Good Grief! Is this crap really what we have been reduced to on this forum? Here's what we "know" about the situation: 1. Female (along with several other male, several other female, and, based on nothing more than statistical probabilities, a few gay) reporter heads off to Egypt to cover a popular uprising. 2. Said reporter goes out into a crowded protest and gets attacked. 3. Attack involved "sexual assault". We don't know if the assault was rape. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. Either way that isn't the important thing as an assault is unpleasant enough regardless of the specifics. We don't know which faction did the assaulting. Things being what they are, assaults are not the sole domain of any particular faction. The reporter KNEW that she was in a dangerous situation as other reporters had been assaulted (although, apparently, none of the previous assaults had been sexual in nature). It's not unreasonable to infer that at least some of the motivation for the assault was based on gender. We would not be wrong in doing this as there are ample examples of gender bias in the culture under consideration. That's really about as far as we can go with the information that we have. It's a bummer that Logan got assaulted. It's also a bummer that Greg Palkot and Anderson Cooper got assaulted. The assaults prove nothing more than that not everyone in the "protests" was looking strictly for political improvements. Somehow or other I'm not the least bit surprised by that.