The thinking behind the policy was put simply enough by one of the young women who is liable to be called up. Cana Elgvin said "I think it is natural that in an equal society girls and boys have the same duties."
That attitude casually assumes that men and women are made the same way for the same purposes. I think Cana herself is living proof that this assumption is wrong. Cana is the 17-year-old Norwegian girl on the right of the photo below. Was she really made for aggressive physical combat? For the physical rigours of combat? Look at how slender her forearms are. Could she really lug around a heavy weapon with those arms? Is she equipped with hard chest muscle and muscular limbs? And does she look like she has the emotional hardness and the aggressiveness to stand up for herself in a bayonet fight? And should she, as a woman, be expected to be hard in this way? Would that be the highest realisation of her feminine being?
And what message would her conscription into the army send to Norwegian men? Men are inspired by the beautiful womanhood they perceive in women, a beauty which has a softness and vulnerability to it. The sense of duty men have to protect women from harm is in many ways a response to this perception of beautiful womanhood. But what if the message is that men and women are just the same, with the same duty to serve in the armed forces? Will Norwegian men then have the same sense of duty to protect women? Will they maintain the same masculine culture that breeds good soldiers?
Are Nordic people uniquely susceptible to this sort of idiocy? Not that gender theory is unique to Nordics, but that they swallow it readily. It just seems weird in light of the Viking history, and the fact they don't have a colonial past to shame them into submission.
ReplyDeleteNot that it matters. The free world does not depend on the quality of Nordic troops. For that matter, I don't think Norway has any intention of defending itself from invasion.
ReplyDeleteThe reason women don't belong in the military isn't just physical requirements, but mental requirements as well.
ReplyDeleteIt's a myth that men and women have the same thoughts and brains. They don't.
The Israelis seem to do ok.
ReplyDeleteThe Israelis have limited their women's service to safe areas. They do have a battalion on one of the least active areas of the border.
ReplyDeleteBy design.
I would be very concerned if I had a daughter if she was conscripted.
ReplyDeleteI had a Nordic gf for sometime and she was a very delicate, small and ballerina like young woman. Very sensitive emotionally too.
Her school made her do boxing she told me. Against much larger Nordic women.
I thought this was barbaric. Especially considering her body/personality type it was sadistic too.
A Google search for "Harold Eia brainwash" will bring you to a fascinating documentary on Youtube where Norwegian gender apparatchicks are interviewed about the scientific basis for the social policies they're putting in place. They claim science is on their side, but when confronted with scientific evidence against their case, they raise their eyebrows, snark, and become very uncurious.
ReplyDeleteThey claim science is on their side, but when confronted with scientific evidence against their case, they raise their eyebrows, snark, and become very uncurious.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to have a crack at this so someone correct me if i'm wrong.
Social sciences are not actually "science" they don't use scientific method. They are really just political opinion. In their view they are practicing their science. When met with real science they scoff at it because its outside their field and its not social science "science".
Left-liberals dishonestly claim science is their expertise. What they are saying is their politics is their expertise which they believe to be science. When its not.
I've also seen and read about the old left opinion that hard science and statistics are "rightwing" authoritarian "evil" lies.
Which is just bizarre.
Sort of makes it clear why liberals think telling the truth is criminal. Reality is counter to their thinking.
Then you often hear them say "Reality has a liberal bias" Then why are they so afraid of it being discussed?
We have lost brave women in combat in Afgan. And you ramble about the size of a girls forarms? Please google Marit Bjorgen. And Suzanne Svanevik. They are women that Norwegian girls idolise.
ReplyDeleteI could have told you to google a lot more, like our F16 bombings in Libya. But I wont. Because when people are so lazy that they dont even bother to check out basic facts before writing something, then its not about getting a storie right. Its all about having something to rant about. I feel sad for your lack of ability to adapt to information.
Yours Viking.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn practice, the new law means that both men and women would be asked, like they have been before, but now, it is not so easy even for girls to say "no" if they don't want. The Norwegian Defense tests each person that is aksed. Only the most motivated and best fitted men and women will be accepted. The new law is more symbolic.
ReplyDeleteBest regards from Norway
I would be very concerned if I had a daughter if she was conscripted.
ReplyDeleteMy thought too. I simply wouldn't allow it, which would put me on a collision course with the state.
Anon, thanks for reminding me about the Harald Eia documentary. I wrote a post about it:
http://ozconservative.blogspot.com.au/2012/01/brainwashing-norway.html
The documentary has had some influence.
Viking,
I just googled Marit Bjorgen. I don't know why you thought that would reassure me. Yes, she is muscular - to the point of looking like a man.
anon:
ReplyDelete"Anonymous said...
We have lost brave women in combat in Afgan. And you ramble about the size of a girls forarms?"
The ability of Norwegian women to get killed in combat is not in doubt.
Actually, I completely accept that there are muscular, aggressive women who make decent soldiers. But they are a minority, which is why conscripting ordinary women is a stupid idea militarily. But this is not being done for military reasons, it is being done for social Deconstruction - to stop (white, Norwegian) men thinking and behaving like men.
An absurd claim. This is being done for reasons the Norwegian Armed Forces have decided are worth it and the people have claimed they want. Among other things, equality between genders.
DeleteA lot of the losers in this comment section come off to me as little more than borderline women-haters, thinking the frail, weak "fairer sex" can't handle military service. They can. They have for years.
The system as it works right now is as follows.
60 000 people get called in every year for session. They are both men and women, and are evaluated. Roughly 10 000 get told they are good enough for military service due to a variety of factors, like the will to serve, and the mental and physical capacity to do so. The RNAF don't give a shit about your viewpoints about women, they care for their own viewpoints about what makes good soldiers, and those criteria are met in about 1/6 of their yearly batch of possible conscripts. They can basically pick and chose who they want to conscript and select only the top of the batch, because they don't need even half of the people coming in each year.
The men who are told they are eligible for service are then told when and where to meet up to be enrolled into service. The women get asked if they WANT to serve. IF they say yes, they will be told the same thing as men - when and where to meet up to be enrolled. They have a period of 3 months (IIRC) to re-consider this CHOICE and quit. If they decide to move on after this they serve for a full year like the men. Last time I saw a statistic on this, very few of the women decided to leave inside of 3 months.
The new system will change NOTHING of this except the part where a woman is asked if she wants to serve. She will now simply be told where to meet up and when.
Just like the men.
Because what the Norwegian military cares for is not if you have a penis or not, it's your potential to be a capable soldier.
Anon, that's a naïve point of view. The Nordic governments are committed to making sex distinctions not matter. They would have pushed ahead with this policy regardless of whether women are capable of combat service or not.
DeleteBeing a man means more that having a penis. If you believe that the only thing that distinguishes us as men is our genitalia then you are a lost cause - you will never have much of a sense of manhood.
Nor do you respect women very much if you believe that they are interchangeable with men. That will inevitably lead to women being treated patronisingly as aspiring to a masculine standard rather than being significant in their own right.
Just because you are a white people, doesn't mean that you can keep doing things, crazier and crazier! Sometime that will catch up to you!
ReplyDeleteThese people have watched too much sci-fi...
Viking, women's first call is to motherhood, because they are a society's population bottleneck. Policies that discourage and demean motherhood directly harm the health of a society. But it's ok, if Norway's women won't have the children, the many and vibrant immigrant women will do it for them. Whether Norway remains Norwegian at the end of this process is the subject for further debate...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/article/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal
"The physical strain of enduring combat operations and the stress of being responsible for the lives and well-being of such a young group in an extremely kinetic environment were compounded by lack of sleep, which ultimately took a physical toll on my body that I couldn’t have foreseen.
By the fifth month into the deployment, I had muscle atrophy in my thighs that was causing me to constantly trip and my legs to buckle with the slightest grade change. My agility during firefights and mobility on and off vehicles and perimeter walls was seriously hindering my response time and overall capability. It was evident that stress and muscular deterioration was affecting everyone regardless of gender; however, the rate of my deterioration was noticeably faster than that of male Marines and further compounded by gender-specific medical conditions. At the end of the 7-month deployment, and the construction of 18 PBs later, I had lost 17 pounds and was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome (which personally resulted in infertility, but is not a genetic trend in my family), which was brought on by the chemical and physical changes endured during deployment."
*a toll I couldn't have foreseen*
Why is there an Asian girl in the photo!
ReplyDeleteAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!
Jason: "Are Nordic people uniquely susceptible to this sort of idiocy? Not that gender theory is unique to Nordics, but that they swallow it readily"
ReplyDeleteEducability: an advantage when your teachers are teaching you things that are good for you, a handicap when they are teaching things that harm you.
Jason asks: " "Are Nordic people uniquely susceptible to this sort of idiocy?"
ReplyDeleteEuro-Protestant societies are uniquely susceptible to this sort of idiocy, and to Political Correctness totalitarianism in general, as Paul Edward Gottfried has explained in several books, above all in Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt. Gottfried demonstrates -- with abundant examples -- how P.C. is simply Calvinism turned inside out and robbed of all other-worldly aspects. P.C. takes from Calvinism the absolute division of society into the Elect (who can't possibly go wrong however depraved their actions) and the Damned (who can't possibly go right however virtuous their efforts).