Having gone back to the dark ages for the premises for my post, I was not happy to hear today, on Woman's Hour, BBC R4, an African woman, in a discussion on agriculture, say that one of the problems in her part of the world, is that agencies trying to improve farming cannot deal with the people who work the land (without exception women) as the owners because "women cannot own land. They are seen as the property of the men, husbands or fathers, and so cannot own anything themselves."

If you see a person as property, you are seeing them as a thing, not a fellow person. That is what seems to be behind rape, seeing women as things. Seeing the differences below the neck as more important tjan the likenesses above it. Seeing the thoughts, mental gifts, skills and so on of women as of secondary importance to the uterus, or, in the case of rape, the vagina or other abused orifice. Or even non-existent. (The committers of rape clearly do not take the creation of life as seriously as they should, but I notice nothing has been said of that.)

Someone here has done little to convince me that he recognises women as beings of equal status to men. Mind you, he has gone some way to persuading me that I may be wrong in assuming commonality between male and female intelligence. Thank goodness so many others are keeping me unpersuaded.

Penny