The recent court ruling on women and selective service caused me to revisit my 2015 post on the subject, The fantasy of drafting women:
We may see selective service changed to include women as well as men. We may even see a situation where women are drafted alongside of men. What we won’t see, ever, is a situation where women have high or even significant pressure applied to motivate them to pass physical requirements if they don’t personally want to be there.
What this is about, and what this always has been about, is envy of men. It is about eradicating the idea of masculine virtues, and more importantly, erasing all sentiment of gratitude for what the men in the military do. To a feminist feeling gratitude to men is unbearable. This is why every unit, especially elite forces and combat infantry, must include women. When Seal Team Six took out Bin Ladin feminists were forced to bear the unbearable; public officials expressed gratitude for the “men who risked their lives to accomplish the mission”, and feminists couldn’t chime in with “and women too!”
Never again.
Since the goal is to erase the concept of masculine virtues, the new bargain the introduction of women into combat represents isn’t to have women join equally or even seriously in the fighting and dying. The new bargain is that men will continue to be the ones who fight and die, but they must not feel a sense of masculine pride in either doing this or having this obligation. Registering women for selective service alongside men serves this goal, as does drafting women and letting those who don’t want to be there fail out. The imagined downside for feminists is only a fantasy.
I still see this as mostly correct, but I would no longer be so adamant regarding never. After seeing how the deep state responded to Trump’s election, and the cultural sea change we’ve experienced on transgender acceptance, I can now imagine a scenario where women would not only be drafted, but face pressure to meet the physical standards. I still don’t see this as likely, but instead of being a 0% chance I would now put this as maybe a 5% or 10% chance. The vast majority of feminists (which includes nearly all women) still think the way I described above, and conservatives still hold chivalrous views that would facilitate the option to opt out that nearly all feminists expect. But given that lesbian feminists are now the conservatives when it comes to the culture war, and given that they appear to be losing, a truly radical scenario is at least conceivable now.
For men and women with daughters concerned about the possibility of a draft, my advice would be to consider the issue as it relates to the popular push to have daughters prove their athletic prowess. A girl who went through school trying to prove she is like one of the guys will naturally feel much more pressure to prove herself physically if drafted, even if she doesn’t want to serve. Also, instructors are going to pick up on which young women have “moxie”, and press them much harder to pass military physical fitness requirements than they will a young woman who has a truly traditional vibe. Should we ever find ourselves drafting women, kick ass conservative gals are going to feel much more internal and external pressure to not wash out, and women with a quiet and gentle spirit are far more likely to be permitted to fail out.
Given that serving has become the new “blue collar job” of choice for young men (I read some time ago that almost half of the young men at the local high school try to enlist after graduating), I doubt that we’ll see a draft in a very long time, if ever. So the girls will have to fill out the selective service form to be eligible for college financial aid. Maybe if we elect a government that decides to declare war on Russia then maybe we’ll have a draft, but then again we’ll have even bigger things to worry about if it comes to that.
Or, they’ll just draft trannies, and claim they’re drafting women.
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/transgender-high-school-athletes-spark-controversy-debate-in-connecticut
@FrankK
If the draft were in response to a real need, say an existential war with a near peer, even then I wouldn’t expect women to face much pressure to pass muster. The goal at that point won’t be to bloat out the military, but to fill the real slots that need filling. And those will be filled by men and a much smaller number of kickass gals (again if this is really about need).
The scenario I can imagine where women feel real pressure to pass muster would be ideological radicals using the draft not to win a war, but to rework our society, a kind of wrenching mass change like the Khmer Rouge tried in Cambodia.
A district court decision that could be inconvenient to 20-something women isn’t going to last very long. I don’t really know what legal gymnastics will be required to slap this down at the Circuit court level (with prejudice, if possible) but fully expect to see it later on this year.
Feminist territory marking is all fun and games until some actual price has to be paid, and failure to register for Selective Service can make life difficult.
Feminists and their tradcon sock puppets will get milage out of it, making noise and raising money, but that’s all.
Dalrock: ” I can now imagine a scenario where women would not only be drafted, but face pressure to meet the physical standards.”
That is missing the key point. The key question is how women are deployed. How many will be in combat – getting crippled and killed? Physical strength is a only a minority of front-line jobs (e.g., infantry), and women’s generally lesser strength does not limit their participation in most dangerous jobs.
We saw this play out in the WOT. Lots of praise for brave women fighters! Fifty of whom died in OEF, vs. the 2,297 men killed. In OIF 110 women died vs. 4,300 men. I’ve found no data on deaths by gender due to hostile action, but looking at the lists it appears that most of the women died from other causes (79% of total deaths were from hostile action).
Casualty rates in Iraq and Afghanistan bases were lower than for the same troops in US bases (probably due to fewer road and alcohol-related incidents). If this is true in future wars, women draftees will be quite safe (I don’t know about validity of stories about rape and assault).
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf
Nahh, your old post was correct. Feminists always allow conservatives to win if the net outcome benefits women. Transgender acceptance has not done anything to beat back our culture of chivalry, and your points back then still stand:
“All women who want to avoid being drafted need to do is fail the physical test. When they do, everyone will point out that women and men are different after all. Men in theory could also fail the physical tests, but in practice this will come with a stigma for men that women will never face.”
In the event of a real existential war, all pretense of kick-ass gals being fighting equals to men will evaporate. Women will press their men and sons to the front line meat grinder with gusto, denying they ever were up to the task of front-line combat. With a straight face they will categorically deny women are/were men’s equal and instead that males should man-up and protect our way of life. Overnight the whole society will have amnesia about equality.
I won’t be part of it. Those who do will die satisfied they did their part, preserving gangsta culture (our way of life) and free gibs for all the illegals. Those illegals and thugs won’t participate either, and they will inherit your daughters and widows, safe and sound after the dust settles. Congratulations.
@ Dalrock
“I can now imagine a scenario where women would not only be drafted, but face pressure to meet the physical standards. I still don’t see this as likely, but instead of being a 0% chance I would now put this as maybe a 5% or 10% chance.”
I honestly can’t, for two reasons.
One, women want the freedom to do something, but not the duty to do it. They want the right to join the military and fight, but not the obligation that comes with Selective Service. The moment duty comes into the equation that is when we get the feminists turning into damsel in distress. Ultimately, it comes down to having control. Once they’re part of the draft, they lose control. Like you said, it’s about removing masculine pride, not participating in the group long-term.
Two, most men consider themselves “chivalrous,” and one way for that mindset to get triggered is if their daughter or sisters or girlfriends indicate they feel threatened, which is what a draft would mean for most women. It is more likely that men would actually threaten violent resistance to any effort to forcibly draft “their” women. The issue is too visceral for them.
I would add that a lot of men truly do feel insecure about their masculinity because they haven’t ever been given a chance to “prove it” as they see it. Vowing to fight and die to protect the womenfolk is as good a way as any.
I would add that it would be very difficult for a churchian steeped in chivalry could charge any men in their congregation with sin for threatening violence to protect their women.
When we get medicare for all, the government will need to draft women into a greatly expanded medical corps that serves in government run hospitals that will take the place of private and church-affiliated hospitals. That way, all of our nurses and nurse’s aids will be conscripted at minimum wage rather than having to pay them what real nurses make now. Gotta cut costs somehow to feed the big government beast.
Imagine the draft no longer being about providing the military with the means to defend the country or to win the war, but as a massive force of government run slave labor necessitated by socialism. That’s where drafting women really makes sense.
OT but military related
https://ljubomirfarms.wordpress.com/2019/03/05/a-little-military-humor/
@The Question
I honestly can’t, for two reasons.
I’m sorry Mr. Question, but you are not allowed to disagree with Dalrock, a.ka. “Mr. Buckles.” In an outrageously hilarious send up of our esteemed cult leader, the Warhorn guys have created a fictitious Teddy Bear character that tells us angry bitter men exactly what we want to hear so that we don’t have to learn or grow. The Bear tells us that all of our problems are our wive’s fault (or ex-wive’s as the case may be) and we believe everything the Bear says even though he doesn’t even use his real name.
So in that spirit, I say we assiduously avoid disagreeing with Dalrock, a.ka. Mr. Buckles, a.k.a. our cult leader. That way the riotously funny spoof on Warhorn will be utterly confirmed in its insightful takedown of this website.
Dalrock, I mean Mr. Buckles, let us bow to your almighty pseudo-visage. Eno-eno raza duhl. Rise Mr. Buckles, rise! (chanting noises). Everybody chant with me, please.
Honestly, the Warhorn guys should quit their day jobs and take this show to Vegas.
I think they kill the draft in a panic that women will be forced to serve in combat now that the judges made the correct decision. But you have to take into account that several countries require women to serve already and that may be the model that wins out.
Dalrock:
That could very well be. Of course, one of the reasons we have “economic conscription” and no draft is because the UMC doesn’t want their sons being dragged off to a foreign land and maimed or killed. That’s a job for underemployed schlubs in flyover country.
Mitch:
FWIW, Medicare currently pays private sector providers to deliver healthcare to seniors. But as we know, Medicare isn’t far from insolvency, and I simply do not see how we could switch to a “Medicare for all” system without radically lowering our cost structures, so conscripting young men and women to serve as low paid, poorly trained medical staff could be in the cards (as well as rationing). Or Medicare could simply tell the Medical Industrial Complex “this is all we can pay you, deal with it.”
@Frank K
Or Medicare could simply tell the Medical Industrial Complex “this is all we can pay you, deal with it.”
And how does a private sector business deal with it? When the government controls every aspect of what a hospital receives in revenue but does not control what the hospital pays in overhead, then it goes out of business. This has a cascading effect on private and even non-profit hospitals as their own costs become prohibitive. Then there is no healthcare or the government takes over the hospitals and partially deals with the costs by conscripting slave labor.
YouTube bans Russian Christian channel: https://russia-insider.com/en/it-begins-youtube-censors-christians-bans-russian-faith-us-creator-vows-fight-sign-petition/ri21510
I found this via the Russian search engine, Yandex.com
I have a list of search engines other than Google, because Google censors much. Especially things that make it look bad.
Maybe we’ll get lucky and abolish the draft completely.
RPL
Russian Faith is administered by a friend of mine, and it also where Mychael’s response to the debt free virgins article appears.
Not surprising they don’t like it at YouTube.
Here is a short clip demonstrating that The Royal Navy was on board with female sailors and transgender sailors almost sixty years ago.
I believe the military is requiring implanted birth control, at least in some circumstances.
if they can make a person fight, they can make them take birth control to prevent the escape route.
“When we get medicare for all, the government will need to draft women into a greatly expanded medical corps that serves in government run hospitals that will take the place of private and church-affiliated hospitals.”
Don’t some European countries already mandate some army OR civil social service for two years from their young citizens? Male or female?
And since feminists have pushed this so much, they should take away the one escape option they have and in boot camp, give the women a shot of depo-provera. That way, they can’t have an oops and get out of service free card.
The US military is more of a world military police than a real Army. It is being used as the enforcer of globalist social engineering agenda, both internally and externally. China and Russia are wisely resisting the US empire in a passive-agressive way, which means they are smart enough not to risk a direct confrontation. They realize that time is on their side. The US Empire will collapse because of the failure of the US Dollar, not because of a shooting war with Russia or China. Once that happens, the gender-engineered socialist paradise collapses with it.
“the real slots that need filling”
In any military the majority of jobs are non-combat, many of them safely out of harms way. These are the sorts of jobs you could easily assign women to (and which they would prefer).
@CSI
Well…as long as the women are happy…
Two, most men consider themselves “chivalrous,” and one way for that mindset to get triggered is if their daughter or sisters or girlfriends indicate they feel threatened, which is what a draft would mean for most women. It is more likely that men would actually threaten violent resistance to any effort to forcibly draft “their” women. The issue is too visceral for them.
Or, alternatively, so many American men in the near future will become so sick and tired of feminist yougogrrrrrrl harpies that they’ll either be utterly indifferent to drafting women, or, just as likely, demand that women be FIRST to be drafted in order to prove their SIW bona fides. I think that very few will express visible anger at the practice of drafting women.
Pingback: Revisiting the subject of women and the draft. | Reaction Times
Plus we’ve gotten a lot of chest beating about “how dare they send OUR DAUGHTERS off to war to fight die”; shed a few tears for OUR SONS as we close in on two decades of war.
Well, just like with their 19 minutes long allowed for a lousy 2 mile run, the ladies better hurry the hell up or they’re going to miss their chance! We have only been waiting for 73 years here to get ready.
Because by 2025 there will be more fighting robots/droids in the US Army than human combat soldiers. This does not include flying drones. At the current rate of technological innovation in this sector, I should not be surprised if this date were brought forward earlier. The only enemies with remotely comparable budgets, China and Russia, are both investing heavily in the same kinds of fighting machines.
The future army soldier will still need to be physically fit, strong and with superior physical and mental endurance – ready for battle. But the Army is not going to take on all of the grunts it can grab anymore. And the “backoffice roles” we are currently thinking women can easily do safely “out of harm’s way” are going to all change dramatically. Logistics, electronics repairs, software expertise, configuration/calibration, weapons expertise, munitions expertise, guidance systems expertise, comms, testing, power systems management, infosecurity, will become more important than ever before. Some women can do this work. No doubt. But it won’t be in the feminist approved percentiles.
As for women (and feminists, which are the same thing these days) wanting to “me too!” their way to military valor, the 400,000 graves at Arlington National Cemetary are predominantly (99.9%) male. That ain’t gonna change. So they aren’t fooling anyone but themselves.
My money is on us losing some future conflict big time. I am not sure even that will change the lunacy, by itself.
I don’t want us to lose the conflict of course. I just predict we will, as many have already noted. This won’t be the only factor, but a big one nonetheless.
@Mitch
It would have to change its cost structures, and that would not be easy, but the truth is that our healthcare system is somewhat gold plated. But to give an example:
I used to work for a company that makes defibrillators. We had our high end models, which cost about $10,000. And we also made AED’s,which cost under $1000. You will find the $10,000 model in crash carts in hospitals and ambulances in the US, and I learned that in most other countries they make do with an AED in the ambulances and hospitals.
Yeah, the $10,000 defibrillator is better and can do many things an AED can’t do. But it’s expensive.
We also have a lot of redundancy in the US. Need an non emergency CAT or MRI scan in the US? No problem, they can get you in right away, of course it will cost you (hope you have good insurance). I remember reading once that here are more MRI machines in Seattle than in all of Canada. I was in the hospital last year for elective surgery. They did a great job, but what blew me away was that most of the rooms in my wing were empty. I asked a nurse if that was normal and she said yes. Redundancy makes healthcare expensive.
Don’t get me wrong, I like our gold plated system, especially since I have good insurance. But it is pretty easy to see that costs could be reduced. And yeah, that might mean waiting a long time for elective surgery.
The military is using the Captain Marvel movie to recruit more kick ass women. The star Brie Larson is fittingly a hardcore feminist.
https://taskandpurpose.com/captain-marvel-air-force-recruiting
I think it’s more likely that, rather than being stuck down, the ruling will be upheld by as a good application of the equal protection clause of the Consideration. HOWEVER, rather than forcing women to register for selective service we could see the end of the forced registration of men.
One problem with my hopeful assessment is that once created, government bureaucracies don’t just disappear. Any action to eliminate the draft would have to give the agency and all those people employed overseeing the draft a new mission…. otherwise tye draft is here to stay.
I’m with BillyS, by the time any war gets big enough for Uncle Sam to activate the draft it’ll be too late to activate the draft. Our border security isn’t going to slow down anybody.
In the twentieth century, in the contested “Heartland” region of Eurasia, the Russian women were already nearing combat proficiency, helping out in many ways. The more desperate a nation gets, the sooner and vaster the spread of women throughout industry and backing the front lines.
Russia is a rougher, stronger nation than the bulk of the United States because it is poorer. Wealth has been observed for a long term to debilitate a populace. In an alliance-situation, nearing the choke-point of ABSOLUTE DESPERATION … (a href=”https://foetos.wordpress.com/2019/02/25/state-of-the-alliance/”>Click On HERE to Continue
Sorry. CLICK HERE TO CONTINUE. My post is too long to comment for, otherwise.
Also, what goes unmentioned is that young women are the breeding-population of the future. No sane nation is going to decimate its breeding-stock. And as for women gearing up for combat? Puh-leeze. They’re too busy giggling and doing each other’s hair. The notion that they’re going to stick a bayonet between someone else’s ribcage and get the heart is absurdist fantasy, to say the least.
The whole notion, except what ++I++ wrote on alliances, is absurd.
Pingback: The fantasy of drafting women. | Dalrock
@X
Soviet desperation in 1942-45 is largely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
Your self-contradiction between the first and third comments – duly noted.
OK, very off topic here. I have been working on this one for a few days, and it is in response to the topic of the upcoming 21 convention. Read past the beginning part about snow. Enjoy,
https://ljubomirfarms.wordpress.com/2019/03/06/ok-this-is-just-getting-ridiculous/
Carry on.
Drafting my daughter is a line in the sand. Over my dead body.
This is the “other” Nereus, not the old timer here. After further *respectful* interaction with Bayly, who already knows my real name, he demanded I sign my name immediately to the public discussion posts. I refused. He responded by banning me from his site for 1000 years for making “anonymous accusations”. Seriously. 1000 years. But I did not make any accusations, I simply asked him to deal with the cognitive dissonance and explain how it is a sin for a man to let his daughter to enlist in the military, but it is not a sin for his daughter to enlist in the military.
https://ibb.co/Y7k9tNg
There is something wrong with this guy. He knows who I am. He could know who my pastor is if he wanted to know. The only reason for possibly wanting me to publish my name publicly is so he can commence with ad hominem instead of dealing with the actual argument. Well, unless anyone can think of another reason.
It appears to me that he is fundamentally incapable of defending his own arguments.
Sorry, the correct quote is “Account suspended until March 5, 2019: Refusal to identify himself when leveling public accusations.”
I identified myself to his moderator *last week*. The moderator is his son Joseph, who (without asking me) added Nathan and Ben to the thread, so all three of them know exactly who I am.
Discussion of Bayly’s argument is not an accusation, private or public. An accusation is something like, “you are a liar” (which he and/or crew accused me of several times). I never called him a liar, or a sinner, or a bad pastor. I simply asked him to explain to us military guys how we are responsible for women enlisting when we have no way to stop them. I asked him how he expects us to repent? I asked him if we should overthrow the federal judges who made these rulings? In short, I asked him to give a coherent and logically consistent position on women and men in the military. No accusations were made.
@Nereus600
He may as well have banned you until Pastor Wilson holds women accountable for getting abortions!
@Christopher Conrad Nystrom, what if your daughter at age 18 enlists in the military of her own free will. Is she in sin? Yes or no? The likelihood of your daughter ever being drafted, regardless of what a judge ruled is virtually zero. There are thousands of women in the military today, almost all of them whores, believe me, and every single one of them voluntarily chose to join. Is that a sin, yes or no?
Nah, the women will just get pregnant when a war breaks out. Then they will receive welfare instead of punishment. Meanwhile, the men will get court marshalled, if anything were to happen to him that prevents him from fighting. Atleast if history is any indication.
He might well know who you are but he cannot put your name to your comment without breaking some very problematic moral codes, aka doxing you. He wants you to dox yourself first, then you can suffer the fallout whilst he keeps his hands clean.
They lost a clear cut argument, you can no more blame men for women joining the military than you can blame men for women joining the workforce, women joining sports clubs, women joining Church groups, women joining fitness clubs, women cheating, women doing basically anything by their own choice. At the end of the day, women have agency and it’s high time Bayly acknowledges this.
Men will get shot and killed, put in prison, worked forced labour and a myriad of other potential catastrophes if they refused to serve if found fit enough for service.
But muh oppreshon olympics and teh wimminz are always so oprrreshoned as to be quivering babies but muh eqaulatay!
@Asaph
As part of the zeitgeist of masculinization of women the media was fawning over Kurdish women fighting ISIS:
From their own press:
Those women does appear to be a validation that ideological indoctrination can get them to fight.
”As a young woman of Kurdish origin, I believe it’s almost impossible not to be political. As Maya Angelou rightly said: “If you’re not angry, you’re not paying attention.” At the centre of my understanding of the Kurdish struggle is the Kurdish Women’s Protection Units (Kurdish: Yekîneyên Parastina Jinê), also commonly known as the YPJ.
To give some context: approximately 30 million Kurds live in Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Syria and Armenia. The Kurdish people to this day remain the largest ethnic group not to have gained their own permanent nation-state: a people without a land. Many of us who have lived under Turkish rule; which previously forbade us to speak, write or learn our language, have over time identified as Turkish-Kurdish. However, the feeling of being in cultural limbo in a nation which seems obsessed with patriarchal values and extreme nationalism, can eventually strip people of their Kurdish identity. Frankly, it is much simpler to just be a Turk. For this reason, today in the UK you’ll find large populations of Turkish-speaking Kurds who when asked the dreaded question: “So where are you from?” will end up explaining the entire history of the Kurdish struggle.
The Partiya Karkeren Kurdistan (PKK) contains one of the largest contingents of armed women militants in the world. The group was established in the late 1970s, during which time it waged an armed struggle against the Turkish state for equal rights and self-determination for the Kurds; who make up 15% to 20% of the Turkish population.
Under the Turkish state Kurds have received harsh, dehumanising treatment. This has included: the banning of Kurdish names and costume, the restriction of the use of the Kurdish language, prejudice against the Alevi faith practiced by many Kurds, and even the denial of the existence of a Kurdish ethnic identity.
Political views of the PKK differ considerably. The party is listed as a terrorist organisation by Turkey, the EU and the US, however the United Nations and countries such as Switzerland, China, India, Russia and Egypt do not deem the PKK as such. The party is widely considered by many Kurds in Turkey as well as those living in Iraq, Iran, Syria and abroad, as revolutionary. This is a view which has become more widespread since the PKK’s active role in battling against ISIS and fighting to protect the Yazidi people during the 2014 massacre in the Iraqi town of Sinjar. Despite these contrasting stances, one clear fact is that the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social and economic equality, plays a central role in the PKK’s movement. The YPJ Women’s Protection Unit is evidence of this. Many Kurdish women have gained a sense of secured identity through the Kurdish women’s struggle through joining and supporting this guerrilla movement. In doing so, Kurdish women fighters have subverted traditional gender roles and stereotypes; representing the woman as a fighter, a soldier, a protector, a woman in war – roles more traditionally and culturally associated with masculinity.
The PKK movement rejects the idea of the State, and regards gender inequality as something which must be addressed within its “Women’s Liberation Ideology”. It promotes the term Jineology which is used to fill the gaps that the current social sciences are incapable of doing:
“Jineology is built on the principle that without the freedom of women within society and without a real consciousness surrounding women, no society can call itself free”..
http://gal-dem.com/kurdish-ypj-female-fighters-progressive-feminists-present-day/
This is their state project:
https://womensrevolutioninrojava.org/
Promoting a feminist democracy and empowering women in the Middle East.
This is one their latest videos in the operation in east syria to take out the last of ISIS:
After their desperate situation has passed in Kobani. Which still includes women in combat.
@Nereus600
They’re attempting to appear consistent now that they’ve been exposed. Seems like for all their “only adults in the room” demeanor, Dalrock has these guys on the run. They’re acting like a bunch of chickens with a fox in the henhouse.
“Dalrock has these guys on the run. ”
Running? The wicked flee when no one purses them.
@Ras al Ghul
As far as I am aware, there is no requirement for implanted birth control for women in combat jobs. That will probably be a court case when it inevitably comes up, and it will. It will have to become policy if they want integrated combat units.
Getting pregnant is an easy out, both from deployments and the military itself. You can cut your enlistment short with no penalty if you get pregnant. We had one female at my first base who would time pregnancies out based on her deployment cycle, and then of course, there was the one who had gotten pregnant to avoid a deployment and would get an abortion after the window closed (she’d done it at least twice).
I’m sure liberals would cry about how women can control themselves, and of course, women very easily can choose abstinence. But the feminists have spent five decades now telling us that abstinence is bad and icky and stupid; what average teenage girl has a developed sense of self control?
Do any women today have a “quiet and gentle spirit?” I haven’t seen any of this rare creature. They probably hang out with the unicorns and friendly dragons.
“At the end of the day, women have agency and it’s high time Bayly acknowledges this.”
@feministhater, Bayly has explicitly acknowledged that women have moral agency. He wrote this in October 2018.
> Watch them compound their hypocrisy by denying the moral agency of women who hang out with drunk college boys. But who can blame them? They learned the curriculum well fifty years ago when their teachers taught them:
> never blame the victim; and
> woman is always the victim
> So now we are a nation that claims to be enlightened in our respect for women while we deny women any moral agency.
And yet, three months later, Bayly still denies that the PCA report that he wrote in 2009/10 blames men for putting women in combat, while failing to hold women accountable for their own choice to volunteer. The PCA report condemns men for the theoretical future conscription of women, while tiptoeing around the 220,000 women voluntarily serving in the US armed forces today.
Bayly is part of the problem that he so eloquently pointed out in October.
How can it be a sin for a man to send a woman into combat, if it is not as sin for the woman to volunteer for military service in the first place?
It is the women who volunteered for the military and sued to get into every branch that have set the precedent that will enslave their future sisters and daughters. Until somebody calls them out and says, that is sinful and we will excommunicate anyone who does it, the PCA report is just a waste of ink.
Bayly is probably the closest professional pastor to Dalrock’s position. Yet, he still cannot bring himself to admit the obvious.
Getting sentimental about the Kurds is a bit like getting sentimental about the Catalans. They (the Kurds) as a British briefing from 1918 observed give as good as they get. It was therefore the British that deliberately in 1918 split the Kurds into three: some in Turkey, some in Iraquistan and some I suppose in Iranistan. Splitting up a nation is something all governments find useful much as they find flooding the country with foreigners desirable. My truck driver friend who used to drive to the middle-east said the Kurds were the worst and he thought himself lucky to be alive.
No, I think this was the plan all along. I remember reading that there was little push at the time by feminists to remove this restriction, but the ban was rescinded anyways. This makes sense, because not being subject to military conscription has always been considered a privilege; typically of the wealthy.
What everyone forgets is that the military has every job that the civilian world has as well as trigger pullers. The removal of the ban on women being in combat is the removal of the only justification for the prohibition of women being drafted. Women make up around 80% of workers in the health care industry. According to Wikipedia, men between the ages of 18 – 26 are eligible. It takes two to four years to become a R.N. Should the military need to reactivate the draft, many young female healthcare workers will be re-assigned from the civilian to the military world. My guess is that the military would prefer that 18 y.o. females not make the physical standards for trigger pulling jobs. They will still run them through for justification sake. Keep the ones that qualify. Re-assign the ones that don’t to a non combat function. I think they are really focusing on the 21 – 26 y.o. skilled females in healthcare that will be needed if the situation is so dire, that they need to reactivate the draft.
@Opus
Yeah, I get a little suspicious of the media and neocons waxing eloquent about those brave and noble Kurds. I’m not over there and I’ve not heard anything specifically redemable about them. The only time they trot them out is when they’re attempting to start another invasion.
If they do go to war, the women not on the front lines will still demand “pay equity”. Let’s see how they do against Russian Spetznatz. That aside, it seems most wars are about regime change in countries that do not use the US $.
Opus is correct about the Kurds. They were considered sufficiently disruptive and uncooperative enough at the time that the decision was taken at Versailles to partition them into separate countries run by others. I don’t think they’ve changed that much in 100 years.
“Maybe we’ll get lucky and abolish the draft completely.”
That’s what a lot of Feminist journalists are calling for – now.
Female fighter pilot claims rape by Air Force officer: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sen-mcsally-ex-air-force-pilot-says-officer-raped-her/ar-BBUsMhl
Sen. Martha McSally, the first female fighter pilot to fly in combat, said Wednesday that she was raped in the Air Force by a superior officer.
The Arizona Republican, a 26-year military veteran, made the disclosure at a Senate hearing on the armed services’ efforts to prevent sexual assaults and improve the response when they occur.
McSally said she did not report being sexually assaulted because she did not trust the system, and she said she was ashamed and confused. McSally did not name the officer who she says raped her.
Hmm, what did I see in 21 years? A quick -0- SD layman’s list.
-enlisted women around pilots, dropping trou
-female officers around lauded enlisted combat troops, dropping trou
-senior female officers creating enlisted male he-rems
-women on ships passing themselves out like beads at Mardi Gras
-military women using the opportunity to make piles of extra money in tent city when deployed. And not by knitting socks.
Just a few.
Then when caught in the cookie jar, finger pointing ensues. Guess whose fault it is?
In some cases, PTSD disability money for life.
This stuff was going on 25 years ago. #MeToo for financial/social/promotional gain is not new to.rhe microcosm of the American military. More women = less readiness. Exponentially. Been there. Saw all going on, thinking, “Golly gee, I’m so thankful for my faithful wife back stateside, keeping the home fires burning.” In hindsight, of course, pure /s.
And, as I’ve posted before, if there’s the slightest whiff of a deployment in the air everybody’s preggers. And usually promoted when the men return.
No pasty soft churchian is telling me anyrhing in this area. They have no clue.
–
@Random Angeleno
I wouldn’t be surprised to see YPG/PKK weaponized against Turkey and Assad.
@Opus and others
Agreed the Kurds aren’t necessarily good people. They are a case study of the trend of masculinization of women.
Cross-dressing in their behavior and roles. Which is why they themselves likewise need the Gospel and spiritual rebirth.
They may be good shots. But the battlefield especially battling man to man is no place for any woman.
Many of those women seek a way out of the problems of Islam. And Christianity would be a better alternative to the wicked ideologies that they see as liberation but are in reality simply enslavement’s to sin.
Are women really free when they stain their hands with blood? And have to endure nightmares and depression afterwards?
Women more likely to develop PTSD than men:
https://www.sfgate.com/health/article/PTSD-s-effect-on-female-veterans-studied-4091178.php