An impossible goal

I haven’t been closely following the news, but I am aware of the controversy over women competing against male transgenders in certain sports. At first, I tended to side with the women, but on giving it some thought, it appears to me as though the women have more or less conceded that they are not the ”equals” of the men, or there would be no complaints from them. It seems as though they’ve confessed that the feminist myth of ”equality” is shown to be empty

Then I read what blogger ”Anonymous Conservative” had to say on his blog. I hope he doesn’t mind if I quote this from him:

“What will kill any argument about women in the service from feminists, is asking why they don’t want to compete against male transgenders in sports? If they don’t feel able to compete for a trophy against a man, then why are they putting soldiers lives in danger by stepping onto the battlefield? Nobody will confuse a platoon of women Marines with male Marines in an NCAA competition, so why is it different on the battlefield?”

That was something I hadn’t considered, but he is right; if women can’t compete in sports with men, how can they be equal to the job of soldiering alongside the men? I have never seen the sense of sending women into combat, nor do I agree with the co-ed military. This is all a sham and a pretense. Sports is one thing; but combat is a serious issue; we don’t send women into combat, pretending that they are just as capable as the men there, just to humor them or make some kind of silly political ‘point’. People’s lives should not be gambled with in that way.

And it’s all because people have made ‘equality’ the be-all and the end-all — when equality is an impossibility, unachievable, but yet we have to continue this pretense.

5 thoughts on “An impossible goal

  1. Not so long ago, this was talked about in terms of “combat opportunities for women.” Indeed, I believe it was our “greatest president,” Mr. Obama, who was/is most responsible for popularizing the phrase. Anyway, and as I pointed out at the time, use of the word “opportunities” in conjunction with, as you say, the seriousness (and of the sheer horror of combat) of combat duty, is a dead giveaway as to what this is all about. It’s about money and prestige – combat pay and medals – for women that they have otherwise been deprived of for very good reasons that you are perfectly aware of. But this idea of “equality” between the sexes is nevertheless rampant in feminist circles, even within what I would describe as ‘less than hard core’ feminist circles. To wit:

    My wife and I have friends – a younger married couple named Zach and Carrie. They’re not really ‘close’ friends of ours, but they’re more than mere acquaintances. Zach and Carrie have several daughters (no sons), one of which is the same age as our youngest daughter, Hannah. A couple of years ago their daughter and ours both played on the same softball team that Zach and I coached – their daugher at pitcher, my daugher at first base. Both of the girls are pretty good athletes; probably the two best athletes on that particular team. Indeed, only a year before our daughter played with the boys on the boys coach pitch team I also coached because there wasn’t a (softball) team formed that year for the girls due to lack of interest. The little coach pitch team consisted of seven, eight and nine year-olds. Our daughter could hold her own with those boys at that age, but I of course knew that they would surpass her in athletic ability within the next year or two.

    Anyway, one day Carrie and I had a conversation about coaching girls vs coaching boys, wherein I mentioned (having had lots of prior experience with both) that the girls at that age are, on average, a lot easier to coach than the boys, who tend more to have their heads in the clouds at that age, and that’s putting it nicely. The conversation continued for awhile until, at length, Carrie mentioned that the girls are often better players than the boys. I agreed, due in part to the fact that the girls, as I said above, are more inclined than the boys of that age to listen to their coaches and at least strive to do exactly as they say. I went on to say to Carrie, however, that neither of our girls would be able to compete with the boys within the short span of only a couple of years (not that I would want mine to in any case); that the boys invariably surpass the girls in athletic prowess. To which Carrie replied, “well, sometimes.” I replied, “no, Carrie; all the time.” Now, extreme exceptions granted and all that, their numbers are so negligible that I am never compelled to even as much as acknowledge them unless my interlocutor twists my arm.

    I don’t think Carrie believes her own rhetoric, although I think part of her wants to believe it. I haven’t heard anything about wanting to put her daughter on our little peewee football team, for example. I figure that’s because she’s smart enough to know that the chances of her getting hurt trying to play with the (bigger, stronger, faster, more agile, meaner and so forth) boys in a physical sport are very great. Either that, or ol’ Zach put the kibosh on that idea if and when Carrie ever raised it. He probably just lets her talk, and believe what she wants to believe, so long as it doesn’t endanger his daughter. At which point he puts his foot down and says, “nope, not gonna happen.”


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s