. The Chinese call those men the "Bare Branches."

33 posted on 10/26/2016 7:18:50 PM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson