Categories For later read

7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
Views on women in the army:
So yesterday I conducted a Poll to understand the views of my followers with respect to what capacity should women serve in, within the army. It gained more traction than I had thought. With hindsight I should have divided it into male and female. 1/n


Maybe next time.
So personally I am against women being in the army in any capacity. That is, they can be employed as civilians if needed, but not as military personnel. I would like to thank @fiercelyvirgo and @agnisrivatsa Sir for their inputs. 2/n

I will explain my stand via all the arguments of those who are for women participating in the army in varying capacity

Women can be in non-combat roles: Strictly speaking, non-combat roles have been created specifically for women. 3/n

Men in these so called non-combat roles do in fact get into combat when required. For similar pay, you are actually getting more out of a male nurse in the army than a female one.
4/n

Women are also physically strong, if they qualify, why not: Women are biologically stronger than men as evidenced by their ability to give birth and their longer life expectancy. Women are also less likely to be stupid , compared to men. 5/n
Britain, the UK, or whatever you call it, is an Orwellian construct, based on lies, deceit & a regime of rewards & intimidation. And so too is every so-called #NationState, including, & most importantly, the USA.

This is the truth. Either we face up to it, or we perish.


Who do I mean by "we"?

I mean, our civilisation, which, because it is global, effectively embraces everyone on the planet. Many will survive, but many more will not, & many animal & plant species will be driven - are being driven - to extinction.

I'm not the only one who recognises the peril we're in, but I may be the only one who understands it well enough to offer advice on how to avoid our civilisation's self-destruction. My understanding is not perfect, but a lot better than that of people like #ElonMusk & #BillGates.

Reducing carbon emissions, to combat #ClimateChange, as important as it is, only addresses a SYMPTOM of the CANCER that is our grossly materialistic, mercenary, rapacious & DRIVEN global economy, which is inherently unsustainable on our finite, vulnerable & overpopulated planet.


ALL civilisations rise & fall. Ours is only exceptional in the size of its population, the heights to which it has risen, & the scale of devastation that will accompany its fall, which is fast approaching.
🧵 The conversation surrounding this is confused in ways that really backfire. For example, you often hear that the Founders more or less "wanted gridlock to be the norm," for it to be "hard to get anything done," to guard against radical change.


Naturally, this tends to lessen the public's respect for the whole system. It doesn't sound very attractive, or at least sounds like a particularly inefficient way of guarding against radical change. "They wanted to force compromise," is better, but also backfires.

It confuses the public into being mad that everyone "can't just get a long and compromise," like it's a matter of personal attitudes and conflict is a sign something is wrong. A more invigorating and accurate framing:


We've basically inverted this framing into something very demoralizing. "Congress isn't supposed to do anything," rather than "Congress is gunning for a showdown." And we're so confused that one of the impeachment charges against Trump was "Obstruction of Congress."


The point is that the branches were supposed to be actively tactical, and were given a set of tools to use against each other. Not "do nothing."