Dead Men Don’t Count in War

Sponsored Content

Premium Membership, The Good Men Project

Comments


  1. I care about the millions of indigenous men who are forced into defending themselves and their families as the largest war machine ever assembled rolls into town to occupy their country, exploit their natural resources, dismantle their society, and torture their fellow citizens.

    I care about the men whose economic circumstances mean they cannot provide for their family and see the people they love, their women and children, die through lack of food, shelter and medicine, and see armed resistance as the only way to gain a better life for them and their families.
    These two stike a particular cord with me. With the way deaths are reported it’s almost like male civilians do not matter in the least bit. For males it’s pretty much a case of they are children until they reach a certain at which point they become an enemy combatant. No presumption of innocence.

  2. Random_Stranger says:

    “fighting an asymmetric war against the world to maintain its perceived right of exploitation and enrichment in the face of its inevitable decline” wow, took me a moment to get past this choice statement -what’s this article about again?

    Oh yeah, I applaud the DOD’s decision to permit women to serve in combat positions -but I can’t stand how this is being spun as a victory for women over the proverbial boy’s club. This is at least as much, if not more so, a victory for men who feel their gender shouldn’t uniquely and disproportionately oblige them to bear the costs of their country. DOD just needs to follow-up with gender blind selective service.

    A 1000 dead men a glorious sacrifice on the alter of freedom, a 1000 dead women a rape and massacre, no more.

  3. Come on, we already know the answer: Men don’t count because men’s lives are disposable.

    • Anyone in an empire is disposable so long as they aren’t useful. Warriors, women over childbearing years, those who don’t make money.

      • I think the difference is that unlike those other categories you mention for some reason it’s taboo to talk about the disposability of men as men.

        We can talk about warriors that come back injured and need help living and have already “lived out their usefulness”. (But honestly how much of that conversation is about them as men and how much of it is about them as veterans.)

        We can talk about women over child bearing age.

        We can talk about the poor.

        But talk about men as men in some other capacity than “men are doing bad things to other people”? We are still working on breaking that new ground.

        • Wrong again, I guess I am. I doubt I’ll ever put up a comment that doesn’t get shot down. I think in empire nearly everyone is disposable. Talk or not. That we are talking about poor, women etc is NEW in the history of the world. And the GMP exists. To talk about men. So….It’s happening.

    • I don’t think it’s men in general whose lives are disposable but rather a bit of a split.

      When it comes to putting men into military service and sending them off to wars its not that they are disposable and have no usefulness. I think it’s that their capacity for military service IS usefulness. It’s the “men are usually bigger. stronger” thing. (Yes that same thing that comes up everytime someone wants to wax on about how men commit more violence.)

      When it comes to civilian men I’ll be the first to agree that that there is some disposability going on. If a male is not a child and is not considered to be of fighting shape he is considered disposable (and when you get down to it I think the only reason boys are considered disposable is solely because they are children). As is mentioned in the post. When civilian deaths are reported it’s usually a number and then the portion that were women and children is mentioned.

      Once a guy gets to old he is either a threat (while he is in that age ranged where he’s considered to be combat effective) or he does not matter at all (because apparently even elderly men aren’t even worth looking out for).

  4. John Schtoll says:

    I also read some time ago that the obama administration definitino of enemy combatants as those directly involved in fighting and any male between certain ages within the combat zone.

Speak Your Mind