"It's she-man John vs. he-woman Hil"
Op-ed here. Excerpt:
"Is work/family balance a "women's issue"? I suppose men just love slaving away 12 hours a day in mind-numbing jobs and cramped cubicles so they can come home to their bitter, exhausted wives and already-sleeping children.
Did I miss the memo that humans are now able to asexually reproduce? Otherwise I would assume reproductive rights also affect men - who, I was under the impression, often play a somewhat vital role in procreation.
And on the flip side of the coin, is "the war on terrorism" -don't even get me started on those semantics - a "men's issue"? Were the 160,500 American women who have served thus far in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East since 2003 merely playing dress up?"
Can any of you guys verify the "160,500" statistic?
- Log in to post comments
Comments
160,500? Yeah right.
160,500?? They wish.
Females account for about 15% of the entire US Military, or about 200,000 females out of just over 1.4million people.
For 160,500 females to have served in Iraq/Afghanistan/Middle East would mean that almost 80% of females in the entire military would have spent some time in Iraq/Afghanistan etc in the last 4 years, or almost 40,000 per year.
Based on the available figures, US Miltary numbers in these regions have averaged about 160,000 personnel per annum in theatre.
This means that for some strange reason, although women account for 15% of the US Military, they account for 25% of personnel in combat zones.
Presumably, this would be reflected by a higher then expected casualty rate for females in these war zones? Nope, (according to this article here), females account for about 2% of Iraq fatalities. If you include Afghanistan fatalities in the figures (see here), female fatalities drop to around 1.9%.
So working on actual deaths and average staffing levels in each year, we could say that women have about a 1 in 1800 chance of being killed in Iraq etc. (90 total fatalities in the last 4 years = 22.5 per annum out of an average of 40,000 women), while men have a 1 in 110 chance of dying in the present combats (4268 deaths in the last 4 years = 1067 per annum out of an average of 120,000 men).
Despite there being just over 6 times the amount of men in the army, they are 15 times more likely to be killed than a women.
While women not being in direct combat roles makes them less likely to be killed, this is a huge gulf (90 deaths versus 4352), and very definitely makes the present wars and combat deaths primarily a MALE issue.
Dang
Don't you just hate it when a little critical thinking gets in the way of an otherwise good soapbox ;-)
Thanks,robrob. That was really a good read.
Calm down guys, I can explain at least part of this..
The females in the military are victims of the patriarchal structure of "war", whereas deep down they are innocent nurturing creatures. The resulting inner conflict caused them undue stress and post-traumatic disorder. The patriarchy (as embodied in their recruiters) deceived them into believing that they needed to join the military to obtain equality. Also, they are all single mothers who juggle lots of stuff, have successful freelance businesses, are victims of deadbeat dads and they joined the Army during an episode of post-partum psychosis (an illness so terrible, it is not even listed in the DSM).
They should undoubtedly be able to sue the government for big bucks.
-ax
Excellent Ax!
Your victimology is on point. But what about how men "force women" to have to prove themselves because women have been oppressed by men ever since the time when women sat home on their asses while the man brought home the money that the woman controlled and would spend? What about how calling deities "The Creator" instead of "The goddess"(and worshipping women) oppressed women into having to invent tons of years of revisionist history in pro-fem novels supported by Oprah's book club.
What about how the thousands of poor homeless men are "oppressing" the billionaire Oprah Winfrey into bashing them on TV because women just can't get ANYTHING out of this "patriarchy" but preferential treatment, shorter sentences for the SAME CRIMES, favoritism in courts, free income in the form of child support and WOMEN-ONLY programs funded by our tax dollars(hence robbing all men), and the list goes on.
What about THAT you patriarchal oppressor?!!!
*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy5
I am zee devil
I, a man, am nothing more nor less than Lucifer himself. I have stalked (walked behind) and visually raped (looked at) hundreds of virtuous women. I spend the entire daylight hours thinking of ways to oppress and terrorize women, then go out at night and commit vile acts. These acts include, but are not limited to, trying to talk to a woman, asking a woman for directions, attempting to help a woman stranded on the highway, and contributing to the wage gap by earning more as a software developer than my waitress girlfriend. And as long as I am in mea culpa mode, I will go so far as to confess that I actually bought a woman a drink once..not realizing that I was setting myself up for being jailed for date rape and seduction using a drug, having my dick sliced off while sleeping, and 18 years of child support representing 110% of my income.
-ax