Supreme Emergencies and the protection of non-combatants in war

Is it ever justifiable to target non-combatants deliberately? This article assesses Michael Walzer's claim that the deliberate targeting of non-combatants may be justifiable during 'supreme emergencies', a view that has received some support but that has elicited little debate. It argues that the supreme emergencies exception to the prohibition on targeting non-combatants is problematic for at least four reasons. First, its utilitarianism contradicts Walzer's wider ethics of war based on a conception of human rights. Second, the exception may undermine the principle of non-combatant immunity. Third, it is based on a historical fallacy. Finally, it is predicated on a strategic fallacy-the idea that killing noncombatants can win wars. The case for rejecting the exception, however, has been opposed by those who persuasively argue that it is wrong to tie leaders' hands when they confront supreme emergencies. The final part of the article addresses this question and suggests that the principle of proportionality may give political leaders room for manoeuvre in supreme emergencies without permitting them deliberately to target non-combatants.

Gendered dichotomies and segregation patterns in computing jobs in Australia

Sex segregation in employment is a phenomenon that can be observed and analysed at different levels, ranging from comparisons between broad classifications by industry or occupation through to finely defined jobs within such classifications. From an aggregate perspective, the contribution of information technology (IT) employment to sex segregation is clear--it remains a highly male-dominated field apparently imbued with the ongoing masculinity of science and technology. While this situation is clearly contrary to hopes of a new industry freed from traditional distinctions between 'men's' and 'women's' work, it comes as little surprise to most feminist and labour studies analysts. An extensive literature documents the persistently masculine culture of IT employment and education (see, among many, Margolis and Fisher 2002; Wajcman 1991; Webster 1996; Wright 1996, 1997), and the idea that new occupations might escape sexism by sidestepping 'old traditions' has been effectively critiqued by writers such as Adam, who notes the fallacy of assuming a spontaneous emergence of equality in new settings (2005: 140).