A Voice for Men: we’ll support women in combat only if the proper percentage of women get killed.
Woman officially not in combat role.
As everyone reading this blog no doubt already knows, feminists have hailed the Pentagon’s decision to open combat jobs to women, which will allow women the same opportunities to serve as men. The decision is also a backhanded acknowledgement that, for all intents and purposes, women are serving in combat today already. (Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth lost both of her legs in combat in Iraq – but officially, what she was engaged in wasn’t combat.)
It seems inevitable that, as a result of this decision, young women will be required to sign up for selective service alongside men. While virtually all feminists I know oppose the draft, most agree that as long as registration is going to be required, it should be required for both men and women. Indeed, when selective service was reinstated in 1981, the National Organization for Women brought a lawsuit demanding this sort of equality.
Reaction amongst Men’s Rightsers to the Pentagon’s announcement has been mixed. Some have welcomed the change, as a “what’s good for the goose” acknowledgement of equal rights and responsibilities. Others, like most of the regulars on The Spearhead, predict catastrophe, as inherently unqualified women are sent to the front lines. Regular Spearhead commenter Uncle Elmer joked:
After this experiment runs its course, how many men will have died while bringing tampon supplies up to the front?
Can anyone tell me the additional garbage load from tampon-related issues on all-women submarines? Could a mission fail if some gal flushed her tampon down the toilet instead of following the proper mil-spec procedure?
But the most telling reaction has come from A Voice for Men, which in an editorial suggested that it would only support the move if women were required to die as often as men.
No, really. Here’s what the editorialist, presumably site founder Paul Elam, wrote:
AVFM supports the spirit of the new Pentagon Directive … However, any blanket approval of the new measure thus far would be premature. …
[T]he only way this new policy will have any meaning will be if it is mandatory that women face combat on the front lines. With 20% of the military being comprised of women, that means roughly 20% of combat related fatalities should be female. 1 in 5 of body bags being filled overseas should contain the bodies of mothers, sisters, daughters, wives and girlfriends.
AVFM isn’t alone in hoping that one result of the Pentagon’s new policy will be increased injury and death for women. On his blog the self-designated “counter-feminist agent of change” Fidelbogen quoted – with a weird sort of semi-approval – one comment from an unknown person he says he found online:
I know this isn’t a laughing matter but this is pretty fucking sweet. Now those very same women who complain about how hard childbirth is get to experience real pain and misery by getting their arms blown off by enemy fire or their legs blown off by mines. Or getting infections when they have to stay at their post for days at a time without taking a bath. Those same women who say all men are rapists can now see what real rape is when they are taken as POW’s and gang-raped by foreign men at gun point and passed around like a piece of meat and then their heads blown off when they are done. This is real war ladies, are you ready for your cup of true equality?
In the comments on AVFM, meanwhile one Rick Westlake helped to make clearer the vindictive subtext of the AVFM’s editorial, suggesting that the Pentagon’s decision could be good for men if it served to
rub … some high-ratcheted, ‘entitled/empowered’ noses in the misandric, disposable-male double standard of the Selective Service system.
Our current society, including our military, makes mock of ‘equality’ by divorcing ‘opportunity’ from ‘consequences,’ ‘choices’ from ‘costs,’ and ‘benefits’ from ‘responsibility.’ Princesses are awarded all of the opportunities, choices and benefits and are excused from all the responsibility, costs and consequences. ‘Draft-pigs,’ meaning men, are made to shoulder all those dirty, nasty, dangerous and demeaning responsibilities, consequences and costs on behalf of the Entitled Empowered Princesses.
Putting women on the combat line would be disastrous for the military … But the fact remains, enough Princesses have clamored for the ‘opportunities and benefits’ of serving in the front line, heedless of the consequences and the costs.
By requiring Princesses to register for Selective Service, before they can claim the benefits that ‘draft-pigs’ can only receive if they’ve registered – and by declaring them liable for the same fines and penalties as the draft-pigs, if they don’t – we at least remind them that freedom isn’t free, that choices have costs, and that true equality includes responsibility and consequences.
I can already hear the thin, reedy screeches from the Princesses. Fine. Let them learn what it is to hump 35-pound fifty-cal ammo cans to feed Ma Deuce in a firefight. Or let them scuttle back to the home and the hearth, and give thanks for (and to) the Brave Men who will defend them.
Elam himself echoed this vindictive “let them eat equality” stance in a sneering comment posted under his own name suggesting that in the wake of the Pentagon’s new policy plenty of women won’t find the “aroma” of equality to
be so sweet … This is what feminism was always about, and now, after three waves, the chickens are going to come home to roost. Because feminism never was about anything but creating tax paying, laboring, consuming, bleeding and dying servants to the masters of corporatocracy.
They lured women in with visions of corner offices and autonomy, and now that they have fully taken the bait, the doors are going to be slammed behind them and locked. They will be left to languish in their “freedom” as corporate wage slaves, and when needed they will be forced to contribute to the rivers of blood required to keep it going.
NOW and others will likely succeed in keeping the last part “optional” for while, but it won’t last.
The grand daughters of today’s college woman is as fucked as any man in history.
To which every feminist I know would say: bring it on. Feminists are well aware that equality, along with its many benefits, brings certain costs. Putting more women into combat roles means, inevitably, that more women will be injured or killed. The feminists supporting the Pentagon’s decision are aware of this. Unlike many MRAs, though, they look at combat injuries and deaths as one of the sad but inevitable consequences of war — not as something to rub anyone’s face into.
Here’s a hint to any MRAs who think that either AVFM or the more blatantly sadistic commenter quoted by Fidelbogen has a point: Civil Rights activism is about uplifting everyone, not making others “pay.”
When the American civil rights movement took up the issue of voting rights, civil rights activists demanded that black people be allowed to vote without harassment or other obstacles like “literacy tests” standing in their way.
Civil rights activists didn’t demand that whites be kept from voting.
The Civil Rights movement called for historically all-white colleges to be opened up to blacks. It didn’t call for white people to be banned from these colleges too.
This is how you can tell that the Men’s Rights movement, as it stands today, is not a true civil rights movement. Because insofar as it is about anything other than complaining about (and sometimes harassing) feminists and women in general, it’s about tearing down rather than building up.
Instead of trying to build domestic violence shelters and other services for men, for example, the MRM is more interested in defunding shelters for women – even when their efforts in this area directly harm male victims.
It’s telling that when Father’s Rights activist Glenn Sacks had an issue with the advertisements being run by one DV shelter, he encouraged his followers to bombard the shelter’s donors with phone calls in order to cripple the shelter’s fundraising efforts – even though the shelter in question also provides services for men. It’s telling as well that MRAs rail endlessly against the Violence Against Women Act, and have celebrated Republican opposition to it – even though the act is officially gender neutral in everything but its name, and would provide funding for men’s shelters if MRAs got off their asses to build any.
Instead of fighting for the rights of male victims of rape, the Men’s Rights movement is more interested in downplaying the rape of women, wildly exaggerating the number of “false rape accusations,” and in endless discussions about whether or not having sex with women incapacitated with drinks or drugs is really rape. All of these things contribute to a “rape culture” that harms male victims of rape as well as female.
Not that most MRAs actually care about male victims of rape except as a debating point — perhaps because that would require acknowledging that the overwhelming majority of their rapists are other men. (MRAs do get outraged in the rare cases in which women are the culprits.) The group that does more than any other to fight for male rape victims is the anti-prison rape group Just Detention. Try to find even a mention of this group on any of the leading Men’s Rights sites. (The only mention of the group on AVFM is a comment in a post attacking a feminist writer noting that it isn’t part of the Men’s Rights movement.)
There are endless other examples, because this is in essence the way that the so-called “Men’s Rights” movement does business.
When you take a certain pleasure in the notion of women being “made to pay” or otherwise harmed when they seek equality, you’re about as much of a civil rights movement as the Klan.
Posted on January 26, 2013, in a voice for men, antifeminism, are these guys 12 years old?, douchebaggery, feminism, gloating, hate, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, paul elam, princesses, reactionary bullshit, taking pleasure in women's pain, the spearhead, women in combat and tagged a voice for men, antifeminism, men's rights, misogyny, women in combat. Bookmark the permalink. 1,143 Comments.
In the immortal words of BTO, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.
People have been far nicer to you than you deserve. You’ve been a disingenuous twit.
“Still not a MRA. If you care to scroll through the thousands of comments on this site you will see me commenting in agreement about a lot of things. The fact you only noticed my presence here when I expressed disagreement does not make me a dumbass, teenager, MRA, troll, etc it just means you aren’t very observant.”
…or that we’re multiple pages into the All About Cassie Show…
And Spot That Fallacy!! is my game, and you suck at it. You made a claim that is almost certainly untrue based on how the draft worked in the Vietnam war, people said the only way that could be true was if women were less competent soldiers, and you claimed argument from ignorance. Except is isn’t some “you aren’t even wrong” claim, your claim can be proven wrong, to a reasonable degree of certainty, based on the method of the draft.
Also, you get about 10 shifting goalpost points, and a handful of red herrings. (To the rest of you and your fish discussion, I’m just going to ignore the heresy that is eating fish, my babies are offended! XD )
“Oh, I’m sure you care about a few actual problems. The thing is that people like you are never any real help, because your focus is off.”
Yes well I don’t really want to go there, because that is where the political disagreements between socialists and feminists live, that would turn this forum into a beehive of activity and I can’t be bothered trying to sift through another 4 hours of immaturity and lashing out to try to find some worthwhile points to respond to. It was hard enough the first time.
Do people eat the kind of fish that you have? I dunno. I find it hard to imagine having a pet tuna, but maybe that’s because I don’t live in a McMansion.
Damn, I turn away for a few hours, making chocolate goodies if you must know, and when I return , I find that y’all went and fed a troll.
188 emails from. This. Site. alone.
I know it’s fun to do, but I have heard that troll feeding is terribly bad for your health.
btw, that tandoori chicken sounds yummy:D
“As I’m sure Little David knows, the the military is all-volunteer, so it will probably remain all all men. This is a bill withot meaning. But Little David and his idiots will hail it as the ntx great step to moulding a unisex genitalia.”
1) women already volunteer, and get treated as if they aren’t combat soldiers — this is more than a pedantic technical thing, has to do with pay and benefits, but I’ll leave that for Pecunium.
2) Fuck you, yet another goddamned troll trying to claim that they must be right because biology only has two genders and thus gender binary must be correct and feminists are idiots for saying otherwise. Also, you don’t seem to know what unisex means — nipples are unisex sex organs, gonads too, fuck, all the sex organs are the same until hormones mold them in utero. Science, go get some!
I don’t know that it was a total loss, I think there are some bits that could be turned into A Voice for Pierre. Maybe a MRA wanting to cross the border into Canada to avoid the non-existent draft?
Aw, this is precious.
This is reminding me of this Monty Python skit:
Gendered insults so far! Spiteful, beehive. I’m curious to see what’s next.
“If this isn’t him then I think we just found him a girlfriend.”
Totally ninja’ed and nearly caught up, assuming y’all don’t produce another page of comments while I read this one!
“‘Citation needed, twit.’
Sorry it isn’t my place to educate you, Use google.”
Spot That Fallacy!! Thank you for defining shifting the burden of proof, it is a rare thing that one gets such a textbook example! (Yes I’m resorting to snark before my brain bleeds out stupidity)
Argument from ignorance (appeal to ignorance, argumentum ad ignorantiam) – assuming that a claim is true (or false) because it has not been proven false (true) or cannot be proven false (true).
(shifting the) Burden of proof (see – onus probandi) – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false.
Onus probandi – from Latin “onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat” the burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim, not on the person who denies (or questions the claim). It is a particular case of the “argumentum ad ignorantiam” fallacy, here the burden is shifted on the person defending against the assertion.
Your version of the political disagreements, you mean. You know you aren’t the only socialist here, right? Some of whom have probably been organizing decades longer than you?
Sigh. How was your dinner, Cassandra?
“Your version of the political disagreements, you mean.”
No. I mean the political disagreement itself.
“You know you aren’t the only socialist here, right?”
What’s your point?
Some of whom have probably been organizing decades longer than you? ”
What’s your point?
@ cloudiah
Still eating. Thai chillies are an excellent cure for a stuffy nose, and I feel like choy sum falls under the general category of “stuff that’s good for you”.
I’m all out of spoons with which to feed this one.
“What’s your point? What’s your point?” Look, it’s a parrot now.
Hey, you think if we ignore her she’ll go away? Since, as she said, she doesn’t have to provide citations and we don’t have to listen? Because frankly, the All About Cassie Show I boring (if there’s another page of this when I finally catch up, it’ll be time for EA and how you’re so easy to read but the book is boring me)
“Spot That Fallacy!! Thank you for defining shifting the burden of proof, it is a rare thing that one gets such a textbook example! (Yes I’m resorting to snark before my brain bleeds out stupidity)”
Excellent! You almost understand what I wrote. I asked Hellkell to provide evidence to support her/his argument their response was to say “it isn’t my responsibility to educate you, use google!” So I turned it back around on them when they demanded citations from me to make fun of them using the shifting of the burden of proof against me. Get it?
What is the political disagreement between socialism and feminism, Cassie? I am a socialist and a feminist. I am actually a member of a socialist feminist organization. No disagreement among us.
If you can’t figure out my point, that is kind of on you. I don’t really feel like helping.
@ hellkell
Polly wants a citation and a coherent argument.
I think this one will get the Full Ruby when it rears it’s pointy little head again.
Polly is full of fail.
“What is the political disagreement between socialism and feminism, Cassie? I am a socialist and a feminist.”
There are many but the main one comes down to an argument between what should be the focal point individual oppressions (racial, gendered, etc) or class oppression. Feminists lean towards the former and socialists lean towards the latter.
“I am actually a member of a socialist feminist organization. No disagreement among us. ”
No disagreement at all? That is surprising. I have never met two people who can manage to agree with each other entirely on politics nevermind a whole group of them.
Snarking aside, yes there are feminist socialists, anarcho feminists etc. They tend to lean more towards feminism though. Socialists with too much identity politics and not enough class politics imo.
Argenti can defend zirself, but wow. The condescension. Amazing.
Wait till after the revolution, ladies!
This book was boring the first time I read it.
“Wow, that’s a pretty small military your Dad’s hoping to create. Guess it’s lucky that the US is under no danger of invasion.”
I’m finally catching up!! And yeah, except apparently we are and only he sees that and the rest of us are fools and holy shit how am I the one on all the psych meds?! Seriously, if I had an antipsychotic I’d be half tempted to dose him with it.
He’s talking race war btw, but where he thinks the missiles will come from is a mystery to me. I’ll apparently “play nurse” too, some sick part of me wants this to happen so I can go “oh, you need stitches? Sorry, only a real nurse can do that, I’m just a play nurse” (I can sew, and have an understanding of anatomy, so worst case I probably could do stitches. Being less batshit, I don’t care to find out if I can)
He’s impressively out there. Did you know that the Spanish flu was caused by aliens launching germ filled rocks at the earth? That isn’t even his ASSFAX, that’s a summary of a history channel show I was trying to ignore. (How else could it have spread so fast?!)
Actually, Cassie reminds me a bit of that — make absurd claim that is almost certainly factually incorrect based on just a whiff of logic, claim everyone else is committing a fallacy (or deluded into trusting the gov’n) when we point out this whiff of logic.
Well, I’ma go snuggle the Biscuit and start “The Color of Magic.”
Keep the chew toy sqeaking, good night!
“Argenti can defend zirself, but wow. The condescension. Amazing.”
Sorry, but are you actually insane? Have you really not seen any condescension directed towards me here? Have you not realised that if you keep dishing it out you are going to get some back?
I mean lets look at what Argenti themselves said to me “Spot That Fallacy!!” No condescending arrogant rubbish there at all is there? Wow the lack of self awareness is amazing.
Did you know that the Spanish flu was caused by aliens launching germ filled rocks
I initially read that as germ filled cockroaches. It was more fun that way.
COME AT ME, BRO.
You might want to dial the ableism down a notch, unless of course you want your ass showing to be an ongoing sort of thing.
Fail. Back in the 1990s, my comrades & I called this the “unbreakapartability” of people & the oppressions they face. Later, people came up with the kyriarchy to explain the same concept.
Socialist feminists understand you can’t pry them apart.
You are not worth any more attention.
“Do people eat the kind of fish that you have? I dunno. I find it hard to imagine having a pet tuna, but maybe that’s because I don’t live in a McMansion.”
My babies (my loaches) are supposedly a delicacy, but I’m not sure how true that is (they can get to be over a foot and are bulky goofballs). In the US? Yeah, not so much :)
I’m on the last page of comments finally!
“Socialist feminists understand you can’t pry them apart. ”
Yes, but you still have to push one forward or the other. For example is Julia Gillard part of the gang because she is female or not because she is part of the ruling class?
“You are not worth any more attention.”
Ok, tata then.
Oh, I’m not going anywhere. That’s hilarious.
All the regulars must leave if they don’t agree with Cassie’s unsophisticated understanding of intersectionality! Yep, that’s going to happen.
Oh, finally, Cassie’s leaving.
“Oh, I’m not going anywhere. That’s hilarious.”
I never said you were. I was saying goodbye as you stated you were no longer speaking with me, and yet here you are still talking to me.
“All the regulars must leave if they don’t agree with Cassie’s unsophisticated understanding of intersectionality! ”
I never asked anyone to leave your accusations are getting wilder and wilder.
I understand the concept of intersectionality I just don’t happen to agree with it. Two different things.
Cassie doesn’t understand the difference between being accused of things and being made fun of. Everyone else laughs.
Seriously, Cassandra, my socialist organization had an understanding — pushed by its female members initially, by the way — of intersectionality long before anyone called it intersectionality. This stuff isn’t even new for socialists! Cassie is giving socialism a bad name.
People were starting to talk about this stuff when I was at university. That was nearly 20 years ago. Maybe Cassie communicates with the rest of her socialist group via Ouija board.
“Oh, finally, Cassie’s leaving.”
Probably true, it is just turning into a pissing match rather than interesting debate.
“Seriously, Cassandra, my socialist organization had an understanding — pushed by its female members initially, by the way — of intersectionality long before anyone called it intersectionality. This stuff isn’t even new for socialists!”
There are different types of socialism, not all socialists agree with me, but not all socialists agree with you either. Some socialists believe patriarchy theory, intersectionality and such are useful concepts, some don’t. Present an argument for or against instead of saying “my organisation agrees with me so I am right!”. Well sorry my socialist organisation doesn’t agree with you and many others don’t as well.
Warning to everyone else, I’m now engaging “incredibly pedantic review entire thread” mode.
Cassie —
“Cassie, how is registering for a draft a violation of human rights, and what MRA website did you crawl out of?”
Lol, I am far far far from being a MRA, just because I disagree with you doesn’t mean I agree with them, that is a false dichotomy.
As for why it is a violation of human rights, perhaps it isn’t, I didn’t say it was. If you could provide me with why you guys think it shouldn’t exist at all I could respond to that. Is it because you think it is unethical? Unnecessary? A violation of human rights? What is it?
hellkell —
Cassie, we’re not here to educate your dumb ass. Google is your friend, use it.
Cassie —
I live in Australia, we do not have the draft for men or women here.
Kitteh —
Oh fuck this – Cassie, you’re from here? Then what the fuck are you getting your knickers in a a twist over the US situation for? Christ on a pogo stick, you’re embarrassing. Go play at an Australia day kindergarten picnic or something.
Cassie —
“Oh fuck this – Cassie, you’re from here? Then what the fuck are you getting your knickers in a a twist over the US situation for?”
Because I care about people and their lives and their rights even if they do not share the same geographical location as me.
Do you think I should stop caring that planned parenthood has been stripped of funding? That anti-abortion laws are spreading across america? Just because I don’t live there? Ridiculous argument.
Kitteh —
Cassie, how about actually doing your own goddamn research instead of the MRA trick of sitting back all primly saying “show me the figures!” You’re looking lazy as well as ignorant.
You know the difference between being angry at the stuff happening with Planned Parenthood and attacks on women generally in US policy, and this? The former are real and this isn’t. You’re rabbitting on about nonsense, and it looks even more stupid when you’re doing so a) as an outsider and b) without having done any sort of basic groundwork. You know jack shit about the situation and are arguing with people who live in the US and know what they’re talking about. It makes you look like an idiotic child.
Cassie —
“Cassie, how about actually doing your own goddamn research instead of the MRA trick of sitting back all primly saying “show me the figures!” You’re looking lazy as well as ignorant.”
You asserted a position the burden of proof is on you to provide evidence for it not me. I am not doing your research for you.
Cassie —
“That was what proved you’re an idiot. Military leaders know in advance how many personnel they’re going to need in order to wage a campaign”
That is simply not true, the amount of troops in afghanistan and iraq has changed often and without the foresight back at the start of the campaign that this was going to occur.
hellkell —
“That is simply not true, the amount of troops in afghanistan and iraq has changed often and without the foresight back at the start of the campaign that this was going to occur.”
Citation needed, twit.
Cassie —
“Citation needed, twit.”
Sorry it isn’t my place to educate you, Use google.
FIRST! You had this problem with both hellkell and kitteh, the “problem” being that you have serious issues with backing up your claims.
SECOND!
Person A: widely held position, the support for which is common knowledge
Person B: support your claim
Person A: google it yourself (cuz you should know it already, it is common knowledge after all)
Another example: radius is half of diameter, proof it! No, look it the fuck up, it’s common knowledge. (In before math derail)
Person B: this isn’t relevant where I live
Person C: then why do you care?
Person B: because I do, and shouldn’t I care about [things] (nice kettle logic btw)
Person C: except [things] aren’t similar, and you didn’t research the thing that’s on topic enough to know what a local would (FYI, American here, and kitteh’s right)
Person B: but the burden of proof (to prove things that are common knowledge to the people this applies to) is on you!
Logic: nope, see previous fail
Person A: general claim
Person B: specific example attempting to disprove general claim
Person A: citation needed that your example is even true
Person B: nope, burden of proof (of general claim) is on you
Logic: examples can be used to disprove general claims, but must first be proven in their own right
/incredibly long pedantry
Am I actually insane? According to the state, yes, the feds are still debating it. So seriously, do dial that ableism down some.
And Spot That Fallacy!! is a long running joke of mine, can’t wait to see Pecunium play a round with you! Granted, I only break it out for people who’d cause my head to explode if I tried taking them seriously, but you really need to ponder wtf you’re doing here if that feeling is mutual.
And thanks cloudiah :)
Cassandra — germ filled cockroaches are, after all, actually a thing!
Why don’t you agree with intersectionality? It feels as if you need rigid definitions…i.e draft is bad so end of discussion about women getting registered. Oppression is complicated so you’re opting out of intersectionality.
Maybe I’ve got it wrong but it feels like you are uncomfortable with grey areas. Maybe you have a good critique of intersectionality, but your dissection of the issues around the draft so far don’t point to that
There’s no point talking to Cassie, but in case anyone else is interested in my views…
Simply put, socialism requires women’s liberation — it is impossible to create a new society without exploitation and oppression unless women are fully part of that revolution and that new society. (The same is true of people of color, queer folks, etc.) At the same time, women’s liberation requires the end of a capitalist society. There is no separation between these things. They cannot be broken apart.
Avanti o popolo, alla riscossa,
Bandiera rossa, Bandiera rossa.
Avanti o popolo, alla riscossa,
Bandiera rossa trionferà.
:-)
I’m caught up! That only took nearly two hours of the All About Cassie Show. (Hint Cassie, this means we’re both bored and fed up with your derailing)
Returning to The Actual Topic, whether something is a combat role matters for shit like pay and benefits, and wtf honors you get when you die (even if that’s 60 years later, my grandfather still can’t get the gov’n to acknowledge he was in a combat role in Korea, they’re saying WWII only)
And Cassie? Zirself wasn’t cloudiah not knowing my pronouns of choice, but respecting them — ze/zir please. I’m assuming you used themselves because you thought cloudiah was just using gender neutral pronouns due to lack of knowledge, because yeah, it was personal preference (now would be a good time to confirm that the nym Cassie does imply you use female pronouns though, is that correct?)
Cloudiah, send me to the corner of shame, I forgot your pronouns, again (seriously, I fail at remembering that other people actually give a shit about which pronouns people use)
People eat loaches?!!??!?!!
I feel the same as when I found out that people eat puffins. Sad.
“It feels as if you need rigid definitions…i.e draft is bad so end of discussion about women getting registered.”
How does viewing the draft as a bad thing mean I need rigid definitions?
“Oppression is complicated so you’re opting out of intersectionality. ”
I never said anything like that.
“Maybe I’ve got it wrong but it feels like you are uncomfortable with grey areas.”
Why do you think I am uncomfortable with grey areas?
“Maybe you have a good critique of intersectionality, but your dissection of the issues around the draft so far don’t point to that”
My dissection of the issues around the draft? I haven’t dissected the issues in the slightest.
People eat puffins?!
…glad we could have this exchange of outrage and sadness?
FTR, I’m not sure people really do eat loaches all that much, I figure they would be edible, particularly if starving, but they’re from Sumatra and Borneo so idk if it’s true or another case of “those backwards people” — I’ve only ever heard it third hand from Americans/Brits/etc.
“My dissection of the issues around the draft? I haven’t dissected the issues in the slightest.”
Ex-fucking-actly
We’ve spent five pages talking about wtf you want to talk about, ostensibly regarding the draft, and you haven’t dissected the issues in the slightest.
OT but thought I’d let you know about the ex cyclone that’s hit Queensland. My town has lost power which ironically also means no water since everyone here is on tank water and uses pumps. It’s really raining. In Gladstone they’ve had over 1000mm!! There’s going to be a lot of flooding.
“We’ve spent five pages talking about wtf you want to talk about, ostensibly regarding the draft, and you haven’t dissected the issues in the slightest.”
No, I agree I didn’t discuss any issues to do with oppression, I was trying not to go too political as a massive argument about intersectionality and patriarchy theory…just doesn’t appeal. Here we are anyway…
However I do stand by my original argument. I don’t think discussion of oppression is necessary for it to stand.
People do eat puffins. If you have access to a library that subscribes to Granta, check out Sean French’s First Catch Your Puffin in issue #52.
Puffins are too damn cute to eat, is my position and I’m sticking to it.
Kim, stay safe!
“My dissection of the issues around the draft? I haven’t dissected the issues in the slightest.”
That does not say jack shit about the latest derail regarding oppression. That says, in exactly so many words, that you have not dissected the issues around the draft, which was your original topic.
Fuck, which is THE topic of the goddamned thread.
Kim — that sucks, good luck to you and the rest of the region!
Argenti, no worries, you can use gender neutral pronouns for me or standard feminine ones.
@Kim I hope you and yours are okay.
“That does not say jack shit about the latest derail regarding oppression. That says, in exactly so many words, that you have not dissected the issues around the draft”
When i stated that I had not dissected issues around the draft I meant in terms of oppression. I did however put forth an argument in regards to registering for the draft.
Keep us posted, Kim!
I’m not even getting into the idea that socialism without intersectionality is worth defending. If you’re willing to sideline any issue that doesn’t affect straight white guys, sure, but if that’s the decision you’ve made then don’t be too surprised when everyone else decides not to support your organization.
cloudiah — totally agreed that they’re just too damned cute! And eating loaches seems like a terrible idea, like most wild fish they can carry worms that can infect humans (or my entire tank, can’t wait to have to catch two loaches and cross my fingers that the rest of the tank isn’t infected)
Yeah, anyone have opinions on whether I should dose the entire 55g, which is easier math on the dosage, but risker in that I can’t do an emergency water change all that fast if needed; or use a hospital tank, with harder dosing math and the risk that the big tank is infected in general, but with a solid backup plan if the loaches react badly?
I’m thinking I should risk the whole tank being infected as I ordered enough dewormer to treat it and the tiny tank if needed, but am really worried about dosing all the cories, they’re only like 4 months old, they aren’t babies, but they aren’t mature either.
I just have to keep wild caught fish…why the fuck didn’t I isolate them… >.<
@Argenti, I only keep goldfish plus cold water plecos in the one tank. I’ve read up on this when I was buying new fish and the consensus seemed to be that having a separate hospital tank is best.
All the cats are now barred from fluid and food because one is going in for a brochoalveolar lavage tomorrow. I’ve managed to unthink about him dying from the procedure, now I’m back to worrying that it is cancer. :(
cloudiah — kk, thanks for answering that for probably the third time now!
Cassie — you really didn’t — you gave a bunch of side topics about specific wars, and numbers of troops and completely irrelevant things like a war in the country with the draft. Which, as Cassandra said about my father’s idiocy, isn’t going to happen. You gave nothing like support for your original claim, which, if you’ve forgotten, was that feminists are just like MRAs and other oppressors if we say that the draft should apply to everyone, because it should just be done away with.
When, oh yeah, the odds of the US ever having a draft are less than the odds of various nasty things (guys, should I pull out TB stats again? Current flu deaths in the US?)
All of this, btw, is nitpicking over one statement in the original post while ignoring that MRAs are going into how women should be raped as POWs in disgustingly graphic detail. Pardon us if we’re more outraged by that than inclined to debate in depth over whether the draft (a thing that is highly unlikely to ever exist again) should exist.
Honestly, there’d be more point to debating whether it’s demeaning if cats should get lion cuts when they aren’t medically needed, or needed because of grooming issues. Because see, lion cuts? Those actually happen, the draft isn’t ever going to happen.
Frankly? As an American? You’re really coming off as an outsider know it all that’d be verging on colonialism is the US wasn’t a global superpower (with a volunteer military!). Whether our military should be smaller is really a topic for another day, like, two days ago, on another thread, we totally just did this.
Seriously, fucking no one in the US, who isn’t wearing a tinfoil hat, gives a shit about the fact the draft was never completely outlawed, because it might as well have been. In any case, the draft, in toto, is a complete side topic to the topic of women serving in combat.
Things I never thought I’d say, but can we get back to the MRM’s rape fantasies?
Kim, stay safe! My sister and BiL arrived in Queensland yest, moving back there. Pissing down most of the way from northern NSW. Sister mentioned that a lot of places in the low-lying land round Gladstone are in danger when the dams have to be opened – she reckons people were warned against building there, but didn’t listen (she and BiL lived in Gladstone and MacKay for over a decade).
Argenti – “I do have coffee that’ll put hair on your chest though (with hazelnut creamer, whipped cream and cinnamon). Coffee anyone?”
I think I’ll pass if it’s that strong … hair on the chest wouldn’t go with my clothes and if Mr K has some secret fetish for that kind of thing I’d rather not find out. ;)
“I’m not even getting into the idea that socialism without intersectionality is worth defending. If you’re willing to sideline any issue that doesn’t affect straight white guys, sure,”
You are assuming that intersectionality is the only concept that engages with the existence of different types of oppression within society. This is incorrect. Try reading a book that doesn’t say feminism on it in big letters.
The focal issues for my organisation are palestinian rights, indigenous rights and LGBTI rights and of course workers rights. Nothing about straigh white guys at all.
My favorite attempt at justification was the argument that what if a country doesn’t have enough men to fight in a war and therefore allowing women to be drafted might raise the body count? When someone has reached the point of saying stuff like that, they’re firmly in “I don’t care about the issues, I just refuse to lose this argument” mode.
Intersectionality is about a lot more than just gender, sweetie. Did you decide that you needed to show the few parts of your ass that you hadn’t put on display yet?
Aww Kiwi Girl, best of luck with your babies!
And yeah, in general I know, and use, a hospital tank — but who the fuck expects multiple fish to have worms?! Someone with a sub-par fish store…which happens to be the only local one that isn’t a chain with seriously questionable ethics…
I miss the local guy in Pittsburgh, he knew his shit.
Complaining aside, yeah, hospital tank it is, at least as a first line attempt at solving this, no point risking the others be exposed to the dewormer if not needed (particularly as this shit isn’t fish specific)
“My favorite attempt at justification was the argument that what if a country doesn’t have enough men to fight in a war and therefore allowing women to be drafted might raise the body count? ”
Again I never used that example as a supporting argument I used it to show that one could think it is possible that adding women to the draft could alter the body count without thinking women are incompetent soldiers. Since this is about the fith time I have explained that I must ask the question. Are you thick or is this just that making fun of me thing you mentioned earlier?
“Identity politics” apparently means any identity except class identity is unimportant and irrelevant. This is such an outdated notion! (However to a minority of USian socialist groups, this is possibly true.)
Good night, all! (This is not the same as “tata” as in “I am not coming back.”)