Almost everyone breathing today has lived through a long stretch in which we’ve been forced to pretend that women and men are the same, despite what our lying eyes tell us. In more recent history, though, we’re seeing a vibe shift, one in which institutional equity is in retreat. There are two recent examples of this, both arising from the government, albeit in different directions.
One comes from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who eliminated differing standards for men and women in the armed services. The other comes from Speaker Mike Johnson’s defeat in a battle to prevent Congress from allowing proxy voting for new parents. Both efforts were in pursuit of actual equity. That is, if men and women are the same, they should be subject to the same rules.
It’s tempting to make fun of these developments and point out the logical inconsistencies required to consider accepting differing standards for service for both. Poking holes in the logic of equity is rather enjoyable, after all. But it’s not always very nice, and as this writer is currently in a George Costanza phase, he’s going to resist that temptation.
Also, as conservatives, it’s important to acknowledge when things aren’t really working. While young men are largely flocking to the party in record numbers, young women are moving in the opposite direction. That’s a problem.
And maybe part of the reason is that we on the right are too focused on logic and numbers instead of feelings, as compellingly argued by Freya India. Stop laughing and hear me out, because logic and facts will only get one so far in an argument, particularly an argument with a woman (NSFW). Also, too often, we concede the real argument and instead nibble around the edges.
For example, take proxy voting, a practice that arose during Covid and that no one should be allowed to engage in. Yet the fight is now about new parents and not about the fact that in 2024, only seven members of the House voted on every measure. That’s a problem, as is the fact that as recently as 2020, only 23 percent of young people aged 17-24 met military service requirements. Yes, many of us have aged out, but another factor is that people are too fat.
Whereas one can be rather corpulent and still theoretically show up for votes, one cannot carry munitions, rations, equipment, and a fellow serviceman if one is already carrying around extra weight.
Carrying that logic forward, no pun intended, it becomes logical for men and women to face the same physical requirements for the military. But that argument also carries us backward into logic, and we’ve seen where that gets us. Instead, let’s try feelings, one of which is that maybe the standards for voting and military service aren’t there to keep women out, because they’d be so awesome if they were there; rather women are really awesome all on their own, and we shouldn’t want them debasing themselves in a swamp, whether literal or figurative.
Men can do many things. We can die in wars. We can die outside. We can take stupid risks. We can usually fix some things, if only because we’re less concerned about getting injured taking stupid risks while we try to figure out whatever it is we’re fixing.
We can also work fake email jobs. What we cannot do is give birth or truly nurture future generations. We cannot blow on an owie in just the right way to soothe the pain. Our bodies, to return to Seinfeld, are simian and utilitarian, unlike female bodies, which (while also designed for purpose) are spectacular. There’s a reason that even if Michelangelo had access to a camera and a time machine, he still would’ve gone with a sculpture of David. Also, women generally smell nicer.
As such, they deserve to be celebrated, not reduced to the lot in life that men face. Any and every barrier that keeps them from such a fate is one to be celebrated, not torn down. Anyone can dig a ditch, given enough time, just as anyone can create a PowerPoint presentation, given the destruction of enough brain cells (ask me how I know). Such tasks are mindless and soulless, not things that require the divine feminine input.
Beyond that, approval of Congress is in the gutter. For the military, approval is actually in positive territory, as it should be, but that doesn’t mean that everyone should want the respect that military service affords. If any lowlife women want to roll around in the mud with the other Congress-critters, go for it, so long as you can show up. For any warrior princesses who want to join the military, also go for it, so long as you can carry your weight alongside the literal additional weight service requires.
For society, though, maybe we should stop celebrating women for taking on traditionally masculine roles and instead celebrate them for doing the real, beautiful, and necessary work of keeping this whole thing running now and into the future. If that means giving the same accolades to minivan moms as we do to lean-in girlbosses, great. If that means ditching the memes about yoga pants at Target, fantastic, particularly for those of us who enjoy midday yoga pants at Target.
If that means coming together as communities and providing the support women who aren’t surrounded by affinity groups need, excellent. If it means coming together as communities and providing support to the rare women who actually enjoy ditch-digging and PowerPoint, wonderful. That’s how it should be. Women should feel valued even if they logically know that they are.
But we cannot continue pretending that everyone needs to do everything. Because that reality, the one in which we’re currently living, doesn’t seem to be serving anyone well, and any man who attempts to blow on the wounds caused by it isn’t going to soothe those owies, no matter how low the threshold for successful owie healing is lowered.
Jesus Christ is King
