Friday, May 13, 2016

Feminists don't support equality

To absolutely no one's surprise, feminists are coming out strongly against equality now that girls will soon have to register for the Selective Service:
If equality means sending my daughters to war, I want no part of it

I am a feminist, and I do not support including women in selective service.

When you are not included in something that no one wants to do — in this case, going off to war — it’s not discrimination; it’s a privilege. Some say women should give up that privilege in the name of equality between men and women. But here’s the thing about equality: Men and women are not equal.

That’s right — I’m a feminist, I am a mother of two girls, and I am saying that men and women are not equal.
Feminism never had anything to do with equality. But now, the cat is well out of the bag.

22 comments:

Verne said...

The feminist dogma of male and female equality in all things. It is so obviously fraudulent, yet they stand by it. Until it is over a matter of a mans greater ability to stand fight and die fighting, trying to protect his tribe, his woman, and his children. They like that one. As well as the fact that men take the jobs that tend to be dangerous. They like that one as well. The truth is they know they are promoting a lie. They know that men and woman are not equal.

Dexter said...

"Women who have chosen a career in military service should be able to serve in whatever capacity their particular skills and abilities allow."

So she is fine with women being in the military, just so long as her daughters don't get drafted. WTF?

Crowhill said...

Feminism means men and women are equal when that serves their agenda, but women need to be protected and given special privileges when that serves their agenda. That's been obvious all along, but nitwits haven't been able to see it. Perhaps the draft will finally make it clear, but I'm not holding my breath.

Happy Housewife said...

"When you are not included in something that no one wants to do — in this case, going off to war — it’s not discrimination; it’s a privilege."

Not the brightest crayon in the box, is she?

Ron said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Timmy3 said...

The Registry is a mere procedure unless they expect more. No one will get drafted. It's time to repeal the Registry.

CarpeOro said...

What is fine for me is not for thee.
Some animals are more equal than others.
She is a special snowflake, as are her daughters.
Privileges don't require responsibilities.
Her eggs are special, your sperm is not.

I could go on with statements that naturally flow from her commentary, but why bother? As long as the law and the immoral majority are with her she can ignore the consequences and evade responsibility for her actions and words. This will continue until there is a hard reset and the hard truths are presented to all again.

liberranter said...

That’s right — I’m a feminist, I am a mother of two girls, and I am saying that men and women are not equal.

Cognitive dissonance exemplified, for all time.

liberranter said...

The Registry is a mere procedure unless they expect more. No one will get drafted. It's time to repeal the Registry.

The draft was never really the point of it to begin with. Compiling a database of male citizens (one of the earliest initiatives in "Big Brother" government) was. "The Draft" was just a convenient pretext, as America at the time was just beginning to cast off its residual baggage from the Vietnam debacle and grow another set of hawk talons. The beginnings of a renaissance in "patriotism" was all the pretext TPTB needed.

liberranter said...

So she is fine with women being in the military, just so long as her daughters don't get drafted. WTF?


An attitude that differs not at all from that of the one percent that enabled feminism in the first place ("we'll fight to the last drop of your and your children's blood!").

padriac be damned said...

everyone gets their turn at holding onto the shit end of the stick, dearie. think about all the men--predominantly men with FEW exceptions - sacrificed their LIVES so that women like YOU can take your turn holding that stick, not complain, and do it with dignity.

At least people aren't shooting at you trying to kill you, lady, in your "drudgery of human bondage". You've had it easy for a very long time, and now that the wailing about equality for this, that and the other thing comes to light, you turn into a something of an irresponsible child.

praetorian said...

Gas them all.

Artificial wombs can't come fast enough, said the catholic.

Anchorman said...

An attitude that differs not at all from that of the one percent that enabled feminism in the first place ("we'll fight to the last drop of your and your children's blood!").

As a veteran of multiple combat theaters, I didn't/don't like to throw "chickenhawk" around.

I served, but my brothers didn't. I get that it's not a life for everybody.

The chickenhawk I can't stand, though, is the one beating the drums who never put himself at risk in his life. The journalism grad who went straight to punditry.

On the flip side, my brothers volunteered as firemen and one was a bouncer. Granted, bouncing is not a noble calling, but he accepted risk to body. Bouncers, seeing fights and being part of fights, tend not to seek out trouble, but can spot it. Firemen (except for the pyro loons that sometimes volunteer) don't crave fire, but they do accept the danger and - yes - thrill of the job.

First, I understand arguments should stand by their merits, regardless of who utters them.

Still, I get unnerved when four year grad types who can't bother to kick in a door to stop a fire, take a punch to stop more violence from occurring, or risk themselves in some situation not guaranteed to bee 100% safe, bangs the war drums and calls for others to charge the barricades.

Vox Maximus said...

The question is, however, in our quest for true equality, is the 'draft', from this point forward, enough. After all, I notice that for most of human history, men have fought and died in wars. As far as I am concerned, a proponent of "true" equality--especially one who believes in making present reparations for past sins (like most feminists and leftists do when it comes to their pet topics)--cannot allow this gender injustice to stand. As such, what should really be up for debate is not whether women should be listed on the draft, but whether women today, in the name of equality, should be drafted right now and replace all those men in the combat roles around the world to make up for the military gender inequalities of the past (or maybe just 50% replacement). That's right, the women of today need to make up for the gender inequalities of yesterday. And after women have been drafted and have died in men's place for a dozen or so years, then maybe that will make the present situation a bit more equal.

I jest, of course, but the hypocrisy of these people is rank, and the more it can be exposed to a wider audience, the better.

Remember: "Make them live up to their own principles!"

Maximus
www.voxmaximus.blogspot.com

ray said...

Burn, thou furnace of lies and iniquity.

Aeoli Pera said...

Gas them all.

Artificial wombs can't come fast enough, said the catholic.


That's a bit of an over-reaction. When women, children, and other such subordinates ask for MOAR a firm "No" will typically suffice.

The problem arises when the government is giving out dad's money and educating the kids (/women/the proletariat/subordinates) to believe dad is evil for holding out on the gibs.

The solution...I confess I haven't quite got it.

Dexter said...

This is another case study in this phenomenon:

Woman: "I want this! Give it to me!"
Man: "OK, here."
Woman: "Wait..."

Michael Maier said...

A stupid, foul, layabout useless black bitch at work was going to go AWOL vs. being deployed as a National Guard member to Shitcanistan. But then she was told she would lose her cushy federal govt job if she did so.

So she went, to AC comfort in a desert and "served" in the war vs. "terrer". Then she came back and was more fucking useless again in her "civilian" job.

And she gets "veteran preference" in applying for promotions. Now she's working in my division again.... yay.

Go Uncle Sam!

Derrick Bonsell said...

Feminist hypocrisy and inconsistency at its finest. She didn't even bother making the claim that maybe mean shouldn't be required to sign up for Selective Service. That at least would be a sign of consistency.

liberranter said...

Michael Maier said on May 13, 2016 at 6:28 PM

You do know, I'm sure, that this threefer you're talking about is going to get promoted --multiple times-- at the expense of qualified (irrelevant to the government) white men. You'll probably eventually have the "pleasure" of working for her.

Now all she has to do is scam disability from the VA to become a fourfer (black+female+veteran+disabled). At that point she can just stay home and draw a fat paycheck for the rest of her life and never "work" another day in her life. The government sure as hell ain't gonna FIRE anybody in that demographic group.

Michael Maier said...

liberranter, I do not know but I strongly suspect the HR problems my boss' boss told me about were about HR wanting to put that broad into the promotion I just received this week.

ChickenChicken Sweep said...

"However, if I had sons, I could at least take comfort in knowing that our nation's young men are the most able-bodied people to take on this task and therefore most likely to return home to us safely."

Excellent hamsterization of why sons are more expendable than daughters. Who's more "able-bodied" than a bullet?

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.