It will come as quite a shock to you to learn the Phyllis Schlafly finds our lady folk too delicate to serve in combat. Penning an op-ed piece for a website called Human Events, which bills itself as a place for Powerful Conservative Voices, Schlafly pretty much goes down the line listing the same old tired points on why women are pretty much unfit for everything outside the home. Women are too week, physically and mentally, to rise to a man's role, etc. etc. The piece reeks from her familiar self-loathing of her gender and hatred of empowered women who would challenge her 1950s Father Knows Best world view.
According to Schlafly, the entire charade boils down to the feminists' desire to subjugate menfolk.
It’s lacking in common sense and it is toadying to the feminist officers who yearn to be 3- and 4-star generals based on the feminist dogma of gender interchangeability and on their desire to force men into situations to be commanded by feminists.That was ridiculous enough, but her real shining moment of WTFery is to be found further along in her rant.
Military women are already complaining about increased sexual assaults, and of course those problems will skyrocket. Only men will be deemed at fault because it is feminist ideology that men are innately batterers and women are victims.Got that, ladies? Lifting the ban on women in combat will lead to more men just being men, irresistibly raping on coquettish Jezebels and then having to endure the outrage of all that misplaced blame. It is getting tougher and tougher out there for rapists.
This stupid woman and her fossilized ideas only serve to highlight why the time has come to lift the antiquated ban on women serving in combat. While there are still many details to be ironed out on full integration and implementation, no one will be entertaining the notion that a potential for an increase in incidences of sexual assault must be analyzed from the perspective that men will be the true victims.