Feminists Continue to Destroy Our Military
Sat October 4th, 2003 11:14 MSTThe Arizona RepulsiveRepublic reports:
Two commanders at Luke Air Force Base have been relieved of their command after two strippers performed on the base at a ceremony for new pilots.
Yes, obviously the strippers decreased the capability of our military, so we had to do something!
Lt. Col. Anthony Comtois, who led an operations group, and Lt. Col. Leonard Dick, who headed a fighter squadron that was part of Comtois’ group, were removed from their leadership positions.
Let’s see… two officers’ careers ruined. Millions of dollars in training (of those officers) thrown away. Morale in the units damaged.
Six other airmen were also named in the investigation conducted by a military official from Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson. A spokesman for Luke would not provide details of the incident, laid out in a nearly 3-inch-thick investigative report delivered Friday, but said there was no sexual contact with the strippers.
No wonder we can’t find weapons of mass destruction. Our best investigators are in the AirFarceForce, creating 3 inch reports on a ceremony!
This is Hillary’s revenge. Imagine what would happen to the Air Force with her as the actual Commander In Chief! The feminists started the anti-male witch hunt long ago (remember how many Navy pilots we lost in the “tail-hook” “scandal?”), and it continues.
They just don’t get it! Young men, especially the aggressive hyper-macho types it takes to be good combat fighter pilots, are going to do this kind of thing. Folks may find it distasteful, but I’d rather have a distasteful military than a timid one!
Well, like, you know, us dumb women really will never understand that those hunky, testosterone-laden cuties need to get their rocks off by watching our more adventurous sisters feign sex for money.
Look, I don’t really have anything against strippers, but I think that the issue is that this was a strip show performed on an Air Force base, which kinda makes it officially prescribed, even though many of the families of the honorees might be scandalized by the event, and some of the honorees might, as well.
And, lets face it, the Air Force doesn’t have a smirtchless record on sexual harrassment. Do I think that officially promoting women to the status of body parts and suggestive acrobats might encourage the honorees to think of them as body temperature sex dolls? Yes, I think it might incline some of them that way. I mean, many of the honorees are kids, looking to their superiors as examples of how to live.
If the strip party had been held off base and with voluntary attendance, it probably wouldn’t have gotten so much attention. This is not “Hillary’s revenge” or any conspiracy to weaken the force (and why would it do that? Gimme a break, here!) It’s just acting appropriately, depending where you are and what the circumstances are.
“path” writes:
Your point? The military is full of rituals which serve to maintain unit morale. This was one of them. The fact that you don’t like it is really immaterial. As far as the families… they know about all of this. *they* are military families, and know what that entails.
Those kids have the authority to fly deadly aircraft, kill people, and carry and employ nuclear weapons, but you want to protect these poor innocents from the strippers? Give me a break! And they have already formed their sexual orientation and views by that age.
As for the promotion of women as collections of body parts or whatever…. hey, these guys are young males. And that’s part of how they look at women. And nothing you or any politically correct oversensitive person does is going to change that, because it is in their genes - literally. It’s part of the great dance between males and females that lead ultimately to the reproduction of the species.
Sorry, but the greatly inreased “sensitivity” to this sort of thing very definitely weakens the force. And there have been many more problems caused by the feminization of the military at the insistence of militant feminists such as Hillary and her allies. Just one example (I deleted a bunch because I didn’t want to drift too far)… the Army now has much less stringent standards in boot training, especially physical standards, as a result of the need to be able to graduate women, who otherwise would wash out due to their inability to meet the older physical standards. This is obviously a weakening of the force - even in this high tech era. Just the famous example of the ambush of the 507th (Jessica Lynch’s outfit) shows that there are no longer any non-combat positions in today’s military, and everyone needs to be a capable soldier. This rear-echelon unit found itself in close quarters combat!
Okay… one more example: Tailhook. This incident resulted in the loss of many expensively trained pilots and leaders in the military. People who were perfectly competent at their jobs but who didn’t realize that the rules had suddenly changed and their ancient tradition (which was well known among all the military women who complained, btw) had to change because of the new militancy and political power of feminism.
We are lucky that we have not had a major war against a competent and well equipped military since the feminization of the military. The outcome would be tragic, but would probably lead us to realize that the military folks, with literally thousands of years of experience, might have known something when the objected to the social experiments of the radical feminists. A look at the history of the Israeli Army, which had this exact experience, is instructive!
Are you the John Moore that lived in San Diego and worked at Wavetek?
What I don’t understand about all this is that the feminists defend a womans right to be a stripper as a way for her to empower herself, but on the other hand men are not allowed to see them strip. If they really think that a man seeing a naked woman is the end of all that is good then maybe women shouldn’t be allowed to strip. But I forgot, men have responsibilitys while women have choices.