Cowardly cisgendered men forcing heroic transgendered women to fight in their place.

Back on Oct 30th, the New York Times announced the latest setback for President Trump: Judge Blocks Trump’s Ban on Transgender Troops in Military

The leadership of the complementarian Christian movement was expectedly livid at this ruling.  Here was yet another case of cowardly cisgendered men forcing heroic trans women to serve in their place.  Pastor John Piper, one of the founders of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW), excoriated the cowardly cis men behind the judge’s ruling:

If I were the last cis man on the planet to think so, I would want the honor of saying no trans woman should go before me into combat to defend my country. A cis man who endorses trans women in combat is not pro-trans woman; he’s a wimp. He should be ashamed. For most of history, in most cultures, he would have been utterly scorned as a coward to promote such an idea…

Piper reinforced this in a separate statement:

The courage of trans women will show itself in a hundred ways. But when a cis man is around, he will not exploit that courage to fight the battle where he belongs.

Joe Carter’s response to the ruling was very similar:

Unfortunately, many cis men will be more than willing to allow trans women in combat if it will lessen their chances of having to defend their country in wartime. One of the harsh realities we face is that American society is filled with cis men who are anti-trans woman cowards.

Denny Burke was concerned that this ruling could one day lead to trans women being drafted:

Perhaps some people believe that trans women ought to be able to volunteer for whatever job they are qualified to do. But what if the draft were reinstituted? Under the right conditions, the draft would be a very real possibility, and that specter of a draft is really clarifying. It’s one thing for trans women to volunteer for combat service. It’s an entirely different matter for them to be drafted into it.

Owen Strachan, former president of the CBMW, responded to the ruling with Trans women in combat: A complementarian perspective:

If cis men will not own this responsibility, then trans women will be forced to take it on….

And in another statement Strachan reinforced this concern:

…the call by cis men for trans women to fight in their place is the height of cowardice, and worthy of the strongest possible rebuke.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Complementarian, Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Denial, Dr. Denny Burk, Dr. John Piper, Military, Satire, Turning a blind eye, Weak men screwing feminism up. Bookmark the permalink.

99 Responses to Cowardly cisgendered men forcing heroic transgendered women to fight in their place.

  1. David says:

    Look at how easily these cucks ratify concepts like ‘cis’ and ‘trans’.

    Yet they *think* they oppose leftism!

    Anyone want to bet that their next move will be to shame men for not ‘manning up’ and marrying a trans (aka XY chromosome) woman?

  2. David says:

    For most of history, in most cultures, he would have been utterly scorned as a coward to promote such an idea…

    So ‘transgenderism’ was considered normal in most cultures in most of history? That appears to be what this faggot is claiming.

    This is so over-the-top insane that I am left speechless.

  3. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    I thought this was satire. A few years ago, it would have been.

    [D: It is satire, but not much more absurd than the real deal.]

  4. Peasant says:

    Once you swallow the camel of eunuchs being “trans women”, you’ll go for anything.

    Ironically, there is real cowardice among men here – cowardice at being scorned for calling a spade a spade!

  5. Pingback: Cowardly cisgendered men forcing heroic transgendered women to fight in their place. | @the_arv

  6. The Question says:

    Readers should click on the links to get Dalrock’s subtle, but brilliant point. Pure genius.

    On a side issue, shaming men today for not wanting to become cannon fodder in some foolhardy war on behalf of a country that hates them is like trying to shame a man for refusing to purchase a broken down Prius for $100,000 from an ex-girlfriend who filed a false police report against him.

  7. Cane Caldo says:

    @David, et al

    Just to make sure your shots are on target: Read the linked articles.

  8. John Piper has never served in the military. Is my tweet warranted?

  9. Cane Caldo says:

    @The Question

    It is a ridiculous idea that recruiting into the military women and mentally deranged and mutilated men is a sign of a lack of male candidates. It rather speaks of a surplus when they have the luxury to play around with idiotic, self-defeating, and totally off-mission agendas.

  10. Lost Patrol says:

    I’m even more confused than usual, again. These moral leaders are not providing the clarity needed to understand at my level.

    trans woman – A woman that transforms into a man? A man that has already transformed into a woman? If the later, aren’t we to applaud his/her newly found empowerment as a combat wombat? Why would men seek to deny this to her, and is that even any of his/our business? Shouldn’t we acknowledge her agency, or his, or both together, or is it sequentially?

    not pro-trans woman – Who is this? Someone against a woman who is herself pro the trans people?

    anti-trans woman cowards – People who are afraid of women that are opposed to trans people?

    No wonder I drink.

  11. Junkyard Dawg says:

    Dalrock, I went to the linked sites and none of them use the words “cis” or “trans.” Are you using sarcasm, satire or hyperbole to make a point? (The point being, then that this is the “cross-dressing,” and role-switching that you often talk about, even in church.)

  12. Junkyard Dawg says:

    These pastors’ accusations of men’s alleged cowardice in preferring to allow women to fight in their place is bad enough as it is. They have a very low opinion of men in the military.

  13. Anonymous Reader says:

    @Dalrock: well played. Writers at The Onion should be jealous.

  14. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    It’s now (apparently) a thing for pre-teen boys to wear heavy eye makeup: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/22/style/his-eye-makeup-is-way-better-than-yours.html?mtrref=www.google.com

    Would you be inclined to buy makeup because a 10-year-old boy is showing you how to create a look on Instagram? If we’re talking about Jack Bennett of @makeuupbyjack, then the answer could well be a resounding yes.

    Since convincing his mother to start his account in May, young Mr. Bennett, who lives in Berkshire, England, has amassed 331,000 followers and attracted the attention of brands like MAC and NYX, which have offered products to create looks. Refinery29 has celebrated him as the next big thing in makeup.

    He is the latest evidence of a seismic power shift in the beauty industry, which has thrust social media influencers to the top of the pecking order. Refreshingly, they come in all shapes, sizes, ages and, more recently, genders. Hailed by Marie Claire as the “beauty boys of Instagram,” the early male pioneers, like Patrick Simondac (@PatrickStarrr), Jeffree Star (@jeffreestar) and Manny Gutierrez, (@MannyMua733), have transcended niche to become juggernauts with millions of followers. And their aesthetic is decidedly new: neither old-school-rocker makeup nor drag queen.

  15. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    And my above link is not satire.

  16. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    I got the link from Breitbart, which has an even more disturbing image: http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2017/11/27/nolte-new-york-times-nambla-izes-pre-teen-boys-makeup/

  17. Cane Caldo says:

    @Junkyard Dawg

    It will probably make more sense if you know that John Piper, Joe Carter, and Owen Strachan were all anti-Trump.

  18. earlthomas786 says:

    What is satire today will become true white knighting in a few years.

  19. Gunner Q says:

    Actual linked Piper quote:
    “The exhortation is a good one that we not minimize the sacrifice of the American women who have died in combat, even if we think their presence on the front lines is a powerful commentary on the cowardice of our male military and political leaders. It is not a commentary on the cowardice of women. I do not commend women in combat. But I commend the sacrifices of love in a cause of truth and justice.”

    It brings to mind a quote from Wally of Dilbert fame: “They can’t break you if you don’t have a spine.”

    I like Dalrock’s version better. It has fewer “love languages”.

  20. feministhater says:

    Yep, the surreal nature is in the satire becoming a reality. It’s women today but trans-women tomorrow.

    When the progressives push ever further left, the nutjobs on the conservative or complementary right will continue to place the blame on men who have no means or power to stop the change. It’s funny to watch though. Even to the point of men being blamed for what is actually other men being put on the front line because they have labeled themselves ‘trans’.

    Funny stuff!

  21. Novaseeker says:

    Well played Dalrock!

    RPL — There’s a word for the boy in that article, and it isn’t a new one: “gay”. Boy George was wearing full makeup in the 1980s, and was as gay as the day is long. A boy who is wearing feminine makeup like that at that age (and is not a glam rocker like Robert Smith was) is gay, plain and simple. If he isn’t gay, God help him is all I can say.

  22. John Piper, working desperately to affix us all on the horns of HIS dilemma..

  23. If they aren’t going to have babies like God intended why not make them cannon-fodder?

  24. feeriker says:

    If they aren’t going to have babies like God intended why not make them cannon-fodder?

    THIS. There is no reason for society waste scarce resources on a woman who wants to make herself superfluous by being a fifth-rate man.

  25. Dalrock says:

    @Junkyard Dawg

    Dalrock, I went to the linked sites and none of them use the words “cis” or “trans.” Are you using sarcasm, satire or hyperbole to make a point? (The point being, then that this is the “cross-dressing,” and role-switching that you often talk about, even in church.)

    Satire.

    As to the point, imagine if complementarians were as terrified of calling out the transgendered as they are of calling out feminist women. Women openly fought for decades for the “equal right” to serve in all roles in the military, including combat. Complementarians looked at this and due to their terror at the idea of calling out women sought a way to seem “traditional” without calling out the rebellion. So they decided en masse to create a fantasy world where it was really cowardly men who were forcing women into combat. Likewise, transgendered people have been very openly demanding to be accepted in all roles in the military. It would be no less ridiculous for Piper and the others to accuse cis men of forcing transgendered to serve in cis men’s place today, than it was a few short years ago for them to accuse men of forcing women to serve in their place.

  26. Dalrock says:

    @Cane Caldo

    It is a ridiculous idea that recruiting into the military women and mentally deranged and mutilated men is a sign of a lack of male candidates. It rather speaks of a surplus when they have the luxury to play around with idiotic, self-defeating, and totally off-mission agendas.

    Excellent point.

  27. earlthomas786 says:

    If he isn’t gay, God help him is all I can say.

    He’ll certainly be setting himself up to be preyed upon in the gay community, that’s for sure. In either case something traumatic had to have happened to the boy to make him think that’s a good idea.

  28. American says:

    Not one of the four listed in the OT is a U.S. military veteran. Perhaps that’s why they wrongly blame normal people rather than the disordered people creating the problem.

    As an honorably discharged U.S. military veteran, allow me to offer the correct answer: No, people suffering personality disordedness to the extreme of transgenderism should NOT be permitted to subject the U.S. military to their extreme disorderedness NOR receive any benefit for NOT being permitted to subject the U.S. military to this.

    John, Joe, Denny, and Owen; the source of the problem is the disordered people not normal people. PhDs unable to grasp the obvious.

  29. Spike says:

    The judge in the first article prevented the ban on the basis that the ban ”disapproves of transgenders generally”.
    Would the judge share a foxhole with a ”person” who is juicing up on female hormones, is considering chopping off ”its” (pronoun correct?) penis, can’t control ”it’s” emotions, can’t keep ”their” cool when artillery shells start dropping?
    Piper by his own admission has not served in the military. Neither has the judge. But they can at least empathize. If transgenders are not in a fit state of mental health – as is vouched for by the heads of both Harvard and Johns Hopkins Medical Schools – they have no business serving on the front line. They will only reduce the efficiency of the military at best and will endanger the lives of servicemen when the shooting starts.
    What, exactly is this attempted shaming of ”cis” men anyway? Just another form of getting at the White, Protestant male, really. It’s got to stop, or all of us will stop working. Then the lesbians, gays, transgenders and their diversity-included cohorts can try running things…..

  30. Mandy says:

    So trans woman = eunuch, right?

  31. freebird says:

    Let’s help assimilate this idea into the general public.
    All K-4th grade gym teachers should be trans-women and shower with the little girls.
    Let them get acclimated to the twigs and berrys at a young age,nothing wrong with that.
    Right?
    Isn’t that right, ladies?
    Have another piece of that cake you’re shoving on the rest of us,eat till you choke.

  32. I threw my back out trying to follow the reasoning.

  33. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    I’ve come across men who’ve actually taken on their wives’ last names, or at least share a hyphenated name. Such men offer “logical” reasons for it.

    * Their wives’ careers are better established, so it “makes more sense” to use her name.

    * Or the husband has a brother to carry on the family name, whereas the wife does not. So it’s “more fair” to use her name, so both family names will continue.

    I can sense a desperate virtue signaling in these men. Desperately hoping you’ll admire them for their progressive, feminist emasculation.

  34. earlthomas786 says:

    I can sense a desperate virtue signaling in these men. Desperately hoping you’ll admire them for their progressive, feminist emasculation.

    If their wives won’t even admire it, why should we?

  35. Lost Patrol says:

    So they decided en masse to create a fantasy world where it was really cowardly men who were forcing women into combat.

    Kirsten doesn’t want old man Piper speaking for her. It’s a brave new world. Time to retire, John.

    https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2017/11/26/women-get-chance-to-one-up-the-men-in-mixed-infantry-units/?

    “I want to be one of the females to prove to everybody else that just because you’re a female, doesn’t mean you can’t do the same things as a male,”

    “We kinda just kept looking at each other and we’re, like, all right, we’re both doing it, we’re passing these guys and stuff. We definitely have goals to be better than the guys.”

    The Brass is cool with it all – LtCol Edwards: “They don’t know any different. They don’t notice they’re integrated,” Edwards said. Most just left high school, where boys and girls mingled all the time. “That’s the way it’s always been.”

    Women good to go. Trannies up next!

  36. Pingback: Cowardly cisgendered men forcing heroic transgendered women to fight in their place. | Reaction Times

  37. Spike says:

    OT: Can women do things as well as men? I know all of us are biased on this blog, so we need an objective measure.
    Enter Bear Grylls, and the results of an experiment:

  38. Joshua Johnson says:

    John Piper…wow.

    >

  39. American says:

    @Lost Patrol, but there is not equity. Women are subjected to a far less physically demanding course of training and working conditions. You won’t find an E1-E3 female boatswain’s mate living in the same berthing quarters with the men chipping paint and doing the hard manual work with heavy lifting all day for the simple fact 90 percent of them cannot nor ever will be able to handle it.

    But they’ll fast promote them over the men to order the men to do the dangerous work. I have to think that as men get sickened by joining the military only to find they’re being bossed around by a lot of transgender disordered people and estrogen fueled feminazis that they’re going to be a LOT of single tour male enlistees failing to reenlist… especially as the economy picks up.

    The real men are still keeping it all together but if it slides over this weird 63 gender tranny feminazi cliff: how the government responds to the deterioration is going to be really interesting. .

  40. seventiesjason says:

    This is all hip and cool. I had a roommate when I first moved to California in 1995. He had just got out of the Army. Served in Desert Shield / Desert Storm in 1991.

    He told me that in the summer of 1990 when deployment began…..ALL the women in his unit suddenly became pregnant. So….you know…..they could not be deployed. Before that….they were “just as good as the guys” and “one of the guys”

    He was so angry, and even more angry that no one in the media or upper ranks DARED made a peep about it

  41. After seeing the video I can only recommend that they take the first bullets – Give everyone else a chance to see them gone.

  42. Oscar says:

    Tangentially on topic: The New York Times applauds moms sexualizing their little boys for fags.

    “What you have now are millennial moms who have grown up in an era where gender is more fluid” ~ NYT

    No mention of dads anywhere.

    http://victorygirlsblog.com/nytimes-ok-sexualize-children-cause-genderqueer/

    First, our culture normalized wives rebelling against their husbands. Then it normalized heterosexual promiscuity. Then it normalized divorce. Then it normalized homosexuality. Then it normalized homosexual “marriage”. Now transgenderism is being normalized. Pedophilia is apparently next. Polygamy will fall in somewhere. Bestiality and God-only-knows what else will be normalized eventually.

    Soon, the only form of sex that will be considered deviant is sex between one man and one woman in a lifelong, fecund, Christian marriage.

  43. Anon says:

    Oscar,

    Tangentially on topic: The New York Times applauds moms sexualizing their little boys for fags.

    Ugh. This is a bonanza for a pedophile like Manboobz Futrelle.

    When will normal people start taking direct, violent action against leftists? Frankly, as pervasive as leftism appears to be, the top 100 people are the drivers, and eradicating them would quickly reverse most SJW-ism that we see today (the drone SJWs and virtue-signalers can be reprogrammed instantly once better people control the media).

  44. earlthomas786 says:

    Soon, the only form of sex that will be considered deviant is sex between one man and one woman in a lifelong, fecund, Christian marriage.

    Not sure if this was all planned or just the natural result of normalizing all illicit sex…but you will be right. The only sex that will be considered ‘degenerate’ is the sex that is licit under how God set it up.

  45. earlthomas786 says:

    “What you have now are millennial moms who have grown up in an era where gender is more fluid”

    What you have is the result of states forcing things like homosexuality as normal in public school. The next generation of little boys and girls will have grown up watching guys dressed in drag that read in libraries.

    No mention of dads anywhere.

    Even if it’s not a single family home if you ever see the fathers in these type of stories they are either emasculated, feminists, or you wonder which team they actually play for.

  46. feeriker says:

    In either case something traumatic had to have happened to the boy to make him think that’s a good idea.

    Wouldn’t being born and raised in the UK today be considered a “traumatic event” for a boy?

  47. feeriker says:

    The Brass is cool with it all

    Of course they’re “cool with it.” They HAVE to be if they want their careers to continue, and anybody who has spent any time at all in the military knows the ONLY thing that matters to (what passes for) “leadership” is their careers.

  48. pavetack says:

    Seems to be a lot of “do as I say, not as I do”.

    John Piper: No mention of Military Service (https://www.desiringgod.org/our-founders)

    Joe Carter: No mention of Military Service (https://www.phc.edu/faculty/jpcarter)

    Denny Burk: No mention of Military Service (http://www.boycecollege.com/academics/faculty/denny-burk/)

    Owen Strachan: No mention of Military Service (http://www.mbts.edu/about/faculty/owen-strachan/)

  49. Oscar says:

    @ Earl

    “Not sure if this was all planned or just the natural result of normalizing all illicit sex…but you will be right. The only sex that will be considered ‘degenerate’ is the sex that is licit under how God set it up.”

    I think there’s some of both. Obviously, it’s planned in the spiritual sense. Satan always mocks (in the literal sense; to imitate, as in a mocking bird), or inverts God’s plan. This is an inversion. Some of the people behind this have also planned it that way. For example:

    “Let us have more and better enjoyment of more and better sexual perversions – by whatever definition – by more and more consenting adults. And if bestiality with consenting animals provides happiness to some people, let them pursue their happiness. And let us have more and better enjoyment of more and better hardcore pornography by those to whom such viewing provides happiness.” ~ Frank Kameny

    “… we are proud of you, Frank [Kameny]. We are grateful to you for your leadership.” ~ Barack Obama

    Here’s my source for those quotes.

    Do watch the whole thing, when you have the time. You’ll learn about a book called “After the Ball: How America Will Overcome its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the Decade of the ’90s” (Marshall Kirk, Hunter Madsen), in which the authors lay out their plan for normalizing homosexual perversion. It was published in 1989. Today, it reads like history.

    But most people – including most perverts – are clueless. They’re just happy to throw themselves down the slippery slope because it’s “fun”. They don’t realize that they don’t get to decide when or where they stop.

  50. Boxer says:

    No mention of dads anywhere.

    It’s media protocol never to mention the fathers of children, in any story. I have wrote reams on this nonsense on my blog, for example, when this sweet little girl was slaughtered by her skank-ho single mom:
    https://v5k2c2.wordpress.com/2017/06/20/another-death-by-single-mom/
    no one even bothered to mention that she may have had a dad someplace, who was denied his proper role by a black-robed faggot in a divorce proceeding, and who was then mourning her totally needless passing. Certainly the pseudojournalists who spun the story never mentioned him.

    Boxer

  51. But most people – including most perverts – are clueless. They’re just happy to throw themselves down the slippery slope because it’s “fun”. They don’t realize that they don’t get to decide when or where they stop.

    Plus it’s right there in Romans…it’ll make them have a depraved mind.

  52. Oscar says:

    @ Boxer

    Acknowledged. That’s why I was hoping you’d comment on the absence of fathers in the article.

    @ Earl

    Yes, it’s right in Romans 1, and in the entire book of Judges, and 1st and 2nd Kings, and 1st and 2nd Chronicles, and Ecclesiastes, etc.

  53. Yes, it’s right in Romans 1, and in the entire book of Judges, and 1st and 2nd Kings, and 1st and 2nd Chronicles, and Ecclesiastes, etc.

    Makes you think perhaps God is telling us something.

    There’s also this

    http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/6-18.htm

    http://biblehub.com/1_thessalonians/4-3.htm

  54. Oscar says:

    Also tangentially on topic: Christians understand science better than Atheists do.

    https://hotair.com/archives/2017/11/28/surprising-group-likely-support-science-regarding-transgender-issues/

    “63 percent of Christians ‘say that whether someone is a man or a woman is determined by their sex at birth’.
    62 percent of ‘nones’ [i.e., no religion] say ‘a person’s gender is not necessarily determined by the sex they are assigned at birth’.” ~ HA

    Actually, it’s assigned at conception, but the survey didn’t ask that question. If you read the article, you’ll find that 84% of white Evangelicals believe a person’s sex is assigned at birth, while only 29% of atheists/agnostics believe that. Which means Evangelicals understand biology far better than atheists do.

    But, I guess biology is no longer a science.

    Anyway, looking at Christians alone, Catholics are the furthest down this particular slippery slide. Only 51% (barely a majority) of them believe sex is assigned at birth. It’s clear, however, that the Church in general is being led by the nose to the slippery slope.

  55. Anyway, looking at Christians alone, Catholics are the furthest down this particular slippery slide.

    I’d be curious if the survey separated it from faithful practicing Catholics…and those who say they are Catholics but haven’t been to any church in years or the last time was when Easter or Christmas occurred….or lumped them together.

    You’d be amazed how quickly down the slippery slope a lapse Catholic who doesn’t go to any Christian denomination goes.

  56. Oscar says:

    @ Earl

    “You’d be amazed how quickly down the slippery slope a lapse Catholic who doesn’t go to any Christian denomination goes.”

    I wouldn’t be surprised at all. I’m Hispanic, from a Catholic country.

  57. Boxer says:

    Dear Oscar:

    Acknowledged. That’s why I was hoping you’d comment on the absence of fathers in the article.

    Thanks for noticing me, brother. Here’s another heartwarming story of the natural tendency toward caregiving in the single-mom population. As an aside, if any of you brothers ever wondered what types of people use the Plenty of Fish swingers/dating site, here’s the news:

    (Be warned, it’s pretty depressing)

    https://v5k2c2.wordpress.com/2017/05/17/women-natural-caregivers/

    Naturally, there’s scant mention of this little child ever having a biological daddy either. I suppose all these kids must be “virgin births” (TM Marc Driscoll).

  58. Transgendered make up 0.6% of the US population – or 1.4 million people.

    https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/press-releases/updated-estimates-show-1-4-million-adults-identify-as-transgender-in-the-us-doubling-estimates-from-a-decade-ago/

    How many of them will ever touch military service? 1% of 1.4 million
    As of 2014, only 15,500 transgendered in active duty military service, 134K in reserve/retired:
    http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Transgender-Military-Service-May-2014.pdf

    The history of US military interventions is replete with braggadoccio, bald-face lies, waste, failure and wholesale military incompetence. The bravery, guts and honor are reserved for the soldiers.

    You have to visit St. Mihiel, Calverton, Suresnes, Brookwood or Cambridge to let it fucking sink in. The fact that so many brave young men have died in these wars in horrible pain and suffering, crying out loud or their mothers and for no good reason or discernable, demonstrates just how readily are willing to go to deceive ourselves.

    We have brave men right now on the ground in LIberia, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Niger and Libya – God forsaken places – while most Americans are go shopping on Black Friday, buying lattes at Starbucks, watch NFL football games with kneeling players and the Kardashians.

    When I visit the cemeteries it’s obvious that we Americans don’t deserve these men.

    As for the gays and transgendered, let them fight and die for no reason as well. For God and country?
    Who will care?
    Exactly.
    No one.

  59. I’m so ashamed. Sad face emoji.

  60. Mathetes says:

    Just thought this book would make a worthy post. Someone finally figured out why Christian women marry so many losers:

    http://andynaselli.com/why-christian-women-marry-losers

    The link is to a review of this informative, insightful, and cutting edge topic.

  61. Hose_B says:

    Someone finally figured out why Christian women marry so many losers:

    They think all men are losers. Any woman can shoehorn any man I go one of those 10 categories. Note that “control freak” is first on the list. Find a man who believes in any real form of headship and they will get plunked into this category. After she has put every man into one of these categories, she will look around and ask “where are all the good Christian men?”

  62. ‘Just thought this book would make a worthy post. Someone finally figured out why Christian women marry so many losers:’

    Other than the saturation of sex and people delaying marriage…he’s pretty clueless as to why it’s tougher for women to get married.

    If we look at most churches on Sunday mornings, we will find many
    more women than men. A surplus of strong, godly women compared
    to the number of godly men means fewer choices for women and more
    choices for men. Men are pickier (“I want a hot wife”), and women often
    settle for less.

    Hey guys, didn’t you know we have the hypergamy problem and women have to marry down.

  63. Boxer says:

    Dear Mathetes, Earl, et. al.:

    Someone finally figured out why Christian women marry so many losers

    Some enterprising Dalrockian ought to author a new title, like Why Christian Men Marry Lying Whores. I’d bet that’d be a big seller.

    Regards,

    Boxer

  64. Opus says:

    @constrained locus.

    My arithmetic is not that good but by my calculation if there are 1.4 million trannies in America and that is equal to 0.6% of the population then the population of America is some 233,333,000. Not by the way that for one moment do I believe either of the given figures to be accurate.

  65. Opus says:

    … any more than I believe in the ever increasing number of Elvis impersonators. The key word here is of course impersonator. How is it that Female (rather than Elvis) Impersonators have now been reclassified as a separate class of person rather than (especlally in the case of Elvis) the sad people they really are. Do not mistake me I have always been a big fan of the King, been to his movies and have many discs issued by his recording company but frankly were I to don the sideboards and jump-suit people would laugh at me and wonder why I was acting strangely. Even taking elocution lessons to give me that Memphis drawl or undergoing cosmetic surgery to better approximate myself to his image would not persuade anyone that I was he for they would see me as the delusive loser that I really am – and the trannies, losers too, are no more woman either than me.

  66. Opus says:

    …and further

    One of the really easy sticks with which to beat the Roman Catholics is to castigate the former promotion of Castrati. Young boys with parental approval would before puberty have their testicles removed in the hope – and few would achieve this – that the boy would go on to be a leading Operatic singer – of the castrato voice – and thus rich as well as popular with women – much the way women swooned over the likes of say Boy George. There is just one recording from the early years of he last century of one aging Castrati . The sound is unearthly though perhaps not in a good sense.

    In recent decades it no longer being acceptable to castrate there has been the reintroduction of the Counter Tenor. One must never say that it sounds effeminate. How strange and terrible that we are now enforcing on young boys and without the possibility of fame and fortune a more sophisticated form of castration.

  67. Disillusioned says:

    I hate it when in referring to the military both men and women are equally praised. I believe that the total number of combat deaths in all war is around 1.2 million men and around 50 women.

  68. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    feeriker: Of course they’re “cool with it.” They HAVE to be if they want their careers to continue,

    As a retired Air Force Lt. Col. once told me, “To rise to any rank of general or admiral, you must cease being a soldier and become a politician.

  69. anon says:

    “It is a ridiculous idea that recruiting into the military women and mentally deranged and mutilated men is a sign of a lack of male candidates. It rather speaks of a surplus when they have the luxury to play around with idiotic, self-defeating, and totally off-mission agendas.”

    Kind of like the federal budget demonstrates an obvious surplus of money.
    I mean, they just keep spending and going further into debt so they must have the funds, eh?
    It actually speaks more to the fact that (as the government dole also illustrates) the ones demanding aren’t the ones doing any of the lifting.

  70. Lost Patrol says:

    @American

    …there is not equity. Women are subjected to a far less physically demanding course of training…

    I’m sure you know you are typing badthink there. It will all be sorted out when we get to 50/50 in combat units. The real question is how to count for percentages. Will using women that were men cost actual women some slots? How will we count the men that were women? I mean there is the issue of the transitional phases, where he is not yet she but will be after a course of treatment, etc. You get the idea. The trannies are wrecking the math on ‘gender is a social construct’.

    Just another day at the office –

    If insufficient numbers of women, or trans-women, or trans-men, can’t prevail in these friendly training matches; we can “modify”-not-lower the training standards. So no problem.

  71. feeriker says:

    @pavetack

    The lack of military service by these cucked pastors is par for the course. It’s just as well too, as military chaplains are little more than the equivalent of the old Soviet Union’s political commissars. They have nothing whatsoever to do with real Christianity and everything to do with doing Molech’s will.

  72. Oscar says:

    @ LP

    That dude’s trying really hard for that Kimura. I’d like to know if he completed it.

  73. Oscar says:

    Hey Boxer, got a winner for ya….

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/28/mother-allegedly-threw-newborn-childs-father-broke-babys-skull/

    “Heidy Rios, 24, of Terrytown, was arrested Friday and charged with cruelty to a juvenile, the Daily Mail reports.

    Police say she hurled the 26-day-old at the father’s feet after a fight on Thanksgiving Day.

    Rios’ boyfriend took his infant son to Children’s Hospital in New Orleans, where doctors found that the baby suffered a fracture to his right temporal bone in his skull. They also notified the authorities.

    The boy’s father told detectives that he and his girlfriend got into a heated argument on Thanksgiving Day when she tossed the newborn at his feet, yelling at him, ‘Take your f****** son!’”

  74. Don Quixote says:

    I’ll just leave this here:

  75. Mike T says:

    Joe Carter is a military veteran. It says right there in the link you cited pavetack…

    A fifteen-year Marine Corps veteran, Professor Carter previously served as the online editor for First Things magazine,

  76. anon says:

    “As for the gays and transgendered, let them fight and die for no reason as well. For God and country?”

    Their personal wellbeing isn’t the concern. It’s the waste of resources that is the problem. Transgenders are far more likely to have personality and mental issues that make them incompatible with military service. Which makes them a risk to others and a resource drain. Time and training wasted at large expense (this is true for women as well, that straw-camel-back meme exists for a reason). That doesn’t even touch on the fact each of them is an EO complaint waiting to happen.

  77. earlthomas786 says:

    Saw this story about an amber alert this morning. Another case of a mother with a live in boyfriend.

    http://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/amber-alert-issued-for-missing-3-year-old-girl-from-oslow-county/654585618

    You should note what the biological father says.

    It hasn’t been brought to light yet….honestly wouldn’t surprise me if they did something to her.

  78. Embracing Reality says:

    It’s long past time for Minnesota liberals Al Franken and John Piper to retire. They’ve done enough damage now.

  79. Gunner Q says:

    Would their replacements be any better? SJW intolerance and internal policing makes replacement synonymous with cloning.

  80. “Someone finally figured out why Christian women marry so many losers”

    Okay, they marry losers because they date losers. So…why do they date losers?

  81. “Enter Bear Grylls, and the results of an experiment:”

    That would be much better if it included clips from the men’s camp, too.

  82. Gunner Q says:

    “Okay, they marry losers because they date losers. So…why do they date losers?”

    Drama, dominance and drugs. Why not? Worst-case scenario, she pulls out her pussy pass and the taxpayer fixes her self-inflicted problems.

  83. Cane Caldo says:

    @Embracing Reality

    It’s long past time for Minnesota liberals Al Franken and John Piper to retire. They’ve done enough damage now.

    Haha! Hilarious!

  84. Cane Caldo says:

    @anon

    Kind of like the federal budget demonstrates an obvious surplus of money.
    I mean, they just keep spending and going further into debt so they must have the funds, eh?

    Yes, exactly. The fact that money is borrowed doesn’t mean it isn’t in someone’s hands.

    It actually speaks more to the fact that (as the government dole also illustrates) the ones demanding aren’t the ones doing any of the lifting.

    I can see that point of view, but I blame the lifters as well because they are enablers. Every enabler has their reason or reasons (retirement pension, buddies, whatever) for staying in the military, but at the end of the day they are just hoovering up personal benefits to help the perversion move forward. If they weren’t actually enablers, then they’d be disciplined or discharged.

  85. earlthomas786 says:

    ‘Okay, they marry losers because they date losers. So…why do they date losers?’

    I’d be shocked if he ever mentions the number of Christian women on birth control.

    It’s not the complete answer but if it dies enough to change what they find attractive in a mate it should be addressed.

  86. Oscar says:

    @ anon says:
    November 29, 2017 at 6:39 am

    “Their personal wellbeing isn’t the concern. It’s the waste of resources that is the problem.”

    The real problems are twofold:
    1. Unnecessary risk to good Soldiers
    2. Losing wars unnecessarily

    “The best welfare a commander can provide his Soldiers is tough, realistic training.” ~ Erwin Rommel

    Every minute spent on “transgender training” (I’ve sat through it twice now) is a minute not spent training Soldiers to do the job they’ll do in combat, and that makes those Soldiers less combat effective, and more likely to lose a battle and/or lose life, limb and/or eye sight.

    But wait, it gets worse.

    I started my career serving in all-male combat units. Much later, I served in mixed-sex units. The all-male units simply run more smoothly, which makes them more effective in combat, which makes them more lethal to the enemy and less lethal to our Soldiers.

    Commanding a unit made up of men, women, fags and trannies would be like taking a three ring circus into combat.

    A lot of good men will be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.

  87. Oscar, what in the world is “transgender training” if you don’t mind? That sounds like a…suboptimal use of time.

  88. earlthomas786 says:

    Drama, dominance and drugs. Why not? Worst-case scenario, she pulls out her pussy pass and the taxpayer fixes her self-inflicted problems.

    That’s actually the best case scenerio.

    The worst case is her druggie boyfriend with the volcanic temper that creates the drama she craves…kills her. They never think about that case though.

  89. Lost Patrol says:

    @ Cane, Oscar,

    If they weren’t actually enablers, then they’d be disciplined or discharged.

    This is true. You can’t blame the newer troops, they don’t yet understand what it means, but the old timers know very well how this will end. I’ve been out for several years now, but I wonder if I were around today if I wouldn’t be the rationalizer that is aiding and abetting the farce. There’s a good chance I would be unless there were some personal “last straw” arrived at, whatever that might look like. It can slip up on you via Dalrock’s model where the compromises of today slowly become the new normal, then serve as the baseline for further compromises tomorrow. This is how it’s being handled with the women now, and no doubt trans-humans to follow the same model.

    At first I saw no women in uniform anywhere, at all. This went on for many years but then one turned up. She was a tank mechanic that was quietly moved along in a couple of weeks because she could not lift her tool box, which is the bread and butter of every tank mechanic and he goes nowhere without it.

    Later there is another, but she is in the administration side and you don’t notice adverse impact. Then another, but with only two on hand, one becomes a heroic single mom and the unit has to cover for that. The first one is pretty, so it’s not long before there is trouble in the unit revolving around her too. At this point a man is starting to get the idea, but is also vested for a variety of reasons as Cane says. He can (I did) rationalize it. The machine is big enough to absorb these early experiments without most people noticing. You move around, mix with the other services, and one day there are women in fairly significant numbers right where you are. Some of them are clever, and don’t cause problems. It seems OK. You are being sucked in even as you understand you are letting it happen.

    As Oscar points out, somewhere on the horizon is a war against a near peer, which will bring all this to the fore perhaps in a ghastly way.

  90. Oscar says:

    @ The Real Peterman says:
    November 29, 2017 at 11:45 am

    “Oscar, what in the world is ‘transgender training’ if you don’t mind? That sounds like a…suboptimal use of time.”

    It’s basically a Power Point class telling Soldiers to be nice to trannies. It also explains the process by which one officially changes ones “gender” (no such thing in reality). And yes, it’s a waste of time.

    Commanders these days spend an inordinate amount of time, effort and resources keeping out of trouble with the PC police. I’m convinced we’ll soon have a version of the Soviet Political Officer.

  91. Frank K says:

    So they decided en masse to create a fantasy world where it was really cowardly men who were forcing women into combat.

    From what I’ve heard, so many young men volunteer that the armed forces can be picky about who they will accept.

  92. Kevin says:

    The very adoption of stupid words like cis mean you have ceded the battlefield to them and don’t view the world through Gods lens. Pathetic.

  93. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Oscar: Commanding a unit made up of men, women, fags and trannies would be like taking a three ring circus into combat.

    Sounds like the next Oscar winning motion picture.

    Some conservative (i.e., sexist, homophobic, transphobic) Green Berets are forced to integrate with some women, gays, and trannies. Training is brutal. There are some incidents of hate. Then mutual respect builds. When they are called to battle, this inclusive unit turns out to be the bravest and fiercest, winning the most medals. One tranny wins the Congressional Medal of Honor for dying heroically in combat while saving the entire unit’s lives.

    The film sweeps the Oscars.

  94. Kevin says:

    I commented on the go before reading the links. Well played and sad that it was so believable. Given the insanity you have linked to so often those comments seemed like the next step.

  95. Commander Jack Cross says:

    Let me get this straight;

    Conservative CHRISTIANS are deriding cis men in favor of tranny (wo)men because trannies are in danger at the front lines?

    I wonder how Mars is this time of year?

    [D: Welcome. The post is satire, but no less abusurd than what these men really do write.]

  96. anon says:

    “If they weren’t actually enablers, then they’d be disciplined or discharged.”

    Anomalies happen.
    Just as one can do a lot of harm in a leadership position, one can also do a lot of good.

  97. feeriker says:

    Minnesota liberals

    The second word is redundant.

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s