L'origine de Bert

Get email updates of new posts:        (Delivered by FeedBurner)

Sunday, March 21, 2021

Behind the Veil: Interview with an Atheist Niqabi

An article that has disappeared from the web (and isn't archived anywhere):

Behind the Veil: Interview with an Atheist Niqabi
(Originally on http://www.robmcleod.net/2017/06/15/behind-the-veil/)
Ed: On apostasy, women in Islam, the hijab/niqab and the Left

The following interview is transcribed from a Skype call with “Arwa,” a closeted atheist niqabi, and Bushra, an ex-Muslim cybersecurity professional living in the United States. It has been lightly edited for clarity. Some details have been concealed to protect “Arwa’s” (a pseudonym) identity.

Robert: Thanks for speaking with us. It seems that Islam and its believers are at the center of many of the political clashes and events shaping our world today, from terrorism, immigration, the burkini, etc. And yet it seems we suffer a glaring poverty of narratives about Muslim experiences. As a closeted-atheist living in a niqab (a full face veil which only exposes the eyes) you surely have a unique perspective on many of these issues.

To start with, though, could you tell us a bit about your bio and how you came to be in the position you’re now in today.

Arwa: We immigrated 15 years ago when my father got a job as an Imam. I come from a relatively large, conservative family. Before moving, we actually lived in a very conservative society. In the area I’m from, at least, you still rarely see a woman on the street.

The culture clash became immediately apparent as soon as we arrived. My parents actually became far more conservative than they were before immigrating. I remember as a child having a very gender-neutral childhood and wearing my brother’s clothes. But as soon as I came to [European Country], my mother said, “you need to put on a headscarf now, because we don’t trust this country, and we fear that you may become Westernized.” And when we hit puberty, our Mom said “that’s it, you can’t play outside anymore.”

They tried to keep us inside this bubble for a very long time. But then the educational system exposed me to a completely different way of thinking, and that helped me get away from my religion.

It started by denouncing my culture. I realized I didn’t want to follow it anymore because it’s too conservative, too sexist. It took me a very long time to accept that religion was actually the problem. I just didn’t want to get away from it. Very recently, I finally decided I’ve had enough.

Bushra: You mentioned that the outward manifestation of the conservatism, the niqab and all of that, happened after you immigrated to a Western Country. That strikes me as very similar to what happened to my father and his family. He grew up Palestine where they were sort of religious and very conservative, but they didn’t grow up wearing the niqab. They only became very religious and fundamentalist and started requiring that the females in the family wear the coverings when they immigrated to Western countries because of the perceived lustfulness and sinfulness of those societies.

Arwa: Yes, you’ll notice that many families will become a lot more conservative after they immigrate. My mother was told that, when many Muslim girls come to [our current country] they take off the hijab and become sluts. That really scared her, and it’s made things far worse. Things are becoming even harder for my younger family members than it was for me. At this point, I doubt they will be able to attend University because my family is becoming increasingly scared of where society is going and they’re thinking “we don’t want that for our daughters, so we’re going to keep them in a box and away from Western Culture.”

Robert: So what was the process of becoming an ex-Muslim like and how did you deal with those doubts?

Arwa: For many, many years I refused to even think about going down this path. I doubted the religion, but I said to myself that I wasn’t going to leave it no matter what happens. I think that was largely due to my fear of hell.

But I eventually came to decide that I needed to leave. Now that I’ve done so, I really have to hide myself and who I am. If this was to be known among the community, there would be a lot of backlash not only towards me, but toward my family.

It’s scary because of the views I hear about apostates. I also worry about my community back home, which we visit quite a lot. I’m scared about the next time we visit. I don’t want to anymore—even though I miss it a lot—because I know I wouldn’t be safe there. Anything could happen. Someone could find out and….my life would be in danger.

Bushra: I’m interested in the process you went through internally and the gradual doubt that eventually led to your religion didn’t make sense.

Arwa: The first time I was exposed to a completely different way of thinking was when I went to college. Back in High School, I was inside my head all of the time, I accepted the religious ideology and everything my family told me. But when I went to college, one of the first things that triggered doubts was meeting someone who was gay. I thought being gay was absolutely disgusting at the time, I didn’t want to sit next to that lady. I remember thinking “Oh my God, oh my God, please, please don’t make me sit next to her, do something.” But I started talking to her and it really started to humanize her for me.

In my class we started debating gay marriage and civil ceremonies. I suddenly realized that I agreed with a lot of things being said [in defense of gay marriage] and it took away the hatred and disgust I had for gay people. It occurred to me that this was a complete contradiction of my religion.

Then I got exposed to new ideas, including the Marxist idea that religion is used to control people. I also thought more about the fundamentalist perspective that, in order for a society to be productive, women need to stay home and cook and clean, and realized how stupid it was. This was the view of my culture and religion and, when I could finally see it from a wider perspective, it became clear that I didn’t agree with any of it.

After that, it was an upward spiral and I discovered that there was this entire, larger world that I agreed with rather than what I had been taught my entire life. I realized how repressed I am in my life, and how many things I can’t do simply because Islam says so. I can’t travel on my own, I have to cover-up. I was a staunch feminist at the time, and I realized that Islam was incompatible with those beliefs.

Holding onto Islam was affecting my mental health because I knew I didn’t believe—I didn’t want to pray, I didn’t want to fast, I didn’t want to think about God. Ultimately, this huge weight was lifted off my head and I was so happy. But then, I realized how this would impact my life…

Bushra: It’s funny, I remember going to prayer and saying “Allah’u Akbar” and immediately thinking, “this is bullshit.” So that definitely resonates with me.

Why didn’t you gravitate towards more liberal interpretations of the faith we’re seeing now?

Arwa: I couldn’t buy into that bullshit. My Dad has been teaching me from a very young age with authentic sources. It was clear that all of this liberal stuff I was being taught was people just grasping at straws. I knew it wasn’t real.

Bushra: It does seem to be a requirement in order to be one of these “feminist Muslims” to be either uninformed or simply lie to yourself wholesale.

Robert: Apostasy—the act of leaving the faith—is often considered to be an offense punishable by death, a view endorsed by all 4 major schools of Islamic jurisprudence. Pew Polls have also revealed that this view is held by majorities as high as 88% in countries like Egypt. Of course, many Muslims do not hold this view, or interpret “apostasy” in a very liberal way. Do you know your family’s beliefs about apostasy? If you were revealed to be an atheist, do you have any sense that your life could be in danger?

Arwa: I’ve never discussed it with my father. But I know that, when it comes to the rest of my community, their view of apostates is not good. I know back during Charlie Hebdo, and, I think there was a movie released a couple of years ago, they were saying these people need to be killed. I can only assume what kind of view they have of apostates.

It’s not something I like thinking about. It’s not good, basically….

Bushra: That’s something I never asked my father directly, simply because I knew the answer and I didn’t want to expose myself to risk by him knowing that I was thinking about this. But I think there’s a difference between believing what should be done—believing that an apostate should be killed, for example—and actually doing it yourself. I don’t think he would kill me himself, but I do think he believes that’s what should be done and may see it as a failure of his faith that he wasn’t able to do it himself.

Arwa: I think the worst-case scenario for me is that I would be taken back to my home country and married-off or have to live my life there. They would take away my passport. I see that as a high possibility.

Will they kill me? Not in this country. I can’t say the same thing of my home.

Robert: What’s it like to wear a niqab? How does it affect your daily life and your interactions with those around you?

Arwa: As a person who is forced to wear it, there are times I don’t want to step out of the house. I feel like a freak most of the time.

Physically, it’s very uncomfortable. It gets into your eyes, and makes them itchy, and makes it hard to read, as well.

It also acts as a huge communication barrier. This is something people who are pro-niqab won’t talk about. People often can’t hear what you’re saying because the niqab is muffling out your voice. People are constantly putting their ear close to me and asking me three or four times to repeat myself because they can’t hear what I’m saying. It’s very, very frustrating when you have to do that. I don’t want to have to repeat myself three or four times and it stops me from asking questions to my professors.

Talking to people is very difficult, because they can’t see your facial expressions. Being sarcastic is almost impossible. Whatever you’re saying, it sounds like you’re being serious.

I also believe it’s a high security issues. Most of my lecturers don’t know what I look like. My sister could go to the same university and sit in my exams and nobody would know. My university ID has my face, but most professors won’t ask to see it out of respect. I remember a teacher checking IDs before an exam and when she came up to me, she didn’t pull me outside, she just left it because she wanted to be respectful to me. I thought, “do you realize what you’re really doing here?”

Robert: To many of us outside the ideology, the roles and restrictions imposed upon women by conservative Islam seem clearly wrong and destined to produce suffering. Can you help us understand how women rationalize their subjugation? What are most devout women’s thoughts about things like a niqab?

Arwa: Most of the time, they just say this is a command of God. If you wear it, you’ll get more brownie points.

The underlying reason for wearing the niqab is that your face is part of your body and it can attract men, so you need to cover it to make God happy with you. It’s definitely seen as a form of respect and honor. I hear from so many men who say, “we’re so proud of you for covering your face.” Women who choose to wear it usually do so for that reason. The others are forced into it and there’s not much they can do about it because the families simply won’t listen. There will be huge repercussions if they say, “no, I don’t want to wear this anymore.” Then, it’s not just you who decided to take your niqab off, your entire family is involved and the entire community will talk about you and it will reduce your respect. That’s not something families can afford to have happen in honor societies.

Robert: There’s been a lot of media attention in recent years—especially with Brexit, the election of Trump, and the rising popularity of figures like Geert Wilders and Marie Le Pen—around the rising prevalence of anti-Muslim bigotry (generally referred to as “Islamaphobia.”) As someone who wears your purported religious identity so visibly in the form of a face veil, have you suffered any blatant acts of anti-Muslim violence or discrimination?

Arwa: There was one incident where a man was walking towards me and he had a bat in his hand. He started sort of swinging it towards me, but then moved away from me as he became closer. But you could see that he was really angry and had intentions to harm me, but he didn’t do that.

I’ve been called things like “ninja” and “batman,” but I don’t suppose I’ve really had many experiences with racism.

RM: To many on the Left, there seems to be a tension between letting some communities express and exercise their own norms, customs, and beliefs, and upholding other values like free expression, gender equality, and freedom of belief that seem fundamental to modern civilization. How do you think well-intentioned liberals should approach this problem?

Arwa: That’s the thing. One point of view is, “what right do you have as someone not from the society to change it?” The other is that it’s your moral obligation to do something because there are so many individuals in that society being oppressed. But how do you know who is being oppressed and who is, say, wearing the niqab voluntarily? That’s a question I’ve thought about a lot. If it could be banned, would I ban it? I can’t answer that question. I know so many people who choose to wear the niqab and if it was banned, they would feel like a right was being taken away from them. Do I really want to take that right away from them because a lot of people are being forced into it? I don’t think I can answer that question.

Bushra: I have an opinion that I want to insert here about banning niqabs. It has almost the opposite effect from what liberal legislators may hope for. If a woman is a niqabi, for example, perhaps not by choice, and the country that she lives in bans the niqab, her family isn’t going to just say “Oh, okay, it’s banned.” They’ll likely keep her at home and she’ll have less chances to interact with the outside world as someone living in a free society. So it may not make sense at the level of legislation, but there’s still the question of how do you help these people?

Arwa: The other effect could be that people like my family, who are all immigrants, may just decide to go back to their home countries because the niqabs are important. Yes, this may excite some people, but at the same time, you’d be taking away so much freedom that these women have living in a Western country, despite the oppression of the niqab. If I was forced to go back home, I would have no life.

I have no idea how you can help. But when it comes to minors, something needs to be done. I’ve seen a lot of Muslim children who are really oppressed—especially girls. They’re being forced into niqabs, and not allowed to step outside of their house, or play. It really sucks because it’s having a huge impact on their mental health. But when it comes to the adult population, I really don’t know what could be done.

Robert: So you think it could be a problem without a solution?

Arwa: Yes…

Robert: So when you first started examining your faith, what did you find to be the most troubling aspect of it?

Arwa: Definitely the treatment of women. It got to this point where I didn’t want to be a woman anymore. I remember having dialogues with this imaginary God asking “why the hell would you make me a woman, why would you do this to me? What you did to me was basically torture.”

I know that my entire life will be controlled by men. When I’m by myself, I’m controlled by my father. He then chooses somebody for me to marry and hands his responsibility over me to my husband. Then I have to ask my husband if I can step out of the house, if I can go get a job, or travel, or even if I can go see my sick father.

It’s not fair, because I don’t want to be controlled. People may reconcile that by saying, “Your husband may be able to control you, but you can control your son.” But I don’t want to control my son—if I ever have a son—I just want my own body, my own autonomy. I want to be able to make my own choices.

I don’t even believe in marriage, and that whole idea was like blasphemy. “How could you even say something like this? You need to get married, you need to have children”

Bushra: It’s really painful to hear this coming from someone else—painful and also satisfying, because I went through the very same thing. Those doubts crept in from a very young age because I was a female. I actually suspect there are many more secret female atheists in the Muslim community then male ones, because it’s great to be male in Islam, why would you question it?

I remember having questions for my father like, “why can’t I go to a good school that’s further away from home? Why do I have to get married when I’m 18 and have kids?” That fundamental injustice is really what first opened that Pandora’s Box of doubt.

Arwa: One of the most distributing things I’ve experienced was my Mother speaking to a group of young women who were married—I think they weren’t wearing hijabs. She told them your husband is your “majāzī khudā,” which means, nonliteral God. The Prophet said, “If I could order you to bow down to anyone other than Allah, I would order you to bow down to your husbands.” I remember saying, “No! I don’t believe that.”

I later got in an argument with my sister who told me that the hadith said women are intellectually inferior to men, so it has to be true.

Bushra: Yep, that’s why hell is going to be populated by women…

Speaking of disturbing memories, one I vividly remember in my own life is my father talking to my younger half-sister who was less than three years old and wearing a children’s dress. Just a little dress that little girls wear, she was barely a toddler. And he screamed her name and said, “Awrah” which meant your private parts are showing. She was still in diapers.

It was really disturbing for me to witness because I struggle with sexual shame all the time, and seeing it instilled in this tiny child who has no concept whatsoever of what an awhra is was a moment of clarity for me, personally.

Robert: So what were you taught about female sexuality, generally?

Arwa: Basically that women needed to be covered up because they attract male attention. It got to the point where if we were talking out loud in public, our Mother would say, “Shut up! Don’t talk so much. Your voice is part of your awhra and you’re attracting men.”

Sex was never spoken about. You can’t say the word “sex” in the household, it’s not allowed to the point that you can’t even say “sexism” because it contains the word “sex.”

Everything remotely sex-related is seen to be so shameful that you have to hide it from the rest of society. You can’t talk about periods, and you can’t let the other members of the family know you’re on your period—especially men. You need to hide your bump if you’re pregnant, because it’s shameful.

Everything, when it comes to this, needs to be under wraps. You, as a woman, need to be under wraps because you’re appealing. Of course, by trying to make woman not sexually appealing, you’re turning them into sex objects.

Robert: It’s striking that the onus for men not to be sexually abusive seems largely placed upon women…

Arwa: I remember being at my Islamic school, and my teacher saying, “I know a lot of people feel really sorry for a rape victim. But my question for that rape victim is “why were you wearing those kind of clothes? Why were you outside late at night?”

I was an 11 year old who agreed with her at that time in my life. I was a child, and she was teaching me how to react at rape victim. I look back at that now that I’m older and I realize how disgusting it is, how sad it is. She was basically saying to us, “later on in life, if you get raped, it’s your own fault. Not the man’s.” It feels like that’s engrained in much of Muslim culture, where women are often blamed for the sexual crimes.

Robert: I recently watched the movie “A girl in the River.” There’s a moment in the film where she interviews the girl’s father in prison, after he shoots her in the head over a brief encounter with a local boy. Fortunately she survived. He used a metaphor that I think actually crystallized the concept of honor culture perfectly, remarking that a “drop of piss ruins an entire jug of milk”

Could you reflect the impact of honor culture in your life?

Arwa: For everything I do, I have to think about my family’s honor, because I don’t want to tarnish it. Even though I don’t believe in the construct—I think it’s disgusting—I have to act upon it, because it’s so important to my family. As a woman, if you destroy the honor of your family, you’re not important to them anymore. That’s why honor killings are so prevalent in my culture. That’s all you are, you are the family’s Izzat, and if you run away, or commit apostasy, you’ve tarnished it until death. So either we kill you or we live with you for the rest of our lives as a stain on us. It dehumanizes you as an individual, they don’t see you as a person, they see you as honor. Yes, they will love you now when you’re not doing anything wrong, but the moment they find out, many will resort to violence. It sucks in terms of how much it is still within our societies, and how many people follow this concept to the letter.

Robert: Given the concerns you’re grappling with, I imagine staying within your community would be intolerable. Is that the case? Have you developed an exit strategy?

Arwa: I initially decided that I was going to leave and didn’t give a shit anymore. Now that I’ve had more time to think about it, I’ve just left it.

If anything happens, and I have to run for my life, I will. Otherwise, I’m going to keep evaluating my options and see how my life plays out, because…I still really love my family, and I wouldn’t want anything bad to happen to them. I wouldn’t want to do this to them.

A lot of people say, “Well, they’re still your parents, and if they really loved you, they’d accept you for who you are.” The truth is that love is more complicated than that, people are good and bad. Yes, they may not let me live my own life, but they’re still loving and caring individuals and I still want to stay with them for as long as I can, and be happy with them. If it comes to a point where I’m no longer happy or fear for my life, I will leave.

Bushra: It’s sort of a naïve thing to say, “if your family really loved you.” Of course they love us. That’s why they’re so adamant in making sure we never go to hellfire. It’s out of love that they’re so concerned for our wellbeing after this life. It seems like such a narrow-minded perspective, people just aren’t thinking about it in a nuanced way.

Robert: So you actually think you can live this way for another 5 years?

Arwa: I’m just taking it day-by-day. I can’t think about the future, because I don’t know what’s going to happen tomorrow. Somebody may overhear me, or go through my computer, or somehow find out accidentally—then my life will be in danger and I will have to do something.

I know things will get harder in the next few years, because of the expectation that I will get married. The idea of being married to a devout Muslim man…it’s not going to happen. If they let me live with them as an unmarried Muslim woman, then fair enough. But if they try to manipulate me into it, I will think about leaving.

Bushra: There’s probably going to be some pressures and questions asked after a certain point. That’s going to be tough and I really sympathize.

Robert: There was a lot of pressure for you to have an arranged marriage, right?

Bushra: Of course, that was the only way to do it. That was the only future I had, to have an arranged marriage and children. I realized at a very young age that that wasn’t the life for me, and I was really fortunate that my parent’s got divorced and that my mother was more liberal in general. Because of that, I was able to escape at least one side of my family and I still have my mother’s side, at least.

But I’m still very much estranged from my father’s side. That’s the inevitable outcome—that they disown you at least, because we live in a Western society where they’re not likely to come after you. But I basically don’t have any communication with my father anymore.

Arwa: Have you actually come out to your family?

Bushra: I never said it explicitly, because that’s terrifying. It was so gradual and so self-evident that I suppose nobody asked any questions. It was a sort of de-facto disowning, but I never told him outright.

He did give me an ultimatum when I was 18 and going off to University, which was very important to me. I had my big dreams and I wasn’t going to be held down by any of that. He said that if I went off to university, then I can consider myself not his daughter anymore. I took that as my opportunity, unfortunately. It was him or me, and I chose me.

Arwa: It’s a good thing that you did.

Bushra: Yes, my life is much better now. I have no regrets. Like you mentioned before, when I came to those realizations early on in my life, a huge weight was lifted off of my shoulders. But then the rest of that weight was totally lifted off my shoulders when I decided, “fine, the hell with it—I don’t need a father if he’s going to treat me this way.”

Bushra: Yes, of course. It’s a complicated situation, it’s not black or white. I don’t hate this man, I understand how his religion colors his treatment towards me, and there’s some element of forgiveness that I have, and sympathy even. But at the end of the day, I’m choosing myself.

Arwa: That’s a very mature way of thinking about it. I feel like so many of the ex-Muslims I’ve spoken to have so much hatred towards Islam and Muslims. I understand their point of view, because of how much they’ve had to go through because of the religion.

Robert: Beyond your family, what would you miss if you did follow through and leave the faith?

Arwa: I miss the spiritual aspect at times. I miss the idea of having some higher power up there who is bothered enough to listen to whatever’s going on in my mind. But that’s only because I’m doing something wrong and want someone to forgive me when I can’t forgive myself.

I also feel like I’m losing a culture. Half of my identity, at least, has been taken away. What will I celebrate later in life? Will I celebrate Eid? If I get married, will it just be a civil ceremony?

Bushra: That’s one of the things I’ve missed most. When I decided to leave the faith and do my own thing, I left behind all the people involved in that community, as well, and the culture alongside it. There’s a real struggle to understand who I am because I don’t have typical, white American culture either. So I’m left with a half identity. Islam is such a deep part of me that I still think of myself in relationship to the faith, just that I’ve left it. It’s an interesting struggle and a sacrifice, certainly.

I definitely hold onto those cultural elements much more strongly now. I have such affection for the food and music—which I wasn’t allowed to listen to. I take such pride in those things now, but I took them for granted when they were so intermingled with the religion.

Arwa: Me, too. I need to feel like I belong somewhere. I feel like if I come out, it’s going to suck because then I’ll have nothing. I’m just a brown person living in a white society who has left everything that attached me to my childhood memories and the things that make me who I am.

They seem to be speaking out of both sides of their mouth. They’re claiming that the hijab is something that, historically, it’s never been and in doing so erasing the plight of women who have no choice, who are not wearing this as a symbol of expression and are being made to wear it to desexualize themselves.

How do we address these particular types of Muslims who are washing over the struggles of less privileged women in less privileged countries?

Arwa: Wake the fuck up. It’s really sad to see, and it happens here quite a lot, as well. They refuse to acknowledge that, yes, there are women who are forced into the hijab.

I know a woman who comes from a very conservative background, and wears Western clothing when she’s not around her family. She was forced into her hijab, and takes it off when she’s not around her family. Even she now refuses to acknowledge that women are forced into the hijab.,.

Bushra: I don’t understand this…

Arwa: No, I don’t either…

Bushra: It’s so infuriating, too, because Western liberals take that person’s side, not our side. They say, “it’s true, it’s just a symbol of expression,” liberation even! That’s such a twisting…it’s just topsy-turvy, up is down. I don’t even know how to address it…

Arwa: Me neither. Yes, if you wear the hijab because you want society to take you seriously and judge you for who you are and not the way you look, that’s fine…

Bushra: Of course that’s fine. But it comes from a position of privilege. They can say that because they live in a free society that these other women do not—because of the liberal values that have been granted to them by living in a Western country, not a Muslim one, coincidentally.

Arwa: They don’t only fail to acknowledge all the women being forced into it, but also the younger girls. All the time, I see younger girls forced into wearing the hijabs and they’re not allowed to take them off.

You can’t even talk about the fact that people are forced to do things religiously. When I first started having these doubts, I messaged the girl I mentioned earlier and said, “Because you’re a liberal Muslim, I really want to hear your perspective on Islam. How do you reconcile your beliefs in LGBT rights and women’s freedom?” She messaged me back saying, “I’m not a liberal Muslim, I’m just a Muslim,” and that was it. She refused to talk to me. She was my last hope.

Bushra: It’s very frustrating. People who should be on the side of ex-Muslims take the side of the liberal, feminist Muslims who make no sense whatsoever. The only reason I get so upset is because it’s really is harmful and denies the struggles of so many women who don’t have these options and privileges.

Robert: It’s something we encounter all the time with very well-meaning, Western, progressive people…

We really are on the same side here, or at least we should be.

Robert: Looking into the future, where can we find hope? There are brave ex-Muslims and Muslim reformers, of course, but their voices sound so small. Their stories seem squashed within their community and ignored outside of it…

Arwa: It’s hard to say. But as someone who still lives in the closet and wears a niqab, people often ask me why I wear it and I can’t tell them the truth. I just sit there and lie to them and say “because I want to please my God.”

I find it humiliating as an adult that I have to talk about this. I don’t want to see pity in their eyes, so I just lie. And I know if I tell the truth, I will be harshly criticized by other Muslims because I have given others a bad impression of Islam.

Links - 21st March 2021 (Amy Coney Barrett)

Gad Saad on Twitter - "Kamala Harris failed the bar 1st time. Amy Coney Barrett 1st in her class. I rest"
"Sure but this only proves that the bar exam is a form of white supremacy, am I right Smilin’ @KamalaHarris?"

BOSS LADY: Amy Coney Barrett Breaks Secret Agreement With Man Who Hired Her - "Rushing to confirm Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett before the election was supposed to be a sinister Republican plot to steal a second term for President Donald J. Trump. Obamacare would be overturned, Roe v. Wade struck down, while women and journalists were rounded up and forced to wear silly costumes. The Pope would be installed as king. At least that's what Barrett agreed to when she accepted the nomination, according to the pundits, who are often right. But the Lady Justice had other, more feminist ideas, and a sinister plot of her own. The Supreme Court on Tuesday shot down a lawsuit seeking to nullify President-elect Joe Biden's victory in Pennsylvania, after the case was similarly rejected at the state level. The results of the election are not going to be overturned, and neither is Obamacare. Journalists may yet be spared the gulag."

Liberal Supreme Court justices vote together more than conservatives - "Justice Kavanaugh was supposed to have single-handedly overturned Roe v. Wade, but a funny thing happened on the road to apocalypse. Particularly in petition rejections and other procedural votes, Kavanaugh has demonstrated a pragmatic approach. And a term with few big controversies showed the liberals voting together much more than the conservatives... That dynamic isn’t something that sprang up in the Trump era or with the court’s newest personnel. In the 2014-15 term, with Kennedy at the height of his “swing vote” power —the last full term before Justice Antonin Scalia’s death and resulting year-long vacancy — the four liberals stuck together in 55 of 66 cases, while the four conservatives (not counting Kennedy) voted as a unit in 39... when conservative justices vote together at the same rate as their liberal counterparts, it’s because the entire court is united. Speaking of politically fraught cases that end up 5-4, it’s notable that there's never a question of how the liberal justices will vote. Speculation runs rampant over whether one of the conservatives will go wobbly — whether out of unpredictable moderation, minimalistic pragmatism or idiosyncratic theory — but the liberals are guaranteed to please their constituency... Such intramural fractures often reveal lively intellectual debates that one rarely sees on the left. For example, Justice Neil Gorsuch has joined the liberals five times in 5-4 decisions, four of them this past term alone — with Gorsuch typically writing for the majority or concurring separately without adopting the liberal reasoning. These have mainly been criminal law cases, where Gorsuch’s originalism shines through to the benefit of criminal defendants in the same way Scalia’s often did — to the surprise of those who weren’t paying attention... The Trump appointees voted the same less often in their first term together than any other two justices appointed by the same president, going back at least to President John F. Kennedy. Meanwhile, Obama appointees Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor were together in all the 5-4 cases this term."
Clear proof that the liberal cause is glorious and right. Not proof of liberal groupthink, of course not!
More proof of liberal judicial activism
Also headlined: "Liberal Supreme Court justices vote in lockstep, not the conservative justices"

Bill Maher Slams Amy Coney Barrett as a Really Catholic Nut - "After Ginsburg’s death, some on the Left have rushed to demonize Barrett. Washington Post book critic Ray Charles suggested that there was something nefarious to Barrett’s statement that she intends to pursue “the kingdom of God.” On the contrary, the “kingdom of God” is a common Christian phrase that has more to do with loving your neighbor as yourself than bringing about some kind of theocracy.Similarly, Newsweek ran a story claiming that Barrett belonged to a secret cult-like organization that inspired Margaret Atwood’s book The Handmaid’s Tale. In truth, the pentecostal group to which Barrett belonged, People of Praise, had no connection with People of Hope, the group Atwood seized upon. Newsweek corrected the story but did not retract it. Last year at an event with Hillsdale College, Barrett’s student Stephanie Maloney asked the judge “What role, if any, should faith of a nominee have in the confirmation process?”Barrett said, “None.”“I mean, we have a long tradition of religious tolerance in this country. And in fact, the religious test clause in the Constitution makes it unconstitutional to impose a religious test on anyone who holds public office”... “All people, of course– well, we hope, most people– have deeply held moral convictions, whether or not they come from faith. People who have no faith, people who are not religious, have deeply held moral convictions,” Barrett noted. “And it’s just as important for those people to be sure– I just spent time talking about the job of a judge being to set aside moral convictions, personal moral convictions, and personal preferences, and follow the law. That’s a challenge for those of faith and for those who have no faith.”... "I think it’s a dangerous road to go down to say that only religious people would not be able to separate out moral convictions from their duty""

Amy Coney Barrett's debut shows she will be a tough adversary for Democrats - "[She] could become the first mother of school-aged children to serve on the high court -- she showed how challenging it will be for Democrats to vilify her as a frightening figure who would join the court's conservative majority in rolling back abortion rights and stripping Americans of their health care protections... At a ceremony that the White House choreographed as a near replica of the 1993 event where then-President Bill Clinton nominated Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the 48-year-old judge spoke in reverent terms of the liberal icon she would replace, stating that she would be "mindful of who came before me." Barrett noted that Ginsburg began her career "at a time when women were not welcome in the legal profession," yet "she not only broke glass ceilings, she smashed them."... only about half of Americans (49%) hold a favorable opinion of the Affordable Care Act"

Will Democrats Fail the Amy Coney Barrett Test? - The Atlantic - "I came across a Newsweek story illustrated with a photograph of women wearing the now-familiar red capes with white-trimmed hoods—the universal symbol for female oppression of the most hideous kind. The headline read, “How Amy Coney Barrett’s People of Praise Group Inspired ‘The Handmaid’s Tale.’” That can’t possibly be true, I said to myself, and of course it’s not true. By the next morning, the newsmagazine had appended a correction... In journalism, there’s a name for this kind of correction. It’s called a bullshit correction... The whole thing was a cupcake-size version of the Covington disaster, in which liberal journalists were so willfully blind to their own deep biases that they smeared an adolescent who was guilty only of smiling in an enigmatic and uncomfortable way. Times are hard and talent is expensive, but the mistakes in this piece were so obvious that we may only ascribe them to rank incompetence. That such a calumny should have been based on one reporter’s misreading of a New Yorker profile in which the subject “mentions” a “newspaper clipping” about an entirely different religious group being “a part”—and not the whole—of her “research” means you’re in uncharted territory. I myself have traveled this unmapped region, because I used to teach seventh-grade English; that is, I am familiar with the challenge of supporting a strongly held claim with weakly grasped nonfacts. It was a useless story in so many other ways. There wasn’t a single word on Barrett’s position on the Devil’s Triangle. And couldn’t the writer have placed a call to judicial expert Alyssa Milano? The incident fed into the “fake news” narrative and the suspicion that liberals disdain Christians—by being news that was fake and by betraying an obvious animus toward Christians... What’s got everyone’s hair on fire is that, according to The New York Times, “the group teaches that husbands are the heads of their wives and should take authority over the family.” But the dastardly nature of this expectation is undermined by Barrett’s being shortlisted for a nomination to the Supreme Court. If her faith has put limits on her talent and ambition, there are few signs of it; you don’t get a seat on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals (where she is currently a judge) so that you can keep your hand in and earn a little pin money. During the confirmation hearings for that appointment, Dianne Feinstein informed Barrett that “the dogma lives loudly within you,” which was a personal best for the senator because in just six words she managed to insult Barrett’s faith and accuse her of a thought crime. All Americans, no matter their job or position in society, are allowed to have their “dogma” live loudly within them, as the senator well knows... the confirmation hearings are likely to provide Democratic senators with an opportunity to demonstrate their assumptions of moral rectitude and preening intellectual superiority. They will eagerly display the purifying anger that feeds their insulted and enraged party. In short, they will reify certain conservative assumptions about the left such that once again, Donald Trump may claim both the low road and the upper hand"

Amy Coney Barrett Deserves to Be on the Supreme Court - "Regardless of what you or I may think of the circumstances of this nomination, Barrett is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court... Barrett is a sincere, lovely person. I never heard her utter a word that wasn’t thoughtful and kind — including in the heat of real disagreement about important subjects. She will be an ideal colleague. I don’t really believe in “judicial temperament,” because some of the greatest justices were irascible, difficult and mercurial. But if you do believe in an ideal judicial temperament of calm and decorum, rest assured that Barrett has it.This combination of smart and nice will be scary for liberals"
A woman being qualified for a post only works if she is thought to advance liberal ends

Rachel Campos Duffy: Feminists have an Amy Coney Barrett problem - "Barrett is unquestionably qualified.  She graduated number one in her Notre Dame Law School class, eventually winding up as a clerk on the Supreme Court for Judge Antonin Scalia. Students, colleagues and former professors all agree that she is as brilliant as she is kind, generous, and humble... Since Barrett cannot be attacked on merit, Democrats are in a pickle. How to undermine an indisputably qualified woman in such a way that satisfies your left flank without looking like jerks?... The first round of mom-shaming has already been outsourced to social media trolls who are dutifully testing lines of attack before Democratic senators, still stinging from the electoral rebuke of their Kavanaugh spectacle, consider whether or not to use them in nationally televised hearings in October... For the old guard feminist establishment, the stakes could not be higher.As America gets a front-row seat to the life and times of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a lot of fair-minded women will conclude that her journey looks a lot like feminism to them!... But wait, how could a pro-life, Catholic mom of seven become the new face of feminism?How dare she get married and start a family in her 20s? And how provincial to refuse to abide by a socially and environmentally acceptable number of children?It wasn’t supposed to be this way. The feminist icon torch was supposed to be passed to Hillary Clinton, but she fell short in 2016.Regardless, her brand of feminism – the icky tradeoffs, the anger, and the man-hating – never sat well with younger, sunnier women... Barrett’s life challenges the feminist notion that fertility and children are a drain on a woman’s ambition. In her case, children and family gave her professional ambition purpose and perspective.For the Barrett family, the generosity that faith and family life cultivate gave them the courage to open their hearts and homes to not one, but two Haitian children in need of adoption... Amy Coney Barrett is operating at a higher intellectual and professional level than the vast majority of women.Nonetheless, her life serves as a model to those of us seeking an alternative to the constraints of feminism.Barrett broke all the rules in the feminist playbook. Fully aware of her exceptional academic and legal talents, she didn’t take the predictable, high-powered law firm route.She went back to South Bend, to the Catholic community she knew and loved, to teach and raise babies. She followed her heart, investing early in the things that last – marriage, family, and a deep and active spiritual life.It takes courage and faith to build a full personal life when the world is telling you that you are squandering your talents by dividing your time and energy on diapers, carpools and the quotidian work of family life."

'What Is Thy Bidding, My Master?' Asks Amy Coney Barrett To Cloaked, Holographic Pope | The Babylon Bee - ""What is thy bidding, my master?" Barrett asked after taking off her COVID mask, which made her breathing sound funny. "Shall I jail all the feminists?""Do it," the Pope replied. "Wipe them out -- all of them -- and together, you and I shall rule America as Pope and... soccer mom judge lady."... Barrett and the Pope are also reportedly working on a social justice initiative called "Order 66," where any woman who doesn't have at least seven babies will be shot with a laser rifle"

Senator asks Barrett to hold up the notes she's using to answer questions ... she holds up a blank pad of paper - "Sen. John Cornyn asked Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett to hold up the notes she was referring to when answering questions during her confirmation hearing... If ACB were a liberal the sheer number of YAS SLAY KWEEEEENs flying around the internet right now would melt every server on the planet."

Opinion | The Barrett hearings show how far the Senate has fallen - The Washington Post - "Senator after senator showed they were incapable of taking the moment seriously and acting like, well, senators... Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) was one of the most conspicuously vacuous. Instead of using his time to question Barrett on her jurisprudence, Whitehouse used his initial time to allege a conservative conspiracy to control the courts using “dark money.” His low-rent PowerPoint presentation, using printed cards rather than digital slides to make his points, reeked of preening for the cameras. His “questioning” did not even pose a real question: Barrett did not say a single word during his entire 30-minute presentation.Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) went beyond the absurd and into the macabre. She asked a devout Catholic mother of seven if she had ever sexually assaulted someone... Sen. John Neely Kennedy (R-La.) asked Barrett, “Who does the laundry in your house?”... The Senate likes to call itself “the world’s greatest deliberative body.” That honor was once deserved, as members from all backgrounds and political parties actively discussed issues seriously. Today’s senators, however, seem uninterested in doing that; instead, they use the body’s committee rooms or the Senate floor as a platform from which to read talking points prepared by their staff for regurgitation in friendly social media. That is the political equivalent of a sugar high, producing a short burst of recognition but damaging the institution’s ability to do what it is supposed to do: discuss and pass legislation that affects people’s lives. It’s no wonder that serious and ambitious women and men are increasingly attracted to the law or the bureaucracy, institutions where they can do actual work. The fact that such people wield their power behind closed doors and without public discussion or consent, though, simply shows how our democracy is slowly dying before our eyes."

Feminists hate women almost as much as they hate Trump - "isn't feminism about empowering women? The answer to that question is a big fat no. Feminism is about empowering feminists. Sex, as a noun, is surplus to feminist requirements... In her 1963 book, The Feminine Mystique, Friedan had talked about the "problem with no name" a malaise suffered by women who, like men, are profoundly social animals but who had become like provisioned apes in a gilded cage of isolated domesticity. Her goal was to liberate women from this maladaptive environment, not from the family itself. By 1970 however, her liberal feminism was subsumed by radical, class conscious feminists, who came up with a name, and all encompassing just-so story for the problem: patriarchy! This was everything Friedan didn't believe, it was class warfare between men and women, it was a conscious structure invented by women, as being invented by men, to oppress the aforementioned women. Men didn't actually have to invent anything.Friedan began to warn against the rise of "female chauvinism"... Feminists regularly decry Twitter as a hotbed of misogyny, but studies show that just as much abuse aimed at females comes from other females. My own investigations of a UK government report on female harassment found the same thing. Ethnographic studies have found that in 90 percent of cultures, women are the primary target of other women's aggression... Women's gossip has even been found by anthropologists to create a climate in which the honour killing of young women in some cultures is "inevitable."... Feminists sure do seem to save up the worst of their misogyny for non-single mothers who have successfully slept, supped and co-parented with the male enemy. Single mothers, on the other hand, are far more vulnerable and valuable cannon fodder, and so, must be wooed... feminists predictably flouted social distancing protocols during the pandemic and descended on Washington, DC, to protest Coney Barrett's nomination. In an act of inspirational bravery, the Freedom Plaza was awash with woolly pink pudendum hats, each housing a brain belonging to a proud "nasty woman" who genuinely believed she was a serious representative of female empowerment to the watching world. And all this while thinking Trump is the buffoon"

Facebook - "Just witnessed a male US senator interrupt ACB regarding her personal versus her legal views on abortion.Anyone want to put money on the number of articles that might be generated about the centuries of men interrupting women over this? I bet zero.This week of hearings should be called “MLK week” because suddenly people will be able to judge women on the basis of their beliefs and views and not their immutable identity characteristics.At least until next week, when Kamala Harris does something on the campaign trail and then this power will be revoked by the gods as is normally the case.  "

Will Ricciardella - Posts | Facebook - "The only reason SCOTUS nominations have become so toxically bitter is because activists have transformed the Court from a neutral legal institution into a political lawmaking one, completely insulated from any democratic processes."

Dems are no doubt praying that these hot new media scoops on Amy Coney Barrett will be the final nails in her confirmation coffin - "Amy Coney Barrett was a trustee at a South Bend private school that described “homosexual acts” as “at odds with Scripture” & said marriage was between “one man and one woman” years after Obergefell v. Hodges."
"Adam, I have heard a disturbing rumor that the pope is Catholic. Can you confirm?"

Curt (Libertarian) on Twitter - "Me: "Oh, that was smart of Trump to nominate a woman. It'll be a lot harder to pin serial gang rapist accusations on her than Kavanaugh." Dems: "She's abusive to her adopted kids! She stole her kids from Haiti! She's racist for engaging in interracial adoption!""
"In his defense… I never thought the left would stoop so low as to go after her kids."

Federalist Perspectives - Posts | Facebook - "Leftists explaining that the want more women to hold positions of power:"
"Leftists when they hear a pro-life woman was nominated to the Supreme Court:"

Lance for Liberty - Posts | Facebook - "Amy Coney Barrett's catholicism should disqualify her"
"Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden are catholic"

Trump Preemptively Pens Dying Wish Canceling Out RBG's Dying Wish | The Babylon Bee - ""I, Donald Trump, your favorite president, hereby state that my dying wish is for Amy Coney Barrett to be confirmed to the Supreme Court," Trump wrote as friends and family looked on somberly. "She's a great nominee. The best, maybe ever. That Kavanaugh guy was alright, he was pretty good. But Barrett is the real deal." Legal scholars frantically tried to find a loophole so the nation could honor Ginsburg's dying wish but not the president's, but unfortunately for them, the plan was foolproof. "We are forced to honor this as legitimate," they said. "There's no way around it. Since we accepted Ginsburg's dying wishes as constitutional law, now Trump's are also legitimate. Should have thought that one through.""

Saturday, March 20, 2021

Links - 20th March 2021 (2) (Women in the Military)

Norwegian warship accident raises questions on women in armed forces - "A multi-million dollar warship under the NATO command was entirely submerged after it struck an oil tanker in the early hours of November 8 in a Norwegian fjord.The KNM Helge Ingstad, dubbed as 'unsinkable', collided with a Malta oil tanker Sola TS. A 10-metre-long gash was torn into the side of the warship, which is one of the five in Norway's navy. The tanker, however, is said to be unharmed... Questions remain as to why the well-equipped warship could not avoid hitting the slow moving, 62,557 ton, 250-metre-long oil tanker. The KMN Helge Ingstad is one of the five Nansen-class frigates billed as “unsinkable” due to its construction with water-tight zones designed to keep the warship “intact and operable”... The crash and the subsequent sinking of the frigate has given rise to discussions on gender politics and political correctness in Norway.Sound recordings and radar logs have revealed crude, almost incomprehensible, human errors made by the crew. According to experienced naval officers, the mistakes make the crew look amateurs. This, too, seems to have supported the claim of sceptics who have wondered about the role of women in armed forces.In 2016, Norway introduced conscription for women. The Navy received the highest number of women after conscription duties were introduced.The Norwegian publication Armed Forces had in an article heaped praises on the KNM Helge Ingstad crew in which four out of five navigatos were women. “It is advantageous to have many women on board. It will be a natural thing and a completely different environment, which I look at as positive,” Lieutenant Iselin Emilie Jakobsen Ophus, a navigation officer at the warship, had said.Norwegian journalist, military expert and political analyst Helge Lurås has suggested that the dramatic incident is closely related to the proportion of women in the Norwegian Armed Forces.Luras claimed that the inclusion of women in the armed forces has had an effect on its professional culture. He writes that the armed forces prefer to be politically correct by increasing the number of women in the agency. "It is assumed that women make the Armed Forces better. Those who should think otherwise, receive a plain message that their opinions are undesirable," Lurås wrote. Luras questioned Navy's reluctance in giving out the details of the incident as to who were at the helm at the time. He asks whether the Navy's priority should be spending energy and resources on 'integration' and creating a 'balanced' work environment or defending the country with the best available resources.The uninsured frigate has cost the Norwegian Navy its entire annual budget, but the country also lost millions of dollars with several oil and gas fields being temporarily shut down due to the accident."
Get woke, go broke

Royal Norwegian Navy comes under fire in HNoMS Helge Ingstad collision report - ""The navy lacked competence requirements for instructors and procedures to ensure the functioning of the bridge team while administering training... As a consequence of the clearance process, the career ladder for fleet officers in the navy and the shortage of qualified navigators to man the frigates, officers of the watch had been granted clearance sooner, had a lower level of experience and had less time as officer of the watch than used to be the case"... This implies that due to a shortage of personnel, officers are being pushed through the process quicker than in the past, resulting in a lack of operational experience. The report recommends the navy undertake measures to ensure “that bridge teams have a sufficient level of competence and experience”.It also suggests that the navy review its bridge procedures and governance to solve issues of “organisation, leadership and teamwork” that played a role in the Helge Ingstad’s collision."

Deployed US Navy Has a Pregnancy Problem, and It’s Getting Worse - "A record 16 out of 100 Navy women are reassigned from ships to shore duty due to pregnancy, according to data obtained under the Freedom of Information Act... That number is up 2 percent from 2015, representing hundreds more who have to cut their deployments short, taxing both their unit’s manpower, military budgets and combat readiness. Further, such increases cast a shadow over the lofty gender integration goals set by former President Barack Obama. Overall, women unexpectedly leave their stations on Navy ships as much as 50 percent more frequently to return to land duty, according to documents obtained from the Navy... The evacuation of pregnant women is costly for the Navy. Jude Eden, a nationally known author about women in the military who served in 2004 as a Marine deployed to Iraq, said a single transfer can cost the Navy up to $30,000 for each woman trained for a specific task, then evacuated from an active duty ship and sent to land. That figure translates into $115 million in expenses for 2016 alone... “A pregnancy takes you out of action for about two years. And there’s no replacement,” said Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, a nonpartisan public policy organization. “So everybody else has to work all that harder,” adding that on small ships and on submarines, “you really have a potential crew disaster.”... The Navy has been dogged for years by lingering claims that some women get pregnant simply to avoid deployment... the Navy provided many lucrative incentives to men and women — including free housing, medical care, recreation and educational opportunities.But women got additional benefits, including free prenatal care, daycare, counseling, and special education for toddlers and children with disabilities or for other “special needs.”“Since benefits offered to recruits who are women are so very generous, it almost becomes an incentive,” said Donnelly. “One feminist advocate many years ago referred to the military as a ‘Mecca for single moms.’”... Obama, during his eight years in office, sought to increase dramatically the number of women on ships.In May 2015, Admiral Michelle Howard announced a quota of 25 percent of women on all ships... Former Navy Secretary Ray Mabus in September 2015 pushed the new policy, stating that the Navy SEALs and all other combat jobs in the Navy should be open to women, with no exemptions as part of the Pentagon’s new “gender-neutral” employment policy.Eden believes the policy of increasing women on ships results in failure. “It’s bad policy when you think of ships that have to be battle-ready and then have to transfer women off for pregnancy — something that has to do with controlled behavior or voluntary behavior”"
Presumably more gender diversity is needed so the navy can be even more exposed to operational risk

The US Marines tested all-male squads against mixed-gender ones, and the results were pretty bleak - "In 2013, the US military lifted its ban on women serving in combat. Shortly after, the Marine Corps began what it calls an “unprecedented research effort” to understand the impact of gender integration on its combat forces. That took the form of a year-long experiment called the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force, in which 400 Marines—100 of them female—trained for combat together and then undertook a simulated deployment, with every facet of their experience measured and scrutinized."

Debunking the Israeli 'women in combat' myth - ""it is a common misperception that Israel allows women in combat units. In fact, women have been barred from combat in Israel since 1950, when a review of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War showed how harmful their presence could be. The study revealed that men tried to protect and assist women rather than continue their attack. As a result, they not only put their own lives in greater danger, but also jeopardized the survival of the entire unit. The study further revealed that unit morale was damaged when men saw women killed and maimed on the battlefield"... Writes Edward Norton, a reservist in the Israel Defense Forces: "Women have always played an important role in the Israeli military, but they rarely see combat; if they do, it is usually by accident. No one in Israel, including feminists, has any objection to this situation. The fact that the Persian Gulf War has produced calls to allow women on the front lines proves only how atypical that war was and how little Americans really understand combat." "Few serious armies use women in combat roles. Israel, which drafts most of its young women and uses them in all kinds of military work, has learned from experience to take them out of combat zones. Tests show that few women have the upper-body strength required for combat tasks. Keeping combat forces all male would not be discriminatory, as were earlier racial segregation schemes in the military, because men and women are different both physically and psychologically"... Israeli historian Martin Van Creveld has written extensively about the failure of the IDF to successfully integrate and use women in combat.Finally, even Israeli citizens don't relish the thought of allowing their women into combat roles. In 1998, a survey conducted by the Jerusalem Post newspaper found that 56 percent of Israelis don't want women in combat."

DTIC ADA262626: Women in Direct Combat: What Is the Price for Equality - "Women fighting as members the Soviet Army during WWII and Israeli Army during the War for Independence form the historical basis for the evaluation. Current issues include: physiological and psychological studies to provide data to evaluate relative physical and mental capabilities, a comparative analysis of women serving as guerrillas, police, and firemen, as well as, a review of the Canadian Forces' experience with gender integration. From this assessment, the monograph concludes that allowing women to serve in direct combat units would reduce cohesion and subsequently combat effectiveness"

Female Marine and Army recruits suffer injuries from £79million battle kit designed for men - "The high-tech £79 million Virtus battle equipment system is causing women trying to become Britain's first commandos and infantry soldiers to endure agonising leg and hip problems, according to scientists.They say the 90-litre capacity rucksack is too big for most female troops while the webbing pouches used to carry ammunition and worn around the waist hurt their hips, which are naturally wider than a man's... In 2013, female RAF recruits were awarded £100,000 after suffering pelvic fractures caused by marching in step with taller male colleagues during basic training.
Clearly, the solution is for the women to carry less and let their male comrades carry the rest (since women get injured more than men regardless). And to introduce special kit designed not just for women's but also trans people's bodies.

Women in the Infantry: A Reflection on The Experiences of Allied Nations - "Tasks are deemed “essential” according to the consequences that follow from failure to complete them. Essential tasks are those whose failure would result in at least one of the following:
    Injury or death to the Canadian Armed Forces or to the general public
    Compromise the outcome of a mission or operation
    Cause significant damage to Crown (i.e., government) property
Unless the CAF can show that one of these three consequences is reasonably likely to occur as a result of failure to perform a task, then they cannot enforce the task as an occupational standard... after reviewing after action reports from Afghanistan and training exercises, Canada found that using the fireman carry to extract a wounded comrade is a nice fantasy but dragging is overwhelmingly more common... The CAF occupational standards are also informed by the legal Duty to Accommodate, which states that Canadian employers must provide employees the leeway to complete occupational tasks with work methods to which they are individually suited. In other words, for the purpose of placing a heavy box on a high shelf, it is not the business of the CAF to dictate that a soldier favors the use of his/her arms or hips or legs. Their only business is whether the box makes it atop the shelf. (There’s a lesson here for the US Army, who recently found that despite a relative lack of upper body strength, women were able to load heavy objects by emphasizing their hips and core in the lifting movement.)... the US military community’s concern for women’s pullup strength seems out of proportion to the unique demands of combat. In the participating allied countries, upper body strength is measured with a more diverse set of exercises and in a smaller proportion to the rest of the PFT. Corporal Malin Tilfors, a female Combat Craft Driver in the Swedish Marine Corps, noted that the ability to stay awake without eating for days at a time has played a much larger role than upper body strength in her combat training"

US army halts gender neutral fitness test as women struggle - "The US army is considering scrapping its new gender neutral fitness test because women have been failing in much larger numbers than men.Research showed that the Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT), which is the same for male and female soldiers, was leading to lower results for women with a knock-on effect for promotions.An early Pentagon study showed women were failing the ACFT at a rate of 65 per cent, compared with 10 per cent for men. Congress has halted implementation of the new test and the army has begun an independent review into whether it is fair. It has been suggested that the standard test could be evaluated differently for men and women... average scores for women so far are said to have been 100 points lower.Congress has now declared that the test in its current form should not be a factor in deciding whether someone gets promoted... An army officer told Military.com: "We have to figure out a way to make it fair to both genders.""
Good luck at the next war
So much for equal pay for equal work

With Equal Opportunity Comes Equal Responsibility: Lowering Fitness Standards to Accommodate Women Will Hurt the Army—and Women - "As the Army’s first female infantry officer, I have long awaited the elimination of a gender-based fitness test. The drastically lower female standards of the old Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) not only jeopardized mission readiness in combat units but also reinforced the false notion that women are categorically incapable of performing the same job as men. The new Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT) promised to alleviate these issues by finally assessing women on the same fitness scale as men and setting minimum physical standards based on branch requirements rather than gender.However, these gender-neutral standards have recently garnered criticism. Due to an initial ACFT fail rate of 54 percent among women, activist groups have raised concerns that the test will disadvantage female servicemembers. As such, lawmakers directed the Army to halt implementation of the ACFT until the service can prove it will not negatively impact the recruitment and retention of soldiers in critical support jobs, particularly those with large female populations... First, reverting to gender-based scoring could drastically reduce the performance and effectiveness of combat arms units. Specifically, without a separate, minimum standard for combat arms, the requirements to join the nation’s combat forces could soon be as low as performing ten push-ups in two minutes, running two miles in twenty-one minutes, deadlifting 140 pounds three times, and performing only one repetition of a leg tuck or, failing that, two minutes of a plank exercise. Proponents of this ACFT standard will undoubtedly claim that it is an appropriate predictor of success for combat arms soldiers; as a recent infantry company commander, I can promise you it is not. While these low standards may have seemed adequate in a controlled study, I know from experience that they will not suffice in reality.Indeed, the presence of just a handful of individuals who cannot run two miles faster than twenty-one minutes has the potential to derail a training exercise, not to mention an actual combat patrol. Entire companies of 130 soldiers will be forced to frequently halt operations in order to medically evacuate the ill-prepared as they succumb to fatigue and injury. Missions will be delayed and other soldiers will be overburdened with the weight of their unfit teammates’ equipment. This scenario is inconvenient and bad for morale during a training exercise; in combat it could be deadly. Instead of addressing the issue of having some soldiers insufficiently prepared for the physical rigors of combat, which sparked the APFT’s revision in the first place, a gender-based ACFT in combat arms will normalize it and make it unmanageable. It is wholly unethical to allow the standards of the nation’s premiere fighting units to degrade so badly, just to accommodate the lowest-performing soldiers. Reverting to gender-based scoring and reducing the minimum standard for combat arms will also hurt the women in those branches. Under a gender-based system, women in combat arms have to fight every day to dispel the notion that their presence inherently weakens these previously all-male units. Lower female standards also reinforce the belief that women cannot perform the same job as men, therefore making it difficult for women to earn the trust and confidence of their teammates. The original ACFT promised some respite from these perceptions, but a reversion to gender-based scoring threatens to validate them. While it may be difficult for a 120-pound woman to lift or drag 250 pounds, the Army cannot artificially absolve women of that responsibility; it may still exist on the battlefield. The entire purpose of creating a gender-neutral test was to acknowledge the reality that each job has objective physical standards to which all soldiers should be held, regardless of gender. The intent was not to ensure that women and men will have an equal likelihood of meeting those standards. Rather, it is incumbent upon women who volunteer for the combat arms profession to ensure they are fully capable and qualified for it. To not require women to meet equal standards in combat arms will not only undermine their credibility, but also place those women, their teammates, and the mission at risk."
Internalised misogyny!

What is the New 'Woke' Military Really Preparing Us For? - " social experimentation is directly undermining this readiness. This comes at a time when the military is already understaffed and overstretched, with fewer squadrons and active soldiers than defense experts—both inside and outside the government—recommend. The fitness of Navy ships and Navy readiness are also on the decline, as evidenced by the 2017 collision off the coast of Japan between a U.S. destroyer and a container ship. Presidents have deployed the military for all manner of objectives, which can only with great imagination be justified as defending national security, such as the 2012 hunt for Ugandan rebel leader Joseph Kony in the jungles of Uganda.Hasson is at his best when decrying the inanity of social justice initiatives imposed upon the armed forces. Our military academies, like secular academia writ-large, offer courses that attack America’s history and identity as backwards and corrupt, while promoting identity politics, the transgender agenda, and anti-religious sentiments. It fosters living arrangements that put people of all sexes and sexual identities together, a recipe for trouble...
'The credo of intersectionality is entirely incompatible with traditional military culture, with its hierarchy of command, its focus on duties rather than rights, and its emphasis on the merit, disciplined conduct, and professional competence of its members rather than their assumed victimhood.'
The military cannot afford to be a “safe space,” because it will never execute its mission in safe spaces. It cannot endure complaints about micro-aggressions, because the very nature of combat necessitates enduring acts of aggression. It cannot cater to all the unique variations of individual soldiers, because it is, in Hasson’s words, a “great equalizer” of men and women, regardless of race, ethnicity, sex, or economic status. The military now accepts transgender soldiers and even allows soldiers to “change” genders while in military service; it pays the bill for these treatments and accepts that those who undergo them will be unavailable for months. Not to mention that those who identify as transgender have much higher rates of psychological problems, including depression and suicide, than others. What is the military supposed to do when soldiers have these issues while deployed to places where they are consistently in combat? “These intensive medical procedures are simply incompatible with wartime service,” says Hasson. Unsurprisingly, a 2016 Military Times poll found that only 12 percent of active-duty troops thought the new Obama administration’s policy would improve readiness.Apart from this, according to Hasson’s documentation, there is also the lowering of standards in U.S. Army Ranger school, one of the most elite programs in the entire military. This allowed underperforming women to graduate. Women have also been allowed into combat units, despite mounting evidence compiled by the Marine Corps that co-ed units perform less well than their all-male counterparts. The harsh reality that men and women are physiologically different must be ignored to meet the demands of identity politics... Terrifyingly, 71 percent of Millennials are not even eligible for the military because they are obese, have criminal records, or lack high school diplomas or GEDs. The military is already granting waivers to many applicants to make up for their shortfalls. Meanwhile, our soldiers are being told that evangelical Christianity and Catholicism are forms of “religious extremism.”"

New Army hair and grooming standards allow for ponytails, buzz cuts and earrings - "The Army will make major changes to its hair and grooming policy, including allowing long ponytails, buzz cuts, earrings, lipstick and nail polish for women in uniform, in a push to be more inclusive... Another change also authorizes “professional” lipstick and nail polish, meaning no loud colors.Psychologists on the panel said such additions “allow the opportunity for a woman to still feel like a woman inside and outside of uniform,” Sanders said.“One thing we can never forget is that at the end of the day, our women are mothers, are spouses, they are sisters and they definitely want to be able to maintain their identity,” Sanders said.The changes also include cutting words from the existing regulations that are viewed as offensive or racist... The newest policies come after then-Secretary of Defense Mark Esper in July ordered a review of whether current grooming standards are racially biased, part of a directive aimed at stamping out racial discrimination within the military.While grooming regulations are meant to reinforce uniformity, many women of color have complained that the strict rules don’t allow for braids or other hairstyles that are easier for those with different textures and hair lengths.
How come it doesn't apply to men?

History According to Bob - Misc

Napoleon:

New French Elections 1816

"The fundamental problems of the restoration were essentially extra political in the narrower meaning of politics. Louis 18th recognized clearly what they were and when he wrote his brother in 1817, he did not intend to be the king of a divided people. All the efforts of my government, he said are directed to the effort to fuse the two peoples who exist too much in fact, into a single one, and when happily, the 100 days had broken that spell of general reconciliation, which had only operated for a moment in 1814. Now a White Terror raged in the south before the central government was able to gain control. *Something* in the chamber of Paris demanded that chains, executioners and tortures, defenders of humanity, he cried, learn how to shed a few drops of blood to spare torrents of it. Doubtless to the disappointment of such real enthusiasts, the legal proceedings resulted in only a few thousand imprisonments...

There's great evidence to indicate that Ney’s execution was simply staged. He fell before the shots were fired, no coup de gras was applied after the firing squad. Was quickly, the body was loaded quickly on the cart and left and not very long later on, a gentlemen lands in the United States, who knows an awful lot about Napoleonic history"

How the French Government Manipulated [Elections]

"To attain a reliable body of supporters, the government had to resort to methods of shall we say, electorial management. And some of these had actually been used experimentally under the Directory and were to become classic government steps in the 19th century of France. Reducing the taxes for example of known opponents for the purpose of robbing them of their ability to vote was a common device. So if you made enough money somehow or another in order to keep you from voting, they looked over your taxes and and reduced it. To prevent appeals against exclusions, the lists of electors might be posted up only at the last moment at night, not in alphabetical order and at a height on a wall that made them unreadable without a ladder. The perfects who managed the elections for the government saw to it that all government servants voted for the right candidate. Electoral meetings were prohibited. The Electoral colleges were presided over by officials and although the ballot was in theory secret, supporters of the government took care not to conceal their votes. Once in the chamber, the function of the deputies were limited. Choice of ministers rested in the hands of the king. And the cabinet system was as yet only imperfectly evolved"

Ancient Warfare:

The Sling in Ancient Warfare:

"You will find some of these lead bullets with markings on them. Some of the Greek ones actually say in Greek, take that. Some of them have the name of towns on them. Some of them have the names of the commander or the general so that when you got hit, you knew who was doing it to you, which is kind of interesting"

Helenistic Elephant Warfare Part 1:

"Numerous accounts report that prior to battles elephants were given large amounts of wine to increase their aggressiveness, but this is probably the reason they have a tendency to rampage in the nearby friendly units when they're wounded or become distressed and disoriented."

Silver Shields Part 1:

"At this time, the youngest Silver Sword were about 60, some 70 and a few older. Well how in the world do they hold up in this kind of combat? Ancient sources insist they were still unsurpassed in combat prowess. Physically, the single collision of a hoplite or a phalangite phalanx was ideally suited for men of all ages as the troops only required enough stamina for a single day's fighting. It is logical to conclude that the Silver Shields doing battle in much the same way as hoplites and not needing to be as nimble as they were when they were the hinge unit, could function very well over the course of a couple of hours of battle. The Silver Shields may even have discarded their 7 foot long dori and were now using the large sarissa and as a phalangite it wouldn't have to require them much agility at all. All they needed to do is to be able to hold it and poke and push"

Silver Shields Part 2: "The Silver Shields were simply unstoppable. They were not checked and charged directly into Antigonus’s main phalanx. ‘The Silver shields were so superior in skill and strength that of their own men they lost not one of them, but of those that opposed them they slew 5000 and routed the entire main phalanx of Antigonus’s centre’...

Unfortunately, the rest of Eumenes’s army was not as fortunate. His cavalry on the far left had been driven off and in the dust Antigonus’s cavalry was able to capture the baggage train of Eumenes... the next day Eumenes wanted to restart the battle. After all Antigonus’s phalanx was destroyed. So Eumenes thought that the Silver Shields plus his cavalry could turn the tide. Ah but Antigonus held something special, the baggage. Which meant that was the Silver Shields’ baggage. That was their money, that was their wealth, but it was also their wives and their children... So they moved quickly on Eumenes...

The Silver Shields were now in Antigonus’s service but they were very dangerous. So [Plutarch] says that they were sent to the satrapy or the province of Archicoa [sp?], which is in Southeast Afghanistan. There the governor was ordered to send them on dangerous missions so that they would gradually be destroyed and certainly would not return to Macedonia. There's some discussion that they would break them up into smaller units so they could be easier to remove. Plutarch may have stretched that a little bit to give them a little better background.

It is not really likely that Antigonus would have done something like that to this special group. They are old enough, by just sending them off to a distant area, they could simply live out their days without causing Antigonus any more trouble. In that area Afghanistan, which includes Bactria to the north, and whatever, there are a lot of Macedonian troops that retired there to their own villages and trained their own sons. And then years later you would have some of the other successors would recruit their sons to come in and join them in battle. That's how they got, reconstituting the Macedonian army, so that's a possibility"

Miscellaneous:

Jesse James:

"Mom's gonna make a little money off of this deal... Jesse James's mother charged 25 cents a head to come and see her son's grave. Now, the grave is also covered with some pebbles from the local creek. She would allow people to take those pebbles for 25 cents a piece. Of course, when they ran low on pebbles, she just went down to the creek, got more pebbles and covered it over."

Mansa Musa:

"Many of the other West African kingdoms, their leaders didn't use gold as an emblem. It was too common. They use the rare metal - copper. Great trading network, you actually have trading from West African kingdoms to the north. One of the things that they're desperately in need of it is salt. And they will trade gold for salt pound for pound... A lot of gold in Western Europe, that is going to come from West Africa. And that's going to be the main source of gold until the discovery of, you know, the New World… this idea that the Europeans disrespected these West African kingdoms really isn't true. That's going to take place later, much later but they were revered because of the kind of financial power that they possess"

Teapot Dome Punishment:

"The Inca Empire, if you are a government official and you committed any crime no matter how petty they executed you because they wanted everyone to be sure that they were were fairly treated."

Fritz Haber:

"[He’s] really helped humanity, now he becomes a killer for humanity. And it appalled his wife, his wife was just stunned. Actually called, said that he had prostituted his knowledge from the benefit of man, to the destruction of man and begged him to stop. But Fritz was a very patriotic individual, wanted to help his country, and he refused to stop. And a short time later, his wife committed suicide."

Links - 20th March 2021 (1) (Business School)

The Default Major: Skating Through B-School - The New York Times - "Business majors spend less time preparing for class than do students in any other broad field, according to the most recent National Survey of Student Engagement: nearly half of seniors majoring in business say they spend fewer than 11 hours a week studying outside class. In their new book “Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses,” the sociologists Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa report that business majors had the weakest gains during the first two years of college on a national test of writing and reasoning skills. And when business students take the GMAT, the entry examination for M.B.A. programs, they score lower than students in every other major. This is not a small corner of academe. The family of majors under the business umbrella — including finance, accounting, marketing, management and “general business” — accounts for just over 20 percent, or more than 325,000, of all bachelor’s degrees awarded annually in the United States, making it the most popular field of study... as long ago as 1959, a Ford Foundation report warned that too many undergraduate business students chose their majors “by default.” Business programs also attract more than their share of students who approach college in purely instrumental terms, as a plausible path to a job, not out of curiosity about, say, Ronald Coase’s theory of the firm.“Business education has come to be defined in the minds of students as a place for developing elite social networks and getting access to corporate recruiters,” says Rakesh Khurana, a professor at Harvard Business School who is a prominent critic of the field. It’s an attitude that Dr. Khurana first saw in M.B.A. programs but has migrated, he says, to the undergraduate level. Second, in management and marketing, no strong consensus has emerged about what students ought to learn or how they ought to learn it. And finally, with large student-faculty ratios and no lab equipment, business has historically been cheaper to operate than most departments... business students’ scores improved less than any other group’s. Communication, education and social-work majors had slightly better gains; humanities, social science, and science and engineering students saw much stronger improvement.What accounts for those gaps? Dr. Arum and Dr. Roksa point to sheer time on task. Gains on the C.L.A. closely parallel the amount of time students reported spending on homework. Another explanation is the heavy prevalence of group assignments in business courses: the more time students spent studying in groups, the weaker their gains in the kinds of skills the C.L.A. measures... The pedagogical theory is that managers need to function in groups, so a management education without such experiences would be like medical training without a residency. While some group projects are genuinely challenging, the consensus among students and professors is that they are one of the elements of business that make it easy to skate through college. Donald R. Bacon, a business professor at the University of Denver, studied group projects at his institution and found a perverse dynamic: the groups that functioned most smoothly were often the ones where the least learning occurred. That’s because students divided up the tasks in ways they felt comfortable with. The math whiz would do the statistical work, the English minor drafted the analysis. And then there’s the most common complaint about groups: some shoulder all the work, the rest do nothing... he estimates that a third of students in the business school don’t engage with their schoolwork. At Radford, seniors in business invest on average 3.64 hours a week preparing for class... It is near-universal student folklore that accounting and finance are where the hard work happens... For a career-oriented major, management strikes many business educators as too theoretical and amorphous — a potpourri of psychology, economics, game theory, ethics and international relations... he developed a game-theory model of the “market” for courses. The model predicts that, over time, courses will inexorably become easier as students (even the conscientious ones) choose courses where they can expect higher grades, and professors (even the most dedicated) turn to strategies that they expect will improve their student evaluations.It’s a simplified model — it assumes students are motivated only by grades and instructors by evaluations. But Dr. Mason believes it offers a fair approximation of reality. In a 2003 paper in the Economics of Education Review, he buttressed that model with a national survey of 259 business professors who had been teaching for at least 10 years. On average, respondents said they had reduced the math and analytic-thinking requirements in their courses. In exchange, they had increased the number of requirements related to computer skills and group presentations. Dr. Mason says that without some kind of hard constraint — like the licensure tests that accounting and finance students must face — courses inexorably become less rigorous.And what about employers? What do they want?According to national surveys, they want to hire 22-year-olds who can write coherently, think creatively and analyze quantitative data, and they’re perfectly happy to hire English or biology majors. Most Ivy League universities and elite liberal arts colleges, in fact, don’t even offer undergraduate business majors."

Business majors: College's worst slackers? - "Ever wonder why business is the most popular college major in the United States?Maybe it's because business majors have the most fun... Business majors, according to the survey, studied the least among college students. The average business student studied just 14 hours a week. In contrast, engineering students, the hardest workers on college campuses, studied 19 hours a week"

Abolish the Business Major! - "the growth of the business major inflicts a significant cost on colleges and the students they serve. In an era in which calls to reform higher education are rampant, eliminating the undergraduate business major is one simple reform that would dramatically benefit both colleges and their students. While this change would not require the kind of disruption reformers sometimes seek, it would improve student learning outcomes and refocus colleges on their core mission.Many of the students choosing to major in business and related degrees presumably believe it will lead to higher salaries... The Chronicle’s 2014 Almanac concluded that preprofessional majors initially make more than academic majors, but that by midcareer the gap has largely been erased. The Hamilton Project found almost no difference in median lifetime earnings between chemistry, political science, marketing, and business management and administration majors. An analysis by the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) concluded that over one’s career, median annual earnings for humanities majors and professional/preprofessional majors are almost exactly the same, whereas majors in the sciences and mathematics tend to make more. At their peak earnings, humanities majors, the study found, make more than professional/preprofessional majors... gender may shape future earnings more than college major. As Benjamin Schmidt noted, “the difference between humanities majors and science majors, in median income and unemployment, seems to be no more than the difference between residents of Virginia and North Carolina. If someone told to me not to move to Charlotte because no one there can make a living, I would never take them seriously. But worried relatives express the same concerns about classics majors every day, with no sounder evidence.” The data are not only contradictory, but also messy. It’s not clear, for example, whether majoring in business leads to higher salaries, or whether other factors are more important... The most important complicating factor, however, is self-selection... The evidence suggests there is no reason to believe majoring in the liberal arts and sciences will have a negative impact on earning potential. Indeed, majoring in the arts and sciences may actually improve graduates’ prospects. According to an AAC&U study, employers overwhelmingly desire college students with a liberal education, both for the kinds of knowledge and perspectives such an education offers and because of the higher-end skills it develops.Employers have been saying this for a long time. Back in 1953, John L. McCaffrey, who was then president of International Harvester, stated that a business graduate’s perspective tends to be too narrow, and therefore he “does not see overall effects on the business.” McCaffrey encouraged engineering and technical schools “to give a larger part in their courses to the liberal-arts subjects” because business leaders needed a “rounded education.” In 1960, William Benton, a partner in an advertising firm, admitted that as “a student at Yale forty years ago, I specialized in a mishmash labeled ‘Finance’ — to my everlasting regret.” Business programs “too often are a waste — of time, money, and the priceless opportunity to prepare for successful careers.”... For Benton, “even four years of Latin are more useful than a once-over-lightly course in production or merchandising.” This leads to the second major weakness of the undergraduate business degree: It is less likely to foster the skills that employers value. In Academically Adrift (University of Chicago Press, 2011), the sociologists Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa found that students taking courses in the arts and sciences produce significantly greater gains in critical thinking (as measured by the Collegiate Learning Assessment) than do business majors. They attribute the result to the fact that students in the sciences study the most hours, and students in the humanities read and write the most... The third, and most important, reason to abandon the business major is because business majors are antithetical to college education and unworthy of a college degree even if it could be proved that they do produce higher salaries. College students ought to study the liberal arts and sciences because they provide the knowledge, skills, and virtues that are necessary both for preparing people to be effective citizens and leaders and productive participants in the work force, as well as to further their own learning. While there may be utilitarian arguments for majoring in business, colleges must remain true to their own internal purposes... A college graduate ought to be a different kind of person than someone who did not attend college... The business major is for students who want a college degree without a college education. The philosopher Tal Brewer has written that the very notion of business school is an “oxymoron.”

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Latest posts (which you might not see on this page)

powered by Blogger | WordPress by Newwpthemes