by Quin Hillyer
The House Armed Services Committee abused daughters and granddaughters this week by voting that young women should be required to register for the military draft.
Four Republicans joined committee Democrats in voting for this provision, already approved in a Senate vote, which should be seen as anathema. In doing so, they subject women to conscription into the horrors of war and, if captured in combat, the abject terror and indecent violations entailed in forcible rape — also with, of course, the possible result that no man can experience, that of pregnancy.
It is one thing, deservedly controversial in itself , to allow women into front-line combat roles. At least up until now, the choice to enter the armed services was voluntary. It is quite another thing to require that women, as it is with men, be forced to make themselves available for military duty. Except for in a tiny nation whose very survival depends on being able to muster every healthy adult for national defense, the act of forcing women, effectively at the point of a gun, to wield arms against their will should be seen as not just wrong but barbaric.
Perhaps this position runs against the zeitgeist . The confused elite culture insists that “equality” means equal bearing of burdens, all burdens, as well as of opportunities. In this oh, so exalted viewpoint, the differences between men and women are so negligible as to be unworthy of serious consideration. After all, goes the sentiment, we’re all just “assigned” a “gender” at birth, right? Biological sex? Nothing more than a “social construct.”
Some of us troglodytes still are sure this viewpoint is arrant poppycock. Men and women are different. On average, men are taller, heavier, and have more muscle density, strength, and speed. Science shows that, again in the aggregate but nonetheless by significant margins, men’s and women’s brains tend to function differently — and not by nurture but by very nature. This isn’t to say the brain circuitry of one sex is better than the other, but only that in most cases, they are considerably distinct. As one researcher described it, there is “too much data pointing to the biological basis of sex-based cognitive differences to ignore.”
All the cultural superstructure that once attended the actual celebration of different societal roles for men and women weren’t just some sort of evil work by patriarchy — they were based on clearly observed, biological differences. Human nature itself favors some such distinctions. That’s why, for example, notions of chivalry developed and why chivalry remains admirable no matter how many of the “woke” brigades and ardent feminists object.
And, of course, while captured men can be tortured, the particular sex-based ramifications of the torture, as indicated above, can be very different.
Nobody seriously argues that women should be discriminated against or denied opportunities their own free will and work can secure. There is every reason, however, to be discriminate, in the adjectival sense of the word meaning to “make nice distinctions,” in what the law mandates from men and women. That which is allowed ought not necessarily be required, and in some cases, it absolutely should not be.
Every Democrat on the committee made a bad vote on the draft, as did Republican Reps. Michael Waltz of Florida, Jack Bergman of Michigan, Liz Cheney of Wyoming, and Patrick Fallon of Texas. All of them, indeed every member of Congress, should reconsider. Getting women “out of the kitchen” is perfectly fine, but pushing them forcibly into the hell’s kitchen of warfare is a sign of a society that has lost its logical, moral, and very human bearings.
.....
The House Armed Services Committee abused daughters and granddaughters this week by voting that young women should be required to register for the military draft.
Four Republicans joined committee Democrats in voting for this provision, already approved in a Senate vote, which should be seen as anathema. In doing so, they subject women to conscription into the horrors of war and, if captured in combat, the abject terror and indecent violations entailed in forcible rape — also with, of course, the possible result that no man can experience, that of pregnancy.
It is one thing, deservedly controversial in itself , to allow women into front-line combat roles. At least up until now, the choice to enter the armed services was voluntary. It is quite another thing to require that women, as it is with men, be forced to make themselves available for military duty. Except for in a tiny nation whose very survival depends on being able to muster every healthy adult for national defense, the act of forcing women, effectively at the point of a gun, to wield arms against their will should be seen as not just wrong but barbaric.
Perhaps this position runs against the zeitgeist . The confused elite culture insists that “equality” means equal bearing of burdens, all burdens, as well as of opportunities. In this oh, so exalted viewpoint, the differences between men and women are so negligible as to be unworthy of serious consideration. After all, goes the sentiment, we’re all just “assigned” a “gender” at birth, right? Biological sex? Nothing more than a “social construct.”
Some of us troglodytes still are sure this viewpoint is arrant poppycock. Men and women are different. On average, men are taller, heavier, and have more muscle density, strength, and speed. Science shows that, again in the aggregate but nonetheless by significant margins, men’s and women’s brains tend to function differently — and not by nurture but by very nature. This isn’t to say the brain circuitry of one sex is better than the other, but only that in most cases, they are considerably distinct. As one researcher described it, there is “too much data pointing to the biological basis of sex-based cognitive differences to ignore.”
All the cultural superstructure that once attended the actual celebration of different societal roles for men and women weren’t just some sort of evil work by patriarchy — they were based on clearly observed, biological differences. Human nature itself favors some such distinctions. That’s why, for example, notions of chivalry developed and why chivalry remains admirable no matter how many of the “woke” brigades and ardent feminists object.
And, of course, while captured men can be tortured, the particular sex-based ramifications of the torture, as indicated above, can be very different.
Nobody seriously argues that women should be discriminated against or denied opportunities their own free will and work can secure. There is every reason, however, to be discriminate, in the adjectival sense of the word meaning to “make nice distinctions,” in what the law mandates from men and women. That which is allowed ought not necessarily be required, and in some cases, it absolutely should not be.
Every Democrat on the committee made a bad vote on the draft, as did Republican Reps. Michael Waltz of Florida, Jack Bergman of Michigan, Liz Cheney of Wyoming, and Patrick Fallon of Texas. All of them, indeed every member of Congress, should reconsider. Getting women “out of the kitchen” is perfectly fine, but pushing them forcibly into the hell’s kitchen of warfare is a sign of a society that has lost its logical, moral, and very human bearings.
.....
Read more here (Source: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario