A Few Good Women

by W.F. Price on July 8, 2012

A female marine who deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan makes a case against women in USMC combat units, bringing both humanitarian and practical arguments to bear. The female marine, Captain Katie Petronio, lays it out with brutal honesty, including “We Are Not All Created Equal” in the title:

As a young lieutenant, I fit the mold of a female who would have had a shot at completing IOC, and I am sure there was a time in my life where I would have volunteered to be an infantryman. I was a star ice hockey player at Bowdoin College, a small elite college in Maine, with a major in government and law. At 5 feet 3 inches I was squatting 200 pounds and benching 145 pounds when I graduated in 2007. I completed Officer Candidates School (OCS) ranked 4 of 52 candidates, graduated 48 of 261 from TBS, and finished second at MOS school. I also repeatedly scored far above average in all female-based physical fitness tests (for example, earning a 292 out of 300 on the Marine physical fitness test). Five years later, I am physically not the woman I once was and my views have greatly changed on the possibility of women having successful long careers while serving in the infantry. I can say from firsthand experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and not just emotion, that we haven’t even begun to analyze and comprehend the gender-specific medical issues and overall physical toll continuous combat operations will have on females.

[...]

I was the senior Marine making the final decisions on construction concerns, along with 24-hour base defense and leading 30 Marines at any given time. The physical strain of enduring combat operations and the stress of being responsible for the lives and well-being of such a young group in an extremely kinetic environment were compounded by lack of sleep, which ultimately took a physical toll on my body that I couldn’t have foreseen.

By the fifth month into the deployment, I had muscle atrophy in my thighs that was causing me to constantly trip and my legs to buckle with the slightest grade change. My agility during firefights and mobility on and off vehicles and perimeter walls was seriously hindering my response time and overall capability. It was evident that stress and muscular deterioration was affecting everyone regardless of gender; however, the rate of my deterioration was noticeably faster than that of male Marines and further compounded by gender-specific medical conditions. At the end of the 7-month deployment, and the construction of 18 PBs later, I had lost 17 pounds and was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome (which personally resulted in infertility, but is not a genetic trend in my family), which was brought on by the chemical and physical changes endured during deployment. Regardless of my deteriorating physical stature, I was extremely successful during both of my combat tours, serving beside my infantry brethren and gaining the respect of every unit I supported. Regardless, I can say with 100 percent assurance that despite my accomplishments, there is no way I could endure the physical demands of the infantrymen whom I worked beside as their combat load and constant deployment cycle would leave me facing medical separation long before the option of retirement. I understand that everyone is affected differently; however, I am confident that should the Marine Corps attempt to fully integrate women into the infantry, we as an institution are going to experience a colossal increase in crippling and career-ending medical conditions for females.

It really is tragic when a woman loses the chance to be a mother, just as it is terrible when a man is stripped of his fatherhood by an evil, uncaring state.

One of the potential consequences of feminism I hadn’t thought of was that women will not only be led down the primrose path in regards to becoming a mother, but will be physically or chemically prevented from doing so by the state. For example, I have been wondering what women who just started serving on submarines have been required to do while deployed, as an onboard pregnancy could easily be fatal to a mission. Submarines remain submerged for months on end, and a woman who found herself pregnant on the ship could force the submarine to surface for a medical evacuation if there were complications, thereby compromising stealth and ruining the entire mission.

I am almost certain that females who deploy are coerced into taking chemical birth control – either officially or not – which should be a cause for great concern. Trends tend to start with innocuous precedent, and we could well see such practices expand from the military to society in general.

My main argument against women in the military has centered around waste. The military is a necessary evil that should be as efficient as possible, and no larger than necessary. Making it an equal opportunity employer will introduce bloat and inefficiency, forcing the rest of us to pay more than we should for an institution that at best serves an ambiguous greater good.

However, it appears that there is more to be concerned about than simple inefficiency and waste. We are creating a model for a dystopian, and probably dysgenic, form of reproductive control in our own armed forces, and using women’s bodies for tasks that nature never intended. It’s pretty sick, when you think about it.

{ 123 comments… read them below or add one }

Native Swede July 8, 2012 at 14:25

I’ve heard many stupid reasons to keep women out of combat, but that it may be detrimental to their health is, perhaps, the single most mind-blowing thing yet.

It’s combat. Shit don’t come more hazardous than that.

Now, there are plenty of other good reasons to keep women well away from arms in general and the military in particular. But that the poor wee things will suffer terrible health consequences is not among them.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 112 Thumb down 12
AfOR July 8, 2012 at 14:34

Native Swede nailed it

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 47 Thumb down 6
some dude July 8, 2012 at 14:47

Anybody else notice how shit-hot this chick was? When chicks talk about themselves they’re always the very best…

Anyway, who cares if she lost her ability to squirt out a kid? Who cares if the other wimmin have problems? Do you? ‘Cause I sure don’t.

Nor do I care anymore if we field an army of chicks. It’s no longer my problem. Thankfully neither of my children have any desire to export Western civilisation at the point of a gun. I did when I was a lot younger but eventually you grow up.

We need to stop trying to put the brakes on all this crap and take care of our own.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 66 Thumb down 6
jodark July 8, 2012 at 14:51

My main opposition for females in combat arms positions is simply the physical. Her bench max was 148lbs? Talk about a liability to the unit. When I do a push-up I push 160lbs every time (get a scale and get into push-up position with your hands on the scale, this will show you how much you push when you do a push-up) and I can easily do 60 in the 2minutes required for the PFT. I weigh 230lbs, and with my push-up weight being 160lbs, that means I push 70% of my body weight (I’m 28 and can bench 230lbs 4 reps) with each push-up. Now, I have the typical male build with broad shoulders and chest so my center of gravity is higher like most males.

If you were to do the same math for a female, she would push probably only about 50-60% of her much lower body-weight based on having much less weight in her chest and shoulders. So, if she weighs 130lbs and only pushes 70lbs with each push-up, is it remotely logical to think that she is as remotely physically capable as myself, especially when her standard is fewer PUs than mine? Or even a male who weighs 180lbs? (his PU weight would be 126lbs). She couldn’t carry or pull an average sized male, let alone one my size, loaded down with a full combat load (Body weight+120lbs).

Having women in combat units is a physical liability first and foremost, but then you get into all the other insane unit complications they cause (sleeping with superiors for promotions, creating love triangles, getting pregnant to avoid deployments-which creates holes in unit staffing).

Femininazis cite “successes” of Israeli units with women in them. However, when more closely examined those “successes” weren’t tested in actual combat.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 70 Thumb down 1
Anonymous Reader July 8, 2012 at 15:02

The feminists won’t listen to this woman, because her experience contradicts their ideology – and ideology is all feminism has anymore.

I very much fear that we are going to see some major military disasters in the next 20 years, due to ideology driving people unfit for command into those positions. When that happens, good men and good women are going to have their lives cut short, possibly in very horrible ways.

And all the blood will be on the hands of feminists & their mangina errand boys.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 66 Thumb down 1
Turbo the drycleaner July 8, 2012 at 15:15

Who cares? Its not like women are being kidnapped and forced into the military. If they want to pretend that anything i can do, they can do better, I say we let them all the way to its bloody conclusion.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 56 Thumb down 2
Ryu July 8, 2012 at 15:17

LOL. She could squat 200 and bench 145. Translated, it means she could do each once, with a spotter, in poor form, with a belt, with chalk. That’s about a 16 year old boy, untrained. “Muscular deterioration” indicates that she did not have the mind to eat enough calories to sustain her bodyweight.

Now the average light infantry man carries between 70 and 150 lbs today – ammo, rifle, body armor, equipment. That is over half the bodyweight of most women. It is insane to imagine that any woman could maintain that load for any period of time. Most men who do this will develop knee, ankle, and hip problems.

It is highly insulting to allow women every job but infantryman. What that means is, every job except the hardest. So while the men are doing the heavy lifting, princess can work on her manicure.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 83 Thumb down 7
pb July 8, 2012 at 15:21

” Regardless of my deteriorating physical stature, I was extremely successful during both of my combat tours, serving beside my infantry brethren and gaining the respect of every unit I supported.”

Successful? Or lucky because she didn’t get anyone killed.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 53 Thumb down 1
Poiuyt July 8, 2012 at 15:26

Gendertopias parliaments, legislative chambers and congressional assemblies are today openly debating abolition of womens prisons. And they are making and peddlling arguments similar to the ones welmer makes here.

The counter factual thing is this: When the military, the prisons, the coal mines, the factories and all the other jobs and hazardous places to be on earth are made male only, they will become ten times more lethal to men.

Why? How ?

Only the threat of these prisons, jobs, facilities and places causing injury or harm to women, as they routinely injure men prevents the State and the Corporation from totally turning a blind eye to their hazzardousity and unsafety.

So that more women in prisons and jails, translates to better prison and jail conditions for men and boys.

More women in the coal, asbestos and uranium mine, translates to better working conditions for men in said mines.

More women deprived of their children or forced to pay alimony by court order according to law, translates to better consideration and care in creating such laws as applied to men.

More death, destruction and contagion of females from transmissible and endemic disease, translates to more resources and attention paid to said calamities also experienced by men.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 48 Thumb down 1
Traveller July 8, 2012 at 15:37

I could not care less about women health.

Since when they cared about men health?

We should not allow women in army for their health?

Why, should we allow instead breastfeeding places in companies or useless feminists HR departments? Or female judges with menstrual hysteria?

Military is not different than anything else in a civilization.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 3
Thos July 8, 2012 at 15:57

Maybe it’s my personal experience and total lack of medical knowledge, but I can’t help but wonder if she had a touch of ITB. The atrophy in specific leg spots can be difficult to comprehend if you’re not looking for it. Having gone through the confusion of how my leg could be so weak despite massive amounts of training, that’s my suggestion, however ill-informed.

As to the gentleman who’s dismissing the loss of her fertility as inconsequential, have a bit of a heart, sir. Jeeez.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 21
Hisoj July 8, 2012 at 16:19

women are terrible at handling stress in any situation, let alone a life and death situation. look at any woman trying to handle a career… besides the ones who spend all day at the office playing angry birds or chatting. the women who actually work for a living become wrecks. their gender is not physically or mentally built to handle real work.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 1
Rebel July 8, 2012 at 16:23

Women’s plight in the armed forces draws no sympathy from me.

And just because she didn’t trash men under a gigaton of trashy insults does not make her a good woman.

I want gender equality in the armed forces, too.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 2
Ron July 8, 2012 at 16:33

Having women in combat deteriotes the units they serve in, in a game where “losing” means being dead. Furthermore, it does brutalize our society. Already we live in an era where women have lost much of their femininity, allowing them in combat positions is to make this worse.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 3
Ray Manta July 8, 2012 at 16:39

Ryu wrote:
LOL. She could squat 200 and bench 145. Translated, it means she could do each once, with a spotter, in poor form, with a belt, with chalk. That’s about a 16 year old boy, untrained.

It’s probably less, but it puts her in the extreme top percentile of women. The average woman is far, far weaker.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_can_an_average_women_bench_press

One has to wonder why there are so many shows such as “Nikita” where a hot, willowy superwoman smacks the shit out of platoon of men.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 52 Thumb down 1
pb July 8, 2012 at 16:46

“One has to wonder why there are so many shows such as “Nikita” where a hot, willowy superwoman smacks the shit out of platoon of men.”

Hollywood loves to propagandize in favor of its pet ideologies.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 56 Thumb down 0
Not Sure July 8, 2012 at 16:53

“One has to wonder why there are so many shows such as “Nikita”…”

Who do you suppose most ads are aimed at?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 0
Binxton July 8, 2012 at 17:05

Tragic consequences are exactly what American women need.

American women need to have their egos crushed — their dreams, hopes, and joy utterly destroyed — to grasp the folly of feminism and so-called “gender equality.”

As more and more American women end up like this butch female marine, we may see a glimmer of hope that things will turn around, and women will once again assume their proper place subordinate to Man.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 57 Thumb down 4
The First Joe July 8, 2012 at 17:18

@Native Swede – if you read the article the lady Captain points out that the attrition of her health was beginning to affect her ability to carry out her role, after “just” two tours (lots of soldiers serve more). If soldiers (male or female) can’t do their job, then the mission is at risk.

If armed forces spends $X per trainee and trainees of Type A break down after two tours, but Type Bs keep on working for multiple tours – which Type pays back investment on training better?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 0
Suz July 8, 2012 at 17:31

That she even made these statements is amazing really. She was about as strong and capable as is possible for a woman, especially a petite woman. Instead of living a defiant ego trip and crowing about her abilities, she has admitted that even the “best” women simply don’t have what it takes to compete physically with men. She doesn’t whine that the Eeeevil Patriarchy kept her from being as “good” as any man. She learned from experience that her own biology put limits on her.

And at the risk of sounding like, “You go grrrl!” I think a female Marine war veteran telling feminists they’re full of shit, is rather awesome.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 79 Thumb down 3
Brian July 8, 2012 at 18:00

Price, why do you say the military is evil? I agree that it’s necessary because I don’t think there’s a better alternative for a nation to defend itself. But evil?

Also, if something really is evil, you don’t wish for it to be efficient. You’d prefer it be inefficient. That’s about the only silver lining that can be said about bad government policies and laws.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10
AmStrat July 8, 2012 at 18:23

“Necessary Evil” tends to be a phrase that just means something you wish you didn’t have to do, but you do have to do it. The military, in aggregate, is far from evil, especially when you see what sort of restrictions they put on themselves in terms of engagement. However, a small, naive part of most people wish that killing wasn’t necessary, but so often it is.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 2
Paul Murray July 8, 2012 at 18:38

“we as an institution are going to experience a colossal increase in crippling and career-ending medical conditions for females.”

Career ending? I could have a great career doing this job, if only actually doing this job didn’t cripple me and make me incapable of doing it. So it’s not about getting the job done, it’s about making sure the women have careers. And the inequity of combat is that it ends their careers early.

IOW: “More cushy office jobs for women in the infantry!”

I mean – if you can’t actually do what infantry do, then what does your “career in the infantry” comprise? It isn’t that these medical problems “ended your career”: your career never actually was a thing in the first place.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price July 8, 2012 at 19:25

Price, why do you say the military is evil? I agree that it’s necessary because I don’t think there’s a better alternative for a nation to defend itself. But evil?

Also, if something really is evil, you don’t wish for it to be efficient. You’d prefer it be inefficient. That’s about the only silver lining that can be said about bad government policies and laws.

-Brian

It is the lesser of two evils, the greater of which entails being conquered and enslaved by another nation.

In an ideal world we wouldn’t have to kill people and destroy things, but unfortunately this is sometimes the only choice. This is why I call it a “necessary evil.”

As for why I want it to be efficient, it all comes down to having to doing the job as quickly and thoroughly as possible. The more efficient a military, the less need to have a long, grinding war with excessive bloodshed. Better that we win quickly and decisively than have to fight it out for years with terrible losses.

Pirran July 8, 2012 at 19:38

Radical Feminism approaches reality – REALITY MUST GIVE WAY !!

But how refreshing (and ultimately tragic) that an obviously capable female officer can be so honest and forthright.

The only way women could compete on the front line would be to turn them into Soviet era East German athletes. Whose up for advocating massive doses of horse steroid for infantry-women on Jezeballs or Feministing?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1
Attila July 8, 2012 at 19:46

Quote allegedly by Ernest Borgnine:

On Women’s Rights: “They tried it the wrong way. You can’t expect anyone to take you seriously if you burn your undies and tell me I’m a pig. That’s why it failed. Too many ugly broads telling me that they don’t want to sleep with me. Who wanted you anyway?”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 0
ralph gorman July 8, 2012 at 19:46

We have all kinds of super women beating the shit out of men on the TV set. However, never, ever, will you see karate chopping Palestinian females beating the shit out ofthe Israeli Defense Forces on TV. Guess why.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 2
TLM July 8, 2012 at 19:46

Feminist equality, im my eyes, always began and ended on the bench press and golf course. A 145 bench! Wow, BFD. I’m 44 and warm up with pussy weight. BiWeekly I’m pushing 250 for 8 or more reps. With a max around the 310 lb mark. And just when I think I’m hot shit for doing it, the high school football kids show up and make me look like a freaking wimpy fag with their youthful power.

When chicks tee off from tips instead of the red tees then I may not laugh as much when I have to hear how great some women golfers are. Michelle Wi anyone.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3
Attila July 8, 2012 at 19:49

Sending a lot of these fembots to the front may be bad for their health- but it would do wonders for everyone else’s. Come on Hun — what are you waiting for?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
Beltain July 8, 2012 at 19:57

Well let’s look at a possible brightside to female infantrymen.

The first time one of them gets captured and we get to see how they are treated there won’t be any more of this BS “rights for prisoners” crap on the battlefield to deal with. It will be all out total war against them because the feminist will cry for blood.

Of course the cost to our poor men who will have to take up the slack and endure the drama of having women in their unit isn’t worth it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1
Dan July 8, 2012 at 20:00

Few if any women have the physical strength to be competent in a
combat role like that performed by Marines. Nature simply did not
give them the necessary physique….they can whine and cry about equality
all they want but Darwin and Mother Nature don’t care.

As for serving on board a deployed sub…..I doubt the physical requirements for sub service are so strenous that most women could
not meet them….till an emergency occurs and strength is needed to
“go above and beyond”. The shortcomings due to physical failings
seldom manifest themselves in day to day functions, they show up when
the fecal matter becomes airborne. As for a medical emergency
causing a sub to surface during deployment….could just as easily
happen to a male sailor. Aside from pregnancy issues which can be
easily tested for prior to deployement both sexes can have emergency
issues such as appendicitis etc. requiring evac for medical treatment.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Uncle Elmer July 8, 2012 at 20:01

When I was in Army Basic, there was a persistent and disturbing rumor that they were putting “salt-peter” in the food to keep us from buggering each other.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 7
GREAT BOOKS 4 MENZ Lzozozozolzo July 8, 2012 at 20:19

lozzoozzo

women are the most fierce warriroro warorris. day put da USMC to shame. for via abortion womenz has killed over 50,000,000 unbornz fetutstshes enemies of da state lzozozlzo. and da bankerstserz import pre grown labor from mexico to make up for da decimation zllozlzoz as it is cheeper to put womenz in the workforce instead of let them have children and den import immigrants zlzoz

da central bankers are always fighting two wars

one is da wars on da foreign lands

da other war is on da people of the homeland they are parasitically bankrupting lzozlozozozo

da pill converts da life-giving vagina into a lifeless, sterile buttolooleelslslzlz buttholioozlzlo

if a sperme slips on by, da neoecocntehs wrmonegerteherz command da women to abort da fetussth fetus inncoent fetsus

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 17
Huck Finn July 8, 2012 at 20:30

“a woman who found herself pregnant on the ship could force the submarine to surface for a medical evacuation if there were complications, thereby compromising stealth and ruining the entire mission.”

True. The question is what now has more power politically the Mission or Feminism’s influence in the military?

Men have returned home from wars with various long-term disabling physical health issues (besides direct combat injuries and death). I could care less about the women who want to be a rambo.

I’m concerned with integrating women into combat units who will step back forcing the men to do additional physical work and take even more chances with their lives — we all know women are mostly self-serving, believe it’s ok for men to suffer and die for them, and the games that will be played such as making false rape allegations to get out of combat.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 0
Huck Finn July 8, 2012 at 20:33

OT:

‘More public schools splitting up boys, girls’
Proponents argue the separation allows for a tailored instruction and cuts down on gender-driven distractions such as flirting

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48113073/ns/us_news-life/

The ACLU is fighting it claiming discrimination…go figure.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
dannyfrom504 July 8, 2012 at 20:39

i saw this all the time on my ship and on deployment in the middle east.

on the ship the guys took up the slack because most of the women got out of doing working parties. unless you were in deck or engineering, where EVERYONE does manual labor. choose your rate, chase your fate. but the girls were constantly being white knighted by douchebags that were dying to bang, but never did. guys did the girls maintenence checks for them, did laundry for them. smh.

on deployment, i showed up with my gear and one small bag of civilian attire and PT gear. 90% of the women showed up with gear and 4-5 bags of “clothes”- for a fucking 9 month deployment in the desert. unreal. then these girls had the nerve to beg the boys t help them carry their crap.

i watched, in total amazement as all these guys fell over each other to help the desert princesses. it really was sickening. thank God i retire to my hunting camp in just over a year.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 51 Thumb down 1
Rocco July 8, 2012 at 20:43

Yeah, could care less. My grandfather was mustard gassed in WW I, does anyone give a sh@t?

That’s how much I care.

But I do think that the women in the miltary will be feminists Waterloo. Socon women will never allow a female draft.

So I support women in the military, and female draft registration…..the more and closer to the front lines the better.

And I don’t dislike women, it’s pure poltics of the brand they have played for 150 years.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 0
dannyfrom504 July 8, 2012 at 20:50

Dan-
sub’s have independent duty corpsmen on them. they are specially trained to deal with most medical emergencies on a sub. however if a woman is pregnant she can’t even be on the sub because there is a constant threat of radiation exposuure which could be detrimental to the fetus.

i just don’t see the navy allowing a pregnant woman to be on the sub. and being down a man is a SERIOUS issue on a sub since every person on the crew is vital.

and you are right, day to day life on the ship would not really require any kind of physical strength. but in a general quarters setting, when donning fire fighting gear, setting zebra- you’re damn right you need to exert yourself to keep the ship afloat. a lot of those hatches require 4 people to secure them- 2 to hold it up, and 2 to remove the stanchions.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2
Huck Finn July 8, 2012 at 20:59

Rocco,

The only ones who care are those opposed to men being treated like sacrificial pawns and cheap commodities that can be used and discarded for the sake of a society that does not care about men.

Historical tidbit I read at the Angry Harry site. During WW1 on the first day of the Battle of the Somme the British lost 55,000 men dead in one damn day! Meanwhile, back in safe London on the same day, suffragettes marched and protested demanding the right to vote.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 44 Thumb down 0
Eric July 8, 2012 at 21:22

Price:
The bitches don’t belong in the military—period.

If they want to do something socially constructive with the military, kick the women out; conscript all the bums, thugs, criminals they choose for sex partners and use those guys for cannon fodder. Solves two problems at the same time.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 24 Thumb down 10
walking in hell2 July 8, 2012 at 21:24

Yes, I read and agree with the narcissists’ assessment of her “extremely successful” achievements. To not use American women in the military would be a waste of “extremely successful” potential. Here are some areas in the military where women could be “extremely successful.”

Strap women soldiers with remote controlled bombs; then coerce them at sniper point into walking into crowds of the enemy before detonating them.

Use women soldiers in the front lines as human shields. Their GMO-foods-induced bone mass and blubber could stop any sized round.

Secretly inject women soldiers with a “cocktail” of Bubonic Plague and other infectious diseases and have them co-mingle with the enemy, similar to what medieval armies tried to accomplish by catapulting infected bodies over castle walls.

Spray paint them red, white, and blue and load them onto C-130 transport planes and drop them on the enemy as human bombs. Can you imagine the terror in the enemy as 300 pound red, white, and blue bombs came screaming out of the sky exploding syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia all over the architecture and population?

But by far the most effective use of American women is to simply have them gossip to the wives and daughters of the enemy men, and convince the wives and daughters that they are oppressed, and that they will be happier if they become promiscuous, and if they become competitive with their men.

As their wives and daughters become revolting to their men, the men will lose morale and natural protective fighting instincts. Untold misery will spread throughout the culture. The only men protecting the “transformed” women and daughters will be masochists. Then we can simply march in and take what we want and be welcomed by the men as liberators.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 6
evilwhitemalempire July 8, 2012 at 21:26

Turbo the drycleaner July 8, 2012 at 15:15
Who cares? Its not like women are being kidnapped and forced into the military. If they want to pretend that anything i can do, they can do better, I say we let them all the way to its bloody conclusion.
———————
why is it that everytime there’s a post about women in combat someone has to pull out the clueless “let ‘em get blown up while we stay in bed and eat bonbons for a change” argument?

why is it that they will let men take bullets for them and then come out of the foxhole when it’s all clear, place foot on enemy body and flex bicep for camera not automatically understood?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
walking in hell2 July 8, 2012 at 21:31

Yes, I read and agree with the narcissists’ assessment of her “extremely successful” achievements. To not use American women in the military would be a waste of “extremely successful” potential. Here are some areas in the military where women could be “extremely successful.”

Strap women soldiers with remote controlled bombs; then coerce them at sniper point into walking into crowds of the enemy before detonating them.

Use women soldiers in the front lines as human shields. Their GMO-foods-induced bone mass and blubber could stop any sized round.

Secretly inject women soldiers with a “cocktail” of Bubonic Plague and other infectious diseases, and have them co-mingle with the enemy. Such tactics would be similar to what medieval armies tried to accomplish by catapulting infected bodies over castle walls.

Spray paint women soldiers red, white, and blue and load them onto C-130 transport planes and drop them on the enemy as human bombs. Can you imagine the terror in the enemy as 300 pound red, white, and blue bombs came screaming out of the sky exploding syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia all over the architecture and population?

But by far the most effective use of American women is to simply have them gossip to the wives and daughters of the enemy men, and convince the wives and daughters that they are oppressed; and that they would be happier if they became promiscuous and competitive with their men.

As their wives and daughters become revolting to the enemy men, the men will lose morale and their natural protective instincts. Untold misery will spread throughout the culture. The only men protecting the “transformed” women and daughters will be masochists. Then we can simply march in and take what we want, and be welcomed by the men as liberators.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6
DirkJohanson July 8, 2012 at 21:41

Most feminoists want women to be only generals, anyway.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 1
greyghost July 8, 2012 at 22:41

I don’t fuckin care send the bitches in. “Go on girl kick that ass” Based on her story she is the baddest god damn devil dog we got. And so based on her story I see no reason why women are not required to be in combat as ordered like any man that is in uniform. Every man in the miolitary reguardless of MOS knows at any time he can get orders to get his rifle.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2
Dan July 8, 2012 at 23:02

To Dannyfrom504….

There isn’t a corpsman on the planet who could safely remove
an appendix. Unless the boat has an MD with surgical
training then the boat surfaces and the sailor gets evac’d.
There is a number of other medical conditions that can occur
to young otherwise healthy people that would require a med
evac to a facility that can do surgery. While a carrier has a sickbay
with an MD I’m pretty sure subs do not. They have a cramped room
with some supplies where the corpsman patches up minor injuries,
treats minor med complaints etc.

As for the radiation on a sub….the exposure to the crew will be less
than what a typical x ray tech would get. Pregnant techs work in
radiology around ionizing radiation all the time….70% of x ray techs
are female. The fact that a sub is nuclear poses no fundamental risk
to the fetus barring an accident that releases material into the boat, and
if that happens everyone’s in for a bad day….not just Ms Preggers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
greyghost July 8, 2012 at 23:09

Also to add this Marine officer is trying to play the I’m a girl card. Fuck you honey if at any time one person said exactly what you wrote that guy would be passed over for promotion or forced out. Fuck you the war will be over soon and then you can go back to playing devil dog.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 1
Eric July 8, 2012 at 23:25

Greyghost:
That’s a good point. A man could never have gotten away with writing what she did—especially not an officer.

They need to throw women out of the military altogether; though we don’t have any politicians with the balls to do it. This PC grandstanding is going to get a lot of men killed for nothing.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 3
greyghost July 9, 2012 at 00:00

Eric
The point i was making was that before this don’t judge the girl shit a reason to not have women in the military was exactly what she discribed as happening to her body from the physical and mental stress. Let some guy try telling a new recruit bitch that as a reason to deny her the job she wants and see what happens to the guy. Women are too stupid and self centered to under stand that men have always taken care of women. The patriarcy was just that and stupid ass women think denying them that job was because you hate women. (You were denied to protect you you dumb ass. )
Me personally i don’t believe in that sort of thing. It doesn’t bother me at all to know a woman has burned to death from a jet fuel accident or lost her ability to make a hostage to hang over a mans head from going into combat. Something a she is never required to do.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3
Andie July 9, 2012 at 01:46

Why is it that women want to go head to head with men in combat, but not in say, sports? Let’s get rid of gender distinction in sports, too. Guess what? There won’t be a single elite female athlete left on the planet.

Let’s make the Olympics gender neutral! Not one medal will go to a woman.

Why? Because women CANNOT compete with men in elite physical competition, and combat is THE elite physical competition to end all competition.

Pregnancy, childbirth and abortion belong to women alone. They command the right of life and death over their unborn children. Feminism considers these rights to be sacred.

Combat belongs to men. It is a cultural space that is sacred to men. There is value in having a space that is ONLY for men.

Feminism wants their own sacred spaces protected and enshrined in law, but refuses to allow men to have any spaces of their own. I think it boils down to the uncomfortable fact that we are NOT physically interchangeable and no amount of ideological tap-dancing will change that.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 6
evilwhitemalempire July 9, 2012 at 02:25

Andie July 9, 2012 at 01:46
Why is it that women want to go head to head with men in combat, but not in say, sports? Let’s get rid of gender distinction in sports, too. Guess what? There won’t be a single elite female athlete left on the planet.

————————-
why then do you reckon they want full military integration but place no such pressure on sports competition? (of course they’ll say they’re somehow not able to but anyone with half a brain should have no trouble understanding that they could if they wanted)

because in combat there are no spectators up in the bleachers watching when the female slows the squad down

so if they win she can get credit. if they lose she avoids any blame

but in sports there’s no way to integrate them without showing openly that they suck at them compared to men

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0
Just1X July 9, 2012 at 03:05

I’m sure that the feminist bleedership couldn’t give a rat’s arse about the happiness, welfare or health of any woman actually signing up for ‘equality’ in the armed forces (lower standards abound, there’s no real equality).

They just want to point at such women and say, “See we told you that we were as good as men”. Reality? What’s that got to do with it?

Same for delaying kids until their mid thirties, some of them fail to have any because they left it too late. The bleedership don’t care, they just keep pumping out the ‘you can have it all’ bullshit and throwing normal women under the bus.

Having said that, I’m clear that first we stop throwing men under the bus. Men are the ones getting screwed over in large numbers, by feminists, white knights and manginas. Surely modern women are empowered enough to just say no to stupid feminist bullshit all on their own?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0
Rocco July 9, 2012 at 03:41

@ Just1X

I agree. It’s just that the men here who advocate for no women in the military think their doing men a favor. That a stronger military, even just marginally stronger would benefit society.

IMO this is the last bastion of white knighting.

In a movement that increasing sees no way for a man to achieve happiness in our society still men want to die to protect it.

I say, GTHO and let feminists protect the UFSA (United Feminist States of America).

IMO to vote you should have to register for the draft, men and women alike.

And no, I don’t care if America falls, it fell 40 years ago. I care about my family which has been destroyed by Stalinistic feminist thugs.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
Rocco July 9, 2012 at 03:50

While we can’t agree with policies like military integration, ones in which we have no true voice, Organized Federal Feminism (OFF(tm)) is using their legal wing, the ACLU to destroy even volentary classes in which boys have their own classes so they can learn to read. And the American Psychological Association supports them.

Are we fools?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Rocco July 9, 2012 at 03:50
Gamerp4 July 9, 2012 at 05:56

Dear Price. I dont see why you feel sorry for her after all it wasn’t the men’s fault if she lost the ability to have babies nor it is the military that is at fault here because she can’t perform on the same level as men do. I dont even want her out of the military just because she has health problem (What the hell were this freak butch thinking that it was a walk in the park, its war Womyn and military is all about combat, you are in a situation where you can lose a limb or your life altogether).

I am still trying to grasp this that INFANTRYMEN IS TAKEN AS A CAREER, how come this is termed as career because last time i checked it sure hell was being forced on young men, Forced DRAFTING OF YOUNG MEN IN US MILITARY. SO ya it must be a career choice for this womyn but for young men it was forced servitude and i can sure bet that she wanted this “career” to prove the point of FEMINISM that womyn can do everything that men can and dont forget the best part THEY CAN DO IT BETTER. So no Princess reality and nature dont think so, maybe in books and movies you can kick asses of 100 men in a minute but in reality it takes more PUSSY JUICES to perform 145lbs bench presses.

I really want to see womyn drafted in military, Navy, & more importantly as frontline soldiers and i dont give a dime about their health because its not a GAMESHOW where one has to wear safety suit to save themselves from hazards, it is war and we are talking about equality and according to feminism WOMYN and MEN ARE EQUAl so no second thoughts or false red flags of womyn health issues I DONT BUY THAT, YOUR NEEDED IN THE COMBAT ZONE and YOU SHOULD PERFORM LIKE A MEN DOES.

End.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
Gamerp4 July 9, 2012 at 05:56

Dear Price. I dont see why you feel sorry for her after all it wasn’t the men’s fault if she lost the ability to have babies nor it is the military that is at fault here because she can’t perform on the same level as men do. I dont even want her out of the military just because she has health problem (What the hell were this freak butch thinking that it was a walk in the park, its war Womyn and military is all about combat, you are in a situation where you can lose a limb or your life altogether).

I am still trying to grasp this that INFANTRYMEN IS TAKEN AS A CAREER, how come this is termed as career because last time i checked it sure hell was being forced on young men, Forced DRAFTING OF YOUNG MEN IN US MILITARY. SO ya it must be a career choice for this womyn but for young men it was forced servitude and i can sure bet that she wanted this “career” to prove the point of FEMINISM that womyn can do everything that men can and dont forget the best part THEY CAN DO IT BETTER. So no Princess reality and nature dont think so, maybe in books and movies you can kick asses of 100 men in a minute but in reality it takes more PUSSY JUICES to perform 145lbs bench presses.

I really want to see womyn drafted in military, Navy, & more importantly as frontline soldiers and i dont give a dime about their health because its not a GAMESHOW where one has to wear safety suit to save themselves from hazards, it is war and we are talking about equality and according to feminism WOMYN and MEN ARE EQUAl so no second thoughts or false red flags of womyn health issues I DONT BUY THAT, YOUR NEEDED IN THE COMBAT ZONE and YOU SHOULD PERFORM LIKE A MEN DOES.

End.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Mark Plus July 9, 2012 at 07:53

I recently read Robert Heinlein’s science fiction novel, “The Puppet Masters,” and I noticed that it featured a highly competent warrior woman character well before those became trendy in 1990′s pop culture. (Yeah, I admit it: I watched the adventures of Xena, Buffy & Nikita back then.)

Perhaps the warrior woman idea sounded plausible when Heinlein published this novel 60 years ago, before we had experience with real women in action careers. But it clearly sounds like preposterous bullshit now.

I keep telling people that they need to pay more respect to the patriarchal tradition instead of viewing it as collection of arbitrary superstitions on the same level as god beliefs. We can’t observe supernaturals, despite what the people on those foolish ghost-hunting shows on cable claim; but men have had to live with women all along, so patriarchy has a grounding in empiricism.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3
Georice81 July 9, 2012 at 07:54

I think that this woman needs to be commended for what she wrote. She sees the light!! I also believe that she will be forced to recant what she publicly wrote once the military is aware of that.

Up to the recent past, men fought wars ultimately to protect the women in children back home. Now it appears that we are throwing our women (and possibly children) into the front-line. This country has gone mad! It is bad enough to see body bags of young men coming home from a war but when people see the body bags of young pretty blonde women coming back from a war in mass there will be a rethinking of women being in the military altogether.

There was a war in the 1800′s down in South America. Paraguay got soundly defeated by an alliance of some of its neighbors. Only around 125,000 men survived the war. Yet, that was enough to repopulate the country. The reason is that the women did not fight.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 11
Huck Finn July 9, 2012 at 08:09

To: walking in hell2 July 8, 2012 at 21:24
Great comment. LMAO.

I think we need intermix the NFL with men and women players…just for one season the spectator belly laughs would be good for America resulting in lots of weight loss.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Keyster July 9, 2012 at 08:16

I am almost certain that females who deploy are coerced into taking chemical birth control – either officially or not – which should be a cause for great concern.

Highly unlikely birth control is being handed out. Women would have blabbered about it by now, and it would be a news item. They get army issue tampons and probably Motrin for cramps. Since the “data” says 10% of females in the military are getting raped every year, I’m surprised there aren’t more pregnancies.

A friend of mine’s (advanced placement) son purposefully avoided college because of the on-campus female/feminist crap and joined the Navy. And he purposefully signed up for Submarine duty to avoid serving with women. Two years later they announce the first females on submarines. Obviously he was pissed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3
Grit July 9, 2012 at 08:19

Two points:

” I can say from firsthand experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and not just emotion, that we haven’t even begun to analyze and comprehend the gender-specific medical issues and overall physical toll continuous combat operations will have on females.”

Women can’t just out and say “this is a bad idea, I don’t encourage it.” Despite that it royally fucked her up, she still spins the hamster to protect the sisterhood of feminists. I personally believe that if her general disbanded women from serving, she would agree- and disagree despite her agreement. I also think that the above statement “on the record” is black and white: spend more money and effort to accept feminism, which will be the route that feminists will scream for. “Off the record” its a damning of the whole idea.

The doublespeak keeps her from accepting responsibility if she chooses contrary to what the public might decide. Its pure evolutionary biology: its a woman’s perogative to lie cheat and steal to protect her social status.

“I am confident that the Marine Corps should be integrated…”

The hamster is spinning away. “it fucked me up, but sure, lets do it anyway!” I think when women say “I am confident” it signifies that they are at their most vulnerable.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
Huck Finn July 9, 2012 at 08:30

“men have had to live with women all along, so patriarchy has a grounding in empiricism”

1) Eve was seduced by outside ideas and she then was used to corrupt Adam to eat the forbidden fruit. Adam was ordered out of the Garden of Eden. Was this the first feminist action?

2) Delilah seduced Samson. He really had to be a naive and arrogant man to keep trusting her after her previous attempts to destroy his strength. Samson was blinded by his enemies and killed soon after.

3) The ancient Egyptian official’s wife tried seducing Joseph. He refused and she made a false rape allegation against him. He was thrown in prison.

4) Cleopatra seduced Mark Anthony to betray and fight against his own people the Romans. Anthony lost the war and committed suicide.

5) Helen (of Troy) ran away with Paris resulting in a long bloody war.

Men from around the world saw fit out of reality to keep women on a somewhat tight leash. Most incidents with women causing trouble were not as nationally dramatic as the ones mentioned above. Yet, on a smaller scale it has continued to occur. Women’s inappropriate behavior, false rape allegations, vindictiveness, etc have caused everything from wars and death between smaller tribes, clans, families, and individual men.

The stories passed on to us whether specifically true or simply a learning lesson about life have continued for so long because there some some greater truth or purpose than the individual stories themselves.

There was a good reason for patriarchy.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 5
Keyster July 9, 2012 at 08:34

Only around 125,000 men survived the war. Yet, that was enough to repopulate the country. The reason is that the women did not fight.

The ability to give birth bestows certian privilages and protections upon women; always as, always will. Man’s willingness to sacrifice himself for women, children and country is no less natural an inclination than motherhood. Who sacrifices more, the mother or the soldier? The answer is not always that obvious. To Hillary Clinton it’s the mother of the soldier that suffers the most.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4
Fernandez July 9, 2012 at 08:41

Reminds me of the Kara Hultgreen case in the navy. The first woman to fly a Tomcat and crash it. Despite several attempts from his instructors to prevent her from flying due to her incompetency, the feminist military machinery made it possible for her to graduate. After her tragic death, the government made all sort of excuses for her ranging from engine failure to male conspiracy.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 1
Keyster July 9, 2012 at 09:38

After her tragic death, the government made all sort of excuses for her ranging from engine failure to male conspiracy.

IMO Jessica Lynch was the greatest military heroine of all time. When the Army PR machine began to crank away on how she bravely fought off enemy attacks with her M-16 after her truck rolled, only to to be captured and eventually rescued – – not long after her recovery she called bullshit on the whole story – – how she just layed there, never firing a single shot – – and how she was helpless and frightened while in captivity. She just wanted “the truth to be told”.

That took alot of guts and integrity to stand up to the military PR machine and admit what really happened. Women are sheltered from any publicity that makes them appear weak or vulnerable vs the enemy in battle, and the media plays along with it.

Feminist control over the military PR machine is ever-present and directed by the Pentagon. Heaven forbid you should piss off Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer or Nancy Pelosi…and watch your funding for pet projects go zip.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 3
confused July 9, 2012 at 10:11

” I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it”
Colonel Jessup – A Few Good Men

My issue with all of this is that, while pretending they are equal in every way, women know that they depend on men’s physical strength and intellectual curiousity (weapons development) to keep them free. Meanwhile they demean the very aspects of men which make it possible and pretend to have moral superiority. To add insult, they then pretend they are superior managers and that somehow qualifies them to lead men who are in almost every way superior to them.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3
Firepower July 9, 2012 at 12:00

A female marine who deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan makes a case against women in USMC combat units, bringing both humanitarian and practical arguments to bear.

Sorry. Any female who JOINS THE MILITARY and make such statements is NO MORE to be believed than A STUPID COUNTRY that puts such FLOWERS in place as Marine Officers in the FIRST PLACE.

Today’s Marine Flower could never do what the WW2 Era did. Even with Air Conditioning and prepaid cellphones home to the gf.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
Firepower July 9, 2012 at 12:06

dannyfrom504 July 8, 2012 at 20:39

i saw this all the time on my ship and on deployment in the middle east.

on the ship the guys took up the slack because most of the women got out of doing working parties.

That’s great. Still, it pays your bills.

The obvious question is WHY would you continue serving such a system? A pension?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
Robert July 9, 2012 at 12:14

Anonymous Reader July 8, 2012 at 15:02
The feminists won’t listen to this woman, because her experience contradicts their ideology – and ideology is all feminism has anymore.

Yet they will use and twist her words to fit their agendas and such.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Robert July 9, 2012 at 12:22

Keyster July 9, 2012 at 09:38

I spoke to men of other units coming back from Iraq. She did fire her weapon. She killed several male soldiers in the convoy she was part of. She now gets to enjoy something most male soldiers, who were prisoners of war, do not get to enjoy; immunity/impunity from serving a sentence for committing murder and future life-long financing ( for free ) paid by tax payers. She was, like many females soldiers, given a vagina pass and will be paid for the rest of her life. As far as the army, the media, congress, feminists and such were/are concerned; feck the mens

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Firepower July 9, 2012 at 12:23

Suz July 8, 2012 at 17:31

That she even made these statements is amazing really.

No.
Stop with the “american fair play” stunt.

What are they gonna do, fire her? An Affirmative Action Preferential Gov’t Employee?
Anybody ‘bravely’ criticizing SOMETHING THEY KNOW is INOPERATIVE – and still collecting a paycheck/pension – is blowing smoke up your ass. It’s a US Senator griping about “gov’t waste.”

And ANYBODY strapping on an M4 to risk getting their head blown clean off to “protect the freedom” of such an institution is a fool.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6
Robert July 9, 2012 at 12:24

I bet if Private Manning wer a female, “she ” would be authorized to get away with treason. Look at feminist icon Jane Fonda.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Lyn87 July 9, 2012 at 12:55

As a retired field-grade officer I have a few thoughts about this.

A) I agree with Welmer: having a strong military is a “less bad” option than being subjugated by a hostile military power. It should be as small and lean as possible to get the job done in the way that is most cost-effective in blood and treasure.
B) A military that is more powerful than required WILL BE USED for things beyond its proper role: which is defending the vital interests of the nation.
C) Most of what the military does is not all that hard for most people on most days. The NORMAL duties of most military jobs can be done by any reasonably fit adult of either sex…
D) However, the main reason the military exists is not to perform its NORMAL duties, but for its ability to defeat an enemy in lethal combat.
E) Sometimes it becomes VERY important, VERY rapidly to be able to perform physically demanding, highly technical tasks under intense pressure without error. This often happens with little or no warning – which is a strong argument against having women even in jobs that are not normally physically demanding.
F) Some military jobs routinely require extraordinary physical prowess (not necessarily measured by the ability to lift heavy objects). The number of men who can do them is small and the number of women who can do them is essentially zero.
G) In order to allow women to serve in uniform alongside men, there are two sets of standards. And…
H) If women had to meet the same standards as men, only a tiny percentage of them would make it at all, and virtually none would qualify for elite specialties.
I) The opportunity cost of permitting women to serve alongside men is HUGE, which runs contrary to Welmer’s excellent point:

As for why I want it to be efficient, it all comes down to having to doing the job as quickly and thoroughly as possible. The more efficient a military, the less need to have a long, grinding war with excessive bloodshed. Better that we win quickly and decisively than have to fight it out for years with terrible losses.

J) We can’t have it both ways: either 1) women serve alongside men and are forced to meet the same standards (which would leave a practically all-male military), 2) we stop pretending that having female “soldiers” is a net gain and discharge them all or refuse re-enlistment, 3) we continue as we are with lower standards for women, since that is the only way most of them can contribute at all in the current structure, or 4) we set up separate women’s auxiliary branches like we did in WW2 that allowed women to contribute to the extent of their abilities while not exercising command authority over men.

A final note: the female Marine who wrote the original piece scored 292 on the Marine Physical Fitness Test. While that is excellent for a female, it is unlikely that she would have passed the male version of the test. Yes, the differences in the tests are THAT great.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2
MRAwesome July 9, 2012 at 13:24

Why would women even want to go into the military if chemical sterilization is done?

Why would feminists be pushing for this?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
MRAwesome July 9, 2012 at 13:28

Isn’t the solution for this that men should STOP joining the military.

Let the military become 50% female. When that becomes a problem, then men might say “Nah… not interested”. Then they will re-instate the draft, but since so many boys are raised by single mothers, they will be weak too.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Suz July 9, 2012 at 13:37

Firepower,
What “‘american fair play’ stunt,” and how is it not amazing that she made these statements? Perhaps you’re reading something I didn’t write; I made no comment about “brave” criticism. I’m impressed that she admits the truth. As good as she was (for a female) she now understands the utterly undeniable fact that women aren’t capable of competing with men physically.

Are you suggesting that it’s commonplace for a woman, one who is clearly stronger and more competent than most women, to publicly state that “We are not all created equal?” Really? Women are lining up to tell the world that women can’t do everything men do?

Also, is her “collecting a paycheck/pension” while describing the hardships of war, any different than a man doing the same thing?

Your assertions seem more like a generalized criticism of military personnel (“And ANYBODY strapping on an M4 to risk getting their head blown clean off to ‘protect the freedom’ of such an institution is a fool.”) than a contradiction of my comment. If you disagree with me, could you please be more specific? You did after all, say, “No.” What in my comment is incorrect, and why?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
Russell July 9, 2012 at 14:46

Rather than the physical requirements of combat (which will decrease with advancing technology in the future), consider the risk and danger a soldier faces. Here equality is more than possible, it is desirable. With women at equal risk of losing life or limb, war will less likely be the first option; but the last. It only takes one finger to pull a trigger or push a button. When women are put into harms way equal to men, then we will have equality. When men have reproductive rights (and with future technology reproductive capability), then we will have equality.
These war and reproductive technologies are inevitable if civilization can survive long enough; so we ought to be adjusting our culture to accept the sacrifice of women as we do men. Saying that war is to men; as family is to women, does men a grave injustice.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Russell July 9, 2012 at 14:54

I should add that until men can be trained to discard chivalry to women and women trained to treat men as human beings, women should serve in female only units.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel July 9, 2012 at 14:55

Robert
I spoke to men of other units coming back from Iraq. She did fire her weapon. She killed several male soldiers in the convoy she was part of.

That’s an interesting statement. I have never heard a hint of this previously. Seems unlikely to be honest. If it were true it might explain why Lynch was so keen to assert that she did not fire her weapon.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Matt Strictland July 9, 2012 at 15:01

Women don’t belong in combat roles. I’ll make 3 small exceptions , maybe a 4th

A few police billets, militia sniper (not formal army, its “that redneck girl with a rifle” and spy work.

Its also possible combat aviation is doable, some women have very good G tolerance or so I am told. However manned planes will probably be on the way out soon anyway.

In a more general sense, women can’t meet the physical demands of other jobs. Hell many men can’t, not just from our societies general bad health but because we are asking too much of anyone.

The loads especially are too high. 80 lbs which is more than most women can handle is about maximum for most men. Unfortunately the armor alone (head and torso) is pushing half the load maximum, throw in an M4 , 7 mags, knife and canteen ,and you are well over half the load.

Thats scant 30 LBS for a basic load out which is not that much especially with a military that like old Marius and his mules thinks soldiers are pack animals.

I know few women (or men really) who can lug 3/4 of their body weight day after day as we are asking without serious consequences.

However a man can carry about half if balanced properly and a a woman a third, (a guess here)

This suggests women simply can’t do what is needed.

However on a more philosophical basis, this is hardly a State worth defending. The only reason to sign up with Sammy is to be a merc. I recommend against it myself unless you have no other options.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
woggy July 9, 2012 at 17:02

The question of pregnant submariners was raised.
Sirs, the pregnant ones will not be the biggest problem. Those menstruating monthly certainly will.
All of those feminine products take up valuable space – space that could be used for food or other mission enhancing items.

Of course, such realities are misogyny afoot, so the Navy is full speed ahead with women on submarines.
And what of the men that currently serve? What of those who have just a few more years til retirement, but whose wives DEMAND they get out because he is locked up in a steel tube for months at a time with other women?
Expect a HUGE attrition rate once this ill concieved experiment is fully implemented.

For the simple reason that our armies exist to fight and win wars – against enemies not hamstrung by leftists / feminists who consider the armed forces to be captive participants in social experimentation – I am personally against the idea of women in combat roles, even if the horror and bloodshed would serve some of them right.
I do find the question of the draft intriguing though:
When all of these shrill harlots complain about their rights to their bodies being infringed, it seems to elude their selfish little brains that men haven’t had any assumed right to their own bodies, due to the Selective Service System.
We’re not talking monologuing vaginas here, having to pay for their own birth control.
We’re talking penises, testicles, arms, legs, bodies and souls – available at the government’s whim to be wisked away from their lives for such noble causes as tearing the burkas off of Afghan women while teaching them to Eat, Pray, Love.
Many of those young men, sex organs and all, have the liberating experience of coming home zipped in a bag.
Compulsory draft registration, just for owning male genitalia?
Now THERE is surrendered body ownership, ladies, and a man holding an aspirin between his legs will not spare him.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Dalrock July 9, 2012 at 17:27

My main argument against women in the military has centered around waste. The military is a necessary evil that should be as efficient as possible, and no larger than necessary. Making it an equal opportunity employer will introduce bloat and inefficiency, forcing the rest of us to pay more than we should for an institution that at best serves an ambiguous greater good.

It isn’t just about cost. Making the force weaker means we will lose battles. This isn’t so bad if it is a battle we don’t need to win (but this questions why we are fighting in the first place). But armies and navies exist to fight the battles we have to win. In those kinds of battles historically a 10% or 20% swing in fighting effectiveness can mean everything. We had to be successful on the beaches of Normandy, just as we had to be successful at Midway and at Leyte Gulf. There were also times in Korea where we were close to being routed.

There is another reason we should oppose women in combat, which I don’t think I’ve ever seen seriously argued. The reason this is so important for women isn’t because they (as a group) really wish they could join up and have the fun of being shot at. It is about making sure there is no such thing as manly pride. The military is the last institution where men are called upon to do something special, something women aren’t called to do. It is all about making sure there is no male honor in serving in the military. This is why the issue drives them crazy. Men are being men, with no women around to tell them she is just as good as they are. If women are able to achieve their goal here the military will become just another government job, another pink ghetto.

And of course, when that battle comes which we must win, we won’t. I won’t guess when that battle will come, but it will come one day.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 1
Firepower July 9, 2012 at 18:56

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

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 25
Firepower July 9, 2012 at 19:14

Suz July 9, 2012 at 13:37

Firepower,
What “‘american fair play’ stunt,” and how is it not amazing that she made these statements?

You give her an undeserved pat on the back for something that is her duty: Responsibility to subordinates and The Corps.

21st Century Americans are so hungry for virtue – any virtue – that they pounce on any opportunity for praise. Like cooing over a convict with 23 illegit kids who gets off crack and makes a promise to “do betta” on Maury.

Also, is her “collecting a paycheck/pension” while describing the hardships of war, any different than a man doing the same thing?

No. Military bureaucrats of both sexes are vile. Rural boys die just the same from either when they’re bucking for General in a Democrat Regime.

What in my comment is incorrect, and why?

You are the typical good person who sides in lockstep with the military because of your son’s service.

Serving, today, is corrupted. Your son risks life and limb to protect Obamacare, Rachel Maddow, Operation Fast & Furious, Bill Maher and lawschool profs promoting “pregnimony” and every other vile socialist scheme The Spearhead documents in its daily opposition. That is what America stands for today and the America (and military) he protects is no longer the Good America.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7
Huck Finn July 9, 2012 at 20:07

“It is about making sure there is no such thing as manly pride”.

Women and girls do seem to have a passionate hatred, fear, and jealousy of manly pride.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
freebird July 9, 2012 at 20:29

‘Better that we win quickly and decisively than have to fight it out for years with terrible losses.”

The politicians say this too, but 14 years in Afghanistan shows that what they say and what they do are two different things.
We’re in the ‘perpetual war for perpetual peace’ phase now.
Good luck breaking that motive.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Suz July 9, 2012 at 22:00

Firepower:
“You are the typical good person who sides in lockstep with the military because of your son’s service.”

No, not at all, but I appreciate the “good person” part. I’m not as typical as you think I am, nor as naive. Of course I’m proud of my son, but I have no illusions about the military, or anything else the government uses to “protect” me. My husband is a former soldier and my father and sister are both retired cops. SisterFed retired just recently, and I’ve been holding my breath for about a decade, hoping she could get out unscathed – the job she left was nothing like the job she took 25 years ago.

I give Miss Petronio a pat on the back for being honest and intelligent, which technically IS her duty (or part of it) and is increasingly rare, among both military bureaucrats and women. I disagree that it’s undeserved, and I’m surprised that you feel it is; I would think you’d be pleased with anyone who publicly criticizes counterproductive military policies.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5
Dannyfrom504 July 9, 2012 at 23:08

Firepower-

I stayed in for reasons you’ll never understand.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4
DevilDog July 10, 2012 at 00:51

Bench 1 rep max – 145
Squat 1 rep max – 200

lol… I don’t know, I’m a bodybuilder and Marine.. Those numbers make me laugh, I was hitting those numbers 2 months into my lifting career (Not exaggerating) for 3 sets, 8-10 reps, most highschool guys in my gym rep that out for 8-10 reps.. That’s absolute noob status.. She’s making it seem like she was strong or something, for a Woman, I guess. But she’s weaker than the average highschool Boy in the gym, and most of the devildogs around me.. Just sayin…

Also, she scored far-above average on the Female PT standards.. But the Female PT standards are a JOKE… The MALE PT standards are an absolute joke. Here’s the thing, guys, PT standards are a bar for the MINIMUM. You are challenged during actual training, not during a PT test. For most guys (I’m in the infantry), doing our PT standards test is basically just going outside, running a few miles, knocking out some push-ups, knocking out some pull-ups and sit-ups.. NOT REALLY HARD.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
DevilDog July 10, 2012 at 00:54

Also, people really need to stop acting like military PT standards are a bar to compare yourself to the elite, or something. It’s like qualifying to be eligible for SEAL training. Look up the qualifications, they are EASY. A guy who’s semi-serious and has a few months to spare can meet them, but does that mean he’ll breeze through the actual training? LOL, F-NO. Same thing with Marine/Army/Navy/AF PT standards, they’re JUST the bare minimum.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
tiredofitall July 10, 2012 at 01:29

To the lady who penned the article: “You’ll get no sympathy from me. You want sympathy, look in the dictionary between shit and syphillis. That’s where you’ll find my sympathy.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2
Ray Manta July 10, 2012 at 06:53

Woggy wrote about submarines:
All of those feminine products take up valuable space – space that could be used for food or other mission enhancing items.

So do prosaic features such as bathrooming facilities, which have to be separate for women and men. It’s safe to say that any military vehicle that accommodates both men and women long-term will be more expensive, less efficient, or both at the same time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Firepower July 10, 2012 at 09:12

Dannyfrom504

Firepower-

I stayed in for reasons you’ll never understand.

Gee, thanks for the clearing that up. That’s a pretty good reason…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 14
Firepower July 10, 2012 at 09:18

Suz:
I give Miss Petronio a pat on the back for being honest and intelligent… which is increasingly rare, among both military bureaucrats and women.

That is the problem I described.

I disagree that it’s undeserved, and I’m surprised that you feel it is; I would think you’d be pleased with anyone who publicly criticizes counterproductive military policies.

If outspokeness did any good, then I’d be pleased.

As it is, that alone won’t stop the continued deterioration of our military.

Part of the problem is ONLY a female can “get away with” criticizing the military – she who has no combat experience.

A combat-decorated white male, saying the exact same things, would be kicked-out. There’s the problem.

And, it ain’t gonna be fixed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6
Suz July 10, 2012 at 09:46

“If outspokeness did any good, then I’d be pleased.”

So should everyone just shut up or should they speak up anyway?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
PeterTheGreat July 10, 2012 at 11:11

She describes herself as a superior officer. I very much doubt those under her would really rate her as such due to female physical, emotional and willpower limitations.

It would be interesting if we could get an honest appraisal, though.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
MaMu1977 July 10, 2012 at 13:59

I have some bad news, re: birth control and the military.

If you’re working at the largest hospitals at the largest bases with the largest retiree rosters, about 20% of all pharmaceutical expenditures involve female fertility. Eg., Wilford Hall’s pharmacies order about $20K in birth control options for every $100K spent (I’ll add that another $5K of fertility drugs are usually ordered on a weekly basis as well.) For smaller bases (especially in low-populated areas, such as Montana and Idaho), BCP expenditures can reach *40%* of all pharmaceutical purchases.

My first base was situated between a massive Fort and a minor AFRB. We would purchase about $15K of BCP per $50K order, but we’d regularly receive *cancer patients* who were assigned to the larger bases (despite being downgraded to a superclinic), because the Fort would run out of on-hand treatment drugs for the patients’ condition. On a weekly basis, we’d receive patients who drove between 3-10 hours away from their assigned bases to order their life-saving mess from us (just to drive back to their home base{s}, because we didn’t warrant the assignment of an oncologist or qualified internal medicine doc.) However, my base and that Fort always had 50+ options of birth control on tap…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Firepower July 10, 2012 at 14:03

Suz July 10, 2012 at 09:46

So should everyone just shut up or should they speak up anyway?

They should DO – enough with the gumflapping.

Shut up and DO, or speak up and DO, either way beats endless yapping about “don’t ask don’t tell” bullshit that was being yapped at during the ancient history of Clinton’s Reign.

Too much talk. No action.
PROOF: not a damn thing will change, in fact – the military WILL get WORSE.

I guarantee it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Suz July 10, 2012 at 14:59

Another nice dodge, Firepower. Last night I considered asking, based on your recent history of comments here and elsewhere, if you’re one of those rare men who can’t bring himself to give credit where it’s due if it’s to a woman. Some men seem to believe that if a woman does anything remotely “good,” it’s 1) accidental, 2) because she has an ulterior motive, or 3) not enough.

I didn’t ask because I thought it would be rude and presumptive. Turns out I didn’t need to ask; two out of three in less than 24 hours. You have made your point.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4
dannyfrom504 July 10, 2012 at 15:43

Firepower-

do me a favor- quit going to my site. i don’t want you there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
Just1X July 10, 2012 at 16:09

@Suz
to be fair, Firepower hates everybody. You really shouldn’t take it personally :0

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
ActaNonVerba July 10, 2012 at 18:51

As a former jarhead of ten years I appreciate this officer’s candor and guts to write something which she knew would be met with feminists’ howling. However, personally, I am all in favor of females in combat.

I want as many females in as much intensive combat as possible. Just as I want as many female janitors, prisoners, coal miners, suicide victims, etc.. as possible. I don’t wish women misfortune for kicks I simply want them to experience life they way men do. I want that glass cellar destroyed.

I don’t care about the military’s “operational readiness”, blah blah blah. Our military is ridiculously powerful. We will be fine, particularly if we try to keep our noses out of other country’s business (as much as is reasonably possible). In any case, any damage incurred by putting multitudes of females in front line combat is nothing compared to the damage to the economic and spiritual damage done to our nation by feminism.

Until the glass cellar is truly broken (which may be never) or a solar flare wipes out most modern conveniences via a massive EMP burst (even less likely to happen) women in general, but especially feminists, will never be reasonable towards or appreciative of men.

If anyone thinks I go too far, as yourself: Would more people be physically, emotionally, and psychologically harmed by women getting a shocking wake-up call over the course of a decade or two? Or, would more people be harmed by continuing decade after decade of double standards or misandry?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
? about Feminism, Religion July 10, 2012 at 19:35

Western cultures need to bring back the reverence for the woman’s moon cycles that they used to have and that Eastern cultures still retain.

The rite of passage of menarche and the female performed rituals surrounding it that initiated girls into womanhood in the company of her community’s elder wise women created a sense of honor, importance and belonging in the girl’s mind. Womanhood was something to be revered and enjoyed. She was taught to listen to her body and be aware of it’s alignment with the Earth’s rhythms.

She was taught that her moon cycle was to regulate her life, guide her through physiological changes and develop her intuition. She was to take some time off every month to honor this and self reflect.

Today’s modern West just tells women to pop some pain pills, stuff herself with a tampon and get on out there and plow through the day no matter how fatigued she feels.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4
Suz July 10, 2012 at 19:51

ActaNon Verba,

Unfortunately, you are absolutely correct. Women who demand “equality” need to fully claim it. All in or all out. Yes it would temporarily reduce the effectiveness of the military, but feminism has already done that, so what’s the problem? Might as well accelerate the process and get the worst over with; there’s no other viable way to recover.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
? about Feminism, Religion July 10, 2012 at 19:57

Suz, equality means everyone is answerable to the same laws and the government is answerable to its individual citizens equally. It does not mean we are all the same. No two people are the same. Feminism does not claim that any two people are exactly the same either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
? about Feminism, Religion July 10, 2012 at 20:00

“Isn’t the solution for this that men should STOP joining the military”

Of course. The US military industrial complex has only ever been a means for corporations to make trillions at the cost of the lives of poor young people. Those old geezers are youth haters.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
? about Feminism, Religion July 10, 2012 at 20:09

“Why, should we allow instead breastfeeding places in companies”

See, this attitutude right here is a part of your problem. In your culture reality is shunned and photoshopped fantasies are pimped out in place.

The breast’s function is to FEED, not to stay perky for porn.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5
Suz July 10, 2012 at 20:49

? about Feminism, Religion

” It does not mean we are all the same.”

You’re right, which is why I didn’t say they that’s what feminism claims. True equality is when everybody has the same rights and the same responsibilities. Feminist “equality” is when women have more rights and fewer responsibilities. Nothing would end that particular version of “equality” than giving women the responsibilities that come with the “rights” they think they want – not sheltering women from the negative consequences of their actions.

You are aware, aren’t you, that most women were against women’s suffrage until they were assured that there would be no female conscription? The minute they were promised a right without a responsibility, the majority were all for it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Sun July 11, 2012 at 00:37

@ Suz

Once you admit that men and women are not the same there is no logical reason to treat them as such by granting them equal rights.

The only one is a weak “moral” one that it is ethical on the basis that a few individual women can make the cut.

Equal rights is what eventually leads to what we have now equality of representation and outcome.

It is a slow process.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
ActaNonVerba July 11, 2012 at 04:20

Suz,

I agree with you that it is unfortunate (what I said in my initial post). But, again in agreement with you, I say let’s put all the chips on the table. As long as women/feminists keep screaming that they’re not getting a fair shake while actually getting a much better shake than men they’re living it up and see no reason to change.

They have shown their true natures over the last few decades. Women (except for a small minority of them) simply don’t comprehend or don’t care about abstract concepts like justice, honor, or the benefit of humanity.

Their minds can’t see beyond instincts (theemselves, usually their children, usually close relatives, partciularly female ones) and self interests. They see men as only as beasts of burden or machines. To them, they are our “owners” and we only have value in what we produce for them.

So, again, I feel the same way you do. They want equality, let’s give them 100 percent equality. Whatever damage is done to people and society won’t compare to the damage of feminism, misandry,and double standards.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Firepower July 11, 2012 at 07:55

Suz July 10, 2012 at 14:59

Another nice dodge, Firepower. Last night I considered asking, based on your recent history of comments here and elsewhere,

Thanks, for monitoring me, Mom. Yyou’d make a great Marine Comandantette. But, women don’t belong in the military at all – especially in command roles where they get to Hilary It Up with somebody else’s son.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Firepower July 11, 2012 at 08:01

dannyfrom504

Firepower-

do me a favor- quit going to my site. i don’t want you there.

Yikes…THAT kind of talk of warning posters on another blog to stay off yours, would get you banned on your reasonable, equitable pal Dalcrock’s – he calls it “acting like you own the place!” if I recall.

Still, I will miss your blog; it was great for getting me in touch with My Feminine Side.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
Suz July 11, 2012 at 08:35

Sun,
“Once you admit that men and women are not the same there is no logical reason to treat them as such by granting them equal rights.”

Since when does “legally equal” mean “the same?”
So inborn differences are what should determine the extent of ones legal rights? Are you suggesting that “weak” people shouldn’t have the same rights as “strong” people? “Immoral” (by someone’s definition) people shouldn’t have the same rights as “moral” people? I thought the Constitution provided for punishment and the rescinding of one’s rights AFTER one violates another’s rights, not “just in case” it might happen.

“Equal rights is what eventually leads to what we have now equality of representation and outcome.”

What we have now is anything but equal representation and outcome.

Racial minorities used to have fewer rights than whites. Now whites have fewer rights. Women used to have fewer rights than men. Now men have fewer rights.

Are you noticing a pattern here? As long as any group CAN HAVE more rights than any other group, some groups will actively suppress the rights of others (often “for their own good.”)

You seem to have forgotten one of our most important rights – * the right to hold accountable those who try to restrict our rights, * which is what attaches responsibility to rights.

Personally, I think women should be allowed to enlist in the military, but be held to the same standards as men. Women’s boot camp should be the same as men’s. Any woman who can meet those standards should be welcome in the military. Any woman who can’t meet the standards and still wants to serve, can join a “Women’s Auxiliary” and be assigned tasks which meet her abilities. If there’s a woman in this country who could pass the Navy SEAL training course (men’s standards) she should be allowed to become a Navy SEAL.

“Granting” women the right to vote was not the mistake. The mistake was exempting women from responsibility for the consequences of what they vote for, namely conscription. I guarantee that if the right to vote were contingent on Selective Service, VERY few women would want to vote.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Suz July 11, 2012 at 08:52

“Thanks, for monitoring me, Mom.”

You’re welcome, Kiddo.
Does it bother you when people pay attention to what you said a few weeks ago, and notice trends in your thoughts? (Are you even aware that there ARE trends in your thoughts?) Do you prefer that people not judge you by your words?

Real thinkers like to be challenged. It pushes them to keep thinking.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
? about Feminism, Religion July 11, 2012 at 16:34

”You are aware, aren’t you, that most women were against women’s suffrage until they were assured that there would be no female conscription? The minute they were promised a right without a responsibility, the majority were all for it.”

I’m against “conscription” for either sex. Military service should always be voluntary. And just see, there are plenty of American women today who are not “avoiding their responsibility” and volunteering and they are being criticised for it.

Sun,
“Once you admit that men and women are not the same there is no logical reason to treat them as such by granting them equal rights.”

You and I are also not the same yet I would never suggest you should not have the same legal rights that I do.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
Suz July 11, 2012 at 20:51

” And just see, there are plenty of American women today who are not “avoiding their responsibility” and volunteering and they are being criticised for it.”

Sure, they’re volunteering. They’re volunteering for careers that garner pay and benefits equal to what men earn, but they’re not equally qualified to do the work. Therefore they DON’T do “equal” work.

Of course they’re being criticized. That’s not being responsible, that’s mooching. I’d like to see how many women would “volunteer” to be paid according to their actual abilities.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Stalhjelm July 15, 2012 at 12:05

Active duty Marine here. I had a long-winded, well thought out series of paragraphs relevant to this topic, until Firefox crashed. So I’ll summarize it with this:

No number of briefings on military gender equality, opening new fields to female personnel, and gender-integrating training will change the fact that male Marines do NOT enjoy picking up the slack for a female Marine who gets pregnant due to recklessly sleeping around.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Firepower July 16, 2012 at 11:23

suzy
Now men have fewer rights.

Are you noticing a pattern here?

YES!

The pattern is:
whiny do-nothing mrm activists
will whine even louder in 10 years
when even more of their rights erode

Hurray for ONLINE ACTIVISM

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
Denise July 28, 2012 at 08:41

Is it not the main objective, after the mission, to come out of combat in the best of health as possible?? A missing leg for example is not the same as developing a disease, male or female. And from this article, the main point I took from this is, this officer may have been less of a help and more of a hinderance to her platoon. The officer who wrote this article seems to have the overall Mission then health priority in order.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Denise July 28, 2012 at 08:46

I would be very interested in knowing how you trained for your tour. I’m in a military outfit.. I’m unlikely to see combat. Just out of pure interest, how you coped in your time and what you did to maintain your combat effectiveness.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Brian July 31, 2012 at 19:05

Women should serve equally beside men in every aspect of the military, including the draft, and also on the front lines. I absolutely support women fulfilling their dreams of going to war beside their male counterparts. Why did it take so long for women to stand up for real equal rights in this regard? Ladies, I respect your drive to defend our country in the same way men have for centuries. Being able to go to war means you have to reprogram yourself to devalue and discard life…the life of the enemy. I’m glad women are now capable of what men have had to condition themselves to do for hundreds of years. Nothing better than a woman that’s psychologically capable of capping another woman in the womb. I truly respect your continuing evolution. I’m so proud to know that you have finally come to terms with the meaning of true equality and look forward to serving by your side. I’m glad women have come to terms with the fact that they should have a direct role in the sometimes necessary tragedy of war. To be a soldier means you have to somewhat separate yourself from humanity and transcend to a sometimes misunderstood level of indifference with regard to life. I personally believe that all women can heroically and equally achieve the same level of indifference to life that any man can. Men have been successfully trained to achieve this goal since mankind was created. There is no reason women can’t achieve the same level of spirit and honor in their souls.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Anonymous July 18, 2013 at 10:28

I have a willing synthetic eyesight to get fine detail and can foresee troubles before they will happen.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 3 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: