Download a Permanent Printable PDF Version of This Article.
The Femi-Nazi Green Beret.
Biorseth, Tuesday, June 18, 2013
Comrade Obama, peace be upon him, is setting our military up for defeat. The latest news in this line is that women are now to be gradually phased into Army, Navy and Marine Commando and Special Ops units. According to AP, women may start training as Army Rangers in mid 2015, and as Navy Seals one year later.
The only practical reason would be to weaken these elite corps.
In the openly-homosexual-american-military page we talked about how this President and his Democrat Party, long time political sponsors, champions and promoters of sodomy and perversion, were able to celebrate the success of their long-time project to force homosexuals into extremely close company with all the heterosexuals in America's military, strengthening the giant homosexual plank in the Democrat Party Platform. It was a master stroke, for anti-Americanism, because nothing I can think of could possibly be more destructive to military unit cohesion.
At the same time, we know that, for reasons yet to be disclosed (or reported), the numbers of known gangsters and the numbers of Moslems have been going radically up in the American military ranks under this administration. That means, of course, lots of potential Nidal Hasans in the ranks, potential turn-coats who might turn their guns on their fellow Americans at any time. The more they get into their own religion, the more they read their own Koran, the more likely they are to suddenly go Nidal Hasan. It is the Koran, and not any particular Imam, or any particular Mosque, or any particular terrorist group, that radicalizes Moslems. It's the Koran itself. And Comrade Obama, peace be upon him, knows it.
And now, we are to see our most elite forces lower all their standards in order for women to be able to make the grade, and to get women into these very special units, out of a social-justice sense of Marxist pseudo-fairness. Here is what we said about the ridiculous notion of gender equality way back in the Femi-Nazi Movement page:
In the bizarre world of Femi-Nazism, the only differences between men and women are institutional and/or learned behaviors. Right. These people are just plain nuts. The clear and obvious differences between their own mothers and fathers were learned? Acquired? Not natural?
The major differences in size, strength, sex organs, psyche,
temperament, aggressiveness, musculature, skeletal biology, hairiness,
hormones, chromosomes, DNA, etc., etc., etc., between males and females
of the human species, are all institutional rather than natural?
That is just a typical load of Femi-Nazi horse-hockey-dooty-poop.
Men are bigger, stronger and more aggressive than women. Period.
If Femi-Nazism took charge of their young lives, and made all
little boys play with dolls and little tea sets, and made all little
girls play with toy guns and trucks and planes, when they all grew up,
the men would be bigger, stronger and more aggressive than women.
If Femi-Nazism continued the experiment on into their young
adulthood, and all the boys studied ballet, art and homemaking, and all
the girls went out camping, hunting, fishing and playing football, and
martial arts, when they all grew up, the men would be bigger, stronger
and more aggressive than the women.
If Femi-Nazism took a whole population and put them into a Maoist reeducation camp to learn the error of their ways for fifty years, when they came out, the men would be bigger, stronger and more aggressive than the women.
This is not rocket science. There is nothing difficult about any
of this. It's the reason that the lady’s Tee is closer to the pin than
the men's. All the institutions in the world are not going to change
the necessity for that handicap. There is a very practical reason that
boxers are divided into weight classes, and that women do not box men;
it's a rule that dramatically cuts down on the number of deaths in the
ring. Very simple; nothing to it.
Check out the scores, whether times, distances, weights, accuracy,
laps or whatever, and you'll find that, among all the women Olympic
medal-winners, none of them would have even made the men's team for that
same event. (Unless it was something like water ballet, or maybe
ice-skate dancing, or something else that more correctly would be called
an art rather than a sport, because of the need for purely subjective
And, farther down, here's what we said about women war fighters in that same webpage:
Some time back the courts caved on the issue of men-only
educational institutions being unfair, but women-only educational
institutions being perfectly fair; see? It started with the military
schools; now we have women in the dorms, learning how to be soldiers
along with the men. And this is supposed to make sense. When it came
around to Virginia Military Institute (VMI), and they caved, I read an
article by one of my favorite authors, Florence King, a Southern lady
whom I have always loved from afar. What she recommended, if I remember
correctly, was that it should be:
Razed to the ground, plowed under and sown with salt
before allowing women to enroll in this seemingly last male bastion left in America. I couldn't agree more.
However, VMI is now co-ed; isn't that nice? And so is
Annapolis, and West Point, and all the others. Our American culture is
now debased to the point that an important part of a young lady's formal
education now involves learning how to march, and how to run with heavy
equipment, and how to slam bayonets into bellies.
Just mention admission of men into any female-only educational institution and you will hear outraged screams, howls and hissy-fit editorials, coming from the same
that fought to get women into all male-only academies and into military uniforms everywhere.
The argument was, and is, that military women cannot expect to
advance to general officer level at the same rate as men if they are
denied access to three things:
- the military academies
- fighter and/or bomber pilot training
- actual combat experience.
The false basis for the argument is lost on them. It's the assumption that there is a need
for equal numbers of female and male general officers in our military.
Which makes about as much sense as equal sex distribution among
jockeys, or chess champions, or steeplejacks, or NFL linebackers.
Becoming a great military general or admiral is not and never
was the predominant dream of most little girls. It's nothing more than
another invented disenfranchised class of citizens being prepared by Leftist Femi-Nazism for further exploitation by the Marxist-Left.
The distinctly American problem for the Left is the utter
classlessness of American society. We have this huge, seemingly
all-encompassing middle-class, and literally no rigid class
stratification in which it is not possible for individuals to ever move
between classes. Since we have no rigid class structure here, and since
absolutely depends upon class warfare, unhappy classes must be created,
nurtured, and carefully educated and indoctrinated in just how disenfranchised they are. As an investment
toward a future of Socialism. It's the only way to deal with the
problem of all the American individuals who are so certain that they can
not only make their own way, but do or become whatever the hell they
choose. Which means prefer, which is not the same thing as being guided toward.
Most enlisted men and non-coms know what a ticket-puncher
is. The title is exemplified by John Kerry. A ticket-puncher is a
young officer who somehow finagles for himself just the right
assignments at just the right times, to get himself just the right
awards, commendations and decorations, e.g., just the right punches in
his ticket, before moving on to the next step. His ultimate goal has
nothing to do with the unit, but with his own future. The units he gets
into and out of are mere stepping stones to get him somewhere else.
Following this line of logic, Femi-Nazism claims that women are
not able to compete in the political arena with men who have illustrious
military service in their resumes. I suppose there is some validity to
the claim; sometimes male politicians flaunt their service records and
run on nothing else.
But the world has seen women Commanders-In-Chief and leaders of
powerful nations; the names Golda Meier and Margaret Thatcher come
immediately to mind. Neither of them ever went to any infantry school,
and both got themselves elected. Among those who voted them into office
were a whole lot of ordinary veterans, and serving soldiers and
sailors. (I would vote for Condi Rice for President in a heartbeat.)
The fact that any given woman might make a piss-poor infantryman does
not mean that the same woman might not make an absolutely great President.
Let me be clear:
Purposely incorporating women into combat units is just plain stupid.
This is not ancient Sparta. Exemplary performance of Russian women soldiers in World War II is not a good, practical example, because,
- Russia had already abandoned the civility, mores and standards of Western Civilization, just as she had rejected and even persecuted Judeo-Christian belief and morality;
Russian situation was at times absolutely desperate, as she had already
lost millions of citizens just in the opening weeks of the war.
That the Israeli military, preeminent in their region, experimented
with and ultimately abandoned a co-ed military should not be lost on
Women should not be billeted with men or even be in the same
military units with men. Military women should not be in any combat
units, nor should they be in any combat support units that go anywhere
close to military action. Women should not be among pilots or crews of
combat aircraft, or aircraft that may be expected to fly over or near
combat zones. Women should not be on warships that go into harm's way.
The reasons should be obvious, but we'll discuss them anyway.
Billeting men and women together in typical military situations leads to
nothing but hanky-panky and trouble. The whole purpose for the
existence of any military unit is hindered and not helped by sexual
distractions, entanglements and sub-plots among the members of the unit.
Our military should not be wasting time and tax money designing
maternity uniforms, and somehow quickly replacing key members needed to
fulfill the mission of the unit, but who are off on maternity leave.
You put a bunch of young men and young women together and there's
going to be some screwing around; that's the way it is. We should leave
the co-ed screwing around to the increasingly degenerate campus culture
of American academia, and get it out of our military, because the
mission of our military is much more vital to all of us.
Men naturally tend to be defensive and protective of women near
them. What combat men need to be is flat out aggressive, in a cohesive,
well trained aggressive team. Combat is no place for special
treatment, or for anybody looking out for someone weaker. That's a
distraction from the mission.
Mike Royko, R.I.P., once asked in an Op-Ed article, "what, exactly, is a 120 pound infantry-woman going to do with a 110 pound combat pack, other than sit on it?"
An excellent question. Women cannot carry as much weight, cannot run
or march as far or as fast, cannot get over or through obstacles as
well, and simply cannot perform as well as men in any combat infantry
type tasks. Period. Hollywood can make all the Zena movies and G.I.
Jane movies and Wonder Woman cartoons and female karate expert movies it
wants to; the objective reality of it simply does not change.
An infantry rifle team with one woman in it will not perform up
to the same standard as any other rifle team. A rifle squad with one
woman in it will not perform up to the same standard as any other rifle
squad. A rifle platoon with one woman in it will not perform up to the
same standard as any other rifle platoon. You can carry this to
whatever level you want to, but the important thing to note is that, on
the battlefield, initiative is most usually taken or lost at or below
the squad level.
Added to the physical and mental disability of the female infantryman or other combat participant, is the
- censored fact that women P.O.W.s taken by America's enemies are quite typically gang-raped by them. It happened to female American pilots taken prisoner in the first Iraq war. Gang rape turns out to be a very popular Moslem activity.
Our women pilots have distinguished themselves in combat, and, of
course, may be expected to oppose the notion that they should not be
doing what they are doing. But, the fact is, they should not be
doing what they are doing. Men can do the same job better, and they
could do it even better in the absence of co-ed sexual side-issues
within the unit. Women should not even be on aircraft carriers, let
alone in the cockpits of combat aircraft on combat missions.
Now that women are so deeply imbedded in so many diverse combat
and combat-support units, thanks to Femi-Nazism, it may appear to be
impossible to change that situation. But it can be changed. All that's
really required is a Commander In Chief with the balls to issue the
order, and then stick to his guns afterward. Women could be and should
be reassigned out of these units and into non-combat support roles, or
out of the military.
That's my opinion.
Nevertheless, here we are. What's next? Husband and wife teams in the same units? Homosexual couples in the same unit? Illicit affairs and dalliances, whether homosexual or heterosexual, within the same unit? Squabbles, jealousies and sexual undercurrents taking precedence over the mission on occasion?
Now, in the news, we have the story of "firm action" being taken to thwart the burgeoning Sexual Exploitation problem in the military.
Well, no shuckin', Sherlock.
Who unnaturally forced a huge feminine presence into a previously and naturally all male environment in the first place? And who is sponsoring, championing, defending, promoting and expanding active homosexuality in a previously Judeo-Christian culture?
Could it be that someone wants the military mission to fail?
Could it be that someone wants America to fail?
Smart-Assed Acronym Hover-Link Footnotes: For the convenience of those readers using devises that lack a mouse, these footnotes are provided for all webpages, in case any webpage contains any hover-links. (If you don't have a mouse, you can't "hover" it over a link without clicking just to see the simple acronym interpretation.)
Secularist Liberal Intellectual Media Complex
Gradually, Ever So Gradually, Over Eons And Eons Of Time
Punctuated Equilibrium's Wild-Assed Guess
Them There Real Scientifical-Type Fellers
Them There Real Smart Perfesser-Type Fellers
Them There Real Smart Journalistical-Type Fellers
Surely No Right Thinking Adult Could Believe Today
Surely Today No Serious Educated Adult Could Possibly Believe
We Don't Know
Baboons, Mongrel Dogs, Filthy Pigs and ...
Human Beings Are A Cancer On The Earth
Anti-Christian Litigation Union
Flagrant Liar, Or, Mindless Parrot, Or, Innocent Fool
Marxist Ends-Justify-The-Means Liar
Islamic Ends-Ends-Justify-The-Means Liar
Marxist Principles And Values
Wise, Benign, Elite, Super-Scientific World Governance
The Reason Man's In This Mess
Intellectual Yet Idiotic
Culture=Religion+Politics; Who Are We? Vic Biorseth
The Brilliantly Conceived Organization of the USA; Vic Biorseth
Return to the BLOG page
Return to the HOME PAGE
Respond to This Article Below The Last Comment
Date: Sun Sep 07 2014
From: Vic Biorseth
Changes pursuant to changing the website URL
and name from
Thinking Catholic Strategic
Catholic American Thinker.
Pulled the trigger on the 301 MOVE IT option
June 1, 2014. Working my way through all the webpages. .
Language and Tone Statement
Please note the language and tone of this monitored Website. This is not the place to stack up vulgar
one-liners and crude rejoinders. While you may support, oppose or
introduce any position or argument, submissions must meet our
standards of logical rigor and civil discourse. We will not
participate in merely trading insults, nor will we tolerate participants merely
trading insults. Participants should not be
thin-skinned or over sensitive to criticism, but should be prepared to
defend their arguments when challenged. If you don’t really have a
coherent argument or counter-argument of your own, sit down and don’t
embarrass yourself. Nonsensical, immoral or merely insulting submissions will
not be published here. If you have something serious to contribute to
the conversation, back it up, keep it clean and keep it civil. We humbly
apologize to all religious conservative thinkers for the need to even say
these things, but the New Liberals are what they are, and the internet is what it is.
If you fear intolerant Leftist repercussions, do not use your real name and do not include email or any identifying information. Elite Culturally Marxist Authoritarians cannot and will not tolerate your freedom of speech or any opposition to their own rigid pro-Marxist, pro-Islam, anti-Life, anti-Christian, anti-American, Globalist, anti-Nation, immoral, anti-white, racist intolerant and bigoted point of view.