Military social re-engineering

As part and parcel of social marxism, the latest move is to open up Special Ops to women: http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/11/18/air-force-moves-to-open-7-combat-jobs-to-women.html?ESRC=dod.nl

Mind you the Marines did this, and so far not a single women has passed, and lets be real here, when 60-90% of males are failing – males at the top of their game – what chance does a women have physically?  This is some hyper liberals and cultural marxists dont like to think in their ‘gender neutral language’.

Really 1 of 2 things happens: 1 no women ever makes it, 2 they lower the standards.

Likely it is 1 first, followed by 2, the feminists/ SJW cry ‘sexism!’ and suddenly its a feel good military.

Though with the emasculation of males, and the agressiveness of females maybe women might be our new ‘fighters’…what an upside down world we find ourselves in.

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Military social re-engineering

  1. I support this move. It is a good move. They are not saying we will promote women regardless of ability. They are saying that women are now allowed to make the attempt at earning a spot. They have equal opportunity to be in special forces. When in comes down to the PT to qualify for Special forces “Do 100 pushups” is absolutely gender neutral. I fully expect that no woman ever makes it, and that crys of “sexism” will be met with “Drop and give me 50”

  2. Pingback: Military social re-engineering | Manosphere.com

  3. The article has since been deleted and I couldn’t find another, but activists (quite predictably) immediately responded to the failure by demanding that standards drop for women.

    To be specific, the women failed during the hike, so activists concluded “it’s up to the person in front to set the speed of the hike,” he says. “There doesn’t seem to be a standard around these movements.” and claimed “the goal posts just keep moving.”

    Oh, like the real world, possibly combat situations…
    Ryu, who wants to see as inefficient a military as possible (so far so good there, laddy), is correct. Less efficiency means more casualties and women in combat positions will definitely cost lives. Maybe they can all get pregnant to avoid the frontlines and then they can still play “badazz womenz” while staying at home and sending the few remaining men whose slots they didn’t replace out there double and tripletime to make up for their convalescence.

    And as a side note, anyone who believes that passing even same-standard physicals equal same standard performance must know very little about human physiology. One of the staunchest critics of women in combat was a high performing athlete, female marine. She was in the prime of her life and the top 0.1 percent of the population physically, and the weight of the equipment/combat zone conditions absolutely destroyed her, physically, in a very short timeframe. People who injure easy become liabilities and that gets other people killed. Very bad idea (unless, like Ryu, more dead soldiers seems a good thing to you).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s