Iran said Tuesday the 15 British sailors and marines it detained last week are healthy, have been treated in a humane manner and that the only female sailor among them had been given privacy.
2007-03-27 01:17:16 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Whose obsessing? I merely asked the question. The point was made that the female was given privacy, implying that the males were not. Would it have been wrong of the Iranians not to afford the female privacy? Is it wrong that they are not affording the males privacy?
2007-03-27 01:22:58 · update #1
I think that females do require more privacy than males - look at any typical public bathroom or shower. The ladies all have stalls, the guys use urinals with no privacy. In the lady's gym, again, there are private shower stalls. Guys (from what I've heard) use a kid of communal shower room that just has a bunch of showerheads - again no privacy.
2007-03-27 01:27:01 · answer #1 · answered by baby_savvy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ladies you need to ask yourselves this: Do guys go around looking at other guys di*ks? Not unless they are gay.
I think they were implying she was given privacy away from the guys. Suppose there had been only 1 male and the rest were women. Then what? Would the women marines insist on the guy showering with them or would they want him to have his "privacy"? C'mon. Obviously you have never watched Big Brother on TV.
If you were to go to many Asian countries (like I was in Thailand not long ago) the women clean the toilets while the guys are in there taking a pee and no-one gives a rat's bum about it. Seen one di*k you have seen 'em all.
Sure women have "stalls" in public toilets and so do guys if the wish to sit and read the paper. Also ladies - most guys I know stand up to pee, you should try it sometime while you lift your dress or drop your shorts/slacks around your ankles.
In Japan they have communal dual sex toilets. No Ladies and Men separate.
2007-03-27 01:40:49 · answer #2 · answered by Traveller 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't necessarily think they are drawing those specific gender lines. If the taking of prisoners of war was not so barbaric then maybe you could argue that they all deserved their privacy. However, taking into account the brutality of war, the fact that they are splitting the men from the woman is a sign of a little decency. As much as I'm sure that the woman would rather be with her fellow soldiers for a little comfort, I'm sure she's grateful for having her own bathroom.
2007-03-27 01:24:43 · answer #3 · answered by danili 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think the issue of female privacy is an important one in their culture, so they are making a point of assuring us that our soldier is being afforded the same courtesies their own women would be.
2007-03-27 01:27:11 · answer #4 · answered by oj 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Different county, different religion, different customs. Privacy is the least of their problems at this point.
2007-03-27 01:20:12 · answer #5 · answered by wizjp 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They try to do something nice & people harp on it. If they didn't give the privacy people would harp on it. These people don't give their own women rights.
2007-03-27 01:29:44 · answer #6 · answered by ChaliQ 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋