Logan returned to Egypt after being tortured there only a week earlier because she is brave and wanted to report. While what happened to her is truly tragic, she traveled there with that risk because her job is necessary. To say that female reporters shouldn't travel to war zones is unnecessary and unproductive. Women have a higher chance of getting sexually assaulted period, and that is a social problem that persists throughout cultures (in some more predominantly). And male reporters have a high risk of getting assaulted as well. That doesn't mean that we should, as a nation, cower from the sidelines, when there are courageous reporters who are willing to contribute in a way that most people are far too afraid to.
http://www.inpoortaste.tumblr.com

Is anyone actually questioning whether women should be allowed to cover war zones, or are we arguing with a purely hypothetical sexist here?

If the risk of sexual assault is sufficient justification for keeping a reporter out of war zones, then so is the risk of being killed, which applies equally to both male and female reporter.

I have to admit that I've a crush on Sabrina Tavernise ever since she appeared on the Charlie Rose show: http://www.charlierose.com/view/intervie…

Sometimes, in my (largely justified) bitching and sniping about the mainstream media, I forget that they aren't a faceless monolith. While beltway reporters may be largely spineless tools of the establishment, there are a lot of courageous people willing to risk themselves in pretty powerful ways.

I should send a donation to Reporters without Borders in honour of Lara Logan and the nameless others.