Adopting a Feminist Proposal for Women in the Military

A female Marine struggles to do her hair properly.

by J. Durden on December 22, 2010

One of my favorite conversations recently resurfaced here at The Spearhead, quickly rippling throughout the rest of the related blogosphere: the subject of women in the military. There’s been mumbles and whispers of it for a little while, ever since people started talking about the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell repeal and whether we should be worrying about homosexuals openly serving in our armed forces. (The sensible folks, such as the Spearhead’s very own Jack Donovan, realize this question is largely unimportant, since having women in the military is far more detrimental and stands little chance of ever changing.) Trying to rationally suggest that we re-examine that status of women in the military is obviously met with all of the logical fallacies one has come to expect from the feminist camp – my favorite such being a red herring of the implication that critics of women in the military just want the ladies to be little more than prostitutes.

This got me thinking. What if women in the military were just prostitutes? Perhaps our feminist friends have actually stumbled upon a great suggestion. I used to joke that the Marine Corps should institute a “Barracks Whore” MOS (military occupational specialty, or job, basically), but laughs aside, maybe there is something to the idea. Allow me to elaborate.

We already know, thanks to government commissioned studies, that the average woman has 50% of the upper body strength and 65- 70% of the aerobic capacity compared to her average male counterpart. Studies regarding IQ have shown that men average about 3-5 points higher than women, and perhaps of more interest, that IQ tests tend to be rigged so that women and men appear to score equally. (What’s really going on behind the scenes is that women are only being compared against other women when scores are calculated, much like what happens with physical fitness test scores in the Marine Corps; women are competing only against other women in a test with easier standards, yet their “300 points” on the PFT counts just as much as a man’s “300 points” even if a man’s is much harder to earn.) This means the standby argument that women should serve because they can do the non-combat stuff just as well as the boys – be it turning wrenches, performing surgery, pushing paper or maintaining electronics – might not hold water. Nevermind the disastrous consequences that sexual competition introduces amongst the ranks. (Relevant quote from the previous link: “No one trusts a sexual rival, and nothing destabilizes a society like large numbers of single men. To avoid this scenario, our ancestors had to limit male polygamy and female hypergamy.”)

Anecdotally, I can tell you that most women do not join the service with the noblest of intentions. (Perhaps it is fair to say that most people don’t join with the noblest of intentions – but I suppose that’s to be expected what with the recession and the promise of a steady paycheck and other bonuses for signing up. Women in particular admitted some telling things to me, though.) I’d hate to be accused of exaggerating, so let’s say that half of all (read: literally all of them) the single female airmen I talked to admitted to me that they joined so that they could “travel the world” and “have sex with hot guys.” Pregnancy rates amongst the single female Marines at my base in Okinawa got so bad that the base Sergeant Major held regular PME’s (think, “classes”) with all the ladies to explain the dangers of pregnancy. It was also effecting operational readiness, since pregnant women can’t deploy (and as military readers probably already know and commenter DevilDog pointed out for those that didn’t, pregnancy to ditch out on deployment is a fairly common phenomenon). I don’t have as much direct experience with the other service branches but I figure my findings can probably be extrapolated. Perhaps zealous commenters can help fill in the gaps – I’ve heard pregnancy amongst female sailors is also a huge problem when it comes to staffing ships.

And before somebody gets all huffy and infuriated and starts shouting about the women that have served “in combat,” I’d remind you how precious few there are that have actually done so. When deployed to a war zone, women are generally kept safe on base, doing the same shit they would be doing in garrison (except collecting all the extra hazard pay associated with a deployment). Moreover, the women I know who have been to combat openly admit women shouldn’t be there (probably related to the whole physical fitness disparity mentioned above) or perform super effectively like Jessica Lynch. Maybe I’m beating a dead horse here, but I just wanted to establish that when it comes to the military, men can do everything women can do (except better). As Female Masculinist once remarked:

In short, the idea behind women in the military, police and workplace is that they benefit from being there. They think it’s fun. It flatters their egos, deservedly or not. The idea behind men in the military, police and workplace is that we all depend upon their being there and doing their jobs. All of society benefits from their work. And yet here we are, giving the dispensable privileges for the purpose of feeding their egos at the expense of the people we need who get by solely on their own merit.

Which brings us back to the suggestion that we just make women in the military prostitutes. I know what you’re thinking – it sounds extreme. But it wouldn’t actually be that drastic of a change. Most women in the military are already regarded – be it silently, or oustpokenly like DevilDog’s posts – as whores. Apparently quite a few of them could care less about this (such as the patriotic young lasses who expressed their true reasons for enlisting to me). So let’s take a look at some of the benefits of this proposal.

For the women, they wouldn’t have to worry about silly things like work or training getting in the way of their sex-filled, government-sponsored sojourns. In fact, it would stand to reason that they would be exempt from a lot of the silly hardships of military life. I don’t see why they’d really need to maintain a uniform anymore, for instance – since their job wouldn’t exactly necessitate one. They probably wouldn’t have to stand “duty” or “watch” anymore. Nor would they have to worry about the physical hardships and indignities of basic and follow-on training. Since this is government sponsored prostitution we are talking about, the ladies can expect a regular paycheck and the full compliment of government benefits – health care, dental care, 30 days paid vacation (you know, aside from all the other days of virtual paid vacation), the works. Safety would of course be paramount, including not just protection from physical harm but also safeguards against unwise sexual practices that could result in STDs, either for the ladies or the men.

There’s a host of benefits for the men and more generally for combat effectiveness and unit readiness. Single male service members would feel less pressure to get married in order to gain access to (the perceived benefit of) regular sex. Having regular access to safe sex would probably alleviate the pressure these guys feel to try and maintain untenable relationships, either with women around their base or the women “back home.” These relationships become especially strained during a deployment (or at a duty station far away – I can’t tell you how many nights I was kept up because my roommate was arguing with his girlfriend at two in the morning in Okinawa) and contribute to loss of focus, depression, decreased morale and a host of other difficult to quantify but certainly qualitative problems.

There has been a lot of attention paid to the sky rocketing suicide rate amongst service members – by which I mean especially male service members – and one has to wonder how much relationship issues play a part in this. The simple “reality on the ground” is that a lot of young men in the military (especially young enlisted guys) get married very early in their careers because of the bigger paycheck, the ability to live off base (thus avoiding some “duty” assignments and dodging the misery that is “field day” or whatever other term the other branches use to describe the once-a-week all-day-long haze fest of barracks room cleaning) and the aforementioned regular sexual relations (or so they think – most haven’t heard and refuse to believe that marriage is a leading cause of celibacy). Then they go on a deployment, hear on the grapevine that their lovely wife is getting gangbanged regularly by six or seven (different) guys every night back on base while simultaneously draining all of his accounts, and nobody wonders whether this is a contributing factor to our suicide rate. Hell, I I got more depressed just hearing about how some of the guys’ wives were taking a shit all over their hubbies.

Government sponsored hookin’ would make the barracks a much more attractive option than a nagging bride (there are no wives – hat tip W. F. Price) and future alimony (not to mention potentially child support) payment. Sew them oats young man, and consider a family after your service obligation. (Or once you’re more established and comfortable in your career.)

And before someone gets all NAWALT up in here, I understand that, yes, not all women in the military are “like that.” I haven’t personally met any, but I grant the supposed existence of the hard-charging female who is every bit a man’s equal. I have met a few good wives, as well. But the statistically tiny exceptions to the overwhelmingly obvious trends being discussed here do little to deflate the argument. And civilian brothers, don’t think I’ve forgotten you. If military hookin’ becomes a smashing success, it’ll only be a matter of time before the government decides legalizing and regulating prostitution for the rest of you wouldn’t be such a bad idea either. Can’t tell you how many gals we met in Biloxi who asked us whether they should go to college or become strippers – the market is there, Obama! Ya just gotta tap it (but before you do it, make sure you wrap it).


J. Durden moonlights as super-hero alter ego Dr. Deezee, a D-List internet celebrity of ill-repute working his way up the e-fame ladder by being a massive troll and associating himself with people who are much more talented than he is. He runs the Internet Hate Machine in his spare time and recently decided his life’s ambition would be to spread his personal philosophy of Hatronomics as far and wide as possible. He’s probably just trying to get a rise out of you, but you never can be too sure with his type.

{ 105 comments… read them below or add one }

E. Steven Berkimer December 22, 2010 at 09:03

J,

Great work. When I was stationed in Okinawa in the early 90′s, , at the Naval Security Group Site (Hanza), they came looking for people to head to Kuwait to man a station during the first Gulf War. They gave about 2 months notice that this was going to happen, and that some of us were going to have to go. The rash of pregnancies within the next month, was nothing short of astounding. Of course, that meant that it was the men that had to go, and the women got to sit on thier asses in comfort.

It was at that point, that I started to lose all respect for women in the military (I was in my early 20′s at that point).

If women are so capable, I suggest a combat unit that is nothing but women, and put them on the front line. Let them prove they are just as capable.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 97 Thumb down 1
Nextlevel December 22, 2010 at 09:10

If this ever happened youd see a huge surge in enlisted troops, which is nice, but of course every feminist and religious lobbyist would come down hard on the idea.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 0
Neil December 22, 2010 at 09:19

A better idea is to put all female units into combat, let them have their equality. We need to even out the casualties to 50-50 instead of them being over 98% male.

As for prostitution, your average western woman is unfit even to be a prostitute with her bitchy attitude. If you use a whore go to a Latina or a Eastern European one.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 55 Thumb down 1
Tyrone December 22, 2010 at 09:21

Since majority of western women have proven that the only usefulness they have is being fucked, I have no problem with this idea. What “liberated” women doesn’t want to get paid to ride the carousel?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 53 Thumb down 2
alpha December 22, 2010 at 09:38

There’s a host of benefits for the men and more generally for combat effectiveness and unit readiness. Single male service members would feel less pressure to get married in order to gain access to (the perceived benefit of) regular sex. Having regular access to safe sex would probably alleviate the pressure these guys feel to try and maintain untenable relationships, either with women around their base or the women “back home.”

And civilian brothers, don’t think I’ve forgotten you. If military hookin’ becomes a smashing success, it’ll only be a matter of time before the government decides legalizing and regulating prostitution for the rest of you wouldn’t be such a bad idea either.

Is it okay that I’m salivating?
Oh, maybe we can call them some PC term like “entertainers” or “morale boosters”?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 1
J. Durden December 22, 2010 at 09:48

If women are so capable, I suggest a combat unit that is nothing but women, and put them on the front line. Let them prove they are just as capable.

When I’m being serious, I also make this suggestion. Stand up an all female combat battalion – make the entire operation staffed and trained by females. Once the whole thing flops colossally, we can put the tired debate to bed.

(And maybe entertain the idea that they should all just be prostitutes.)

Herbal Essence December 22, 2010 at 09:52

Guys, we are aware that these will be American women? Not sure about this plan. Our fighting men have to bear too much hardship already.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 1
GH December 22, 2010 at 09:53

Just forcably enlist them like the men. Let them be in all female units (not jeopardizing any male lives). May all the feminists enlist and show their battle prowess.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 1
Keyster December 22, 2010 at 09:55

To even suggest this is completely impractical in the face of more pressing issues. This is exactly the kind of red herring proclamation that the feminazi corp uses to discredit the entire men’s rights community with “average” people. It’s idiotic and serves no purpose other than to offer up free ammo to the enemy.

What really needs to be discusssed is the push for uni-sex barracks and facilities. If openly gay people are sharing living quarters, I don’t see why men and women shouldn’t, other than to protect the woman’s dignity and virtue; which is of course paramount in time of war.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 21 Thumb down 19
AfOR December 22, 2010 at 09:56

Not knowing this particular bit of US history myself….

How did the “buffalo soldier” all negro platoons play out?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 4
Anonymous December 22, 2010 at 09:59

Interesting proposal. I wonder what score on the ASVAB would warrant this particular MOS……

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Rifles December 22, 2010 at 10:00

It will never happen until men collectively embrace sexual access to women as a right/ By the way, how much cognitive dissonance does one require after being told of his gangbanging wife caught in the act, to have the society that he’s risking his life for, treat him as the wrongdoer and garnish his current and future military paycheck in the name of women’s rights? How does such a man not explode from a DOES NOT COMPUTE malfunction?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 5
Kave December 22, 2010 at 10:01

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 39
J. Durden December 22, 2010 at 10:01

AfOR –

IIRC, they played out quite well, which is to say they fought with dignity and valor and helped prove to racists of the time that skin color had nothing to do with fighting ability. Of course, they had the advantage of being men…

Coastal December 22, 2010 at 10:04

I think the quote from Female Masculinist nails it. Under our PC reign of terror, the Forces recruit men to defend the country and recruit women to have a representative workforce. The men are there to do a difficult and dangerous job, the women because the feminazis have successfully mau-maued governments into accepting that women have a right to their ‘fair share’ of the benefits of life in uniform (but, as ever, all the responsibilities turn to be symptoms of unjustifiable patriarchal oppression).

It’s the difference between those who want to serve and those who want to be served.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 1
WOW December 22, 2010 at 10:18

I’m in Canada….can someone explain the energy devoted to this “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy…while ONLY MEN have to register for selective service.

Questions:
1. Is there a push to force women to register for selective service?
2. Is there a push to NOT force men to register?
3. What is the penalty for not registering?
4. Is it not against a man’s freedom to force him to register?
5. Why do men down there tolerate this…has it been challenged to the Supreme Court?
6. Should a man not have the freedom to not register, is that not protected?

Excuse my ignorance, I just can’t believe this exists in the USA!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 1
fondueguy December 22, 2010 at 10:38

IQ differences of 3 to five points, lol.

Even the races have bigger differences than that.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 12
fondueguy December 22, 2010 at 10:43

I’m in Canada….can someone explain the energy devoted to this “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy…while ONLY MEN have to register for selective service.

Questions:
1. Is there a push to force women to register for selective service?
2. Is there a push to NOT force men to register?
3. What is the penalty for not registering?
4. Is it not against a man’s freedom to force him to register?
5. Why do men down there tolerate this…has it been challenged to the Supreme Court?
6. Should a man not have the freedom to not register, is that not protected?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
J. Durden December 22, 2010 at 10:45

“IQ differences of 3 to five points, lol.

Even the races have bigger differences than that.”

With the tests rigged (so the real difference is much greater). The point is, MSM/common opinion holds that women are smarter than men generally; evidence suggests otherwise.

Bob December 22, 2010 at 10:46

@ WOW

1) No, not in the least.
2) There is, but no one takes it seriously since it’s mostly perceived as college-aged liberals trying to preemptively dodge the draft.
3) A massive fine and up to 5 years in prison. Plus, registering to vote includes registering for the draft, so you can’t legally vote if you skip out on it.
4) Yes and no. I’m for universal service, under the belief that everyone should serve to benefit. Given the current state of benefits, I admit that position is more about principle than practical issues. And I can certainly understand the argument that being forced to serve in any way is anti-freedom.
5) Same reason we tolerate everything. To my knowledge, it has never reached the supreme court. The draft has been around since the 1860′s and no one really thinks it’s ever going away.
6) Every man has the freedom to register. We just don’t have the freedom not to.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
fondueguy December 22, 2010 at 10:46

Accidentally hit post…

But good point WOW.

I wish these type of posts posts would at least recognize the burden male armies are on men and that there is a good fucking reason feminists as a whole aren’t doing shit to get women on the from lines or in the draft.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
fondueguy December 22, 2010 at 10:48

“With the tests rigged (so the real difference is much greater). The point is, MSM/common opinion holds that women are smarter than men generally; evidence suggests otherwise.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
DirkJohanson December 22, 2010 at 10:48

I like a hybrid of the prostitution idea and women in combat.

The good-looking ones will be on the prositution track, and the ugly ones on the combat track. Of course, many of the ugly ones will make themselves look hot in a quick.

The prostitution idea would undoubtedly cut down on rape of women in the military, and by our guys in the military. I don’t know how much of this really happens, and I know our military is far better about it than perhaps any military in the history of the world, but even if only a little occurs, it will be lessened.

To those of you who think this idea is so silly, DADT is going to making female barracks a lesbian-sex free-for-all, largely at the expense of guys getting some action. Are our men in military supposed to be virtually celibate while this is going on? I don’t think so.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 2
Rebel December 22, 2010 at 10:49

Why do men register for the army?

We are going to bury our nth soldier who died in Afghanistan. Useless deaths. (I lost count). Fortunately, all our dead are males.

Why do we fight there? Perhaps our gobvarmin was afraid the Afghan space armada would invade Manitoba…

Brave Cannuck Gobvarmin: they discovered that bows and arrows are weapons of mass destruction. (sarcasm well intended)
And they are a threat!
And so are the quatrillions of terrorists who live here, each with a complete nuclear arsenal. Teratons of explosives. Each.

There are so many of them that we barely have enough space to breathe.
The Afghan submarines are getting ready to fly over and drop neutron bombs over the Rocky mountains. (!!)

And we are falling into an abyss of stupidity. Led by our feminist leaders.

I quit worrying about it all some time ago. Resistance is futile. Utter stupidity will reign supreme. And I’m afraid of splitting a gut from the roaring laughter…

I just mourn the disappearance of intelligence. But on the other hand, this was to be expected from a feminist society.

But it’s become irrelevant now. I think we should stop caring.

Gents, an Atlas shrugged moment is in order.

And I’ll drink to that.

What the fuck!

Go your own way.

And live it up! Live for yourselves.

Nothing else matters.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 4
continent December 22, 2010 at 10:50

WOW,
Assuming you are asking the question seriously instead of humorously I try to answer.
No. 5. It has been decided by the Supreme Court about 20 years ago. Usually I only find a legal link but now there is a new link that explains the reasoning behind it.
http://www.infoplease.com/us/supreme-court/cases/ar36.html
It obviously circumvents the Constitution, but as the former Chief Justice reportedly said “The Constitution is what we say it is”
Registration imposes burden on men since you have to report change of address or get penalties.
https://www.sss.gov/RegVer/wfVerification.aspx

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Aharon December 22, 2010 at 10:51

Good piece. I attended the Army Airborne School many years ago. Due to the female quitting and failure rate being so high, the Army ordered men and women to be trained somewhat separately. The women received easier physical training, more easy passing qualifications per week, and more water breaks than the men. When a media crew interviewed the trainees the women said they go through the exact same training as men. Typical.

Separately, I just visited a blog and read what is perhaps the most disturbing thing yet on the gender war: the male suicide rate and especially the stories and stats for young men. Too much reading for too long on feminism and the discrimination against us men can be depressing. Nothing actually moved me to a few tears as reading about how the discrimination against us males is going so far as to create such a spike in suicides.

http://rebukingfeminism.blogspot.com/2009/03/male-suicide-rates-on-epidemic-climb.html

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 0
fondueguy December 22, 2010 at 10:52

Sob, I hate this phone.

@j we know women aren’t smarter and that the evidence points to men being smarter. The point is that thews difference in averages is not that big, the differences between the races are bigger whether you believe it genetic or cultural. The evidence does supported that.

So I wouldn’t use IQ as a basis for keeping the women out of service.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
J. Durden December 22, 2010 at 10:58

@ fondueguy

IQ isn’t “the basis” for keeping women out of the service. The idea is (with the military at least), anything a woman can do, a man can do better. Men are stronger, have more endurance, and are measurably more intelligent on average. We gain nothing by adding women to the mix, and as various other links demonstrate, adding women in is actually detrimental due to sexual competition and tension and so forth.

It is commonly thought that women are still “good enough” to do the less rough and tumble stuff since they are thought to be generally smarter etc, which is why I pointed out some of the interesting IQ research (which you don’t see a lot of). Really though, I’d sooner see those jobs be handled by civilian contractors (male or female, at that point it wouldn’t matter much) than have women in the service, if that what it takes.

Peter December 22, 2010 at 11:02

I’m in Canada….can someone explain the energy devoted to this “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy…while ONLY MEN have to register for selective service.

Questions:
1. Is there a push to force women to register for selective service?
2. Is there a push to NOT force men to register?

And you get to the heart of feminism in one neat little package. Feminism only demands equality when that improves conditions for women. I see no feminists pushing for this in the states. Yes, they pay lip service to the idea of women in combat, but they get away with it because the women in the military are volunteers. And they’re not pushing for it particularly hard anyway, which means it won’t happen, as the traditionalist types in the military won’t push for it either.

This is another case of feminists using white knights and traditionalists as proxies for their cause, their useful idiots, if you will. The feminists don’t want to put women into combat, because they know that women will desert the military in droves and this will prove the point of gender realists. But they can’t oppose it either, because that would expose them as the female supremacists and hypocrites they are. So what they do is allow the traditionalists and white knight betas to be the opposition for them, while simultaneously deriding those same tools. But not too loudly, lest their whining becomes a clarion call for change.

Think about it, when’s the last time you saw a major feminist website do a big push for women in combat? Never, that’s when. On the other hand, you had the feminists lose their shit over Jon Stewart’s “sexism”, and a coordinated push for him to hire more unfunny guilt-tripping feminists as “comedians”. He capitulated pretty quickly; the military would too.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 2
fondueguy December 22, 2010 at 11:16

“IQ isn’t “the basis” for keeping women out of the service. The idea is (with the military at least), anything a woman can do, a man can do better. Men are stronger, have more endurance, and are measurably more intelligent on average”

And the women of some races have higher IQs, sat’s scores, grades, etc. than the men of other races on average but I don’t see that being a factor to keep certain races out of the military. The gender differences in IQ are not significant enough to when there is no race based effort to elevate the average iq of military when race cab be a much bigger predictor of IQ. Then there’s always ranking within the military to appropriate individuals to where they belong or you could have an IQ entrance.

Your point was to refute those claiming women are smarter and that’s fine but I wouldn’t go beyond that saying women should stay out of the military in part because of their iqs.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 20
Andrew S. December 22, 2010 at 11:26

Do women really join the millitary so they can get “fucked by hot guys?” I’m not suprised that once they join they become the personal sluts for all the alpha millitary guys, but is this really a reason given?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0
WOW December 22, 2010 at 11:31

continent: I am totally serious. It wasn’t until recently I found out American males have to register at age 18. In Canada there is no such thing. I kept hearing American men discussing the selective service thing, and I never understood the inequity, or even what it was….I researched it and couldn’t believe my eyes….so I posted here for some verification.

I cannot believe women are not also forced to do this in the name of equality?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1
Firepower December 22, 2010 at 11:46

Face the facts: It’s a good thing if more fags and dykes die for their country.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 29 Thumb down 16
Firepower December 22, 2010 at 11:48

Andrew S. December 22, 2010 at 11:26

Do women really join the millitary so they can get “fucked by hot guys?” I’m not suprised that once they join they become the personal sluts for all the alpha millitary guys

Then, what you’ll turn the military into will be the same as an urban high school.

And we all know how well that runs.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 9
UncleFester December 22, 2010 at 12:11

It is dangerous to claim men have higher IQ than women. It is even more dangerous to prove it, as danish Professor Helmuth Nyborg (wiki him) found out. Even if 3-5 points difference is totally without pratical significance, just going against the party-line will get you in trouble. Science and facts are patriarchal opresssion tools to the Feminists.
In the misandrist state of Denmark, all danish men aged 18 are drafted ( as in: no coice). This is more about data-collection, and less about filling the positions, as Denmark has always had enough volunteers to meet our international obligations. Danish men volunteer because the armed services are pretty much the last non-feminised environment in the country. Here is the kicker: 23. Feb.2010 we got our first female DefenceMinister (Head of the armed services). I’ll repeat that. Compulsury military service for men (and men only) under a female Commander. The Feminist agenda is so institutionalised and ingrained in our cultural-DNA, they can not even be bothered to pretend to recpect their own principle of equality.

P.S: Durden, don’t knock uniforms for prostitutes. They can be a lot of fun (google 3wishes).

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
J. Durden December 22, 2010 at 12:20

Even if they did have uniforms, UncleFester, I can’t see a uniform inspection playing out the same way for them as it did for me.

criolle johnny December 22, 2010 at 12:23

AfOR
“How did the “buffalo soldier” all negro platoons play out?”
The Plains Indians revered the buffalo. It was actually a near god/spirit to them. They used every part of the buffalo for some part of their life, it was their Wal-Mart! The U.S. Calvary destroyed the Plains Indians by destroying the buffalo herds, not by defeating them in battle.
The Plains Indians met the all-black units in combat and left calling them “buffalo soldiers”.
They were impressed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7
Opus December 22, 2010 at 12:27

It is a rule of life that when one woman and one man are placed on a desert island that sooner or later, they will start having sex. Putting women together with (0bviously) fired up guys is a recipe for disaster – or a recipe for frustration. My own line of work was not the military but exactly the same happened there: Women get in the way (they are not actually that good) , put guys off their stroke and basically think through their Pussy all the time, hence the endless need for guys tread on egg-shells to avoid the absurd allegations of sexual harrasement that the women fantasise up, when the harrasement ALWAYS comes from the women!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 1
Punchline December 22, 2010 at 12:36

What will happen eventually is men are going to walk around with contracts on their person to protect themselves from “VAMA”, “HARASSMENT” & unwanted (or wanted) “SEXUAL ADVANCES.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
UncleFester December 22, 2010 at 12:43

@Durden
True. I’d still like to see the “chambermaid-brigade” in action though.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Keyster December 22, 2010 at 12:52

I cannot believe women are not also forced to do this in the name of equality?

There have been instances of feminists publicly pushing for this, as well as women in combat, but the patriarchal politicians scrap it everytime it comes up. Hitlery was at the forefront of this for a while. It’s WAY down there on their agenda of things “to keep fighting for”, but it has come up. Neither our executive or legislative branches of govmint will broach it.

If you think open gayness in the military was an electric third rail, bring up conscripting women or women on the battle front. Most of these politicans have daughters. Proposing legislation that says women must serve and fight is not gonna be a winner.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1
Peter December 22, 2010 at 13:11

There have been instances of feminists publicly pushing for this, as well as women in combat, but the patriarchal politicians scrap it everytime it comes up. Hitlery was at the forefront of this for a while. It’s WAY down there on their agenda of things “to keep fighting for”, but it has come up. Neither our executive or legislative branches of govmint will broach it.

If you think open gayness in the military was an electric third rail, bring up conscripting women or women on the battle front. Most of these politicans have daughters. Proposing legislation that says women must serve and fight is not gonna be a winner.

Exactly – as I said above, the feminists know that, so they balance whining about it occasionally to keep up appearances, but not so much as to actually push for change, and the useful idiots of the former patriarchy do the work for them by opposing it.

Take a look at this story on Jezebel’s front page:
http://jezebel.com/5715978/pregnancy-complicates-ptsd-depression-in-female-veterans

As Welmer said, the feminists have already added veteran’s issues (specifically suicide) into their list of whines about sexism. Now it’s PTSD – watch as this study is used to call for even more special treatment of women in the military. And they don’t even have to have any women serving on the front lines to try to steal the issue like this, so there is no downside to feminists of no women in combat.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
DirkJohanson December 22, 2010 at 13:14

PS In my previous comment, I meant elimination of DADT, but I think you guys got the idea.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
LushFun December 22, 2010 at 13:15

Almost sounds like the Hooker Battalions in the Mexican-American War. heh would be cool too.

Be all that you can be in the army “wink” reserve. Training include
multiple position gymnastics, acrobatic variance, and natural comfort methods. lol

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Lovekraft December 22, 2010 at 13:23

Considering the nefarious socialist advancements from the San Franciscan Pelosi and her ilk, combined with the manchurian Kenyan Obama, it doesn’t surprise me that reducing the strength of the military would be top of the agenda. And we shouldn’t count out China’s role as it seeks to surpass America at the top of the global totem pole.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Herbal Essence December 22, 2010 at 13:25

Keyster “There have been instances of feminists publicly pushing for (female conscription) this, as well as women in combat, but the patriarchal politicians scrap it everytime it comes up.”

True, but to be fair, conservative women also twist arms to make sure it’s scrapped. Phyllis Schlafly comes to mind.

Whether on the Right or the Left, a woman’s world view is “Men must sacrfice for women.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1
Rebel December 22, 2010 at 13:28

I can’t think of anything more stupid and utterly disgracious that “dying for one’s country”. There is not one single reason on earth to do that!

Specially in a feminized world. It – is – not – worth – it!

By dying and fighting for your country, you are merely filling the feminazi’s prescription that you must die. Lemmings do that. Free men don’t give a sh*t.

Some years ago, I was called up for the draft. I refused to obey and I ran off.
I was labeled a “rebel”.

Had they succeeded in getting me “under the flag”, I would have sabotaged everything I could have put my hands on.
And I would have betrayed them without even a second thought. Call that being pissed off. I care much less about “my” (ex)country than I care about the whereabouts of my first crap.
That’s how far it goes.

Motherland my ass! It’s nothing more than feminist diarrhea now.

Sounds unpatriotic? Damn right!
Fuck the country!!

Not one is worth the sacrifice of your life.

Prepare to defend your own life instead.

It burns me to see those young men lured into their own deaths for a worthless piece of junk called “a country” in which they have no place.
Do not join the ranks of the dead white males: you will be seen as scum, just the same. You will be blamed no matter what.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 5
Angelo December 22, 2010 at 13:32

I really like the idea of all female combat units. I think that single gender units would work far better than mixed ones.

How many women are in the infantry? Would there be enough to put together a sizable unit with a proper chain of command? It would be incredibly interesting to see if they could maintain the same battle readiness and combat effectiveness of the all male units. Women maintain that they can, so why not let them do it?

One or two rotations through Afganistan or Iraq should tell the tale.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0
Smith December 22, 2010 at 13:37

Hah!

From my stack of old New York Times Magazines I pulled
the week of Feb 16 2003 containing a huge 12 page photo
spread titled “Women Go to War – a portfolio. Life size
head shots or full body shots of females from all the
services dressed in their full ready-for-combat regalia.
The intro is: “Warrior Women. With war looming, they
are more numerous and closer to combat than ever.” Yup.

The best, i.e. most ridiculous, is two pages of eight
female “Marines” standing side by side, their faces
painted green, with all the camo and gear, and M16s.
It’s a studio shot in the Avedon style. Looking at this
picture it becomes less ridiculous and more simply sad
and pathetic. On the one hand these particular women
have gone through some kind of rigorous trial which
lesser women failed but to what end? What’s the point?
They may as well be dressed as the second string
defensive line for the Patriots.

Here’s a gem from the afterword:

“They are still barred from certain roles
– those with specific physical requirements
that, as a practical matter, women tend not
to meet — and from any units primarily involved
with front-line battle. But in modern warfare,
with its rapidly shifting front lines, or in
the global war on terror, where there are no
visible front lines at all, that last and most
significant distinction is quickly diminishing.”

Yup. Notice the insertion of the wholly unnecessary
phrase “as a practical matter” in the above paragraph.
It’s there to soften the blow of the one fragment of truth
in all the sophistry.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
Angelo December 22, 2010 at 13:40

You know, maybe we are approaching this whole Men’s Rights problem in the wrong way.

Maybe we should be lobbying with the feminists to get equal responsibilities for women as well. Compulsary military service is a prime example. If you are equal, great, you also have to pull your weight.

I suspect women would be disenchanted quickly with feminism once they have to pull the same weight that men have to and would return to traditional societal roles. If the opposite happened and women take the responsibilities that come with the rights and truely acted as our equals, I would take no issue with that either.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
CajunQM December 22, 2010 at 13:58

I remember seeing a documentary on the French Foreign Legion, where they had government subsidised brothels where ever they were located. It worked great!

I’m retired U. S. Navy. My last command was at a personnel command, (not my normal job), working with ships Forward Deployed (i.e. stationed permanetly in Japan). Prior to a deployment (2 months) they had a large number of women get pregnant, had to be removed from the ship. It was so bad there was a video conference on the issue. Nothing was done though, guys had to suck it up.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0
UncleFester December 22, 2010 at 14:19

@Angelo
I’m with you in theory, but trying to hold a woman accountable for her BS, and make her accept responsibility with privilege is like trying to hold a slimy eel with hands covered in vaseline. It can’t be done.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0
Traveller December 22, 2010 at 14:49

It is already said elsewhere, also in this very site: if the IQ value differs slightly for men and women, it is the standard deviation being bigger for men. This means there are more retared men around, but more geniuses.

High intelligence females are much rarer. I would call them “genetic mutations”. So, if intelligence is required for a career, nature disadvantaged women. They are not born for that. I do not know if in the army intelligence is required to climb the ladder, but I would guess so, at least for understanding a bit of strategy. For sure it is required to utilize and repair complicated equipment.

I agree with who said there is not gain for the society from the women entering in workforce – any, not only army.

In Italy until some years ago the military service was mandatory for men – only them. I always thought women at 18 years should have served 1 year in brothels, like men in barracks. And they should have earnt exactly what a military male earnt (when I did long time ago, 2,5 euros at day). When joining for that year, men are classified for their physical fitness (disability, eyeglasses, genetic illnesses and so). So women should have classified for their attractiveness.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
J. Durden December 22, 2010 at 15:34

How many women are in the infantry? Would there be enough to put together a sizable unit with a proper chain of command?

Combat arms assignments are still barred for women AFAIK. Nobody is much interested in changing that, either. From what I’ve looked into, the last comprehensive study into the combat effectiveness of women in the military was done in the 90′s – it was linked to in the article, but here it is again.

Oh, and for those who haven’t caught on yet, this piece was partly satire / tongue-in-cheek.

Gilgamesh December 22, 2010 at 15:47

I’d rather use them as first-wave cannon fodder. Guess that’s why I’m not an MRA elite(TM)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3
UncleFester December 22, 2010 at 16:15
Anonymous age 68 December 22, 2010 at 16:44

Actually, Fester, the jury system was set up as the final tool in a system of checks and balances. If all else fails, the jury can refuse to convict. It’s called nullification and in the 1890′s, SCOTUS said that was the jury’s right.

In Hidalgo County, Texas, when prospective jurors go through orientation, at least one judge always tells them that is their right.

It’s not mutiny, its supposed to be that way.

On dearies in the military, NO ONE MENTIONED THE FACT THAT WOMEN ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE PHYSICAL COWARDS. For shame. The reason men are 93% of on the job deaths is because cowardly women won’t take jobs that are dangerous. Paper cut is the limit.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 3
UncleFester December 22, 2010 at 17:03

@Anonymous age 68
-I get that the “mutiny” part is government-spin for “Why the fuck won’t they do as we tell them.?” I still get a grin out of the reactions of the prosecutor and defence, though.

@Durden
I just read :Reasons Why I Am A Celibate – Mommy Issues
Written by Dr. Deezee
Please pass my thanks and respect to Dr. Deezee for the colossal mountain of shit he had to climb to write this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
greyghost December 22, 2010 at 17:07

Aharon

Separately, I just visited a blog and read what is perhaps the most disturbing thing yet on the gender war: the male suicide rate and especially the stories and stats for young men. Too much reading for too long on feminism and the discrimination against us men can be depressing. Nothing actually moved me to a few tears as reading about how the discrimination against us males is going so far as to create such a spike in suicides.

The number one reason why I am here.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0
J. Durden December 22, 2010 at 17:11

@ UncleFester

I am Dr. Deezee. It’s my highly pedantic gaming alias. So, consider your message passed.

fondueguy December 22, 2010 at 17:18

“It is already said elsewhere, also in this very site: if the IQ value differs slightly for men and women, it is the standard deviation being bigger for men. This means there are more retared men around, but more geniuses.”

True but that’s not the issue here. If we were instead talking about high rankings within the military then your point would be relevant. I’m sure many of the higher ranking positions do tend to require higher iqs and because of such less females would be qualified.

Coming from that line of thinking I’d like to point out that if an all female battalion succeeded it would prove women’s usefulness in the combat but if the all female battalion failed it wouldn’t necessarily prove women are not meant for combat. It has to do with rank and divisions of people. In either case it would be very informative to see an all female battalion.

Try it out with the women who actually do bust ass.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7
J. Durden December 22, 2010 at 17:25

How do you figure that if an all female battalion failed, it wouldn’t prove they were not fit for combat? I’m not sure I follow what you mean by “it has to do with rank and divisions of people.”

The effort would be a fully female battalion, with all the ranks and billets fully fleshed out by females. A female CO (probably LtCol), XO (Major), SgtMaj, female company COs (Capts) and 1stSgts and so on down the line…

In the Marine Corps, boot camp is already a segregated affair (for the most part – all female platoons with all female Drill Instructors, but I think the female DIs might answer to male superiors) too.

UncleFester December 22, 2010 at 17:30

@Durden
-Glad to see you walking and talking, brother.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
fondueguy December 22, 2010 at 17:51

There are a number of analogies I can use but the point is you have different people with different traits that take different positions.

You can’t have a soccer team with a bunch of strickers, a bunch of people trying to be captains, too many skilled but inexperienced players, too many experienced but over the hill players, etc…

Would if the women all suck at one position, then there whole group would suck. Would if the group of 1,000 women do not have 8 geniuses, like the group of 1,000 men, due to their lack of variability and because of such could not form a capable intelligence team.

It is still true than an all female battion that succeeded would tell us that women can be in combat because we could at the very least use all female battalions. In either case the AFB would be very informative on the issue of women in the military.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7
fondueguy December 22, 2010 at 17:59

“Would if the women all suck at one position, then there whole group would suck.”

I should have added that the women could fill the ranks of the other positions.

Also, with regards to the AFB if 80% of the females tripped on a rock at some point in the service and broke their bones then I’d say 80% of the females suck at combat. A different group dynamic wouldn’t fix that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5
tweell December 22, 2010 at 18:30

The Navy has tried very hard to get female fighter pilots, the best of them still could not handle carrier ops. That program has been quietly discontinued. The drive to promote women officers to command combat vessels hasn’t turned out well either. Support and supply is where they belong, if they belong in the military at all.
A friend of mine was on a supply ship for an enlistment. It deployed every two years. Over half the women in his work center got pregnant shortly before it deployed. He had two types of women working for him – sluts and dykes. He preferred the dykes, they would do their work and not have planned pregnancies.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
WOW December 22, 2010 at 18:47

tweell…I thought there were already female fighter pilots, flying F-16s etc….is that not true?

Are they dropping bombs, have any women engaged in air to air dog fights for real (prior to US air superiority)?

Are there female helicopter pilots that engage in combat?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Xpat2 December 22, 2010 at 19:09

OT, I just happened upon your Mommy Issues post by following the links to the other site. That is a powerful and moving piece of writing. I hope the world gets to see more stuff like that from you in the future.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Elusive Wapiti December 22, 2010 at 19:13

While I generally cotton to the overall tone of the article, being no fan of women integrated into the military, I have to give a stink eye to the assertion that women join up just so they can get banged by hot guys.

My sense is that they join for mostly the same reasons that men do–i.e., money, boredom, nothing better to do–with the added incentives for the choice mommies of heavily subsidized child care and of course free housing.

My father was in Desert Shield, activated as a naval reservist. He served aboard a supply ship, one of those ones with a high percentage of female crewmen. A ton of that female crew suddenly found themselves preggers after the deployment orders went out. Of those that did sail with the ship, a huge fraction came back knocked up.

I read somewhere recently that every ship and/or unit that ships out to the AOR goes out undermanned…because the womenz decide it is an opportune time to have a kid.

if the all female battalion failed it wouldn’t necessarily prove women are not meant for combat.

Yes. For like I said here, how do you measure effectiveness in the fog and friction of war? Especially when such measurement is sure to be politically very sensitive and the leadership will be very vested in seeing them succeed? In other words, they’ll be tempted to cook the results?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Elusive Wapiti December 22, 2010 at 19:14

Are there female helicopter pilots that engage in combat?

Yes. Just not in SOF.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
J. Durden December 22, 2010 at 19:52

I have to give a stink eye to the assertion that women join up just so they can get banged by hot guys.

While I could have been moar fair and balanced about making sure people understood I wasn’t trying to assert or claim that ALL women join up for that reason, it is true that every female airmen I talked to (who was not already married) told me that they joined so they could travel and fuck hot guys.

Maybe they were just trying to get in my pants. Something about the uniform. Little did they know, I am a devout celibate.

E. Steven Berkimer December 22, 2010 at 20:42

EW,

That’s the time I was in as well. My brother was on one of the first ships on station, and fired the first Harpoon into Iraq. I ended up in Kuwait, at a monitoring station (I was a CTR – copied morse code), going there from Okinawa Japan. Not a single woman was there, and yet, when it was announced to all at my regular duty station, about 50-60% of the women came up pregnant, before the date to ship out arrived.

There is no way that military readiness can be maintained, so long as women can get pregnant and that is then used to not ship out with your command. If any man did that (not be ready/able to ship out), he would either be classified as AWOL (Absent With Out Leave), or be brought up for dereliction of duty charges.

Sorry ladies, you knew what you were signing up for. I think the Norplant implant should be a mandatory thing for any female joining the military, and it should be mandatory for the entire enlistment. That would really cut the wheat from the chaff.

@Criolle Johnny,

The buffalo were hunted so heavily for the furs. The rest of the animal was left to rot. While there may have been some military involvement, it was primarily “buffalo hunters” that did the damage.

Commercial buffalo hunting started in earnest in the 1830’s and this hunting continued through the 1870’s with very few wild buffalo remaining by the 1880’s. The market for buffalo hides and tongues were driving the slaughter. Hundreds of commercial buffalo hunting operations could be found on the plains at any one time. The number of buffalo hunters increased dramatically with the depressed economy that followed the Civil War. With the arrival of the railroad was the fate of the buffalo was sealed.

http://www.longrangehunting.com/articles/buffalo-hunting-1.php

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Elusive Wapiti December 22, 2010 at 21:14

J. Durden,

Perhaps it is a generational thing…to join the military to be able to travel the world and sleep with hot guys. I still have a hard time imagining it.

E. Steve,

To me, pregnancy should be treated the same way as getting a bad sunburn…if something that you do to yourself through your negligence takes you out of the line of duty, that’s grounds for a captain’s mast.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
DevilDog December 22, 2010 at 22:56

Good article..

It’s only going to get worse though folks.

Funny thing, I was in San Fransisco earlier this morning and got called a baby killer by a young Woman who had a big pro-life pin on her shirt.

Heh…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
J. Durden December 22, 2010 at 23:03

Baby killer, eh?

Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeyut.

DevilDog December 23, 2010 at 01:06

Oops, made a mistake, I meant pro-choice… Ain’t no damn pro-life in Frisco hah.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
Former USMC December 23, 2010 at 01:45

Considering the ‘comment wars’ of the last article on this subject, I must say that this article is a lot more balanced and presents a more thoughtful argument about the disadvantages of women in the military. Before I get numerous dislike ratings due a NAWALT type comment, let me just say that I have seen some good females in the Marine Corps, but yes , I have also seen plenty of bad ones as well!!
The Roman Army used to maintain travelling brothels for their troops, and the French have also done so. Its a good idea that allows the male troops to relieve some stress. Part of the reason why everyone is so pissed off at every Marine Base is because their isn’t enough women to go around!!

BTW, despite all the accusations of my leftist liberal tendencies, I think Obama is making a major mistake by repealing DADT. It undermines the values of the military as a traditional institution. If your a homo, don’t pollute the ranks of the USMC!! Join another branch of the service.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Traveller December 23, 2010 at 02:39

It is a recent news women will start serving in submarines (Google “submarines women” or similar).

The close space and the separation from the outside will increase the problems already discussed.

It will happen what we already guess: a few alpha soldiers will screw them and the rest of the crew will stare with empty hands. This will bring a lot of issues, but of course feminists do not care.

I bet not even officials will care: the chance of a real combat are really tiny, in front of a lot of units deployed around the world.

So, just some billion $$ of submarines down the toilet. Always, it is men who pay the bill with their taxes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Philip December 23, 2010 at 03:20

DevilDog the baby killer eh?
Feminist the sleeping baby killers (foetus anyone)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Opus December 23, 2010 at 03:51

They say that there is nothing new under the sun and indeed the above proposal reminded me of an event found in Book 1 of Herodotus Histories. He related that in Babylon (that’s eye-rack to you americans) the young woman has, once in her life to sit in the Temple of Aphrodite and offer herself to men otherwise unknown to them. Herodotus, of course, does not approve. The men had to pay a silver coin and the women (of the lower classes) could not refuse. Presumably Babylonian men (also of the lower classes) were conscripted into the Army and could also not refuse. Somehow I am with Herodotus on this one.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
Migu December 23, 2010 at 06:00

Funny thing, I was in San Fransisco earlier this morning and got called a baby killer by a young Woman who had a big pro-life pin on her shirt.

I generally ignore that one, but when a woman says it, I tell her I didn’t want him to grow up and rape his wife. Usually shuts em up.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
Peter December 23, 2010 at 06:54

E. Steve,

To me, pregnancy should be treated the same way as getting a bad sunburn…if something that you do to yourself through your negligence takes you out of the line of duty, that’s grounds for a captain’s mast.

Yep, I agree. The feminists lose their minds when stories come out about officers ordering the women in their units not to get pregnant. Which I think is perfectly reasonable – the women have access to birth control methods, and are perfectly free to use them, plus they have the morning after pill and abortions as backup. And they can also choose to, you know, keep their legs closed. In other words, there is no excuse for a woman in the military to get pregnant – they can choose to not get pregnant.

I say equality should be very harsh for women in the military who just happen to get pregnant before or during a combat deployment. A choice of court martial or forced abortion would be perfectly reasonable. Feminists will whine about choice but just as a man isn’t justified in taking himself out of combat by wounding himself, it also means a woman doesn’t have justification for taking herself out of combat by getting pregnant.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Aharon December 23, 2010 at 06:57

“I generally ignore that one, but when a woman says it, I tell her I didn’t want him to grow up and rape his wife. Usually shuts em up.”

That’s a great response. It doesn’t match yours though I recall my older sister telling me a story from when she was in grade school during the Vietnam War. A student asked a Green Beret speaker who visited the school if the American troops ate Vietnamese babies (that was actually believed back then by many in the anti-war movement). He replied only when really hungry.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Bill December 23, 2010 at 08:06

I am a Naval Officer, my ship recently went from an all male crew to integrated crew with females and the enlisted quarters has turned into high school prom. I have met a few really great qualified female sailors, they work hard and get the job done. Alas, most of them are whiny dirt bags that date crew members and constantly pull the “female” card. I feel that getting rid of women in the military would do a disservice to the few great females we have and to the country. That’s why we need to set a standard and stick with it. The great females will pass and the others will get left behind.

I consider there to be an even greater threat to the military than women being *in* it. It is women married to men who are. I don’t think half of you would believe some of the shit military spouses do to their so called significant others. Its even worse than in civilian life because when you go on deployment you have to leave your wife with the checkbook to pay the bills. When/if you get back they aren’t going to give up that power easily. At that point they control everything in soldiers and sailors lives and they take full advantage. I have actually seen MANY sailor ask their wives for money to buy snacks and basic necessities from the ships store. We were in Africa on deployment and i asked a male officer if he wanted to hit the shore for liberty and he said he couldn’t go because he already spent the 40 dollars a month his wife gives him. All pay is public record, he makes 5100 a month in base pay not to include housing allowance, COLA, and all the other benefits. Out of 5100 he is ALLOWED by his wife $40. He was sad when on the last day of deployment his wife left him, took the kids, crashed the car, maxed out all credit cards, left -6000 dollars in the bank account, left him with a 4 bedroom house that he couldn’t afford to live in with the alimony and child support, his credit score when from 790 to low 400s, held his kids hostage, and got 40% of his retirement pay for the rest of her life. If you are evil enough to catch them cheating on you they pay you back in full by blowing all your money, not paying any bills, racking up mountains of dept, taking the kids, which of course costs you your security clearance (financial irresponsibility) which in turn costs you your job. Then they leave you to clean up the mess and hold your kids hostage as payment. They of course don’t do this to your face they ALWAYS do it while your deployed. Military spouses are a bigger hindrance to national security than bin laden ever was.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 1
Gx1080 December 23, 2010 at 08:43

Fun stuff.

Besides the utter degeneration of putting the results of a fucked up society……screw it, chickenshit leftists say that men on the field conquer, politicians recieve the goods and soldiers only get a pitful salary.

If our Feminazi overlords don’t want soldiers “raping” the women of their enemies (bunch of cowards that have no business saying what happens in the field), fine. Let them bring their own women to rape.

Heh. Fun stuff.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
fondueguy December 23, 2010 at 09:12

“Funny thing, I was in San Fransisco earlier this morning and got called a baby killer by a young Woman who had a big pro-life pin on her shirt.

Oops, made a mistake, I meant pro-choice… Ain’t no damn pro-life in Frisco hah.”

I’m confus, how can you be called a baby killer by a pro choice woman?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
fondueguy December 23, 2010 at 09:16

“. For like I said here, how do you measure effectiveness in the fog and friction of war? Especially when such measurement is sure to be politically very sensitive and the leadership will be very vested in seeing them succeed? In other words, they’ll be tempted to cook the results?”

Your right.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Aharon December 23, 2010 at 09:18

If, on the street, I saw some woman being mugged or raped, I don’t think that I have enough Chivalry left in me to go to her defense. Spiritually and morally I think that is wrong yet the woman can easily be a female supremacist man-hater and the thug might be armed. Why should I risk being hurt or killed with how women and feminism are treating men?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3
J. Durden December 23, 2010 at 10:10

Bill –

Thanks for the input, especially from the “shiny side” of the fence. Like I said, I’m sure there are quality females in the service. But I wonder if the few quality females make up for the all the other ones who aren’t pulling their weight. I suppose we could look at ways to screen and weed out the bad eggs better, but I wonder if it’s worth it in the end – particularly with the added headaches that sexual tension can bring to a unit.

And I totally agree about spouses. Way too many young guys get married way too soon (in my estimation, to escape the barracks, get more money, and the perceived access to regular sex) and their brides end up dominating their lives.

Firepower December 23, 2010 at 11:01

criolle johnny December 22, 2010 at 12:23

The Plains Indians met the all-black units in combat and left calling them “buffalo soldiers”.
They were impressed.

Riiiiight…more PC Television/Public Skool propaganda – parroted as “history.” You watched too much Little House on the Prairie and 1960s Sidney Poitier movie bullshit.

The indians called them buffalo because of the similarity of their color, and especially the curly characteristics of “Negro” hair was like that of a buffalo’s coat.

Go peddle your bullshit elsewhere.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Peter-Andrew:Nolan(c) December 23, 2010 at 11:34

When I put a post onto the Irish Free Man site and asked the women to step up to the challenge of being 50% of the war dead they were very quiet about that. Women want to be PAID to be in the military but they don’t want to be getting killed for it.

Women said things like ‘women are not strong enough to be front line troops’ I pointed out that in places like the Somme men were sent over the top without even a gun. They were to just run towards the enemy machine guns until they were mown down thereby using up bullets. When I pointed out women were perfectly capable of running forward and being mown down by machine gun fire they were real quiet about that.

When I talk about how muslim boys were forced to walk across mine fields to be blown up to clear the mines and that girls were perfectly capable of doing that they are quite.

Whenever I challenge women to actually BE equal they are quite.

Worse still? Whenever I ask men HERE to join me in OTHER forums and speak up THOSE men are as quiet as the women. If you men here do not go into public places and make your comments where OTHER MEN and MANY WOMEN will see them? This place will become as much of an echo chamber as feministing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2
Peter-Andrew:Nolan(c) December 23, 2010 at 11:41

Bill December 23, 2010 at 08:06
“I don’t think half of you would believe some of the shit military spouses do to their so called significant others.”

Trust me Bill. I’d believe ANYTHING about women now. Western women bitched to me about ‘you have to respect women’. When I ask them ‘why’ they say ‘because we are women’ or maybe the get to ‘because we have the babies’. When I point out that is extreme sexism because it is asking for privilege based purely on gender they get all upset.

Then they often trot out ‘all people have a right to be respected’. And I say ‘no, respect is earned, it is not a right. Men do not respect all men just because they are men. Some men are scumbags and we don’t respect them. Some women are scumbags and we don’t respect them either. You want respect, earn it’.

I think all you boys in the armed forces should just quit. Go on strike. See how the women like it when all the men in the armed forces and police forces go on strike.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2
post-modern devil December 23, 2010 at 12:42

BTW, despite all the accusations of my leftist liberal tendencies, I think Obama is making a major mistake by repealing DADT. It undermines the values of the military as a traditional institution. If your a homo, don’t pollute the ranks of the USMC!! Join another branch of the service.

Former USMC, I agree with you partially, but I beleive you’re mistaken on the issue of homosexuality like most other Americans. An attraction to other men is honestly less than meaningless, the issue is the gay culture and promiscuity that constitutes the mainstream image of ALL gays in American culture. You can hold masculine values and characteristics (emotional restraint, discipline, loyalty, courage, strength, etc.) and be attracted to other men sexually at the same time, but most of American culture seems to idiotically beleive that masculine behavior and identity is directly tied to an attraction towards women and to presume otherwise is to be the equivalent of Indian hijras or “third genders”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
fondueguy December 23, 2010 at 15:09

“I think all you boys in the armed forces should just quit. Go on strike. See how the women like it when all the men in the armed forces and police forces go on strike.”

The media wont even call the miners who die in some collapsed hellhole, men. Instead they were workers, loved ones, or miners… Are men just not good? why should they do it? Their reduced and insulted because of a political agenda. Wouldn’t want to recognize them as men right? Wrong! They are men, that is why their deaths are forgotten and their situation is not improved. All we hear is the made up crap women disproportionatly go through.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
knuckledragger December 23, 2010 at 17:50

I don’t throw it down just so but this shit gets me wound up. I’ve done Iraq twice and Afghan once, and not behind the desk; walking point sleeping on roof-tops, and getting it the f*** on. Besides those trips, I’ve been all over the world on other deployments for the last 20 years and I can tell you one thing for certain: Chicks have NO BUSINESS in the military. Not at a desk, not behind a wheel, and ssure as hell not behind a rifle. I’d rather slam my hand in a car door every day for a month than bring a chick on an op.
In Iraq I had this broad who swore up and down that she was an Arabic linguist and if we would just stop discriminating and give her a chance… the minute we left the gate that chick was sweating like a rapist and had eyes like tea-cups th entire time. We raid some guys house and everybody in the place looks at her like a retard when she trid to speak what was apparently not arabic, completely useless. When we got back, there she was firsrt thing in the morning documenting the evening to put herself in for a medal. “Combat Action”, what a hitter.
Of course that chick didn’t hold a candle to the nut-job I was un-officially bedding in Kuwait in December of 2002. This broad was an Army officer, an Apache pilot, which she should have been disqualified for based solely on not having a cock, but wait, there’s more. So I’m bangin’ her, and she breaks out in tears. Not because she’s scared to go to war, and not because i was forcing it on her, no, she got “raped” by her step-daddy just wanted to “hurt someone”…hence the pilot deal… You give a broad like this a straightjacket! You don;t hand her keys to a f**cking FLYING ROCKET LAUNCHER!! …but promoted, of course, and went home before the war started…
As for saying women in the military should be officially designated as whores, they pretty much designate themselves, no worries. You could say that kind of talk gets in the way of the woman trying to do an honest job for Uncle Sam, but whoever THAT ONE woman is, I’ve never met her, you’d probasbly find Bigfoot boning the Loch Ness Monster before you find the military felale doing an honest day’s work.
In terms of policy, now that the very few girly-boys are out of the closet and the gaggle of useless dykes that were pretty much out anyway can have their day in the sun, maybe they can start looking at treating the “average guy” in the military like a human being; quit shoving chicks ahead of me in line and telling me not to look at their asses, quit puitting me in the middle of no where and telling me to “man up” and “be a man” but to be a “diplomat” when some broad rolls through to pretend to work in the field for a week(That’s right jessica Lynch, the trigger is the one right there by your hand sweetie, it’s ok to shoot back). And for God’s sakes, let a guy tear off a little bit here and there without threatening to end his career! You think Im carrying this gun for my health?!
People will say oh, well you could leave if you don;t like it, but you know, you never really figure out you’re being lied to and taken advantage of for a few years, and by then they got you by the nuts telling you if you’ll juuuuuust admit that she’s just as good as you, we’ll let you keep your crummy job and throw you a few bucks extra…and it’s a bunch of shit to say I can’t keep my job blowing up people’s doors just because some 21 year old twat secretary working an hour a day doesn’t like it when I say the F-word. Yeah screw this, I’m leaving anyway, maybe I’ll open a strip bar and give the recruiters a run for their money….self-esteem dispensed here nightly in $1 incremements.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2
J. Durden December 23, 2010 at 17:58

Where you setting up the bar? I’ll come drink so long as you serve The Glenlivet.

knuckledragger December 23, 2010 at 18:09

.@Durden – actually talked to a few guys about doing just that. I’m in San Diego and trying to open anything here is like running for Soviet office, but alot of guys talk about opening places overseas, places like the PI. It’s Third World-esque but you’d be amazed how women know their place when they don;t have an entire government infrastructure to shake you down with. …and the Glen will be in attendance.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
J. Durden December 23, 2010 at 18:31

Haha, I’m San Diego for the time being. I might be here a bit longer – depends on employment prospects after I get my DD214 – so we’ll see. Speaking of Glen, time to go have a conversation with him right now.

Renee December 24, 2010 at 07:55

In short, the idea behind women in the military, police and workplace is that they benefit from being there. They think it’s fun. It flatters their egos, deservedly or not. The idea behind men in the military, police and workplace is that we all depend upon their being there and doing their jobs. All of society benefits from their work. And yet here we are, giving the dispensable privileges for the purpose of feeding their egos at the expense of the people we need who get by solely on their own merit.

Here’s my take. I’m sure there are women who join the military, police force, and workplace because it’s “fun” and it stokes their egos. But I would like to think that for the most part, others join the military and police force because they want to make a difference in their community and the world just like the men who join. As for the workplace, women want and need to earn $$$ like men do. I mean, don’t people need cash to provide for themselves, unless they live with their parents for years on end.

Dirk,
To those of you who think this idea is so silly, DADT is going to making female barracks a lesbian-sex free-for-all, largely at the expense of guys getting some action. Are our men in military supposed to be virtually celibate while this is going on? I don’t think so.

Just single men, or all of them?

Lastly, here’s my rationale about the scoring system.

I see male physical benchmarks and female benchmarks as two completely separate things. The best of both get the maximum points possible. The male standard isn’t held as the end-all-be-all of the physical standard. I don’t see it as “lowering” the standard. With that being said, I can see the problem in all this. Since the male physical standards are seen as the most optimal in being in the front lines, and since females are weaker, then I can see how problems can arise.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 15
fondueguy December 24, 2010 at 10:52

“I see male physical benchmarks and female benchmarks as two completely separate things. The best of both get the maximum points possible. The male standard isn’t held as the end-all-be-all of the physical standard. I don’t see it as “lowering” the standard. With that being said, I can see the problem in all this.”

Actually their incredibly easy to compare and determine which one is easier, ie which one has lower standards. You didn’t even provide a rationalization and instead you just claimed the military is not lowering the standard for the women.

You could argue that the women’s standard of fitness is sufficient for combat but that the higher male standard is necessary for men to “break them down” as part of the mental conditioning. But before you make arguments like that I’d suggest you actually try and find out how well women can do in combat or mock combat.

I think it would be much better to do away with standards based on gender, unless you plan on having separate battalions. If not there should only be weaned and stronger, some divisions being stronger and others being weaker. Furthermore everyone should shave their head eat the same shit, and women should get penalties for getting pregnant just before being deployed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
J. Durden December 24, 2010 at 10:54

I see male physical benchmarks and female benchmarks as two completely separate things. The best of both get the maximum points possible.

The job requirements don’t change depending upon the gender of the person performing the job. So why should the standard?

fondueguy December 24, 2010 at 10:58

“and it stokes their egos.”

That’s What the special treatment is doing for them, especially the “service” but practically no combat phenomena.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
greyghost December 24, 2010 at 12:21

knuckledragger there was an old saying to your comment
“That makes my dick hard” I hope you get that titty bar. I remenber the one across the rooad from MCAS Mirimar. (NAS at the time)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Amy McGaughey June 13, 2011 at 23:41

Women in the Marine Corps yes, have made it hard for the few of us females to be respected, but it is completely disrespectful to imply that female Marines should be used as prostitutes, I am not just a female in the Marine Corps I am a Marine. I have done my job more diligently, professionally, accurately, and overseas more than most males have. I also am a wife to a Recon Marine and have two kids and a house. I am a good faithful wife to my husband, a good mother to my children, and a damn good Marine. I train with my husband so that I don’t have to be categorized into a WM. I can hump just as hard as a male Marine, complete a ruc run with 50 pounds, shoot my rifle with expert, not only do I have a 293 pft score, I can do 8 correct pull-ups and strive to continue to do more. I am field radio operator, which means I leave my children all the time, and my husband is constantly at different courses and deployed. I work my ass off to be who I am and I have my father to thank for that. My father was a Marine in WWII. He was an infantry Marine who fought in the Pacific. He brought me up to be just as tough as you male Marines are, some of you. I know who I am and I will never let you male Marines get the best of me.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Angelo December 24, 2013 at 15:22

I like to disseminate knowledge that I have accumulated with the yr
to help enhance team efficiency.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 4 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: