Out of one side of men's mouths, you get this. Out of the other, you get this whole comment thread which is arguing that women should not be on the front lines, period. Those in the comment thread also bring in an argument saying that women will try to get out of deployment by "getting pregnant"(both before and during), as if it doesn't take two to tango, and as if condoms don't exist and aren't readily available to anyone in the army. (as an aside, it's generally been decided that it wasn't even a woman who wrote the OP of that thread - It was likely a man impersonating a woman online to say that women shouldn't be in the military) Selective service cannot be discriminatory if the military is "for men only." Selective service is bullshit, but it's not discriminatory against men considering the general attitude of american men on women in the military.Another thing to consider: selective service. American boys are required to register for selective service when they turn 18, and failure to do so can have various consequences for them, none of which are good.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems like two sides of the same coin: attitudes of patriarchy considering women to be weaker than men. It creates barriers to women in the military and leads to more men dieing in battle. I'd heard feminists arguing against this same policy in the past and had the impression that it wasn't really a divisive issue between them am MRAs. Or maybe it's just an imagined divide...
That's kind of what i'm arguing, in a way. I'll try to be more clear - You can't say "women can't do x" and then complain that "Men are the only group expected to do x". I'm doing my best to stay out of this thread because I don't see it as my place, and because I have strong opinions on the matter that can lead to arguments that get nowhere. What I was attempting to do with this example is point out that both of these points are ones often made by men who are anti-feminist (though not necessarily people identifying as MRA, let me make that clear), but when juxtaposed against one another, they show a contradiction, and a cognitive dissonance, because holding one opinion leads to the other. Does that make more sense?Correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems like two sides of the same coin: