On April 2, Army Specialist Ivan Lopez shot and killed three people on the Fort Hood military base in Texas, before turning his gun on himself; 16 others were injured. It’s not clear what caused Lopez’ killing spree, though the incident seems to have been triggered by the difficulties he encountered trying to get a 24-hour pass to attend his mother’s funeral.
But a writer for A Voice for Men, , has a novel explanation for the tragedy: the military’s excessive niceness towards lesbians and gays.
In a post entitled “What role has feminism played in the shooting at Fort Hood and its aftermath?” Conzachi sets forth his thesis:
Numerous directives from the Pentagon and the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS), of which some in the military refer to the group as the “Super-Feminists” or jokingly, the “Lesbo Circle of Doom,” allow for and promote an immediate leave period of five days for same sex military couples to marry. …
How is it that a large contingent of feminist dominated military and Pentagon leadership enacts policies that favor, prioritize, and give expanded benefits for same sex couples; yet Specialist Lopez apparently was only allowed two days to bury his mother?
If that was you, and you could only get two days to attend to your mother’s death, and you see same sex military couples being allowed five days immediate leave to marry; wouldn’t that bother you a little, regardless of what your opinions are of gay and same sex couples? Where is the equality?
Yep. An unhinged man murders his fellow soldiers in cold blood. Let’s blame it on same-sex marriage and the “Lesbo Circle of Doom.”
At least Conzachi admits that his theory is only a theory, and that “whether or not we will ever learn [the shooter’s] true motives is unknown.”
Setting aside the absurdity, and offensiveness, of Conzachi’s argument for a moment, he’s wrong to suggest that same-sex couples are somehow being coddled by “Lesbo” brass. Straight couples can also get marriage leaves of up to 3 days, and the reason the military gives extra time to same-sex couples is that many of them have to travel long distances to get married, since same-sex marriage is only legal in 17 states. The military has been slow to actually implement the new policies, and many same-sex couples have simply been denied leave to get married. Soldiers, regardless of sexual orientation, also have 30 days of earned leave each year they can use to get married.
Coznachi spends the rest of his post tearing down the female officer who confronted Lopez and brought an end to his killing spree.
He ends with this question — a question that he seems to have already answered to his own satisfaction:
Are the military’s priorities of same sex couple, gay, and women in combat issues harmful to males in general?
A number of those who are associated with A Voice for Men — most notably “managing editor ” Dean Esmay and “contributing editor” Karen Straughan — profess to be great Friends of the Gays; indeed Straughan describes herself as a “genderqueer, bisexual … woman”).
I can only wonder why they would want to associate themselves with a site that publishes articles suggesting that supporting the rights of same sex couples in the military to marry is “harmful to males in general.”
Disgusting. I know they love to use any tragedy to blame women, or anyone who isn’t white cys straight male, but damn. This hits close to home for me, so a giant “fuck you” to Conzachi.
I know Harrison Ford has aged a bit but I am so going to see this film when it comes out.
This sounds familiar – didn’t a MRM movement blame a shooting on women a few months ago? Only that time it was because no one would have sex with the guy so that was clearly why he killed people and clearly women are to blame for not having sex with him.
Do you ever get the feeling that they hate women and blame them for everything?
Well, not everything, have to leave room for the LGBTQA+ and racial minorities oppressing them too.
Even the reddit MRAs were taken aback by this argument, and they normally lap up everything AVfM
Any old assfax will do if it can be used to blame women for something.
Well, obviously a male officer would have gunned down Lopez before he had a chance to kill himself. Which would have made such a difference. I mean, if Lopez had been killed by the officer, then he couldn’t have gone on to, er, kill himself.
What is even the fuck here. I mean really. This is just ridiculous (and by that, I mean even more ridiculous than usual). How does any of that make any sense to anyone.
It seems like a really bad strategy to project one’s own ideology onto a mass-murderer. Just saying.
More passive-aggressive threat making. Do want we want or we might just have to flip out and kill people.
Ah, no,@Kootiepatra, not when one is hoping to frighten and silence half the population. Then one can say to those people “Look what you make one of us do by how you are behaving. If you don’t stop behaving like that, more of us will lose control and shoot you all. Be afraid. Be very afraid.”
I wonder (not really), why does that sound exactly like a gaslighting abuser?
Ooops, ninj’d by zoon
I keep waiting for AVFM to run an article about how feminists cause earthquakes, tsunamis, and hurricanes.
@cassandrakitty – on the day they announce their support for UKIP, presumably?
You expressed it better, titian.
This made me think of The Onion’s “Gays Too Precious To Risk In Combat” video. What’s funny is that if you replace “gays” with “women,” this is how MRAs think the military really works. Since the repeal of DADT in the US, I’m sort of surprised that I haven’t heard them complaining that now gay men are no longer ineligible for the draft and this is clearly a feminist plot.
That’s just terrible. Queer folks are treated slightly nicer in one respect than straight folks – it is only a matter of time before the queerarchy is established.
And yet they accuse us of “looking for things to be offended at”. Hypocrites.
“Males in general,” you know, the real males. The straight ones.
That is what that means, right?
@cassandrakitty Well, that hypothesis was already tested, and the evidence was against it, turns out.
I didn’t believe this. Certainly, I thought, even AVFM wouldn’t publish a lot tearing down an officer who confronted an armed shooter? Even if that was officer was a woman, wouldn’t thy have some kind of basic respect for the bravery it takes to do that? But no. Nope, he does indeed spend the rest of he post tearing down the female officer.
I don’t really know why I was so surprised. Anyone who would blame one person choosing to pick up a gun and shoot other people on something so completely and totally unrelated as gay marriage is not well versed with the concept of logic.
And is a hateful asshole.
That was my thought too, Cassandra. I’m just waiting to hear about how gays and feminism caused this weekend’s tornado outbreak.
I don’t even like to call the MRM a “movement” anymore because of this nonsense. They’re just a bunch of people clinging to a reactionary ideology that only serves as a platform for defending and attempting to justify privilege.
Assfax.
From the comments section:
Wrong-o!
Speaking of GirlWritesWhat, I just found out that she has a TVTropes page. As a result of the wiki’s entrhonement of fanboyism, it’s pretty much an excuse to link to as much of her videos as possible, and even the YMMV (Your Milleage May Vary) page is used to forestall criticism.
And now I need brain bleach. 🙁
The shooter shot things up because WOMEN IN THE MILITARY ARE GETTING GAY MARRIED! And then when a woman in the military (who may or may not be gay and/or gay-married) stops the shooter, that too is a bad thing?
I’m starting to think all these people just plain hate women. There is no other way for this whack-logic to make sense.
“If that was you, and you could only get two days to attend to your mother’s death, and you see same sex military couples being allowed five days immediate leave to marry; wouldn’t that bother you a little, regardless of what your opinions are of gay and same sex couples?”
Yeah, it would bother me if I couldn’t get the time off I needed when others could. I’d want more time. My instinct would be to try and get more time or complain that I didn’t get enough. It would not be to want others to have less time or hold it against them or resent people who are getting what they need just because I’m not. Human 101.
It seems weird to compare time off to get married with time off for a funeral. Though now I’m curious; how much leave time do heterosexual soldiers get for weddings?