feminists and selective service

[black saltParticipant 25]

just wondering…

have you ever heard one of these modern-day feminists screaming for their RIGHT to register with selective service?

dumb topic. possibly.

but when in-discussion with ladies about equal this, equal that, i often ask if they’re ready for equal jail time for the same crimes and being equally REQUIRED by law to register with selective service.

the subject usually shuts them up fairly quick.

[Tiga KParticipant 1693]

Many of them would tell you that we are “equal BUT DIFFERENT!” I’ve never understood what exactly that is supposed to mean, but they use it anytime a double standard is brought up.

[Klaus WindamierParticipant 543]

Equality for feminist means woman got all the right with no responsibility.
Equality for feminist means woman are equal but they need special treatment.
Equality for feminist means woman want the cake and eat it too.
Equality for feminist means woman should paid more while man do harder and longer job.
Equality for feminist means woman should be able to walk naked while man are all objectifying them.
Equality for feminist means woman are superior than man while in the same time blame all the man for whatever happen.

(So much for equal, yes?)

[Anonymous 18]

We talked about it a while back. One of the brothers posted a link to an article and the comments from the phi-mails were absurd and hilarious.

A feminist hates losing an argument.

That’s why her kind invented rape. And patriarchy. And misogyny.

Feminist stupidity though is authentic. Why else a woman be a feminist?

[HitmanParticipant]

well , if they REALLY want equality why AREN’T they protesting for the right to fight and DIE for their country ? you know , the country that affords them the FREEDOM to do so ? hmmm…maybe because they are so full of S~~~ where their rational MINDS should be !

[AttonParticipant]

You don’t understand feminism its equity when it suits women and women are helpless victims when it does not.

A MGTOW is a man who is not a woman's bitch!

[RoyDalParticipant]

black salt wrote:

… have you ever heard one of these modern-day feminists screaming for their RIGHT to register with selective service?

I have heard them arguing against drafting women, but never for it. We, the US taxpayer, have to pay for remodeling submarines and surface warships to accommodate women. We have to lower or drop physical fitness standards into the military, police, and firefighting. We have to select women over men for white collar jobs and college admissions. We have to pay for their abortions.

But we can’t draft them. Oh no, not that.

Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?

[RedDawnParticipant 1391]

Politics is never about equality, by definition it is the struggle for power.

Courage is the key to life itself - Morgan Freeman

[Crazy CanuckMember 4215]

NCFM Will Argue Challenge to Male-Only Draft Registration

http://ncfm.org/2015/12/news/conscription/ncfm-press-release-concerning-our-lawsuit-against-the-selective-service-system/

"If pussy was a stock it would be plummeting right now because you've flooded the market with it. You're giving it away too easy." - Dave Chapelle

[Anonymous 5]

C~~~s gonna c~~~.

[narwhalParticipant]

I personally don’t want women in the selective service. It is one thing to allow women who are more of an exception then the rule, but I can’t imagine wasting all that money trying to train women who are more concerned about the latest fashions and gossip then they are about protecting their lives and the lives of their brothers/sisters.

It just seems to me that the vast majority of men, though perhaps not physically gifted, have a mentality to protect and server, and fight when needed. You can’t take the average woman and expect her to do that.

Honestly, I hope we never have to draft soldiers again, but if we do, I can’t see drafting the average woman as a good thing for anybody.

Ok. Then do it.

[Bob BashboshParticipant 160]

Tiga K wrote:

Many of them would tell you that we are “equal BUT DIFFERENT!” I’ve never understood what exactly that is supposed to mean, but they use it anytime a double standard is brought up.

I actually have no problem with that statement from a philosophical standpoint. That is, as two parts of an enduring biological symbiosis necessary for species propagation, we share equal value through mutual necessity and we are different, anatomically, physiologically, genetically, even neurologically.

But I agree, standards are standards. If allowances have to made for the inclusion of another demographic, they’re simply not suited to that role. It reminds me of that great scene in Monty Python’s ‘The Life of Brian’..

[Tiga KParticipant 1693]

Bob Bashbosh wrote:

I actually have no problem with that statement from a philosophical standpoint. That is, as two parts of an enduring biological symbiosis necessary for species propagation, we share equal value through mutual necessity and we are different, anatomically, physiologically, genetically, even neurologically.

Yes, I agree with that…. yin and yang.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22520]

Bob Bashbosh wrote:

I actually have no problem with that statement from a philosophical standpoint. That is, as two parts of an enduring biological symbiosis necessary for species propagation, we share equal value through mutual necessity and we are different, anatomically, physiologically, genetically, even neurologically.

You speak of the “social contract”. Well, the women have broken their part of the social contract and they have renounced their responsibilities of said contract. Yet, these same hypocritical women demand men uphold their part of the “social contract”.

In response, men go MGTOW and they leave women behind.

While I doubt it will happen in my lifetime, if women decide they want the social contract back, give us a call. We are more than willing to listen. But, before any agreement is reached, we will first renegotiate, and you women will be made to uphold your end of the contract.

And threat of force will not work. There is little difference between minimalism and death.

You cannot squeeze water from a rock. You cannot work a horse with a broken back. You cannot build a brick wall out of air. And you cannot control men that you have spurned to the point that said men have rejected society as a whole.

The only difference between MGTOW and every other group of wronged men in history is that we are honest and polite on the manner. Meaning, we MGTOW prefer to just walk away and let you women rot in your filth.

[MattNYCParticipant 2329]

Faust For Science wrote:

if women decide they want the social contract back, give us a call. We are more than willing to listen.

I wonder what this would even look like though. What could a woman offer me? For the things that women bring to the table, that i actually value (a good time in the bedroom, and a classy woman to follow my lead on the dancefloor), i don’t need the costs & risks of a relationship for any of them.

Does marriage grant me any sort of social benefit?
Does having a girlfriend get me “ahead” in life?

I guess if women made a serious offer i’d listen, but i can’t imagine what they’d have that i’d be interested in. Like someone trying to sell me tickets to see the circus. I don’t care where the seats are or how big the discount is – i don’t give a f~~~ about circuses.

[Bob BashboshParticipant 160]

Tiga K wrote:

Yes, I agree with that…. yin and yang.

EXACTLY Tiga!! That’s why I’m so despairing of feminism, it refuses to recognise the natural, all be it, fragile balance of nature – it’s perverse.

Faust For Science wrote:

You speak of the “social contract”. Well, the women have broken their part of the social contract and they have renounced their responsibilities of said contract. Yet, these same hypocritical women demand men uphold their part of the “social contract”.

EXACTLY Faust!! You’ll get no argument from me. Nicely put!

MattNYC wrote:

I wonder what this would even look like though. What could a woman offer me? For the things that women bring to the table, that i actually value (a good time in the bedroom, and a classy woman to follow my lead on the dancefloor), i don’t need the costs & risks of a relationship for any of them.

Yes, as I say, it’s not only perverse, it inherently self-destructive – cutting off ones nose to spite ones face.

Great thread and great posts again guys. That’s why I love MGTOW philosophy.

[Tiga KParticipant 1693]

@ MattNYC

I’m right there with you. Even if gender relations magically became perfectly fair overnight and soulmateunicorn descended from heaven right in front of me, mgtow still has value. This site is important because new guys can come here, get the red pill rage out of there system, and then they have a positive environment that shows them they can be happy without women. Marriage is never a requirement for a happy life, neither now or in my hypothetic scenario. I enjoy being single and focusing on my hobbies.

[Puffin StuffParticipant 24979]

I can see the case for female draft going to the supreme court but with Ginsberg, Kagan and Sontomayor on the bench they only need one guy to agree with them and the female draft becomes unconstitutional.

The supreme’s will never let it happen.

#icethemout; Remember Thomas Ball. He died for your children.

[Author]

Posts