76 notes &
If our national security is on the line, the defense of your children, your family, when that’s on the line, who do you want manning the Howitzers? Who do you want manning the M-16s. Who do you want manning the fighter planes? Do you want somebody who is characterized by sensitivity, warmth and apprehension? That is somebody who is sensitive, who is warm and who is easily spooked? Is that who you want defending your national security?
Or do you want somebody who is characterized by emotional stability, dominance, rule, consciousness and vigilance? Well if your answer is B, which I think any objective, logical, right thinking, clear-headed, non-politically correct corrupted thinking person would think, clearly you have just said we ought to have men in combat. … Women are not wired, either by evolution or by God, whoever is responsible for this difference, they are not prepared by DNA and innate personality characteristics to be in those positions.
Bryan Fischer of professional hate group American Family Association explaining why women aren’t suited for combat.
We’re delicate flowers, y’all! Too fragile!
Yes. You know why? Because Fischer is a patriarchal asshat who believes women violate evolutionary principles when they do something but be brood mares because we’re “apprehensive” and “easily spooked.” Yeah, every single time a balloon pops I dive under my bed and cower. Now I know why! Love how he cites “evolution” as a possible reason when it seems to suit his argument…
In conclusion:
And especially Bryan Fischer. And P.S. - AFA + Rick Santorum = TRU LUV 4-EVA. You know, the same Rick Santorum who walked back similar comments about a week ago.
(Source: cognitivedissonance)
