Saturday, August 06, 2016

Feminizing the U.S.

CAVEAT ALERT: The following may be considered by some (maybe most) as sexist, racist, misogynistic, homophobic, politically incorrect or just plain stupid, in light of which I couldn't care less.

Perhaps the nation has changed culturally and socially in the years post-1970 more than in any comparable period of time in its history.  Feminization of about everything has constituted the major element of change, seen most graphically during the Obama presidency.  

The democrat party’s nomination for the presidency of Hillary Clinton is the epitome of that change, which embodies both the feminization aspect and its consequent overwhelming influence, since Clinton, besides being a compulsive liar, has committed high crimes (perjuries, as acknowledged by FBI Director Comey) toward which the Justice Department, headed by—you guessed it—a woman, has turned a blind eye. Hillary has been lynched (freed by Loretta, that is), but not by Congress or any court.  

Hubby Bill was impeached over a lurid sexual matter for committing perjury—lying under oath—when he was president . Hillary Clinton has committed far more serious perjury in lying to Congress about the private unprotected email servers she used instead of the government’s server when she was state secretary, thus placing on the Internet secret government documents that have been hacked and are now being released by Wiki-Leaks honcho Julian Assange, no matter who the actual hackers were. Astute high-school students could have done it.

The ladies are accustomed to being given a pass now, no matter the subject, not least because men naturally defer to them, but the ladies outnumber men in law schools and are at least on parity in areas in fields such as medicine. They are gradually taking over the court systems as well as the legal profession.

 The ladies finish high school in numbers greater than men's and outnumber men now on college campuses. They've even discovered that they can scream “rape” now and, while not necessarily being successful in making it stick (in fact, rarely, especially on campuses), they can ruin a man's reputation since his name is, without charge/trial, spread by the media while the woman is given a pass and remains anonymous. A gal takes whatever revenge she can get when she acts a fool, gets drunk and hangs out in fraternity whorehouses, conscious or not.

TV has done its part in this cultural change. Women now beat up men physically on shows such as NCIS, something which, all things being equal, just doesn't happen. Women fill police and fire-fighting forces now, never mind that they lack the physical skills to either overpower criminals or carry heavy equipment up long ladders and carry heavy people down. Chirpy gals in cocktail frocks are taking over the TV news/talk programs, letting thigh and cleavage do what the often abrasive, high-pitched voices don't, i.e., hold attention.

Recently, two female army officers were assigned to Ranger training, the toughest in the army, and, as before with females and many men, they failed.  The men were out of luck.  The women, however, were given a second chance, which they failed, so they were given a third chance and subsequently were certified.   

The course is designed for two months and 40% of their class finished in that time.  One female took four months and the other had to keep trying.  The president had demanded that women be in the Rangers, never mind the problems presented.  The course hadn’t changed and by then neither had the women become stronger after extended time to “bulk up.”   

Congressman Steve Russell, a former Ranger, became aware that people at Fort Benning said the Army had lied and were complaining of special treatment for the women, and became concerned.  Only the most naïve believe that the women qualified...that nudge-and-wink thing.  

The course is utilized to develop leaders who can function in combat, necessitating command skills, the proper emotions, and the ability to function physically in instances in which great strength is required.  Women lack these skills, not because they’re somehow inferior but because they’re different.  No soldier (male) should have to enter combat while by instinct forced to protect a female officer, the protection of whom could cost him his life.  

Though one is deemed chauvinistic or worse to point this out, the truth is that mortal combat is a “man-thing.”  The president and the politically correct social engineers would have it that unisex is here to stay, but it has never existed and never will.  

For that matter, a president should always have had military experience, combat preferably but not required.  To call her/him commander-in-chief without it is sheer folly. A c-in-c who has never worn the uniform is an empty suit. Obama's ignorance of anything military is the prime example. Except for Bill Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, all presidents since WWII have worn the uniform.

Women, who have proven they can be just as corrupt as men, have the right to excel in whatever field they choose except one—the military.

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home