Governor-General tells male soldiers to "get down on their knees" and thank the female soldiers

Here's a more complete version of the article where this is mentioned.

...in our country, where the head of state and her second and third in command are all female, and NONE of them were elected. Women hold all three of the positions which allow someone to effectively veto all legislation in Canada.

As for this sexist loudmouth of a GG, what more could you possibly expect from someone who got her job for being the politically correct choice?

I have no problem with women doing all the things men do, or being in leadership roles in our society, if they're elected to fill those roles. Our GG, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and Queen were all appointed, or inherited their positions. Regardless of how they get their jobs, I have a problem with SEXISTS in those roles, whether they're male or female, and this woman is clearly a sexist. The same logic applies to Hillary Clinton.

To such women I say this: take your man-hate and stick it up your ass. It's an anachronism that makes you look like hateful scum, and which harms the interests of both men and women who are interested in equality and fairness.

Fortunately, as a political appointee, the GG will be gone in a few years. Good riddance to this sexist.

"This just shows that women are part of the Canadian Forces and that we are here doing the same job as the men," said Master Warrant Officer Mary-Ann Barnes of Barrie.

BULLSHIT.

If that's the case, then why are essentially all of the combat deaths overseas happening to MEN. Why do draft laws apply only to men?

Before I get into this, I DO know that women are serving in combat roles in Canada's military. Yet most of the deaths and injuries happen to men at rates well above and beyond what the percentages of men and women 11% in the armed forces would predict, i.e. women aren't taking 11% of Canadian casualties. I believe that out of 46 Canadian deaths in Afghanistan thus far, only ONE has been a woman. That's not 11%. (Details here.)

Why?

This is the worst part of the feminist rampage: women are entering traditionally male fields of pursuit (policing, military, heavy industry), and that would be just great if they were actually doing the same jobs in those fields. A few are, but many of them aren't. In practice, women are preferentially given all the safe, easy, low-risk, non-physical work available, generally for pay equal to what's given to the men in the riskier, more demanding occupations in that field or organization. For instance: women being excused from combat roles in the US, and then having the gall to whine about how "equal" they are.

This forces more of the men in those fields/organizations into increasingly dangerous and risky roles, all so some princess can bitch and moan about how she's "equal", demand equal pay and avoid the dirty work. That isn't equality, it's chivalry, and it's a disgrace. It's women taking advantage of men.

Yeah, there are exceptions, but I've worked in enough places where this is happening. Some girl sitting in an air-conditioned office screams for equal pay with the guys working in 100 degree weather breaking concrete, or in a warehouse or factory doing riskier, physically demanding work in unpleasant conditions.

For every entitlement princess collecting a paycheck in the rear echelon, yet another man has to face bombs and bullets. They're "doing the same job as men"? Really? Then why aren't they being wounded and dying as frequently as men, after correcting for the number of men and women in the forces?

When women sign up for the military and aren't expected to do every last job a man does at exactly the same rates, they're endangering men and taking advantage of men. Then again, I'm sure that makes the feminists very happy. To the women in the Canadian forces who ARE in combat and other traditionally male roles, I extend my thanks and respect for a job well done. To the princesses filing paperwork for the same pay, well, you can probably figure out what finger gesture you're getting right now.

This kind of doublethink (women are equal when they do less/men owe women protection, advantages, etc.) makes me want to puke. It's the same chivalrous bullshit that fuels "women only earn (insert random number under 100) percent of what men do". That's right, they do. Because they only do a fraction of what men do. Do what we do if you want what we get. Some women do, and they should receive the same pay and respect a man does. Not more, the same. Giving women in Canada's military all this media attention just for doing what men do every day? That's MORE "respect" than a man would get for doing the same job, and therefore sexist.

I'm all for equality, but when I meet a woman doing a man's job just as well as a man can, I'm not impressed: we're "equal" after all. If we're so equal, a) why has it taken women thousands of years to start doing the things we do every day, often with special, women-only advantages, perks and praise and b) why is it such a big media event when a woman finally manages to keep up with the guys if we're all so equal?

In addition to being misandric nonsense, it's demeaning to women to report this kind of crap. What it's saying is "women are so unequal that it's a major event when a woman does what men have done for centuries, even when she only does a part of it or does it with men's protection".

Again, this doesn't apply to all of the women in Canada's armed forces. The ones doing the dirty work and the fighting are just as deserving of praise and respect as the men BUT NOT MORE, and I'm glad some women have finally stepped forward to take responsibility for our country after all these years. It doesn't change the fact that it's still a media event whenever a woman comes close to doing what men do all the time, even if she's doing it with a man's help. That's sexist nonsense, and it demeans both men and women.

Look at this (video).

She is the center of a newspiece because she injured her back loading and unloading munitions from trucks and other such vehicles.

I am not denying she deserves very good medical care as does anyone injured in a combat zone whether in support work or combat. What I am pointing out is that there are men in Walter Reed who have lost three limbs who don't get a lick of attention from the press. One elderly munitions stevedore however injures her back and she gets a CNN newspiece and all the national sympathy she can collect! And why? Because she is a she. I suppose she actually believes she should be placed in line for surgery ahead of men who have had their arms blown off?

[Aside: And just WTF is a 50+ YO person of either sex doing loading and unloading heavy munitions in a combat zone? Or has the Army gone utterly nuts?]

Couldn't agree more.

Back injury? What about the MEN that have had there faces and limbs blown off? This is why women dont belong in the military. This woman feels like such a victim that she's not treated like a "human being" as her horrible injury is treated. I find it ironic the politicians are focusing more on proper military equipment and increased veteran benifits. These are important issues, yet I can't help but wonder if its because more women are in the military. Women expect society to pamper them, and that includes the military. More female soldiers will undermined the competance of our armed forces.

enjoy

anthony

So what did the Canadian men do after being publicly insulted by this misandrist? Evidently, NOTHING! This either indicates they are so self-loathing that they actually agree with her crap or they are more interested in ice hockey and drinking ale and hope for better days for men.

I know what you mean Luek.
That really bothers me too.
The only thing I can think is that these are career military men, and this was their Commander and Chief...
In other words, they felt like they had to go along with it.

Great thread, lots of fine logic and comments.

I've noted previously that it's a strange kind of Evil Patriarchy that designs an entire system to advantage, elevate, benefit, enable, and protect the class of individuals it seeks to "oppress."

To every feminist and/or wussie-poopy metro-sexual Hugo-boy fellow traveller railing against women's lack of "ekwality," I'd pose this question -

"Can you name even one socially condoned form of oppression against women?"

I believe that's a paraphrase from a long-ago debate on another forum that was intended to be a 15-round engagement; and that question terminated the bout in Round No. 1., because no socially approved oppressive practices could be found...

(The debate, obviously, excluded truly patriarchal cultures - mostly Muslim - and was only about Western feminocracies.)

Enough with the Canada-bashing, Luek. We MRAs up here are part of the same fight, so drop the nationalist insults already.

Luek, all the government offices are closed on the week end, I already left a voice complaint and sent an e-mail to the governor generals office. As far as the blog and forum; it is plain to see the bias, it claims its for “citizens voices” but the gg’s version of citizen includes only “women” and “youth” There is not even a men’s section. They censored all my dissenting comments about her actions on IWD. Is anyone here honestly shocked?

What do you recommend for a plan of action?

You are right. I guess I was expecting more from Canada than I should have.

Try some of the F4J tactics. Block traffic with large banners saying what a misandric a_hole the GG is. Interrupt tv interviews. Lots of things can be done besides leaving a very concerned message in their voicemail.