Did anybody watch HBO’s Baghdad ER Sunday night?

[johnnyp]

Did anybody watch Baghdad ER Sunday?  The show was about the US Army hospital in Baghdad, Iraq.

It was sad to see all of those wounded men, and the show was pretty graphic with footage of wounds and amputations.

There were two things that I took away from that show:

1) The bravery and dedication of our men in uniform.  These men were disciplined and strong as they lie on a hospital gurney with holes in their bodies.  There was very little crying or moaning.

2) All but one of the wounded soldiers were men.  The one woman had a minor wound and had a small sliver of metal removed from her scalp.  

The men on the other hand had holes in their bodies and shattered limbs.  Several times the camera showed a medical technician throwing mangled arms or legs into a bio hazard bag for disposal.

Footage of the medical technicians zipping up a body bag and wheeling a man's dead body to the morgue was not uncommon.

My questions are:
-Why are there no protests for sexual equality?  Where is the national outrage?
-Why are so many men being killed or suffering from broken bodies?
-Is this not the 21st century and the age of equality?
-Are men disposable?  It the value of a man's life that much less than a woman's?

link to HBO
http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/baghdader/

[johnnyp]

btt

[johnnyp]

I guess no one cares that men and their body parts are being put in bags and taken out with the trash.

[bill001]

I guess no one cares that men and their body parts are being put in bags and taken out with the trash.

I care.

My questions are:
-Why are there no protests for sexual equality? Where is the national outrage?
-Why are so many men being killed or suffering from broken bodies?
-Is this not the 21st century and the age of equality?
-Are men disposable? It the value of a man's life that much less than a woman's?

Answers:
Women don't want that Kind of equality, they want only the good stuff.
And yes people in general see men as disposable.  If we cared about men as much as we care about women then we would have alot less wars.

[jaketk]

Did anybody watch Baghdad ER Sunday? The show was about the US Army hospital in Baghdad, Iraq.

I wanted to watch it, but I was watching my godson. Was it as difficult to watch as some critics have said?

My questions are:
-Why are there no protests for sexual equality? Where is the national outrage?
-Why are so many men being killed or suffering from broken bodies?
-Is this not the 21st century and the age of equality?
-Are men disposable? It the value of a man's life that much less than a woman's?

The administration has gone out of its way to prevent anyone from knowing just how bad things are for our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. But remember, men have always been viewed as expendable, and no social reformations have ever bothered trying to challenge that. Even in our so-called enlighted society, we still think it's perfectly fine to risk young men's lives and expect them to be grateful when we refuse to house them, pay them or even acknowledge their sacrafices.

[gwallan]

I'd still like to know how many Iraqi soldiers have died. Does anyone care? Most, apparently over 90%, were conscripts. Those men were nothing more than targets herded in to bunkers at the point of a gun. We haven't even given them numbers let alone names.

[johnnyp]

I wanted to watch it, but I was watching my godson. Was it as difficult to watch as some critics have said?

The producers did not focus on the gore, but it is impossible to avoid all of the blood and guts in a combat ER .  The show was not as bad as it could have been.  

Did it bother me?  Yes, at times it did bother me.  One should never get comfortable with the sight if a man's leg being tossed in a trash can.

What bothered me most was the lack of diversity in the people receiving serious wounds or getting zipped up in a body bag.


The producers did state at the end of the show that 17,000+ military personnel have been wounded in Iraq, however, I was very disappointed that the HBO producers did not call out the fact that 98% of the people suffering from gaping wholes in their body, or missing limbs were men.  I though we lived in an enlightened society that values diversity.

[jaketk]

I'd still like to know how many Iraqi soldiers have died. Does anyone care? Most, apparently over 90%, were conscripts. Those men were nothing more than targets herded in to bunkers at the point of a gun. We haven't even given them numbers let alone names.

That's Bush's choice. His administration has refused to release that information.

[johnnyp]

I'd still like to know how many Iraqi soldiers have died. Does anyone care? Most, apparently over 90%, were conscripts. Those men were nothing more than targets herded in to bunkers at the point of a gun. We haven't even given them numbers let alone names.

That's Bush's choice. His administration has refused to release that information.

Bush is an intersting topic... but I think the fact that nearly all of the casualties being men is the important issue.  Nearly all of the casualties are men reguardless of who is president.  Hell, you do not even need a war... the vast majority of workplace fatalities are men.

When are we going to have a diversity movement for the bad stuff!

[Sir Percy]

If we cared about men as much as we care about women then we would have alot less wars.

One. It is 'fewer' not less.

Two. If this is the sort of 'logic' (very feminist in its construction) we are going to use, (only the 'if' and the 'then' fit proper logic) why not go the whole hog? From the strange premis we could draw the conclusion that if we cared about men as much as we do about women we would have capitulated and been over-run with Germans and Japanese. (Then the Russians. Chinese. The West Papua New Guineans, anyone and his dog) . Well that's OK then. Bring on the blond frauleins and the geishas. Just so long as we 'care'.

The moment we start to put such 'caring' qualifications on a matter as pressing as war, protecting our civilisation, combatting evil, we are in deep doodoo. A better arguement would be for the establishment of all-female divisions and battalions. We can 'care' equally and still do what is needed. But the wars would still have to be fought. As it is now, it is only the men who seem to care enough.

[neonsamurai]

I'd still like to know how many Iraqi soldiers have died. Does anyone care? Most, apparently over 90%, were conscripts. Those men were nothing more than targets herded in to bunkers at the point of a gun. We haven't even given them numbers let alone names.

Well said gwallan.

The moment we start to put such 'caring' qualifications on a matter as pressing as war, protecting our civilisation, combatting evil, we are in deep doodoo. A better arguement would be for the establishment of all-female divisions and battalions. We can 'care' equally and still do what is needed. But the wars would still have to be fought. As it is now, it is only the men who seem to care enough.

Agreed. However, if the president of a country was going to war and sending thousands of women to their death in the process there would be a very negative backlash. It's like the ultimate chivallry of these politicians to send men to war to protect women, not to put women in the firing line. Just look at what happened with Jessica Lynch.

Warren Farrell said in his new book, that women should take on dangerous jobs and get paid extra for danger money, because no company would dare say that they aren't as capable as men at the work, but those same companies will protect them far more than they would a man. It would be a PR disaster for a company to send a woman to do a dangerous job and then get killed. If it's a man, well, that's what we're for.

[Sir Percy]

Warren Farrell said in his new book, that women should take on dangerous jobs and get paid extra for danger money, because no company would dare say that they aren't as capable as men at the work, but those same companies will protect them far more than they would a man.

I think there is a BIG maybe over that issue. It is men mostly who organise such dangerous jobs and these men and the men that do them try as much as possible to limit the danger. They generally succeed. I see no reason to have to increase safety checks more than is reasonable or possible without making the task impossible to do at all. If its good enough for men its good enough for women. If it isn't good enough for men then such better safety measures should be forthcoming. If men haven't organised to provide such measures then I would hold them responsible for their own folly.

Some jobs carry more risk than others and demand specialist skills. Some environments are more dangerous than others. That's what training is for and equipment is for. As for more money - danger money - I see no reason to pay more money to women than to men. Do women astronauts get higher pay than male ones??? Pretty bloody dangerous job having tons of explosive strapped to your arse and being rocketed up to where there isn't any air.

Fighting is a necessary and dangerous job. Equality of the sexes demands that woman do their share.

If a nation's President or Prime Minister thinks there would be a backlash just because its women sent to do the fighting, then get rid of the outdated, sexist, wimp. It is time we had some real leaders.

There will be more 1939s. The American experience of war on their own soil is far removed in time and very limited. War isn't just about going overseas and fighting on someone elses patch. Preferable, admittedly, but sometimes it comes to your patch.

If women want equality - and I for one say why not - then they should carry the responsibility for that equality and do as the men have to. Men's legs and lives are worth just as much as women's.

MRAs MUST value themselves properly. We must DEMAND our value be recognised. If it's not, then REFUSE to join the fighting forces.

[johnnyp]

In the spirit of affirmative action, we should draft women into military service and dangerous jobs until the death rates are equalized.  We don't want anyone to be oppressed do we?

[gwallan]

I'd still like to know how many Iraqi soldiers have died. Does anyone care? Most, apparently over 90%, were conscripts. Those men were nothing more than targets herded in to bunkers at the point of a gun. We haven't even given them numbers let alone names.

That's Bush's choice. His administration has refused to release that information.

So where's the UN. Too busy counting the "rape" victims and widows on Hillary's behalf. Too busy laying the blame for global warming on men - women don't breath or fart I guess. Too busy donating money to Saddam's corrupt henchmen. Too busy diverting Amnesty donations into abortion clinics.
Remember that in a war zone a fourteen year old boy or an old geezer in a wheelchair are "combatants".
Born with dick = cannon fodder = don't count = disposable

[jaketk]

Well, that's true. But remember, Bush told the UN to go f*** itself just before we went into Iraq. I doubt they've forgot that.