Should Men Join the Military?
I have been thinking about this question lately, especially given how female-centric our society has become. In the US today, men are often treated as second-class citizens, stripped of rights afforded to a common criminal, and masculinity itself is constantly on trial. I wrote a post a while back asking readers how to “Go Galt” in a female-centered society, and some readers mentioned avoiding the military as one possible way. If Western civilization is under assault and men are seen as the cause of all that is evil here, why should those men fight for the very culture that says they are not worth as much as other citizens and devalues them as human beings because of their sex?
So my question to readers (as I would like your opinion) is: Should men join the military to protect the very government and its citizens who see them as second class citizens or are there good reasons for joining up?
There are good reasons for joining up but no more than one four year hitch, and while young. (preferably while still in one’s 20′s)
Also, I would not join the Army or Marines. Do it like me: I did a three year hitch in the Navy and got out with the GI Bill. Even now I have something called a VRAP – the VA is paying me to go to school for a year and they are direct depositing $1500/month into my checking account.
So yes, join the Coast Guard or Navy or Air Force and get the hell out after three or four years with an honorable discharge and benefits. But do not make it a career. It’ll fuck your head up.
Agreed, avoiding the education bubble is really the only reason left for any responsible young man to join – the Air Force isn’t a bad choice either.
just the opinion of another MGHOW.
I hope you two are women because if not then you represent the “New” American spirit of what can my country do for me. Both of you are cowardly douchebags. On the other hand under Obama’s reign I would advise ANYONE to NOT join the military because you will be doing much more dangerous work with much older and limited equipment. He is the kind of leader(?) that will expect more of the military and offer them even less of an incentive and credit than any president that I have ever seen. The military runs in cycles and the cycle for now is downward and it will take years before it turns upward again. For what it’s worth from an old vet, stay out!
“cowardly douchebags”
Let me guess: you watch Fox news, chew tobacco and are always on the look-out for Commies. Hey Rudy, take your “man up!” patriotism and stick it where the sun don’t shine.
No, he probably served in the Army or Marine Corps like I did. I thought his summation was spot on and accurate. I fought for assholes just like you. Here’s the motto from the last squadron I served in, HMM-266 (no VMM-266)
“First to go, Last to know, We will defend to the death you right to be missinformed, United States Marine Corps”
I wouldn’t trade the experiences I had, even though being medically retired, and having the the VA fuck up my pension so badly, that in 28 years, I’ve never been able to collect a single fucking cent.
So YOU stick that up YOUR ass and suck a lemon besides.
Do you really think this crowd will be convinced that you are above reproach for serving in the military? That you are more honorable than others? (Just by serving). That assertion makes YOU the douchebag. I met all kinds of dirtballs when I was in the service, and if you think your service exonerates you, then I will let you chew on that for awhile, fucko.
@shmiggen mghow
You don’t see that some of us might have taken offense with your above posts?
“Also, I would not join the Army or Marines. Do it like me:; But do not make it a career. It’ll fuck your head up.”
You got yours. Good for you squid.
“That you are more honorable than others? (Just by serving).”
Some of us actaully put our lives on the line. Thats not honorable in your world? Ah. Rich pegged you properly.
Sanctimonious
poltroon
I have spent time on Naval Stations, Army Posts, Marine Corps Stations, and spent 24 years in the Air Force. Believe me, the Air Force treats its people better. The VOQ at Roosevelt Roads Navel Station in PR were not even air conditioned. Enlisted people were quartered six to a room. The Air Force never has more than two to a room—like a college dorm.
Just remember, never be behind closed doors alone with a female service member. Some of them can and do say anything if they know you can’t prove it isn’t so.
This is really kind of a stupid question, since I’m in Baptist-land, but in Baptist-land you’re never, ever supposed to be alone in a room with a closed door with a member of the opposite sex. I grew up like that.
Everyone seems really upset by this reasonable, basic civility. Is it just a precaution, rather than good manners, in the rest of the world? I can’t tell. My friends in other states are orthodox jewish, so they do this, too, or conservative catholic, so they’re with their family, like, all the time. Being alone with a guy is what you do when he proposes marriage, and that’s it.
Is there some awesome something happening that ya’ll are upset about?
I’m asking honestly. I see it come up again and again as a problem, but I thought that was normal procedure, anyway.
Coming from the San Francisco Bay Area, men and women are required to treat each other exactly as equals, no matter the situation. When I say “equals”, I do not mean “equal before the Law”; I mean “socially, ethically, morally, politically, and biologically equal in all ways and manners”. It’s the “biologically” equal part that’s difficult to swallow, as women where I’m from have been raised to believe that they are literally as-strong as men, and non-recognition of this “equality” is PROOF of bigoted sexism. Women reserve the Right To Help Move The Couch, if they so desire, and if they do not desire, then Let The Men Do It. I’m not talking about being useful and productive where one can, I’m talking about a Belief that the biological differences DO NOT EXIST.
I can’t express what it’s like to live there if you’ve never experienced it directly. It’s one thing to theorize about “Female-Centric Societies” and “Second Class Status For Men”; it’s another thing to live in a society like that and experience it first hand.
It’s not merely based upon bigoted sexism. It’s mindboggling ignorant of basic Common Sense. And that ignorance is Willful Ignorance. They WANT to believe what they believe, and will ignore all data and argument that does not confirm their beliefs.
These people cannot be reached.
There was a girl like this at my middle/high school. She’d been raised the way you describe, to think she was literally as strong as the boys. She was fairly big for a girl, but when we took weights in PE she found out just how wrong she was. It was amusing to watch pre-conceived notions clash with reality.
I’m pretty sure in this context Ken is referring to an office or other workspace. The things you mention are reasonably standard procedure in other situations even outside “BaptistLand”.
Wuss.
If this was your reason for joining, you didn’t “serve”; you took advantage of.
Buzz / inspectorudy, re-think what you are saying, especially you inspectorudy, as a veteran. You should know that whether they choose to serve for 4 years or for 20, they are still putting their lives on the line to protect my life and freedom. I don’t care if they only do it to get the GI bill benefits, or if they choose a “safer” service in which to serve. The fact is that in my mind they have the choice to leave and the benefits promised because they have earned them by offering their lives, and some of them have paid the price in blood.
And I am very aware that they have earned some of those same choices and benefits for me, and by their sacrifice gave me the ability to choose not to. Do not think that when I see a person in uniform, that I don’t see someone who is risking more for my sake than I do myself. If they make the maximum use of the benefits we offer in reward, I for one will not begrudge them that one bit. Every vet or serviceman gets my respect and gratitude for what they have done for me, and the GI bill is the least we can do. We mistreat our vets enough as a country, we don’t need to disrespect them for not serving enough in our eyes.
Did my 4 in the Air Force and went to college. Same with both my boys (one Air Force, one Navy).
It’s a great way to get your schooling paid for. And a good way to kick around until you figure out what you want to do with the rest of your life.
My younger son was in the Navy as a crew chief for EA6 Prowlers. Now he’s a mechanic for a private aircraft maintenance company in Montana. When we talked about careers in high school, jet mechanic on the deck of a carrier never came up.
IMO citizens should consider a career in the military if they feel like a military life is a good match for their personality. They may want to consider US foreign policy in general with respect to current and future presidents. IMO domestic policy would not bear greatly in this decision. The US military protects the country as a whole and defines the US presence throughout the world.
I think your question is a good one but would relate better to a career that would end up directly dealing with the issues you bring up.
“Should men become police officers, FBI agents, trial prosecutors, judges or child protective services employees given the fact that they will be called upon to unfairly target men and fathers?”
Having witnessed the Carter-era presidency first hand, I would disagree that domestic policy has no influence over whether one should join the military. The Carter philosophy towards the military was that it was to be a jobs program, a dumping ground for “malcontents”, a cash cow for entitlement programs, and a scapegoat for his adminstration’s problems. The result of all of this was the demoralized “hollow army” of the late ’70s, and the resulting disaster of Desert One. People ask me why I never served. I graduated from high school in 1978. That’s why.
I was there. Spent 3 years in an all-black battalion on Ft. Bragg. Had a lovely time.
It used to be that the military was a male dominated refuge from feminist influence. With the exception of some of the tip of the spear spec ops units this is not the case any more.
I mean seriously, who wants to be in an organization where the CO knows he’s going to get burned if fraternization comes to light (notice how I didn’t say “occurs” because it’s going to occur – another problem..) and is constantly spending time and mental resources making sure it doesn’t (or at least that he is in a CYA situation). No problem when your not in combat, but a big problem if you are down range. Add to this the lowering of standards to let women in. Thankfully I’m out but at 6’5″ and 215 I don’t trust a little 5’2″ GI Jane wannabe to be able to grab my drag loop and pull me out of the shit much less shoulder carry me out.
These and other related reasons may be the biggest factor in men avoiding the military.
Hey, great points. I learned @ Parris Island, that it’s worth my life to bring you back…dead or alive…and if I go down, there will be more behind us to come and get both of us…and I’m only 5’9″! That’s the most important lesson,
“Never leave ANYONE behind.”
Whether you like the guy or not, you go get him irregardless of the danger involved, because he’d go get you. That’s something that those not exposed to the USMC, or Army SpecOps ever learn. After all, for those of you who never served, how many people would you die for trying to get them out of the line of fire?
Think about that…
The Army is pretty fem-centric in a lot of ways. I’m sure it varies according to your MOS, but there was a LOT of sensitivity training when I was there. It didn’t feel like much of an escape from the problems your talking about.
Also, the Commander in Chief makes one hell of a difference. Our ROE (rules of engagement) in Afghanistan infuriate the hell out of the guys fighting for us. Civilian casualties mattering more than US military casualties doesn’t make you feel particularly appreciated.
As a 25 year USAF veteran, I could recommend either a career or period in military. I initially sought to join in 1979 during Carter years and Iranian hostage crises. I believed I should be part of defending our country. I was commissioned in 1980 even before Reagan was elected. As an aircrew member my entire career, I was certainly part of a “boys club”, yet it was not anti-woman as eventually many women became part of our “flying club”. Spirit was more about professionalism and discipline (flying jets is very unforgiving of inattention or slack). People willing to adopt those values fit right in, as well as a willingness to fight, if necessary, for our country.
Stephen, God bless you for having volunteered during that extremely difficult period. As you might have read up-thread, I came of age at about the same time as you, and I chose not to serve because, at the time, I regarded it as a lost cause. I tell people that if I had volunteered then, my bones might still be bleaching in the sun at Desert One today.
There is no going Galt with respect to manhood. Manhood is exactly the set of demands that are never excused. Women being annoying and producing collective political idiocy is just something to be endured and can never justify abdication of that which a man should need to be.
It is more than women being “annoying.” If women and the government are using the state to crucify men, why would you join in that endeavor?
Was Seneca the Younger foolish to have served Rome, even to the point of committing suicide on her behalf at the order of Nero, the man he tutored? Perhaps Old Hoya is expressing the stoicism we should hope to see in a warrior class. Rome may fall and its ideals live on – but only if there are vessels that carry them forward.
Dr. Helen, this is one of those “can of worms” questions you pose here.
I think several of the veterans have made some decent points. In regards to military service being one of the last tolerated “boy’s clubs” and where the rather obvious differences in attitude, physical strength, and psychological predispositions actually favor men, the creeping incremental effort to diminish the mil in favor of civilian PC standards is really causing problems.
Witness the recent Petraeus/Broadwell debacle. The UCMJ has codes against adultery between officers that are evidently not going to be enforced in the case.
The military is one place where swearing an oath still means something. Unlike the state usurping the role of the church in the definition of marriage, and upsetting the apple cart of several millennia of both established social order and the biological imperative, military operations are one place that should remain a man’s prerogative.
Also unlike a politician swearing an “oath” to “obey, support, and defend” the Constitution, military personnel well understand the nature of that oath differs from that of we mere civilians in many ways both gross and sublime.
As one poster above mentioned, many times in the name of budgetary cutbacks or outright denial of hazardous exposure to our own weaponry, sometimes our veterans are exposed to “stuff” that already leave them physically impaired or worse after they separate. I know a vet who was aware of Agent Orange in Vietnam and what it would do physiologically, yet how many decades did the V.A. deny health related claims due to exposure to it?
War is a pretty rotten business all around. I do not believe that a civilized Western society should involve its women in combat related activities, let alone the “fraternization” episodes that cause institutional friction that are a major distraction to the services as another opined.
In this instance, we should let the boys have their “club.” I am the son of a military officer, and the brother of another. I do not question their reasoning for joining, though I believe that there was a strong streak of altruism and patriotism involved, not just a matter of receiving justly deserved benefits when they returned “to the world.” We should not engage in this particular discussion, for if our guardians cannot serve their time proudly and without wasting a lot of time worrying about their motivation for doing it, who will be there in uniform when the coming conflagration in the Middle East consumes us all?
Respectfully,
David
“Women being annoying and producing collective political idiocy is just something to be endured…”
It is something to be opposed, not endured. There is nothing military about supine surrender.
“…..of that which a man should need to be.”
How does going into the military and on into combat to protect women who won’t do the same for you have anything to do “that which a man should be”? What does any of that have to do with being a man? Or a real woman, for that matter?
I agree, I don’t know what to make of this. Abandon the still vastly superior western culture to middle eastern savages and the mongoloids? No.
Certainly not, Brian. But sometimes it is necessary to fall back to a defensible perimeter. Is America, in its current state, defensible? Or are the borders too porous, and the territory within too infiltrated with enemy agents? I’m mainly talking about ideals at the moment, although at some point ideals have to be mapped to physical boundaries in order to survive. The U.S. military itself is a territory with a perimeter that is known to have some holes, and it doubtless has some number of enemy agents operating within its boundaries, as all organizations do. The 64K question is: how big are those holes, and where are those agents? And where, exactly, are those borders anyway?
That’s true. There is difference, though, between a willingness to give everything to a few specific women and a willingness to give do so for all women on general principle as has been the norm. I’m not sure I can do the latter, now.
I guess the question is, will you withhold your help and let the whole thing burn… and then try to rebuild civilization?
Or will you protect what can be protected, and try to reform it from within?
It’s not a short term question, any more than the slide from inequality to equality to inequality happens over night.
The complexity is part and parcel of our complex country. Think about who voted for who recently? Vast swaths of country voted one way while the coasts often voted the other, and yet where do the lions share of military come from?
Who do the femmes vote for disproportionately?
The biggest problem is that letting it go until they actually cry for help is just too late. You can make armies from nothing, unless the barbarians are at your gates, and then much of what you protect is rubble.
For these reasons and more, I think mil service should be compulsory for 2 years after high school for everyone, NO EXCEPTIONS. So that everyone is on the same page about what all this means and what needs to be protected, and what it means to protect. THEN we will be equal… and maybe there will be a better understanding of what it takes to keep anyone safe.
Now, I know that this is probably impractical, for a country of our size… so maybe it would be better to do it at the National Guard level… but the IDEA of it is important.
The problems with your suggestion of 2 years of compulsory military experience include:
1. Some 3 million teens graduate high school each year. That’s almost twice the size of the entire active duty military today. To have them serve for 2 years, you’d need a military over 4 times its current size. We simply don’t need nor can we afford a military that large.
2. You know as well as I do that those kids with political connections won’t have to serve. It’s been that way with every draft in US history.
3. Despite the Supreme Court ruling to the contrary almost 100 years ago, compulsory service is involuntary servitude, AKA slavery.
Regardless of you concept of the Constitution, Article I, Section 8 gives Congress the power to regulate the militia and it has done so from the republic’s inception first with the Militia Act of 1792 which declared that the militia was to be composed of all free white males 18 to 45. By birth, such males were members of the militia and subject to duty. They were also the bulk of the electorate and enjoyed the franchise of the vote. They had ‘skin in the game’. The militia act was modified in 1862 to be extended to males of African decent which would be followed by the 15th Amendment extending the franchise to the same group. Today per the Constitutional authority of Congress, the Militia is defined in Title X, USC, paragraph 311 -
“(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.”
What you and others refer to as the ‘draft’ is the selective activation of the federal ‘unorganized’ militia. If you’re male between 17 and 45 you are already a member whether you know it or not.
The issue really is that 19th Amendment severed the link between the franchise and the obligation in the fundamental contract. Women get to ‘volunteer’. That’s why it’s really not about equality, but privilege, prerogative, and power. It doesn’t take a Constitutional amendment to alter the basic law from ‘all able-bodied males’ to ‘all able-bodied citizens’. Let’s make it happen.
Perhaps we need to institute the Heinlein rule (aka “Starship Troopers), you can’t vote unless you served in the military or some other “federal service.”
Now there’s a provacative thought. Personally, I’ve always thought that one of the qualifications to be President SHOULD be military service. After all, if you’ve haven’t been willing to put yourself in harm’s way, how can you, in good conscience, send our young men (& women) there on your own behalf?
NO EXCEPTIONS!
Yeah, like how about the kid is blind, or deaf, or in a wheelchair?
Or Dad’s a congressman and Mom’s in the Senate? Don’t kid yourself: the powerful ALWAYS get their kids off the hook. Fairness is for little people.
Then, per the Heinlein rule (see above) they don’t get the franchise of voting. Fair enough? You serve, then you get to vote…if not, you don’t.
Zorro, the military always has jobs that anyone can do. The tip-of-the-spear soldiers are really only a small part of the total organization. Remember the old saying: “Tyros talk about tactics. Amateurs talk about strategy. Professionals talk about logistics.”
What in hell are you blabbering about? Did you even read my comment?
D: Sorry, but I’m not with you on the compulsory part. Jacked up soldiers who volunteered held us back enough as it is. Filling units with a bunch of toddlers who don’t even want to be there would make it far worse.
“Jacked up soldiers who volunteered held us back enough as it is.”
Would you care to elaborate? On the entire sentence.
“Would you care to elaborate? On the entire sentence.”
I can’t speak specifically for Martel, but I’d bet his experience is similar to mine. I served during the Ford/Carter years (USN 1974-1980), and way too many of my fellow enlisted sailors were a drag on their units. Slackers, slugs, druggies and a fair number who bordered on outright mental retardation.
I spent 5 years enlisted, 2 as a cadet and 30 years as an officer in the Army. And mostly in combat units, with multiple tours to Iraq, and other places.(Retired in 2009.) I have 2 sons, and a daughter. I did not suggest service to them, based on what I have seen since 2001. My daughter was not the type, and while my sons did show some interest, I knew that the fields they wanted to go into they could not be successful due to the current organizational structure.
Just a matter of fact. Unless you want to go into an infantry, ranger or spec ops unit, I wouldn’t go into the military. There are just too many problems of structure, organization and priorities to be a careerist. Unless, of course, you stick to the traditional infantry derived combat units.
If men see it as a way to become greater, physically and mentally, than yes. If they see it as an opportunity for glorious self-sacrifice, than no. Our society is no longer worth saving.
Then just quit then. Just because this idiot got re-elected, so many “conservatives” are willing to throw in the towel.
The notion that this country is too far gone to save is just laughable. This country has faced far more dire challenges than this.
I have a family. I can’t give up. And this quitter attitude among conservatives really has me questioning what I’ve been doing in the conservative movement, as it doesn’t seem to stand for anything if it’s come to this.
You call it a “quitter” attitude, but it’s not. It’s the realization that the voting bloc of parasites has finally tipped the scales in their favor on a permanent basis.
Quitting? I’m not quitting. I’m taking steps to salvage what I can and prepare for the locusts when they start stripping this nation bare when Government can’t deliver goodies.
I will still serve my church. I will take care of my sons. Of course, this government will not get my sons. They will find it tougher to get resources from me. I am slowly building the resources to live independently and as freely/quietly/peacefully as possible.
In a few years, it will dawn on you that charging headlong into a wall of voters that vote to strip you of money and tangible assets and strip you of rights so they can live with a marginally easier lifestyle was pointless. What was once the American culture will become one that rewards toeing the socialist line, calls advocates for freedom and responsibility “agitators,” and pushes moral relativism so as to avoid consequences of policy and diminish God’s Truth. Can’t happen? It’s been happening for years.
Quitter? In four years, you’ll feel the same way, only you’ll have wasted four years that you could have used to better advantage. This isn’t a “doomsday” message. I don’t believe in a great collapse or anything like that, but that doesn’t mean I can’t see a return to hard, hard times. When those times hit, they will strip the producers for short term benefit of the locusts.
I advise them against it. The Army, even my beloved 82nd Airborne Division, was too PC back in the late 80′s & early 90′s. I’d hate to imagine how insane it must be now. And with the incredibly restrictive ROEs in combat zones, you’re just asking for it. There is no leadership or a clear plan of action to victory. Despite the “We Love the Troops” BS from the general public & politicians, nobody really gives a shit whether these guys make it or not. And what would you be fighting/serving for? A nation littered with looters, free-loaders, government workers, and losers. No thanks. Not to mention that the queers are now likely a “favored” class within the ranks, giving them all sorts of special treatment & special favors. Stay away young men, lest you find yourself pinned down by a barrage of Taliban machine gun fire unable to call in air support because the shooter is set-up in a mosque or some other hands-off position.
TLM for the win!
Ugh, guys. My son turns 18 on Saturday. He is weighing his options whether or not to go for ROTC when he heads to college. He was born in Germany at the tail end of my husband’s med school payback time in the Army. So many negative comments, real discouraging.
One of the comments really illustrated how big the screwup is in that while the military guys are out “fighting” jihadis in one country, our government appears to be aiding and arming these same people in overthrowing the regimes in other countries. Bah, seems like a bad idea
I hear really PC problems in the Army medical organization nowadays also. Between that and Affordable Health Care Act, I can’t even see him following his heart into becoming a doc like his Dad.
Challenging times for a young man to be coming of age.
.
Ma’am, I appreciate a lot of what you write on this blog, but this whole “men going Galt” theme is counterproductive. It won’t make the radical feminists like men more, won’t change the laws and in fact will confirm the agit-prop about men being worthless. But the bigger problem is that you’re asking men to stop being men. If you’re not willing to stand up and be counted just put on a d*** dress. I have a 14 year old son and I try to model the values I learned (and still learn) from my dad everyday. Yes, there’s way too much PC crap in the military, but he wanted to join, I’d be very proud. It is what’s coming from within that matters.
There’s a difference between men serving in order to further their own development physically or mentally, and in order to help protect and perpetuate the feminist matriarchy this nation is becoming. Men who can benefit from the former should certainly go ahead and do so, but those manginas, white knights and betas who would serve at the feet of their feminist mistresses (of both the leftist (shrill commie pinkos) and rightist (‘woman knows best’ Christians) variety) definitely should _not_.
“Should men join the military to protect the very government and its citizens who see them as second class citizens or are there good reasons for joining up?”
–
One reason to keep joining the military is that when SHTF, military training will be very valuable. And should it ever come down to it, an occupying foreign army is more likely to kill off military aged men. It’d be nice to be able to fight back.
I served (Air Force), as did my wife (Army), as did her brother (Army) and both her parents (Air Force- Retired), as well as my brother (Army). Of my five uncles three served in the Navy and two in the Army during WWII while one of them saw. My grandfather (deceased) fought in WWI.
None of us would recommend to my son or the nephews to enter any branch of the military under the present circumstances. The situation was already deteriorating when I left 27 years ago. In the present there is no compelling reason for a young man to enter service.
My father and uncles served. My brother served (Navy). Most of my cousins served. I served (Army and Air Force). My stepsons served (one did a hitch in the Army and the other is a career Navy officer). I wouldn’t recommend my grandsons serve under the current conditions.
I hail from a long line of military professionals going back to a great-grandfather, and I was very proud to serve during the Reagan administration. You bring up an excellent question that I’ve been thinking about when considering my own children and those of friends who ask my advice. The military has always served a population that was not 100% behind it – that’s just a fact of life. But we serve to protect the Constitution, nothing more.
So the question I have, if I were to consider the decision to volunteer today, is whether a Constitution that has been breached so badly over the last 75 years continues to be a worthwhile endeavor. We have been fortunate to have an all-volunteer force for many years, many of whom have been Republicans. But with the way we educate our young and treat our soldiers, I fear a drop in future volunteers.
The beauty of this new world is when danger strikes and we need soldiers, a DRAFT is party blind…
Reasons to join?
1. The GI Bill, that’s a pretty damn good deal. Especially if you’re 18 and don’t know what you want to do with your life. Join up, learn about yourself, make some friends, and get a reduced-cost education (Community College of the Air Force gives you credits that you can use to avoid those bogus indoctrination courses that pass for liberal arts/general education nowdays). Not cut out for college? There’s good manual arts training programs in the military. I’d argue Electronics Tech education is better than what you’d get at a DeVry type school.
2. You will make friends, especially if you deploy overseas. Not everyone makes a career out of the military and they do get out. There’s no better way to network than the military. And if you do get out, you have that bond with everyone else that’s served. Believe me, that helps.
3. You will be part of the 1%. 1% of the population’s served. And right now, the military is one of the last venerated parts of American society. Whether that’s guilt over Vietnam, Vietnam guys ensuring what happened to them doesn’t happen again, or the fact that most people are too undisciplined, fat, or lazy to serve is debatable. What isn’t is the fact that it looks good on a resume. True or not, Military = leadership in the minds of an employer.
Yeah, there’s a lot of suck, there’s a lot of bogus PC stuff, but what other industry doesn’t have that garbage too? I know female officers that have gotten away with sleeping with enlisted and still wound up with Bronze Stars. I’ve seen incompetence on a large scale. I’ve seen leadership not give a rat’s rear about their troops. Rewarding the undeserving, incompetence, and self-serving leadership is a part of the American condition now, not to mention promoting women (or not punishing them) for their transgressions. You’ll see it in the private sector as well as the military. Yeah, it’s complete garbage and I hate it, but I’ve been on both sides of that fence and can tell you that it’s unavoidable. The grass isn’t greener on either side.
I’m still in. I may get out soon. I might not. I’ll make up my mind when I get back from my latest OEF tour.
Hey Steve Canyon, good for you. You have said it best. And thanks for still serving! Because that’s what it is; selfless service to country, of course; but more importantly, to your fellow men and man, (yep and women too) I’m an Army Infantry guy my self, still. No man or woman, should deprive themselves of the chance to serve. You’ll love it and hate it and it’ll brake your heart and scar you deeply. If you give it your all, it’ll test you and hurt you. But I’d not trade one moment of my 35 years! It’ll make you a better man, (or woman) and a true citizen of this great nation, and the world. You will spend your days in the company of men of daring and character. Life is ever sweet in such company. Say Hi to the Dragon Lady for me.
While there is a lag time, the military culture eventually reflects not only the civilian culture, but also the political culture. Look around now, and see what has happened in both spheres, and how life is in the military now. Today, our chain of command reflects our National Command Authority. The lives of our troops are thrown away, not for any purpose related to the defense of the country or its interests; but to advance a favored political agenda. Recent events bear this out, and the status of our forces in Afghanistan scares the [deleted] out of me.
For the record, while I am not a MGMOW being happily married, kids grown, retired Peace Officer, I understand the arguments and if I was not as favored as I am now …
While growing up, all I wanted was a military career. Tried to enlist, active or reserve in all services during the Vietnam War. Got rejected every time as soon as the doctors saw an x-ray of my spine. Had a lot of my extended family in, several in SpecOps, but all are retired except for a Marine Gunnery SGT nephew who is a few years from retiring. 3 daughters, one son; none had the inclination for the military. And to be honest today I am glad of that. I would not want them in.
#13 Cautiously Pessimistic raises a good point, although I personally judge that he is overly limited as to his definition of the opposition; but if the Long Night falls, I suspect for a while there will be enough veterans to do some training.
Subotai Bahadur
Dr. Helen,
When I was 18 I joined because I was full of piss and vinegar. Now 21 years later I’m a little saltier, but the underlying motivations are still there. I’d like to give you some long explanation of GI Bill benefits (which I used to get my degree and commission) or job training, but it boils down to this… I still believe that Men are inherently different than Women when it comes to fighting and adventure. It’s in our DNA. At some point in a young mans life he will have a burning desire for the exhilaration of near death experience and travel. Look at all the extreme sports that cause micro adrenaline rushes. I wish after 21 years and multiple deployments I could say I have out grown it, but it’s still there. Besides, I want to win this clash of civilizations we are in.
I’ll give you two examples of my time as a commander at different levels.
1) I had two of my females make rape accusations on their fellow Marines after their husbands discovered their infidelity. Every one involved was a Marine with some attachment to my unit. We sent the accused to pre-trial confinement and with held all promotions. The prosecutors were able to extract confessions on the stand from both accusers that they lied in order to avoid punishment for adultery as well as divorce from their husbands. You guessed it, not one thing happened to them. They were never charged with making false accusations. I tried to withhold their next promotions based on character and was told I could not make a “non-recommendation”. This caused a minor civil war not to mention deplorable unit morale.
2) Under the recently revised Article 120 in the UCMJ, if a woman has even one drink of alcohol she is deemed incapable of consenting to sex, therefore, if she want’s to, can legally claim rape after the act. During a safety stand down to explain this rule to my Marines I said that logic dictates that if a woman cannot consent to sex after one drink then all DUI convictions, or manslaughter charges as a result of DUI, need to be overturned or never brought up because obviously alcohol renders women unaccountable for their actions. This comment did not go over well.
So yes there are double standards, and yes it is infuriating. However, I still want to win. People seem unable to grasp the actual nature of the war we are in right now.
Semper Fi
Monty,
I’m an active duty Air Force lawyer. I’ll admit that at least within my service, I’ve heard the rumor perpetuated that “one drink negates consent.” (It’s weird that this standard only applies to the woman, not the man.) Believe me, having worked in several prosecutor’s offices, I would NEVER prosecute a case under the theory that the accuser was drunk on one drink.
Obviously, *sufficient* alcohol can cause an individual to become so sloppy that they’re not able to say no. This is going to vary under the circumstances–common sense says that an inexperienced 18-year old weighing 100 pounds is going to handle liquor very differently than a 30-year old, 250 lb experienced drinker. We look at facts and circumstances, and if they’re not there, I wouldn’t press with the case.
Sorry if you’ve had a bad experience with young airmen/soldiers/saliors/marines getting falsely accused, or being educated on a lousy standard. I hope your local JAG office is working with your installation to help de-mythologize this ugly rumor. I’m all in favor of scaring young troops straight, but not through perpetuating a legal falsehood.
AF Lawyer,
I understand prosecutorial discretion, however, as I am sure you are aware it’s Battalion Commanders on up that actually bring the charges and make the decision whether or not to prosecute. I know good lawyers out there who can talk a commander off the cliff, however, if a commander is a politician then he/she will move forward regardless of advise.
My biggest complaint was the double standard of not being able to hold those two women accountable.
Monty,
I can’t disagree with you there. Best wishes in shoveling back the tide!
“What do you call a man who sacrifices for a country and a culture which is indifferent to him at best and hates him at worst?
A fool.”
-Roissy (Chateau Heartiste)
Well, it may well offer an opportunity to kill terrorists, so there’s that going for it.
Coast Guard or navy offer a great chance to serve our country and return without consequential damage. Most folks realize that we live in a PC world, so what. You can fulfill some great responsibility and service to your country by Coast Guard rescue patrols and safety inspections, and improve your job prospects afterwards. I know less about today’s navy, but most Navy folks I know seem to enjoy their service and no regrets. it really helps that the wars we are in, which involve dangerous patrols in areas where the population hates us, are not fought by the Navy or Coast Guard. The enormous percentage of PTSD among these combat veterans speaks volumes.
No. This population has decided to hand power to those who claim to be anti-war in all circumstances. Such a population doesn’t deserve defense, and no one should be offering his life to protect it.
No.
Face the fact that America is no longer the country it once was, and will in all likelihood never be again. Be nostalgic, by all means, but throw away your life for a long-gone dream? Idiocy.
What’s more, to even stay in America is being foolish, if you can leave and make a life elsewhere. To stay and then whine can complain about the unfairness of it all makes no sense. Emigrate. Seriously. That’s the ultimate ‘Going Galt’, without having to live a life of poverty or mediocrity. Go someplace where hard work is rewarded and success is admired (many places still do that, don’t think that America was the first and even less that it was the last).
Where would you recommend?
Why? Because it was often the Praetorian Guards who overthrew the worst Caesars.
Cato the Elder used to say that he who robs virtue of honor, robs youth of virtue.
Why should anyone join an organization that leaves them under assault for 7 hours without sending assistance?
Maybe, at the end of the Roman Empire, there were soldiers who still believed in the ideals of Rome
But the entity they believed in was dead and had been for some time
The Fall of Rome was rough, leading to the Dark Ages and oppression for centuries but the trees that grew from that loam grew stronger eventually. Maybe that is what we need.
The hard part is the enemies we face, China, Islam and socialism, tend to endure. They either absorb conquerors, refuse to yield to losses or just go to ground and become environmentalists when their economies collapse
I fear Orwell’s eternal boot is the future
Personally I left the ROTC because I couldn’t imagine dying for this country/civ. I told others differently, because I didn’t want to get into it.
As earlier commenters have said, there is a considerable amount of sentiment that our current society is not worth preserving. In that case, it is foolish to put one’s life on the line to protect the wider society. It MIGHT be worthwhile, if you live in a conservative state, to consider the National Guard.
I can’t see many here wanting to do much to save Cal, Ill, NY or Mass and I don’t blame them. They’re not worth saving. In those places, the sooner reality gives the libs their comeuppance, the better. Texas and Utah, on the other hand, they’re worth fighting for.
It was the Praetorian Guard who overthrew the worst Ceasars.
I served 24 years and retired as a career NCO. While I was extremely proud of my service, once I made staff rank, and started seeing how the wheels turned, I concluded the purpose of the military is to no longer win wars. Officers are forced by circumstance to never “think outside the box” despite all the rhetoric, and God help anyone who shows initiative. All the “good” officers who could lead in the field, and make sound decisions quickly and competently top out at Major, because they can’t stand politics. Promotions for Sr NCO’s are based on how well they can attach their lips to the defecating organ of a Sr. Officer, period. My personal opinion, is if we get into a major shooting match with an adversary with any type of near parity, it will not go well. After about 20 year service, I stopped pushing my troops to re-enlist, and I believe anyone thinking about enlisting today should do a major risk/reward analysis.
-Burger
I know someone who is leaving the Army for this very reason. A country that does not value his service, with election fraud on a massive scale, and a fraudulant CIC is not worth defending. And I have to agree.
It’s all happened before. Here is the first and last stanzas of Kipling’s Tommy:
I went into a public-’ouse to get a pint o’ beer,
The publican ‘e up an’ sez, “We serve no red-coats here.”
The girls be’ind the bar they laughed an’ giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an’ to myself sez I:
O it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Tommy, go away”;
But it’s “Thank you, Mister Atkins”, when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it’s “Thank you, Mister Atkins”, when the band begins to play.
You talk o’ better food for us, an’ schools, an’ fires, an’ all:
We’ll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don’t mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow’s Uniform is not the soldier-man’s disgrace.
For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Chuck him out, the brute!”
But it’s “Saviour of ‘is country” when the guns begin to shoot;
An’ it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ anything you please;
An’ Tommy ain’t a bloomin’ fool — you bet that Tommy sees!
Like the man says…read the whole thing.
Son’s in Army now, and planning to leave soon as possible. Two big reasons:
The ROE they’re ‘fighting’ under are insane. Among other things, they were told that if FIRED ON, if they returned fire without first getting permission from an officer they could(strongly hinted WOULD) be court-martialed.
Second, directly connected with the above and to current events, he doesn’t want to wind up stuck somewhere in the anal region of the world with the barbarians about to overrun them, and find out that they won’t get the support they need because some politicians- in and out of uniform- decide that it would be ‘politically troublesome’ to give that support.
Add that to the other PC idiocies, and that the administration and most of their supporters look on troops as expendables…
One word: Benghazi.
And that was an ambassador and SEALs, what makes anyone think that any concern will be shown for the lives of a bunch of dime-a-dozen grunts who only plan to be in for a few years anyway?
It’s much cheaper (financially and politically) to shed crocodile tears on coffins and similar theater than to actually support the cannon fodder.
I say ‘YES’, with caveats.
Only join Infantry, Ranger, SpecOps, Marine combat specialties, etc. Combat Medic would also be a good role. You want the toughest, nastiest training end experience you can get. but, as stated above several times, don’t make a career of it.
Here’s my reasoning:
1) There is no substitute for the experience of being under fire and learning that you can continue to think and perform efficiently under those conditions.
2) Seeing the conditions that most of the world lives under makes you realize that for all of it’s faults, what we have here is well worth protecting.
3) If we ARE headed for a new Dark Age, then your skills will be critical to salvaging the best of America, as well as your family and community.
4) The last remaining bastion that values male qualities (courage, honesty, sacrifice, duty, etc.) are our combat units. There is a real sense of pride and accomplishment to having the respect of your peers in such groups.
Sure, you could be killed. The reality is that the chances are pretty small. But the skills and experiences will be invaluable in a society of entitlement sheep. Leadership starts in small groups. People under stress look for people with confidence and ability. Our combat veterans have always been influential far beyond their numbers. I expect that trend to get even stronger in the coming years. And combat veterans are aware of the true cost of Liberty, and willing to pay that price.
Men behaving like women doesn’t strengthen the brand; it weakens it. Go be apologetically men and women/society will come around.
Stop being women and worrying about what everyone thinks all the time. Do whats right and F’em if they can’t handle it.
I spent 26 years as a Marine. The main reason was to get away from civilians.
“The main reason was to get away from civilians.”
Summer of 90′, I was pulling CQ one night when one of my troops came back to the unit in Germany and I asked him how his leave went. His only reply was, “civilians are f*cking crazy” as he walked by.
He was right.
Guess I should consider myself lucky that all I had to worry about during my career was being a loud, whiney speed bump in the Fulda Gap.
Helen, I served 20 yrs in the USAF as an officer and a pilot, retiring in 2008. I entered through OTS after working as an engineer for several years. My answer is yes. Regardless of the female bias of our country and all the PC crap, it made me a far better man than I would have been if I’d remained a civilian. Men should do it for their own development, if not for love of country.
I did three years in the Army, from 79 to 82, and served with a lot of guys who were either originally drafted or had been court ordered to serve, which was either serve or go to jail. I was in an all male MOS, Chapparal/Redeye Missle Crewman and the only females we saw during basic and AIT were the lunch ladies. It was a great start for many of us. We learned discipline and responsibility at a young age. Even in 79 the PC police were at work. The Drill Sargents had to stop calling us “trainees” and start calling us “soldiers” and we could tell they weren’t happy about it.
My son is currently in the Army as a Parachute Rigger or “Red Hat” and is deployed to Afghanastan. He told me about the “survey” they took on gays serving in the military. Him or none of his friends ever saw a survey. The decision was already made before they went public. He joined because there was absolutely no work where we are at and wanted the educational benefits. It is disheartening to serve a country that elects a Commander in Chief who has cut their budget and is making the military a testing ground for his poltical agenda. With the endless wars our troops are facing deployment burn out, some having deployed eight or more times.
Men will be men and the times can’t change that much. There is adventure in the service, which fills a certain void in a lot of guys, one they wouldn’t find elsewhere. I tought my son that he is who he believes himself to be and the opinion of others is just that, an opinion. They don’t have to live his life. He has his own standards, as do most of his friends and a political agenda won’t do much to alter them.
So, let me get this straight. We are treated like second hand citizens with less than equal rights. And then you’re going to give us guns, ammo & training? How well will that work?
If someone wants to enlist, male or female, more power to them. That is their right and privilege. However, if enough men decide it’s not in their best interest to sign up, how long do you think it would take before the draft is reinstated? In my opinion, the greatest injustice and most hypocritical thing on the part of so-called “feminists”, is the fact that ONLY males who reach the age of 18 MUST register with the Selective Service! While I don’t believe either men or women should be subject to potential conscription, it is absolutely unfair and discriminatory that women are not required to register with the draft board as well! If feminists truly believed all of their “equality” BS, they would be DEMANDING that this policy be implemented immediately.
“Should men join the military to protect the very government and its citizens who see them as second class citizens or are there good reasons for joining up?”
No. My experieces align with some of the other posters, but the PC sop was leaking in even when I was in the Army (87-92′). Keep the females in support units, but keep them out of combat arms. They are a liability and will get men killed. That doesn’t matter though. The all-knowing people DC, most who never served, want another instituion to perform social experiments, not win wars. After thought, the ulitimate objective is perhaps simply weakening the US miltary over all.
It seems perfectly clear to me:
Men should join the military in order to be adequately trained in that area.
Then they should join law enforcement in order to be adequately trained in that area.
Then they should lead their lives as they see fit, while periodically reading-up and spending range-time to keep in fighting trim. But career military — a poorly-compensated sacrifice for a society which doesn’t appreciate your ideals and tries to undermine the military ethic with the intellectual dishonesty of sensitivity training — should be pretty rare.
But the skills are important. After all, in the coming dysfunction, you are responsible for defending yourself and your loved ones. A man should know how to do that, just as he ought to know how to change a flat, check (change?) the oil, operate a fire extinguisher, swim, perform a water rescue, perform CPR…the usual basic emergency-response skills of a competent adult.
Children especially should grow up in a household where they have the experience and security of a dad who is competent and prepared when the feces hits the fan. Little girls should have a dad who makes them feel secure. Little boys should have a dad who motivates them to emulate his competence, self-discipline, and basic goodness.
And, though we hope it won’t, there may (possibly) come a time when you must overthrow a Constitution-defying government, who will likely, in part, be supported by whatever its military is then. That means they’d have all the big guns, making this nigh-on-impossible for an untrained and unarmed people, and very difficult for a trained and armed people if they are too few.
However, if we can amplify in our ranks the culture of manliness such that at least one in ten of us is trained and practiced and competent and reasonably well-armed for defense against criminals, then we stand a very good chance not only of defeating an elected dictator, but of preemptively frightening him away from the worst of his mischief.
Before anyone gets the wrong idea: I have zero — I repeat, ZERO — fantasies of any of this applying to our current executive leadership. Despite their rank disregard for the Constitution relative to our historical norms, we must admit that they are no Saddam Hussein, not even George III.
So don’t go there.
The worst that can be said of the current crowd is that they plan on harshly financially penalizing Catholics, traditionalist Evangelicals, and certain groups of Orthodox and Conservative Jews who morally oppose artificial contraceptives and/or abortifacient drugs and whose ethical systems therefore forbid them to include such drugs and services in compensation packages for employees.
People with these religious/ethical beliefs, for all practical intents and purposes, have been barred from owning or operating businesses or charitable organizations with more than 49 employees apiece. That’s QUITE BAD, my friends. But there is still some hope for relief at the Supreme Court level. This is NOT the time for a shooting war — not even over something as central as religious liberty.
So nobody get any harebrained damn fool ideas from what I’ve just said. A man needs to know how to keep his head and not embarrass himself, too.
It’s not just how society treats men. Look at the corrosive atmosphere within the military.
A man signing up for the military is handing his life over to feckless politicians, PC thugs ready to ruin a career, and military wives that plot to strip him of his children and money after ten years.
Are there good people/wives? Absolutely. Why put all on the line, especially when the civilian culture can leverage your experiences against you?
Who benefits? Does the young man, considering the culture and political landscape has shifted against him?
The game is rigged against men in the modern military. I speak as a twelve year veteran who has seen too many men used and thrown away.
Could go one beyond the Heinlein Starship Troopers route.
.
Everyone in the military is a volunteer.
But only honorably-discharged or medically-discharged military vets (not active duty) get to vote.
.
Or, if that’s too picky, only vets get to vote in the national election (House/Senate/President).
.
Non-vets can vote for local and state candidates, but only those who put skin in the game can vote at the national level.
Then I don’t care about gender anymore.
I would say there are still many good reasons to join the military. What I now argue is that a sense of duty, patriotism, love of country, and/or a desire to serve are not good reasons to join. Men should join the military only if they believe that the advantages and benefits (and there are many, both open and hidden) they will personally accrue outweigh the risks and costs (and there are many, both open and hidden).
I spent 5 years as an Army officer, including a tour in Iraq. I don’t regret it, but I do consider my noble intentions in undertaking this service to have been naive now that I have a greater understanding of our cultural milieu.
If the only way to stop the takers and looters is to let it burn, then let it burn.
I have a 17 year old son, who wants and engineering education. He considered pursuing the Air Force academy, but I dissuaded him, for many of the reasons mentioned hear. This thread brings to mind Kipling:
The blame of those you better,
The hate of those you guard
JAZ
My youngest was (still is a reservist)active Army from 2005 as an Infantryman. Carried a SAW in Afghanistan “somewhere south of Kandahar” for a year, did a turn in Kosovo. When he was coming up to re-up to remain active I discouraged him. I saw the 2008 handwriting on the wall and told him as an Infantryman he’d be in some sh*thole with an empty weapon and a JAG on his shoulder. Hate to have been so right!
Frankly, in today’s World, I wouldn’t fight or encourage anyone else to for anything other than my immediate family, associates, and possessions. The last election proved that we are no longer a free people and I simply have no interest in doing anything that I can avoid for the moochers and looters.
Well, if you have a legacy you can milk, why not? Recently in one of my classes there was a high school senior who’s daddy was a retired Major. He had interviews with all the Service Academies. I’m confident that without his connection he wouldn’t have gotten close to an Academy. He did end up with an ROTC scholarship. I would be surprised if he lasts 4 years in college. So if you’re part of the in club, why not?
People love to allege that there is some “old boys network” or “club” that is the key to getting prized admissions or job opportunities and there is some of that, especially with graduates of “prestige” schools, but the reality is that what you know is more important than who you know. A military parent is going to know who the kid should go see and get to know, know what special spells and incantations should be written into the interest letters and applications. I could get any one of my kids a job with the State government without making a call or using myself as a reference, and they don’t have our last name, simply because I know how to work the application system and I know what application reviewers are looking for when they screen. The most important thing in getting into something or getting a job is knowing what they’re looking for and knowing how to demonstrate to them that you have it. But I won’t deny that knowing somebody helps.
Legacies at service academies are a thing of the past, for a long time now. Only way mommy or daddy gets you in is if they were MoH recipients. A holdover belief that heroism resides in genes.
But, if one of your parents was a grad, odds are you grew up in a middle to upper income stable household. Which increases the odds that you got a good education, and have decent SAT scores. Plus, a knowledge of what the service academies are and feel an obligation to serve, obtained from the people around you. (I live in a middle of nowhere rural area and am amazed sometimes at things I know and take for granted that others around me don’t.) With all that, you’ve got a better shot at getting in should you apply. Helps to be an Eagle Scout (or Gold Star for girls), on an athletic team for all 4 years of HS, even if you weren’t a star. I recommend track and cross country for young adults- you don’t get cut as long as you show up for practices and meets.
I was the first family member to attend a service academy. Didn’t make it all the way through. My oldest is a graduate. Of the other one. Family connections did not get him in. Eagle Scout? Check. Sports? Check. Good grades? Check.
I served for six years as an enlisted man from 1985 – 1991 in the Navy. Like some of your other commenters have mentioned, the PC crap was already getting bad then. I know it’s much worse now. With that said, I would advise a young man to join the Navy, Air Force or Coast Guard for a one-time enlistment. You learn about yourself, about discipline and attention to detail, and about camaraderie not to mention acquiring useful technical skills and benefits. The military still has the best technical schools in the country and the training is invaluable. Since leaving the Navy, I’ve had a good career and have made a good living and am now making a comfortable six figure income. It’s those skills, both technical and non-technical that I learned while serving that are most responsible for my success.
Well, for a variety of reasons the military isn’t having any difficulty finding volunteers, even with the multitude of problems all of the branches are facing. As the father of a 2nd LT Army Ranger, while attending his celebration after Ranger School with his newly tabbed friends I was amazed at the level of professionalism and highly functioning group of young men who attended that celebration. I asked my son why he left his well paying job at a research/toxicology laboratory to pursue the course he has chosen. He explained to me that his college coach drummed into them to become part of something larger than themselves. How could I question that? I’m totally satisfied as a parent you raise them as best you can, give them the tools and education they need and let them follow their path. The 1% that serve in the military today are no different from the men at Valley Forge, Gettsburg, Iwo Jima or Khe Sanh, they serve because they want to!
Yes, of course men should join up, especially now that society doubts their worth. Military service in the US has always been about protecting the rights of those who don’t understand what it takes to protect their rights. It has always been about living an example that quietly undermines the extremes of domestic society. New generations have always had enough young men who saw the silent sacrifice of those who went before, and learned from it more than they would ever learn at a teach-in. We have to continue to do serve, so that some among our children and grandchildren will see our example and emulate it, and not fall into the groupthink of those they protect.
One of my great-uncles fought in the last battle of the Civil War. My grandfather served in WWI. My father served in the Korean War. My brother served on a nuclear submarine in the 80s. His sub actually did the recon for the bombing on Ghadafhi’s house.
I wanted to serve, but my parents forced me to go to college. I was the first male in my family to graduate, and my ancestors immigrated to these United States in 1844.
Should men join the military? Yes, but there are other ways to serve your country. You could become a teacher, as I did. Or you could start a business and hire people, as my mother did.
One thing I know about the military though, and this comes straight from my brother’s mouth. He said that the entire time he was in the Navy, he never met a female sailor who wouldn’t give a BJ for $5.
Military culture is no different from American culture in general. The percentage of criminals and prostitutes is the same.
Should men join the military? Yeah, if they want valuable training. There are lots of businesses who hire veterans on sight.
But anyone who thinks that military culture is different from American culture is insane. The girls are the same, they get special priveleges, and they don’t think twice about performing sex for money.
Join the military to serve your country, learn valuable skills, but don’t think it’s any different from the rest of America. The girls are all the same; they just want to have fun. And it will cost you. That’s a fact.
My father thought I should join- I was the oldest. I’m female. He thought my brother should stay home- he was a baby.
I’m a housewife, now. He’s a highly respected oil-field worker on a giant rig in the Gulf. Social engineering really only goes so far.
Researching, I found the worst sorts of “dark erotica”- what to read when 50 Shades gets dull. The writers and biggest fans were military women. I asked a lit-professor on the front-lines- she teaches freshman comp each year- she said her military females were generally very messed-up from their experience, while the guys were invigorated and sensible.
I really do not see how women in the military keeps being a great idea for the next fifty years. Paula Broadwell isn’t an anomaly, particularly. I think someone is going to notice that these are not good human beings that the rest of of wish to be near.
Not to dispute your own direct experiences with female ex-military, but I’m not sure a Lit professor is the best judge.
I did 6 years before getting out and heading to school full-time at a major, non-Ivy League private university. Being highly motivated — and in my experience that IS one of the distinguishing factors for many (tho not all) vets, I did very well. Got to know many professors.
Had one say “You’re ex-military ?!? But you’re so SMART ?!?!”
She did not mean it to be insulting.
But many college professors at major universities had considerable preconceptions about the military. Many still do. I think it may color their thinking. My spouse — who has taught at a major university as well at 2-year colleges — agrees that it’s by no means uncommon in the 4-year schools. Says it’s not common on the 2-year campuses, however.
I’ve worked with a half-dozen female vets. Not one that I’d call seriously messed up. Not sure what that Lit professor thought was messed up about them. Did the professor mean cursing like a sailor (pardon the expression) ? Being very matter-of-fact about life and death ? Even “earthy ?” Well, seeing combat, or the aftermath of combat, gives one a thick skin. Possibly, the professor saw that as “sensible” when voiced by a man, but disconcerting when voiced by a female.
When we did humanitarian relief after an earthquake years ago, I met a few civilian females who were, ahem, very “earthy.” It seemed to go with the territory.
Food for thought ?
My mom is a veteran. Her mother, and aunt and other aunt, and so on and so forth, were military veterans. Officers back through the founding of the country. DAR, and CSA.
Dad is a veteran. He started enlisted, and moved up. Mom was marrying down. What’s bizarre is that they did the same thing to her family- she was the oldest, so she joined, while her “baby” brother stayed home. He’s in the police, so I’m thinking maybe he ought to have gone to soldier.
Probably the most rebellious thing I’ve done in my life is not join the military, get married, stay faithful, join a mainline Protestant church, and cook dinner, make lunch for the family, all the normal, stereotypical housewife stuff. I’ve managed to offend every last single member of my family by doing this. I can feel like I’m smoking a cigarette at the back of the high school just by going up for communion, and kneeling at the altar.
The prof is my friend- so she’s more conservative than I am. She was commenting on PTSD and the really outsize attractions to BDSM, and other quite brutal sexual working out that her students wrote about. I was asking her about the BDSM fan-clubs for really appallingly depraved books- the writers all seemed to be combat vet women, and the readers were mostly military women, as well. I only know one or two guys into that stuff, and they are mostly laughable little twerps. That so many women could rock that? all military? I mean, harlequin is big enough to specialize- cowboy, ranch owner, military guy on leave, historical by period…
I’m not slagging on all of them. The infant nurse at the hospital that coached me through three c-sections is proof enough that there are awesome female military-types. I’m just noticing that military men say they work with “females” but date “girls” and “women.”
My best friend married a pilot. She was a military wife,very femme. She didn’t have to worry about other wives, but other military ‘females’ really didn’t seem to have a clue that a wedding vow meant something. She’s still upset about it, even though her husband has been out of the military for 15 years. Those years in the military were Peyton Place, apparently. I don’t know. She has good taste, discretion, and class.
“Should men join the military to protect the very government and its citizens who see them as second class citizens or are there good reasons for joining up?”
Helen, I put my hand up Sept 12, 2002 – would have been the 11th had the station been open that day. I did not sign up to protect the government or the citizenry at large, though I do protect them by doing my job.
I signed up for one simple reason: I never want anyone I love to have the make a choice where jumping from a 110-story building is the better option.
I served 3 years in USMC(71-74). I had graduated from college, so the GI Bill was never used for educational benefits. At that time, I thought highly of my country; there were things that needed work, but overall I believed in America. Today, as I observe the current political environment, I would never recommend yea/nay on joining the military, but I’d probably would not join. I guess I don’t believe in America like I did in 1971.
My son is in the Marines, an organization where men and women are still kept apart during boot camp, for reasons that the other services seem to want to overlook (You cant enforce the discipline to act properly until you’ve been conditioned to act properly in the first place).
My first bit of advice to the other services is to return to separate boot camps for men and women. The recent scandal at Air Force basic training is proof of that. Get your recruits in order before you put them into difficult situations and there are few more difficult situations than being a teenage male in close proximity with a female.
My second bit of advice is to increase the time in boot camp from 8 weeks to 12 weeks and increase their physical standards.
I’d think it will work, but I’ve recently read Fallen Angels. It will STILL be Men’s fault.
It has less to do with how men are treated, and more to the specific core question of “Is this country worth dying for”.
Hmmm…. not an easy answer any longer. How men are treated is one of the factors, but how the productive are treated (poorly) seems just as pertinent.
My answer now.. hell no. Not worth dying for. Any sacrifice made abroad will be squandered at home.
My opinion is thus; we’ve already lost. We are in the cultural minority in this nation. Our youth are not being taught our history or our culture. The Enemy has worked vigorously for decades in our schools teaching people to believe their narrative as Truth. We have done nothing to oppose them directly. We have not treated them as enemies, but rather as “those crazy liberals”. Those crazy liberals have been teaching our children to believe what they believe for generations, and their narrative is now the only truth the majority of the population knows.
We’ve already lost.
The Left is marching through the institution of the military, first using women, now using gays, as human shields.
So, my father was a Marine, but I cannot now imagine encouraging my sons to join the Marines.
I spent 21 years enlisted active in the Navy. My eldest is currently an Arny officer, West Point grad, on active duty. A comment first on what Monty said.
His examples sound like things I said, or my son has said or done. While I served, political correctness was growing, and it is it full bloom in the Navy. My son is at the point of the spear, so to speak, in the sandbox again. His views would keep him from promotion, but, and this is a very big BUT, the Army is at war. Effective combat leaders tend not to be from the PC crowd, and combat has a way of weeding out the weak.
A far as ROEs go, my son interprets them his way, and his senior enlisted go along with it. Schoolyard rules- you can’t start a fight, but you can finish it. And it’s better to kill then be killed. After action reports can always reflect that in place ROEs were followed to the letter. The important thing is stay alive- he doesn’t want to write next of kin letters.
When I talk to young people thinking about going ROTC or to academies, I ask a series of questions.
1. Two of your men are injured and stuck in place. An evac helicopter in 15 minutes away, and a plane is overhead keeping watch. 4 enemy are approaching your men and are 5 minutes away. What do you order the watcher to do?
Everyone gets it right. Order the plane to fire on the enemy.
2. Same scenario. A platoon of 20. 99% answer the same.
3. Same scenario. Local tribal leader has inflamed the locals. A mob of men, women, and children, including babes in arms, is approaching your men.
The only correct answer- fire on them. And a lot of people break down on this. If you are leading men in combat, your loyalty is to them, not the enemy, not enemy soldiers, not enemy civilians, or enemy babies. The equation is- the life of ONE of your men is worth more then an infinite number of enemy. Period. Combat is a black and white situation- there are no shades of grey.
America is certainly not worth dying for. It never was. It certainly isn’t anymore.
There are still lots of good reasons to join.
I meet a lot of successful rich men who, after a few drinks, will tell me they wish they had joined the military, or they almost joined the military, or they could have joined the military.
Women like military men. Good-time party girls like military men. The sort of women who make good wives like military men. Be careful not to get the two types confused! With a little common sense, and the ability to think with the big head, not the little head, and you will come out well!
Military folks look out for each other. Vets look out for each other. There is an invisible network out there, formed of elites, and unapologetically elitist, that will watch your back.
You will have the sort of miserable experiences that allow you to take the rest of life in perspective. Years after you get out, you will wake up in the middle of the night so happy to be in a soft warm bed, with hours to go before you have to get up!
You will have the sort of wonderful experiences that you will talk about time and time again. The sort of things that require millions of dollars of equipment, thousands of dollars of fuel and ammunition, hundreds of square miles of land, and a bunch of trustworthy, hardcore buddies.
This whole MGTOW, I sort of understand, but like marriage, manhood is an adventure. Yeah, you might end up paying alimony and child support to some slattern with kids you didn’t even sire. You could also end up with your guts spilling into the dust in some godforsaken hell-hole. But play it too safe and you may die old and bitter with a catalog of regrets and shoulda-dones in a lazy-boy in front of the TV.
You pay your money and you take your chances.
And when it comes down to it, a lot of these fears are overwrought or imaginary. Yep, we all know some guy that got burnt by some woman who took him for everything, or got fired due to some Phony Baloney HR harassment charge. But if you let your fears ruin your potential, that is way worse.
Because the guy paying alimony, he is still alive. Maybe he even is in a happy marriage now. And the guy that got fired? He probably found another job, and maybe it is a better job.
But you with your fears? You missed out on a thousand opportunities, and are none the wiser or richer. And what is worse, you don’t even realize what you have lost.
Well said. Because of the US Navy I saw the world and had a great time. And it got me a civilian job. In my experience, act professionally, don’t try and find love where you work and you’ll be OK.
Sorry, don’t mean to intrude … but are both of you utter morons?
Just curious.
Spent 6 years in the AF during the Vietnam quagmire as a SP (combat arms) and have spent 35 as LE. I have two grown sons who both at one point or another have asked if they should follow my career path. After long consideration I have told them NO. The society and especially the government are no longer worth the risk to self and honor, as the government has none, honor that is.
On principle, the purpose of the military is to serve to “support and defend the Constitution, against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same…”.
The reason for the Constitution is that it prevents the federal government from abusing the (natural born, God-given) rights of private citizens, and the states. That politicians and bureaucrats, male and female, abuse the Constitution in service to a female-oriented agenda that oppresses men is all the more reason to defend the Constitution.
A nation without people willing to defend its Constitution will not sustain itself, as it devolves into a nation of men, not of laws.
Would I recommend men to serve? Damn right I will!! No job is perfect, and many are dangerous. But without strong and able defenders of the Constitution, we are all doomed.
I served 21 years in the Army, and retired in 2009. I would still recommend military service for males (and most females, too). I’d encourage a 4-year hitch, but think long and hard before staying in longer, the Service is a harsh and demanding mistress. That being said, I had tremendous fulfillment, opportunies, and enjoyment.
Outside of the earned benefits like the GI Bill, there are a lot of intangibles, some form a veteran’s character, others refine that innate character brought with the recruit into service.
The recruit will meet people you’d never meet otherwise, be forced to work together, that usually results in forming teams that are cohesive during the mission, even if they don’t “like” each other. As a veteran, this benefits society as a whole. A veteran knows that as bad as things appear, he’s probably been through worse, and survived, this is immeasurably helpful to the individual and his friends and family.
Despite all the PC crap that has built up over my two decades of service, the military is still a place where a man can be a mand, an individual, and in many ways be freer than a civilian because he knows what he’s been granted as an inalienable right, knows what he protects, and knows what real restrctions, rather than “feeling oppressed” are, so he has the discernment to know what to complain about, and ultimately what to fight for.
Men might be ill-served in present society, but only about 1% of the population serves in uniform in any case. IT gives a man something to hang his pride on, and that’s harder to find in the civilian sector.
This is typical of the overwrought, self-pitying handwringing I see from so-called “conservatives” these days.
Second-class citizens? Men? Really? Please.
Life is more complicated than that. Maybe in the media created world men are second-class citizens, but not in real life. Not in this country or in any other.
We have an atrocious president, so what? This country has been through hard times before and we got through them, because of American men (and women) who did not give up. Throwing yourself on the floor and crying into the carpet is not a solution.
That’s not what we’re doing.
It’s all yours.
Thank you for your concern, troll.
I did it for me – USMC 71-77. It was worth it for me, but you might not be so lucky. Actually, nobody will ever be that lucky, but you have to make your own choices.
You bet your life. No guarantees, no do-overs.
There is something liberating about knowing you’ve done more than most ever will.
I would never serve for the following reasons:
We (meaning the terribly few of us who are informed) know we wouldn’t be serving the Constitution or the people. I’m not going to be putting my life on the line for foreign bankers, the federal reserve, and military contractors. I’m not going to fight for a government that tells local police depts that the founding fathers and our current veterans are terrorists.
Every war we’ve been involved in in the past 100 years was unnecessary or involved provocation on our part. Our War on Terror is phony baloney. We enable Islamism and dictators, directly and indirectly, and then wonder why we’re having these issues. Syria is a prime example. We put Al Qaeda there (on record) and now want an invasion to get rid of them.
As for compulsory military service, hell no. Not unless WE’RE being invaded.
The only compulsory anything should be mandatory gun training for citizens, handled by the states.
I guess it all depends on which American male you are. I would point out those four “bumps in the road” that recently died in Benghazi were white male civilian employees of the state, while their leadership was an incompetent black male (the president) and white female (Sec. Of State). The Black Caucus (a systemic racist institution by definition) just advised Americans that a white male senator is presumed racist and sexist for being critical of the black UN ambassador’s story kissing off those deaths to an allegedly racist video. OK…so if you’re a white male why join up to live twenty-four-seven with people you normally wouldn’t give the time of day to while being obligated to do most of the dying while the women get to skate, and getting equal pay? Since the German citizens are not going to take on the joint liability for all of those Greek, Spanish, French and Italian debts, I fail to see why American white males should volunteer to do all the killing and dying while being presumed to be racist; and then be required to pay the taxes for the foreign aid that ends up buying the bullets and weapons for the enemy. Let the women and the senator’s daughters do it.
I did 20 years in the army. In retrospect I believe experience shows that young men now should stay home and fight the domestic enemies of this country.
Iraq veteran here. Will never serve this country in any capacity again. I’m not some disgruntled vet either, voted for Romney, run a business, far more functional than 99.9 percent of Americans. I simply will not lift a finger to protect this country until the feminists and degenerates and parasites are put back in their place, and not running the show. Chivalry is dead, it died when feminism arrived.
After 29 years in the USN I cannot advocate anyone spending more than one hitch in the military. For the Navy side google CDR Salamander and read his blog. Sometimes it has to be seen to be believed.
The answer is a disheartening, “no” for men to serve a system that is utterly against them. It is disheartening because military service provides a man with quite possibly the fullest expression of masculinity available today. However, continuing to support a system that seeks to destroy you is not an option.
The military is one big gravy train.
We have 3 militaries now : one active and two retired.
The cost in benefits for the retired exceeds the payroll for active duty personnel.
We need to slash the military to the bone, reinstate the draft, and pay enlistees $21 per month.
Sooner or later the Chinese are going to stop loaning us money for our military and when we have a conflict with them, they will simply tell us to hand over our equipment per the terms of the loan agreement.
If it were still around I’d enlist in the Confederate States Army.
Men who fight.
Not any more. This country is no longer worth it.
I had a friend who died in Vietnam. As far as I am concerned he died for nothing.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/25/few-female-marines-step-forward-for-infantry/print/#ixzz2DK8Arpyx
Related to the topic. Comments on this are, well, generally not PC.