If it weren't for men being feminized and weakened to the point of letting a (not the only) female perspective dominate their rationality, then the feminist movement would have gotten nowhere. The feminist movement has been "successful" because women have two things men want: wombs and vaginas. If it weren't for these two things, and women were instead much less important to men, then one doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to see that the real strengths of women are the things that men want. Hence, the prostitution phenomenon. Hate it, despise it, hate us, despise us, but there is no way we are wrong about this. Sure,there are some men who profess that they sided with women due to other more "worthy" reasons, but even they are sitting on the sidelines witnessing the fact that feminists would have gotten nowhere if they didn't have vaginas and wombs. Too bad, the truth prevails, always will.

Military Women

Excellent question:

Why is it that women are supposedly as capable as men, yet most always need entrance, promotion standards, and ongoing regulations lowered so that there can be more women in the military, police, fire departments and other soldiering entities?

For example, as military entrance minimum weight regulation requires, some 90 lb females need to eat a few pounds of bananas moments before officially weighing in, in order to weigh enough to meet their already lowered weight standards. Now ask yourself this: How is a 95 lb female body going to hoist a 250 lb injured man over her shoulders and zig-zag run to safety while under enemy fire?

If your answer is “we don’t have wars like that anymore”,  you are delusional.

Let’s just hope it doesn’t come to things like this, for if it does, we’ll lose.

Allowing women in the military may have placated feminists’ short-sighted thirst for experimenting with society and with our WAR MACHINE, but in doing so, we weakened ourselves overall. Men, out there:  Still feel like great big men for siding with feminists? You should feel about 2 inches tall right now.

You know, that is all we really needed to say on this page.  The thought processes happening in objective people’s minds will answer those questions billions of times over. But, of course MOTIVATEMEN has more to say, so read on….

And no, we do not think the advantages of males over women are purely anatomical, muscular, and various “physicalities”.  That is not why MOTIVATEMEN mentions physical differences as substantiations. But it does beg other questions:

The question is not about men using their physical advantages “against” women, but it is why do feminists get furious when we state these obvious truths? Aren’t they telling on themselves when they get so mad at men’s right to defend our physical strengths (that women do not normally and naturally have)? Aren’t males even allowed to claim a victory—-just like the women would if the physical strength were theirs? Now the feminists are claiming nature’s “decision” to make males physically stronger is pre-conspiring men’s fault in which men are to throw that valid attribute in the trash (apologize) —-else take advantage of “male privilege” (some of the new bywords of the radical feminists….

We’ve warned you, feminists, just like a bunch of women, will never be satisfied and will never stop.  So men, how long are you going to put up with this—-forever?

It is very subjective for feminists to not want men to bring up the physical strength differences between men and women….as if men must let women win…. “win” on this issue too (or else “hate women”).

In a proper mix for equality, both strengths and weakness should be acknowledged in which both genders should come to a rational medium or compromise based on all such criteria—-not pretend they do not exist so one side (the weaker) can “win”.  But, not surprisingly, feminists don’t want men to mention any positive things males have to offer society (including for women…. like lifting heavy things for them at work while the women get paid the same).  Men can’t tell the truth. If they do, they “hate” women.

Why can’t men tell the truth?  Why can’t they make up their own rules as to how to handle over-the-top feminism?  Well, they can—-if they’ll just do it.

________________________________________________________

So….women can endure higher altitudes for longer periods of time compared to men? ( a supposedly “truth” touted as a support (esteem-building) fantasy for females’ less physical/muscular capacities in military “fight”  situations).

But now ask yourselves…. How many battles are fought solely on mountain peaks? And also ask yourself why don’t we let all the military females gather on the mountaintops of Tora Bora and fight the Taliban and Al  Queda, even fight Bin Laden himself? That advantage of theirs is supposed to be so balancingly advantageous….then why not let it manifest?

The answer:    Even if men can’t endure thinner air for as long (besides, men can breathe just fine if they train/acclimate at higher altitudes), they’ll still kick those silly women butts.  The point is….while a weakened and wimpy peacetime military will yield to women so they can feel included, and to get to do what men do, war is NOT for women—-like it or not.

However, under the tenets of TRUE EQUALITY, shouldn’t just as many women be vaporized, blown to bits, maimed, burned, shell-shocked, and tortured?

______________________________________________________

Several state’s state trooper policies were that anyone wanting to be a trooper must be at least 6 feet tall.  Of course, feminists, able to think only of themselves, saw this as discrimination against women.  So they fought to overturn such rules.  But the purpose of such exclusionary rules (even excluding shorter men) was to provide the forces with beings statistically and soundly able to overcome most others physically,  since most people are not over 6 feet tall. It made the forces more formidable, chances were.

Now, just imagine a 120 lb female trooper having to physically apprehend a huge 200-something lb male? Better hope she can rely on her gun….she’s darned sure going to need it. And perhaps the additional training (costing us $$$$ tax dollars), she received simply because she is female, will compensate.

The feminists missed the boat on this one….as they most often do! This is but one in thousands of ways it is proven that they just do not get it? Pure obliviousness!

__________________________________________________________

The military reason for short hair on male soldiers is intended as hygiene training for field/wartime operations.  In such environments, lice, ticks, mites, chiggers, scabies, and other skin vermin take advantage of long hair—-hampering the mission.  Plus,  long hair sours badly when sweaty, takes longer to prepare, needs more cleaning and cosmetic weight to be packed/carried, and doesn’t always stay put up higher than shoulder length (military standard for women only) while physically training.

Why can’t males wear their hair as they please too? It can’t be for “uniformity”—not anymore!

Now, now, don’t miss the point when answering.

We bet the answer revolves around SPT for women—AGAIN!  Maybe our military, world-wide, has eradicated skin insects that affect females? You reckon? If so, why doesn’t the same thing be done for males?

________________________________________________________

WITNESSED BY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE:

Other than the masculine-like softball-playing  females (who represent a tiny number of women overall….and even then, their throwing arms are NOTHING like their male counterparts), have you ever watched regular females in general throw a ball?  Now replace that ball with grenades—-weapons that must be thrown far enough to not be deadly to the thrower.  During basic training, males were required to practice with grenades. Most could hurl the weapons far enough to pass the tests.  However, when a drill instructor was asked about the female’s grenade exercises, the response was, “Females don’t have this training.”

Wonder why?!!!

When a female was told to quit standing around watching and to grab a wrench to tighten a nut on a vehicle, she complied.  But when the wrench slipped off the nut (a common thing in the world of mechanics), her hand slipped too causing her to slam her soft hand into another hard, rough surface.  She eventually got the nut tightened, but in checking (for safety) the nut had to be tightened a good bit more.  The next day, her hand was sore and bruised to the point she couldn’t work well or even focus. Some males noticed all this, started talking about it amongst themselves, but were verbally chastised when they were overheard speaking the truth of the situation. Men can’t speak the truth in the workplace anymore….not even in the military!

In the early 90’s Gulf war, female “soldiers” had so much  difficulty hoisting their fair 5 gallon share of shower water onto the tops of tall sun-heated tanks installed high atop the gravity-fed shower stalls, that an order was put out that males were to do all of this heavy lifting not only for themselves but for all the females as well. Males were supposed to do all this extra work (in addition to their other normal workloads without the females doing any return  favors, aka true teamwork) without so much as a complaining peep out of the males—-else be tagged as not being “team players.”

Too, when females wanted to take “pride” in their own ability to “pull their own weight”  by erecting their own heavy-as-hell canvas group-living tents, they were granted permission to try. But when a desert windstorm followed by a brief pelting rain downpour blew away their tent and wet all their stuff, whose tents do you think they ran to for cover?

That’s right, they ran into the male tents hoping to be protected while the men were ordered to brave the storm and salvage the females’ tent (and their enormous amount of personal belongings) the best they could. From then on, men were commanded to be the tent erectors while the women “helped” (more like watched on,  or otherwise got in the way).

In the Iraqi war, the media told of  one woman’s  capture by enemy soldiers (several females in the war erroneously ventured into no-female combat zones). Her mother, (obviously and conveniently “forgetting” that ladies are certain kinds of women, just as “gentlemen” is limited to certain kinds of men) was put on TV pleading with the enemy to remember that her daughter was a “lady”, implying for the enemy to respect her as a female.  The captured woman was returned.  However, would males be returned so readily?  To the contrary, they would be retained and tortured. In fact, males were treated horribly. Many of them didn’t live through their hell!

And what about that puny little female from a reserve unit in Virginia who was also captured but rescued by elite forces (all males)?

These stories are only the tip of the iceberg. Still think females belong there?

Did you know that Israel reversed its placement of females into combat zones alongside males? Need we explain the multiple realities of why?    You may not have heard about this due to the liberal media’s fear of the truth in which they covered this news as little as possible.

While serving in the Middle East, there were some females assigned to our unit.  Unfortunate for the men who would have to physically work much harder due to the presence of  females trying to do what it takes strong men to accomplish….and even the men sometimes have great difficulties maintaining. Anyway, we were not on the front lines with hard-as-hell combat, so females were allowed.

One of the females, wanting to be in the military with all the benefits it has, was happy getting the perks, but did not want to have to pull her weight and honor her obligation to serve in actual war. So she pulled an unethical stunt compounded by other atrocities in order to get her swept away from danger.

Required pre-deployment testing proved she wasn’t pregnant prior to being flown to the war region.  However, a month or so afterward, she became pregnant. She (and her partner) obviously had sex while in a war, but never mind the traitorous connotations.  That is the least of it!

She of course was relieved of her war duties, got to return to the States and resume her life as usual. The unit she was assigned to had been deployed so she had to transfer to another unit in order to serve out her obligation. One would think she could remain in the company of that unit until she had her baby, then just like so many other women, be required to deploy, leaving her baby behind with someone else to care for it. That is not what happened.

She had an abortion.  She murdered the baby—-the same baby that got her exempted from war duty.  There were no rumors or proof of prenatal complications “requiring” her to kill the baby; She just wanted to kill it because it was in her way.

She was never required to reunite with her war-deployed unit. While this one was up close and personal, there were other rumors of similar happenings going on in the military at that time.

It doesn’t take a genius to see the multiple ethical realities deeply embedded within this true scenario.  We could elaborate at this point, (and believe it…we’d love to) but this is one time we will let your own conscience take over (if you have one).

The men of this country forced to occupy the front lines are required to defend hideous practices coming from “1st class citizens” just like this bitch who treated her (and his) baby as well as her coworkers like crap.

If you think there was nothing wrong with her despicable actions—-not just the baby murder, but also her exploitation of pregnancy to get her removed from her military obligation…and how it made the other women (and men) feel, how it DID make the father of that baby go to his knees to cry and cry, how it stinks of SPT for women—-the same women who cry and whimper about equality but can’t seem to come up with the substance to prove they are actually worthy of it—-then you are proof and an example of the chaos and profound and unethical situation that has been foisted onto our society.

Our country is going to pieces while in the custody and company of immoral people like her and people who think she did nothing wrong.  Now you see why MOTIVATEMEN has such a problem with handing power over to creatures such as selfish women who think whatever they want to do is just fine. Women should have an unbridled free-for-all with no real sacrifices expected of them, while men remain tethered to strict rules, censorship, ethics, responsibilities, accountability, and sacrifices.

If a male had done something equally as despicable, with the feminists overseers in charge like they are, his name would have been plastered all over the TV sets and he would have been severely punished. He would have been plucked up and sent back to perform his sworn duty to defend this nation—-or he would have paid dearly for it.

Where is the equality that misfit feminists prodded, ensured, and convinced ordinary women they “needed” and had to have….to abandon the families in their quest for power? Except for benefits, why does what they call “equality” resemble nothing similar to what equality actually entails?

Where are the real men who should put a stop to this bull crap?  Hiding behind the requirement (the lie) that makes them please and get them a woman in order to be a “man” ?—- “making” them accept all this mayhem and chaos….so they never speak up?

Now you see why we at MOTIVATEMEN know in our hearts that it is men who are at fault too and that they should embrace whatever courage it takes to make changes in themselves and male socialization when it comes to women so that they are not prisoners to these kinds of horrible changes.

No one here is saying men should learn to live without women or to quit liking women. (If you hear that nonsense, just know that it is comprised of lies from those who are scared of the truth we speak). All we are saying is that the process should be done correctly. What is so wrong with THAT?! Men can help themselves. There is no “hardwiring” making them behave so stupidly.  The correct label is cowardice! They refuse to change—-or even try.  This does not conjure images of duty and heroism—-true manliness.

The majority of men in this world, while loving women immensely, do not agree with feminism, but are not trained by the men doing the exampling for them to protect this world and its societies from those who seek to destroy it. Lazy, apathetic, puppet-like, and brainwashed-feminized males are our biggest problem in this arena. The feminist plot to alter the masculine minds of males is working well!

And if men can’t grow some guts and make sacrifices here, then it will only get worse! Real stories like the preceding one are just the beginning.  Even a thousand years from now, feminists will still be whining and sniveling about something coming from nature that makes women be female….and they will still be getting by with changing the rules to suit them—-whatever makes women feel better.

What will men be doing then?  Will there be many males?  What will be their duty?  Will they live passed pregnancies?

Selfishness will rule if men don’t learn to fight again!

_________________________________________________________

Females in outer space

(This entry is not military per se, but it goes with military issues  in a way. There was no where else to put it on this site.)

Here is some proof that we are not against women per se, are not against them working, and not against them being participants in the world…and beyond.

Men do not want to colonize space without women.  That would be too boring.  It is not reasonable to state that men would be happy for very long if they were expected to venture into space without females. There is no way that the colonization of the space frontier would be successful without also training women to endure many of the rigors of outer space.

What would men have to do in order to be successful astronauts ?  They could either swear to celibacy, or resort to male sodomy (just kidding), or masturbate regularly (not kidding), or they could take frequent vacations and return to earth to have sex for enjoyment and to generate the offspring they need (and hope their children aren’t murdered by abortion).  None of those options would be ideal.  The solution is for men to train and help women be participants in space.

Of course there are other reasons to engage life with women besides only the sex issue.  Stating otherwise is not our purpose.  Women can actually make great companions for men, that is, if they would stop competing with men.  Men want companions by their side, not competitors. Men are naturally geared (but not required or helplessly hard-wired) to compete with other males, not females.  There is nothing bigoted or sexist about that truth.  It is just a fact of natural life as we know it regardless of how much feminists hate the truth and desperately try to replace everything naturally truthful with their prostitution-powered synthetic replacement scheme.

So, as far as MOTIVATEMEN is concerned, the more women present in space, the better.  And this goes for companionship and/or sex. However, actually doing the hard labor of space work needed to build  astro-cities, labs, space stations, and such, men can do all of that just fine on their own in which females would often be in the way or pose logistical issues.   Women are welcome to participate…the few that can actually handle the stresses and conditions.  But, MOTIVATE MEN also sees it prudent to ask this question:  Is there anyone out there that truly thinks women, only women, all by themselves, could do what men have done in space and could carry on the projects all by themselves?  Like all other endeavors about  women’s successes, hasn’t it been men that enabled women to achieve…even in space as well?

Before departing this issue, it may seem humorous to many but it is actually not far from the reality lurking in many feminists’ fantasy-saturated minds, but perhaps feminists want to colonize space for entirely different reasons than being recognized as intelligent, intellectual participants.  The way feminists have shown their butts in latter years,  it is conceivable that they also might be dreaming of colonizing a distant planet, asteroid, or space station all of their own: that females would be the only ones allowed.  In their hatred of the God-ordained and natural truth and commonsense of universal male dominance, they might want to experiment with going it alone without male “nuisances.”  However, there are some glitches in their plans. First, they need men to help build such an escape  route and venue, then set it in motion.  Then, they would need males’ sperm to make their experiment last more than one or two generations unless they are content with experimental, egg-only generation of human beings, which undoubtedly will result in malformed humans and genetic anomalies.  Plus, when things go bad, such as the space warriors of another civilization encroaching (in which a female-only military would get their ridiculous butts whipped), apocalyptic scenarios, and self-induced emergencies, they will need men to come rescue them or help them in ways they are not willing to currently admit (not until they actually are forced to accept that help…in which of course, males will turn a blind eye to it and pretend they didn’t notice.  Wink-wink).   Even in space, feminists will hate the truth. It is their number one enemy.

Sorry feminists, but the space thing could be done completely without women, but not the other way around.  It’s just that men prefer women to “help”.  So don’t worry, your going to get to be astronaut-ettes.  Have fun!
Back to top
_________________________________________________________

Afghanistan and Iraq:

Number of military males dead:____
 
Number of females:____
 
Number of injured males:____
 
Number of females:____
 
Number of traumatized, stressed males:____
 
Number of traumatized, stressed females:____
 
Ever noticed the liberal,feminist-leaning press using cover-up tactics to hide the fact that not as many females are dying, injured, and/or are post-stressed from war?
 
Yeah, they say things like: "The men and women in the military" ....(which does not take into account that women are a small minority). "There have been ?? deaths of men and women".... is another way to get unsuspecting people to believe just as many women are dying and injured.
 
But when detailing specific battles on the front lines, the reporters say, "?? soldiers were killed." They won't say "men" in times like these.  But let a group of only women be affected adversely, then, " ?? women were...." they will bleat.
 
They do this to bolster women in ways they do not deserve. They are trying so hard to erase the truth when it comes to realities like these.  They want to brainwash the masses into believing, thus, supporting the crazy stuff they are wishing for.
 
Their scheme is more affective than an outsider might think.  Some of us were eating out when a man and woman couple sitting close by chimed into a conversation we were having about this subject.  Both the man and the woman said, "What?!!, not as many women are dying and suffering as men?"
 
They really believed that just as many women as men are sacrificing. And you know what?  Those deliberately misinformed people vote! Having had lies forced into their heads, people go vote in ways that satisfy and perpetuate the liberals, keeping them in power so they can lie to everyone again and again.