0 comment Saturday, October 11, 2014 | admin
It's interesting that this story has emerged now; it's been known for a while that these things happen.
I posted about such incidents a couple of years ago, but I think the fact that the issue is getting coverage in the mainstream media is something new.
No, not in war, but in the Peace Corps. An investigation by ABC's 20/20 claims that "More than 1,000 young American women have been raped or sexually assaulted in the last decade while serving as Peace Corps volunteers in foreign countries," and that some of the victims say "the Peace Corps has ignored safety concerns and later tried to blame the women who were raped for bringing on the attacks... Jess Smochek, 29, of Pennsylvania was gang raped in Bangladesh in 2004 by a group of young men after she says Peace Corps officials in the country ignored her pleas to re-locate her." These attacks have happened in Benin, Bangladesh, Haiti, South Africa, Georgia, and many other places. When I blogged about the subject a while back, I got one very nasty, bullying-style comment from someone who found my blog piece objectionable, and hateful towards Third Worlders, according to him. Interestingly, the comment was posted from a government facility. The tone of it was rather creepy. But that's the nature of lefties; they become nasty and hateful while deploring other people's ''hate". And when your ''hate'' is nothing but facts, backed up by links -- well, that does not stop the left from attacking.
This piece from Alternative Right is about women in the armed forces, specifically the decision to put women into combat units. I think that one point made in the article, the fact that all our institutions have been infiltrated and co-opted, is a very valid one. Most of us on the right have thought, traditionally, that the military was a last bastion of the 'old America' but we see that this is not the case, and has not been for some time.
This story from the UK has been much discussed lately, though, like the Peace Corps story, it has been known for some time, but ignored by the controlled media.
What is the common thread here? Of course leftism and political correctness drive much of the hypocrisy on these issues. But a very important part of these problems is feminism, which of course is part of the leftist subversion of Western society.
The insidious thing about feminism is that it has pervaded all segments of society; even ''conservative'' or right-wing women -- and men, often -- support feminism, and even more, without realizing it, implicitly endorse feminism and egalitarianism in all its forms. Many uninformed people on the right think it is somehow part of the 'American way' to erase all differences between people, whether racial or gender or any other innate difference.
In discussing the shooting death of a female police officer, the FReepers are divided over whether women should be in such roles, though at least one good comment is offered.
To: AbolishCSEU You are right. Even conservatives have bought into the feminist outrage at the very idea of there being any limits at all on a woman doing exactly what suits her fancy. PC has hit us all hard. - Women ARE built different than men, they don�t have the upper body strength to do certain jobs. A former military officer told me that he had women under his command and that when his company got the order to "bug out", the women couldn�t do the heavy lifting to accomplish a bug out. They�d just ignore the order to do so, and call it done. In combat, sadly, calling it done isn�t getting it done. It�s foolish and costs lives.
26 posted on Sunday, January 02, 2011 5:31:40 PM by Twinkie
I don't know who Twinkie is but she (I am assuming it is a she) makes good sense, unlike some others on that thread who spout the egalitarian party line with the best of them.
Women are different than men, and as 'Twinkie' implies, there should, accordingly, be limits on what they do, and where they go. Is this unfair? It's simple common sense.
The girls who traipse off to the Third World in some do-gooder cause, and who thus come to harm, as well as the young rape victims in the UK, and the women in the military -- all have been taught the feminist dogma that women can do anything a man can do, except beget children. ''I am strong, I am invincible, I am woman!"
Obviously women are not invincible, and women who knowingly enter into dangerous situations based on naivete and ''colorblindness'' may come to harm by having been taught that they are 'strong women' who can handle anything. And besides, everybody is the same under the skin, right?
Feminism taught that girls as young as 12 or 13 were entitled to be called ''women'' and entitled to make their own sexual choices . Young girls like those in the UK incidents likely come from 'broken homes' or homes with an absent father. Their mothers, in turn, are probably self-centered feminists who are out pursuing their own ''choices'' while their daughters go unsupervised and unguided, easy prey for the predators. Girls who are living a loose lifestyle (to use an archaic term) are vulnerable to many dangers. Girls who are out meeting grown men, drinking alcohol, taking drugs, will end up compromised at some point, bereft of inhibitions while intoxicated to insensibility, a sure recipe for disaster.
Yet women continue to insist that women should have a ''right'' to do these things: to impair themselves with drugs or alcohol, to consort with people who are a danger, to wander the streets alone (or with other females) at all hours, in bad areas -- all in the name of 'equality' and 'freedom.'
The same attitude leads young women to go into countries which are known to be dangerous, and to put themselves in risky situations -- to show that they 'trust' people, and to show their 'tolerance' -- but they too seem to think, like Helen Reddy, that they are ''invincible''.
Feminism, more than many other aspects of liberalism, has really dug in deeply into our society. It will be hard to challenge that, but it's something that has to be done.
I posted about such incidents a couple of years ago, but I think the fact that the issue is getting coverage in the mainstream media is something new.
No, not in war, but in the Peace Corps. An investigation by ABC's 20/20 claims that "More than 1,000 young American women have been raped or sexually assaulted in the last decade while serving as Peace Corps volunteers in foreign countries," and that some of the victims say "the Peace Corps has ignored safety concerns and later tried to blame the women who were raped for bringing on the attacks... Jess Smochek, 29, of Pennsylvania was gang raped in Bangladesh in 2004 by a group of young men after she says Peace Corps officials in the country ignored her pleas to re-locate her." These attacks have happened in Benin, Bangladesh, Haiti, South Africa, Georgia, and many other places. When I blogged about the subject a while back, I got one very nasty, bullying-style comment from someone who found my blog piece objectionable, and hateful towards Third Worlders, according to him. Interestingly, the comment was posted from a government facility. The tone of it was rather creepy. But that's the nature of lefties; they become nasty and hateful while deploring other people's ''hate". And when your ''hate'' is nothing but facts, backed up by links -- well, that does not stop the left from attacking.
This piece from Alternative Right is about women in the armed forces, specifically the decision to put women into combat units. I think that one point made in the article, the fact that all our institutions have been infiltrated and co-opted, is a very valid one. Most of us on the right have thought, traditionally, that the military was a last bastion of the 'old America' but we see that this is not the case, and has not been for some time.
This story from the UK has been much discussed lately, though, like the Peace Corps story, it has been known for some time, but ignored by the controlled media.
What is the common thread here? Of course leftism and political correctness drive much of the hypocrisy on these issues. But a very important part of these problems is feminism, which of course is part of the leftist subversion of Western society.
The insidious thing about feminism is that it has pervaded all segments of society; even ''conservative'' or right-wing women -- and men, often -- support feminism, and even more, without realizing it, implicitly endorse feminism and egalitarianism in all its forms. Many uninformed people on the right think it is somehow part of the 'American way' to erase all differences between people, whether racial or gender or any other innate difference.
In discussing the shooting death of a female police officer, the FReepers are divided over whether women should be in such roles, though at least one good comment is offered.
To: AbolishCSEU You are right. Even conservatives have bought into the feminist outrage at the very idea of there being any limits at all on a woman doing exactly what suits her fancy. PC has hit us all hard. - Women ARE built different than men, they don�t have the upper body strength to do certain jobs. A former military officer told me that he had women under his command and that when his company got the order to "bug out", the women couldn�t do the heavy lifting to accomplish a bug out. They�d just ignore the order to do so, and call it done. In combat, sadly, calling it done isn�t getting it done. It�s foolish and costs lives.
26 posted on Sunday, January 02, 2011 5:31:40 PM by Twinkie
I don't know who Twinkie is but she (I am assuming it is a she) makes good sense, unlike some others on that thread who spout the egalitarian party line with the best of them.
Women are different than men, and as 'Twinkie' implies, there should, accordingly, be limits on what they do, and where they go. Is this unfair? It's simple common sense.
The girls who traipse off to the Third World in some do-gooder cause, and who thus come to harm, as well as the young rape victims in the UK, and the women in the military -- all have been taught the feminist dogma that women can do anything a man can do, except beget children. ''I am strong, I am invincible, I am woman!"
Obviously women are not invincible, and women who knowingly enter into dangerous situations based on naivete and ''colorblindness'' may come to harm by having been taught that they are 'strong women' who can handle anything. And besides, everybody is the same under the skin, right?
Feminism taught that girls as young as 12 or 13 were entitled to be called ''women'' and entitled to make their own sexual choices . Young girls like those in the UK incidents likely come from 'broken homes' or homes with an absent father. Their mothers, in turn, are probably self-centered feminists who are out pursuing their own ''choices'' while their daughters go unsupervised and unguided, easy prey for the predators. Girls who are living a loose lifestyle (to use an archaic term) are vulnerable to many dangers. Girls who are out meeting grown men, drinking alcohol, taking drugs, will end up compromised at some point, bereft of inhibitions while intoxicated to insensibility, a sure recipe for disaster.
Yet women continue to insist that women should have a ''right'' to do these things: to impair themselves with drugs or alcohol, to consort with people who are a danger, to wander the streets alone (or with other females) at all hours, in bad areas -- all in the name of 'equality' and 'freedom.'
The same attitude leads young women to go into countries which are known to be dangerous, and to put themselves in risky situations -- to show that they 'trust' people, and to show their 'tolerance' -- but they too seem to think, like Helen Reddy, that they are ''invincible''.
Feminism, more than many other aspects of liberalism, has really dug in deeply into our society. It will be hard to challenge that, but it's something that has to be done.
Labels: Biased Media, Egalitarianism, Feminism