Reply to Interesting Reddit post exposes a big problem modern dating

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Interesting Reddit post exposes a big problem modern dating"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Oh, so there are repercussions for oppressing women for hundreds of years and now they get enhanced choice in who they procreate with? Boo hoo to you. [/quote]

lol…oppression Olympics.

I live how women say they’re oppressed yet men routinely fight and die in wars to protect the very women who say they’re oppressed.  Or they work dangerous jobs that equate to men have 95% of workplace deaths.

Don’t see women clamoring to be working the in coal mines, oil fields and risking their lives in cargo ships so you can buy the latest Lululemon to complete your clean-girl aesthetic.

But yeah…women are oppressed….[/quote]

This x 1 million. You know what my Great Grandmother was thinking when her in 1944. It was “I wish I wasn’t so oppressed so that I could dodge a barrage of MG42 bullets to storm a gunner’s nest in Normandy. I have to toil doing unpaid care work while my husband is out galavanting around the beaches of Western Europe! What an oppressive monster!!”

[/quote]

Good lord.  Do people have no grasp of history?

In WWII, women were discriminated against and were not permitted to join active military service, for the most part.  But, women did clamor to serve in WWII in the ways that they were allowed.  In fact, women have been fighting in America's wars since the beginning, "The WAAC was the first women’s corps to serve within the US Army. However, prior to World War II, 20,000 women assisted the Continental Army during the American Revolution, acting as camp followers, spies, nurses, and some dressing as men to participate in combat. Women also served in the Civil War in the same roles. During World War I, switchboard operators known as “Hello Girls” were members of the Army Signal Corps but were considered civilian contract employees." [url]https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/womens-army-corps-wac-world-war-ii  [/url]

The Navy had a similar program but Navy women were actually part of the military, not an "auxiliary force" like in the WAC.  "More than 350,000 women joined the US military in World War II. By the end of 1942, 3,190 enlistees and 770 officers joined the US Navy as Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service, also known as the WAVES. By July 31, 1945, the WAVES had 73,816 enlisted women, 8,745 officers, and nearly 4,000 in training, far exceeding the Navy’s early projections for recruitment.[1] Despite early challenges to women’s place in the Navy, the WAVES’s establishment as a part of the Navy itself, not a corps or auxiliary like the WAACs, was “precedent-breaking.”[2] The WAVES challenged wartime gender perceptions and offered new opportunities for women desiring to enter the US military."[url]https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/waves-us-navy[/url]

Women have been fighting to get into the military since the beginning, and under the Obama administration and Defense Secretary Panetta, the military lifted the "combat exclusion rule," allowing women to serve in all combat roles.  [url]https://www.history.com/articles/women-us-military-timeline[/url]

And women have been fighting to be full and equal participants in the military, despite a rate of military sexual assault that is 12 times that of men (1.9% of men suffer sexual assault in the military versus 24% of all women).  https://costsofwar.watson.brown.edu/paper/deserted-us-militarys-sexual-assault-crisis-cost-war

Why do women want into the military so badly?  The same reason men want to serve -- good pay and benefits, an opportunity to serve the country, and access to post-military benefits and career support networks and entry into high level politics and government positions.

Despite the fact that all 5 services and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff testifying that they have yet to see any indication that women serving in combat units have caused standards to lower (https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2026/02/12/no-evidence-women-in-combat-roles-lower-standards-top-enlisted-leaders-say/), current Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has long said the opposite (without basis).  And, as SecDef, he has done all he can to purge women military leaders, cut benefits for military women, eliminate the DACOWITS which advises on women in the military, etc., even though women are 18% of all US service members. [b] https://www.aclu.org/news/womens-rights/pete-hegseth-wants-women-out-of-the-military-and-hes-not-hiding-it[/b]

You PPs are complete idiots.

And, to get back to the thread, "the problem in modern dating" isn't that we think you men look uglier than you are, it's that you continue to display your ignorance and misogyny at every opportunity, and women have no interest in living with that.  That is why the Trump Administration is trying to do things that [b]force[/b] women back into marriage, instead of letting the dating marketplace determine which men are able to date or marry women. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics