Friday, February 14, 2014

Equality demands it

Women should soon be eligible for the draft. Because equality:
NCFM has filed a lawsuit that challenges the legality of requiring only males to register for the military draft.  The lawsuit was filed against the U.S. Selective Service System in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on April 4, 2013, Case Number 2:13-cv-02391-DSF-MAN .

The 1981 U.S. Supreme Court equal protection case of Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57 (1981) held that men and women were not similarly situated in the U.S. military because women were excluded from combat, therefore women did not have to register for the draft.  Dissenting Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote, “The Court today places its imprimatur on one of the most potent remaining public expressions of ‘ancient canards about the proper role of women’.”

In January, U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta announced that women will be allowed to enter all combat positions in all branches of the U.S. military, thereby removing the sole legal basis for requiring only males to register for the draft.

NCFM’s complaint alleges that because men and women are now similarly situated in the military, Selective Service’s requirement that only males must register for the draft violates the rights of both men and women to equal treatment under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, and under United States Code, Title 28, Section 1983.
Furthermore, men should be advised that if physically attacked by a woman, they should feel free to defend themselves every bit as vigorously as if they were attacked by another man. Because equality.

Black knight the hell out of every woman who so much as mentions the word equality. Treat her exactly like you'd treat a man who runs his mouth, who lays a hand upon you, who dares to get in your face and challenge you. The only way women will ever be convinced of the error of their feminist ways is to be forced to live up to the reality of their ideal.

And besides, there are few things funnier than the look on a woman's face when she suddenly realizes, to her abject horror, that she isn't going to escape the consequences of her own misbehavior by playing the "I'm a girl" card.

25 comments:

ZeitgeistX said...

Absolutely agree. In the debate over equality, the first thing to look for is contradiction. We know its not equality they want, but domination combined with preference, privilege and entitlement. However as long as they continue to forge ahead under the banner of Equality, then we must capitalize on their contradictions and call them out immediately. It is very, very common for a woman to claim a point that contradicts her overall argument and them try to slip it by you with distraction. Call out every contradiction in their argument and their agenda.and then when they become victims of their own double standard, they will be forced to retreat from their rhetoric and demands.

Desiderius said...

On this one especially (the draft), you're hitting Dads (like Blow) right where it hurts, and it Dads of these girls driving the whole train.

His princess gets drafted, his tune will change in a hurry.

spastic0plastic said...

They'd probably call the bluff, and abolish the draft. We're already a nation with no borders, so the militia is obsolete anyway.

swiftfoxmark2 said...

I didn't know Feminists wanted to be raped so badly.

swiftfoxmark2 said...

Then again, they do push for girls to go to college, where there is a 25% chance of being raped. I know those numbers are fake, but that is the number they push, so I say that Feminists want to be raped in college and in the army.

CarpeOro said...

Going back to the point of the 25% rape chance. If there are fewer men than women in college, that means the chance that a male college student is a rapist goes up considerably as there are fewer of them. When will the push to ban men completely occur in order to protect these brilliant, empowered young women?

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

I've seen that look and it is indeed funny. You can almost hear the gears turning.

I'm not sure how many women who would be especially enthusiastic about being drafted. The young women around here seem more interested in being sluts and princesses.

cailcorishev said...

This is great. Except for a few super-butch lesbians, no one who pushed for women in combat really wanted (or intended) for women to see serious combat. It was just a way to get the necessary boxes checked on their resumes so they could qualify for upper command positions. It seemed safe enough back in the 1990s, what with the end of history and all, when people thought we'd do all our future fighting with cruise missiles. You could sign up, see "action" escorting UN food drops somewhere in BFE, and then move on up.

Probably doesn't seem so safe now.

AtomicSwirl said...

The progressive totalitarians need to have girls to register for the draft. It's a incremental step towards their goal of mandatory government service for all young people. It won't matter whether the draftees serve in the armed forces or some kind of civil service project as long as the young people get the message: everyone is just property of the state and they must obey the state.

Feather Blade said...

Ugh.

Right, so for all women who don't want to be in the military, this is the time to join a religious community that has strong convictions against women going to war, so you have some grounds for claiming "conscientious objector" status.

How old does one have to be before one is no longer eligible for the draft?

tacticaltoolbox said...

In re Vox's final statements of black knighting I refer to a passage in the Law which opened my eyes:

Deut 22:

"22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.

23 If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;

24 Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die.

26 But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:

27 For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her.

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days."

Two things to note: #1 rape of non-betrothed virgin solution = forced marriage. #2 rape of non-virgin, non-betrothed, non-married = no crime. This law right here would change the whole feminist society overnight. Not a virgin and no man to protect you? Sorry. Your class doesn't exist inside the law and therefore is not protected.

Patrick Kelly said...

"How old does one have to be before one is no longer eligible for the draft?"

During the endless war with terrorists from Eurasia there is no age limit. Why do you want to help the terrorists?

Joel said...

spastic0plastic: "They'd probably call the bluff, and abolish the draft."

Good. The draft should be abolished anyway. We win either way.

Markku said...

This is good news indeed.

mindstar3000 said...

According to Wiki (take it for what it's worth) there's a provision in the Selective Service Act which applies to trained healthcare personnel and references in other areas that they would be draft eligible until age 54. I would assume for ground pounders the cutoff age would be lower because of physical requirements. Absent that no reason to asume 54 years wouldn't apply to all. Except women naturally...

JCclimber said...

religious convictions do not exempt you from the draft.
They only exempt you from being required to bear arms.
I have several uncles and a grandfather who served that way.
On the front lines as medics. Not for the faint hearted, to be out there giving emergency aid to men during battle while being shot at yourself.
But I'm sure some alternative solution would be found for female religious objectors. I seriously doubt any of them could ever qualify as a field medic.

b1bae96e-6447-11e3-b6bb-000f20980440 said...

How old does one have to be before one is no longer eligible for the draft?

The draft runs from 18 through 25 currently. If they wanted to increase the age they would need to pass a new law. Then again seeing as how the Executive is handling Obamacare it wouldn't surprise me if your 26th birthday was some how retroactively delayed a few years.

b1bae96e-6447-11e3-b6bb-000f20980440 said...

What you would find is they would go back to requiring whatever it is, 5 pullups from a dead hang which only women with a year or more of training could actually do. And then wash them all out in the 8 week bootcamp. So the military won't be saddled down with unqualified women in combat but they would have to waste twice the resources training soldiers.

Jurgis Rudkus said...

Posting from Afghanistan - the ramifications of coming policies like this are already evident. We already employ feminized policies in the way we pursue war. Having women drafted into the service will not wake anyone up, it will just continue to change the acceptable means by which we fight our nations battles. We won't be fighting any more to win. We will extend the pattern of "war" as an extension of a public relations campaign while keeping EVERYONE (men and women alike) inside secure compounds and safely away from the enemy. Realize that more US Service Members die on bases in the continental US now than die across the whole country of Afghanistan. The "war" against boredom and stupidity (ie drunk driving and Darwin award candidates) combined with failure to recognize and take action against the mentally unstable and recognized evil (Navy Yard and Ft Bliss) takes more lives than a dedicated enemy insurgency can. That should tell you what a really sheltered way we are going about war these days and in the foreseeable future.

Feather Blade said...

"What you would find is they would go back to requiring whatever it is, 5 pullups from a dead hang which only women with a year or more of training could actually do. And then wash them all out in the 8 week bootcamp."

Heh. Three-quarters of the women in the country with a big red 4-F stamped in their draft files...

ray said...

Treat her exactly like you'd treat a man who runs his mouth, who lays a hand upon you, who dares to get in your face and challenge you. The only way women will ever be convinced of the error of their feminist ways is to be forced to live up to the reality of their ideal


fantasyland


even a WORD to a female that she considers offensive gets a male a trip to the mancages, in chains


after that, the emasculated Servers n Protectors will trot you out before their Bitch-in-Robes, to finish the beatdown


if youre gonna give men advice like this, you have to tell them the truth about the consequences

cailcorishev said...

Ray, fine, tell the truth: what percentage of the times that a man says an offensive word to a woman results in arrest? I doubt it's any higher than 1 in a thousand. Probably much lower, considering how easily offended many women are today. I know I've said a few things that made the women around me gasp, and the worst I've ever gotten was a quiet, "That was kinda mean...." Are you really going to tiptoe around because of something that unlikely?

I don't know if there are any reliable statistics on what percentage of people who hit their spouses/lovers get arrested, but one report I found said that when police are called to an incident, there's less than a 50% chance of anyone being arrested. (Some jurisdictions have mandatory arrest, which presumably raises that number.) So even when it gets to that point, you're not doomed. Interestingly, I also read that when one state toughened its domestic abuse laws, making it much more likely that a 911 call would result in arrest, the number of calls went down significantly. Sounds like some of the callers were looking to scare the other person, but didn't really want to punish him or her.

The "truth" is that if your wife slaps you and you slap her back, she's not going to call the cops unless A) you start apologizing and let her know you're her bitch, or B) she was goading you into it for that purpose in the first place, in which case you probably long since should have gotten clear of her.

I'm not saying men should start beating up their wives. But if she slaps you (assuming you honestly didn't deserve it. If she caught you with her sister, that's another story), you're already past the point of having a good, safe response. You either respond in kind, which may be risky but at least draws the line; or you bow to her authority and let her know she rules the roost from now on. Or you leave for good. Take your pick.

tz said...

Women do grate in the draft, so we shouldn't skirt the issue

tz said...

Or as I suggested, if the sexes/genders are equal;, repeal rape laws and let everyone defend themselves.

John Rampton said...

"But if she slaps you (assuming you honestly didn't deserve it. If she caught you with her sister, that's another story), you're already past the point of having a good, safe response. You either respond in kind, which may be risky but at least draws the line; or you bow to her authority and let her know she rules the roost from now on. Or you leave for good. Take your pick."

Agree and amplify. This includes her decision to get into a fist fight. You never respond in like kind. If you decide that the line has been crossed, and that she intends to inflict harm, you beat her until you establish very clear physical dominance. Beat her within an inch of her life, if it comes to that. It's no different than the tactics men use when fighting each other. Tit for tat never works. Make her fear you, and suddenly you're sexually attractive to her again. And it's very highly recommended that when the inevitable honeymoon phase starts (typically almost immediately after the beating) this is the time you dump her. And never admit it's because you fear what she's capable of. Make it seem like she's boring, or fat. Avoid other relationships for a while, because women scorned are hell on wheels, and she may very well try to kill her. But you leave during the honeymoon phase. That's the most strategic time.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.