- 13,827
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Nah, mate. That changes nothing.Reading comprehension is key.
The word I specifically used was “drafted” into the military, as in a “draft card” that young men in the United States have to fill out when they turn 18.
I’m all for women being in the military, law enforcement ect. But I’m 100% against women being forced into the military, like young men are apt to, in the United States.
You're against young women being drafted, but you're okay with it for young men? The idea that the draft is okay for one sex but not okay for the other is just as dumb as the idea that being in the military is okay for one sex but not the other. It's still sexist and it's still hilariously incorrect purely on the basis of how a modern military is structured. It's the same stupidity, but in a slightly different frock.
Even ignoring all the physically non-demanding ways in which people serve in the military, men aren't universally imposing physical specimens. Some of them are even quite weak and frail. And the moment you start applying restrictions on which men get drafted and which services they get put in based on physical capability, you realise that actually you could have just applied the same conditions to everyone regardless of sex.
Have you got any more excuses for your misogyny and refusal to treat people equally based on their skills, experience and ability? Or are you going to keep writing people off purely because they weren't "lucky" enough to be born with a twig and berries?
Right. You only want the best of the best. And you don't see how a woman could ever be an excellent agent when a man was also in the picture. To you, the man will always be a better choice. Otherwise you would have stopped at "I'm not against women in the Secret Service".As far as the rest of what I said, I stand by purely on the scope of whom they have to protect. Am I against women in the Secret Service? Of course not.
But for the safety of our past and present elected leaders, I personally would only want the best of the best (and yes, for me this includes physical attributes), protecting the likes of Biden, Obama, Trump, Pelosi, and their families.
I’ve been on waaaay too many police-related calls that have gone sideways, to see what happens when you have cops that aren’t physically up to the task be them fat and out of shape, not strong enough, not big enough, ect. People get hurt. Civilians get hurt. Wouldn’t want that to happen to America’s most important figures
When you talk about cops that aren't physically up to the task because they're fat and out of shape, how many of them are men? Is it even relevant what genitalia they're packing, or is the real problem that they're fat and out of shape? It's about being able to do the job. There's nothing about having a vagina that makes someone suddenly incapable of protecting a politician.
Honestly, I thought you'd see the problem when it was pointed out to you. If you have to put a "but" after any statement that you're not against women, you kinda are. You're willing to grant them some concessions, but you're not willing to openly give them exactly the same opportunities that you would give a man.
I guess you can lead a horse to water, but you can't undo decades of explicit and implicit training that women are second class citizens.