WRFH/Radio Free Hillsdale 101.7 FM - Strength & Dignity: Equality vs. Equity and the Societal Consequences

Episode Date: July 2, 2024

Michaela unpacks a recent proposal in the Senate for a required women’s draft in 2025. She traces the feminist ideology and logic behind this proposal and present the biblical alternative.��

Hello and welcome to strength and dignity. This is Michaela Estreuth, and you're listening to Radio Free Hillsdale 101.7 FM. So today I want to talk about something that is relevant and that is in the news, but it's not actually from the normal side that I go to of Ms. Magazine. I am stepping away from that platform just for this episode and want to talk about a few articles that I saw reported in the news. I saw one on World Magazine, which is a Christian worldview journalism organization, and then also one from the Federalist that's based in D.C. It's a conservative outlet. And they both were responding to this news of a committee in Congress that advanced something called the National Defense Authorization Act for 2025. So a committee of Congress proposed this, and so it hasn't been passed. It hasn't become law, but it's on its way. to be voted on. So on page four of this National Defense Authorization Act of 2025, the proposal promises to, quote, amend the Military Selective Service Act to require the registration of women for selective service. So what that means is to require women to sign up for the draft. So every

young man upon turning 18 has to go sign up for the selective service. And granted, we haven't had a draft in decades. But it's a reality that every single man, upon turning 18 has to sign up for this selective service even if there's not an ongoing draft just in case in 20 years there is one and they need record of him and so this law that would be passed in 2025 requires that all women do the same upon turning 18 and this gets into a really tough sticky topic because there's a huge spectrum of well should women serve in the military at all to, well, it's okay if you want to serve, if it's voluntary, then to now this that, well, every single woman should be forced to. And that's because based off of contemporary feminist ideology, it actually makes sense to require every 18-year-old woman to sign up for the draft if you follow the logic of feminist ideology.

Because what feminist ideology proposes is that men and women are interchangeable. And so it doesn't make sense to say that women can have all of these rights or be interchangeable with men and yet not have this natural duty put upon them as an expectation of them serving. And so to be fully honest, the middle ground between, well, women can, if they want to, if it's voluntary, sign up for the military versus every single woman should be required to, even if they don't. serve, you know, every single man, even if he's not in active service or at all involved in the military, is still pledging that duty. To try to tow the line of, well, only the women who want to have to just doesn't make logical sense. Because if women are truly interchangeable with men, then it makes sense to say, nope, you need to sign up for the draft as well. And that is a key, key difference in the part of feminist ideology.

between equality and equity. Equality says that men and women are equal in standing, dignity, and value. And the Bible clearly states this from the beginning. So anyone who says that the Bible is inherently anti-women or misogynistic is completely wrong because you have to read, starting in the first chapter of the Bible in Genesis 1, it says that God made men and women in his image, in the image of God, he created them, male and female he created them. being made in the image of God means that men and women have equal standing and equal dignity before God. They're both created in his image.

They're also both given the duty to be sub-creators and or procreators and to subdue the earth. He says be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. So they're given dominion over the fish and see, the bird to the air, over every living thing that moves on the earth, both of them. He says to both of them. So in Genesis 1, in the Bible itself, God creates man and women equal before him. But just because they're equal doesn't mean they're the same. It doesn't mean they're interchangeable. It doesn't mean that their differences between male and female make them less equal.

It just means that they're different. So what the feminist ideology pushes for is equity, which demands that men and women are identical in every way. There's no difference between male and female, and so their expectations and responsibilities are the exact same. And they probably wouldn't say it in those exact words. Some of them might. Some of them might say, yeah, it's completely societal construction. The differences between male and female.

They're all stereotypes. But a lot of them have a really hard issue with biology and being able to say, actually, no, there are physical differences between men and women. And, like, biologically, you have two X-grammatism. zones or you have an X and a Y chromosome and you kind of can't get around that, even though obviously our society has tried to get around that and has tried to deny that. So that's quite honestly where feminist ideology has almost eaten itself because the feminist ideology of second wave feminism in the 1960s pushes for this equity of interchangeability. But then the transgender

movement, which is in line with this way of thinking, has raw. women of safe places robbed women of solely women things but in the 1960s this sexual revolution second wave feminism demanding for equity basically they wouldn't say well men and women are completely interchangeable but they would say men and women should have all the same rights and they define rights not as human rights but as rights to something so like you have i mean a common example would be right to abortion or, you know, right to health care, right to all of these constituted rights that are created by society as provisions, essentially, instead of essential basic human rights, which are their rights to life and to liberty.

So second way feminism in the sexual revolution kind of wanted to, it did a lot of these things, but, you know, women in the workplace, they have a right to work, they have a right to not be, I guess, what Betty Friedan would call, being in. enslaved in the home. They have a right to sexual freedom, meaning it's not just men. They get to do whatever they want women too. And that's how abortion plays into that factor of, well, this liberates me from an unwanted pregnancy. And so then I can do whatever I so please in my actions as an adult. But again, following that thinking, you are quite literally saying there's no difference between men and women and therefore there should be no differences in responsibilities and in expectations.

And again, I mentioned this earlier, but it's so illogical because you have to deny biology at that point. It's almost demeaning, like women, not just feminist ideology in general, like the theory, but even women today, just like the average women, could for some reason get upset if someone said, well, men are physically taller and stronger than women. For some reason, that's like outrageous to say or like extremely offensive because women can be just as strong as men and they can be way more disciplined and work even harder at the gym or whatever than the average man and how dare you like impose this stereotype on me that as a female I'm weak, which A is not what

was said. And B, again, going back to biology, you cannot deny that. men have 50% more muscle mass than women and women have twice as much body fat. It's a fact. You can't deny it. And when you recognize that design as from God for specific purposes, the differences are beautiful instead of oppressive or demeaning. And so that goes actually ties back in to this bill that is now for 2025 and involving the draft for women. And it's been an ongoing conversation of what is women's role in the military? Because if they really are the same as men, then they should be expected to do this. Well, it hasn't, this isn't just like a new idea that sprung up in 2024. In 2021, Congress delayed the implementation of the Army's new combat fitness test. And the reason

that they delayed it, it was in 2021. It was in March of 2021. And this new test that the Army had spent, I'm pretty sure it was years formulating these expectations. It was supposed to be implemented in October of 2021. And in March, Congress delayed it. And the sole reason they did that was because at that point, 54% of women had failed to pass the requirements. So it was supposed to be one test that was same sex. Like both men and women have to meet these standards

because these are the standards to be in the military. and like these are the expectations put upon you and 54% of women could not meet them and Congress panicked and they were like well we can't look sexist and we can't be discriminatory so we have to change it and so it wasn't until 2022 that a new combat fitness test was implemented and they were actually this is what makes the thinking so illogical they implemented two tests there's like one for men and one for women okay I guess that make sense because now you're kind of recognizing that there are differences and yet they lowered the requirements for both significantly. So for example, women have to run two miles in under 23 minutes and men have to run in two miles in under 22 minutes. And quite honestly, that's terrifying because a test for the military isn't just like a test in school, which obviously everyone knows. It's not just, oh like okay i got to be instead of an a oh well study more next time like the test is literally determining if you have the grit and the physical ability to protect yourself and protect your

fellow man in the midst of combat like that's a life or death situation and so now that's what is so sad about these requirements of potentially having all women sign up for the draft is not only has training and expectations changed in terms of requirements to get in the military voluntarily, but also now all of these women who don't want to be in the military will be forced to sign up for the draft just in case. And then you are subjecting not only these women to horrible situations on the battlefield, but they're fellow men and women who they're fighting behind or beside who they haven't been trained to fight. and so that that comes to my last point, which is a lengthy point, but that God did not design women to be the defenders. God did not design women to be fighting on the battlefield for their family or for

their country. Like that throughout history in the Bible and throughout all of history has been solely for the majority of time a male role. And there's reason for that. And it's not just physical, but physicality plays a ton into that, right? That women were not designed to run as fast as men. Women were not designed to carry as much weight as men. God calls the men to defend their homeland, to defend their country, and to defend the women and children. When God gives instructions to the men of Israel in Deuteronomy, he's instructing them how to kick out the Canaanites in the promised land that he's said he's going to give them. And God commanded Israel that they will go fight and that God will go before them and behind them. But he says, leave the women and children behind. You're fighting for

your family and you're fighting for your people. But the women and children stay behind. And he's implementing the requirement or the expectation that men are leaving. leaders and that men ought to be the protector and the defender and the leader not only within their individual family but also in society right and lots of people will cite well women in the bible serve like women in the bible fought and this is where i'm not splitting hairs i'm just taking those in context i'll only do one from the bible and then one from a very common story that I think a lot of us are familiar with to illustrate that it's not sinful for women to fight or and it doesn't take away their honor if you know like it is honorable

for women to make that sacrifice but it's shameful to men because in at least in the story of Deborah in judges, it is explicitly clear that the men are failing to lead and that they are being cowardly and that the women are having to step up. And that's not to undermine Deborah or Jail's service to Israel and the duty and the strength that they showed. but it does shine poorly on Barak, who's the man that God had called to lead. So let me read from Judges 4. Deborah calls to Barak and said to him,

Has not the Lord the God of Israel commanded you, go gather your men at Mount Tabor, taking 10,000 from the people of Naftali and the people of Zebulin, and I will draw out Cisura, the general of Jabin's army, to meet you by the river Qishan with his chariots and his troops, and I will give him into your hand. So Deborah says to Barack, hasn't God told you this? Why aren't you going?

And Barack says to her, if you go with me, I will go. But if you will not go with me, I will not go. And Deborah says, I will surely go with you. Nevertheless, the road on which you are going will not lead to your glory. For the Lord will sell Cessaria into the hand of a woman. And that's exactly what happens. The king Cessaria goes and is well. welcomed into a tent. And Jail, a wife who has welcomed him into this tent, drives a tent peg

through his temple as he's sleeping. And she is the one credited with killing this king. And so Barack doesn't receive any glory. And so Deborah is very clear about that. You will not get the glory because you were resisting this and you were being cowardly. Okay, so one other literary example I want give. And I think lots of people hopefully are familiar with it, but it's Tolkien in Lord of the Rings he writes about Aowen, the niece of the king of Rohan. And she, if you've seen the movies, is portrayed differently in the movies than she is in the books. And she wants to fight. She wants to fight for her country. She wants to be involved in this battle for mankind. And she does. And in the movies, what happens is she ends up fighting the witch king of Angmar, who is the head Nazgol,

so the black cloaked men who are not actually men, they're basically like spirits because they can't be killed. And in that battle scene, she's struck almost fatally, and the king of Angmar says to her, no man can kill me. And she says, well, I'm not a man. And so Tolkien, you, uses her womanhood to defeat this prophecy or the idea that no man can kill this king, king of Angmar because he's a spirit, and she as a woman can. So that's a beautiful and ironic twisting of the story or of the plot for this king to be defeated. And yet she's severely hurt and she needs healing. and eventually in the books, this doesn't come out in the movies, but in the books, she says,

I will be a shield maiden no longer, nor vie with the great writers, nor take joy in the songs of slaying. I will be a healer. And this is part of a longer song, but basically Tolkien is doing the same thing with Aowen that the Lord demonstrates with Deborah in J.L. and judges four, and that is, she still receives honor for the military act that she did. and, you know, praise for her work. And yet there's a realization that this is contrary to the way it ought to be. And there's a expectation that the men should step up in order to protect her from having to face that, or in order to take that upon themselves in the sacrificial way and in their duty that they're supposed to do. and so those are just two examples of how women can be honored through their service and yet how

it is in a way disordered or not the way that God designed it and it is reflective upon men to step up into their role and to be the protector and the leader and the defender. Friendly, I do just want to add one last thing. I know I said final point a bit ago, but one really interesting thing about all of this in society is that the feminist ideology shows the tension between men and women, not just in a marital stance, but in society. So it fulfills the curse that God put upon men and women in Genesis 3, where he basically says this design that is beautiful that I have made is now has curses upon it, that when the design is not followed, it is disordered. And so the

curses that he speaks to Adam and Eve in Genesis 3 are he says to Eve, your desire shall be for your husband and he shall rule over you. And a lot of people interpret this a lot of different ways, but the idea behind your desire shall be for your husband's role is really helpful in understanding you will want to be in his position. You will want to lead. You will want to be in control. And yet he is the one who is the leader. And so the idea of two tendencies of women and men, are manipulation and domination. And so women often turn to manipulation because they want to control the situation. They want to be the one leading. And then men, when they abuse their leader role, are being domineering or dominant or even abusive in that. And so the idea that that doesn't just

happen within a marriage or just a one male, one female relationship, but it also happens in society through this evidence of women trying to manipulate their way into the roles and responsibilities and duties of men. And now men in our society dominating women's circles. And so that comes back to the transgender movement and women now not having a place that's safe because men are allowed to be in there. Or the denial of motherhood and the cruelty of abortion. and basically granting men even more liberty in how they conduct themselves sexually because women now, well, you just go get an abortion, which is an extremely abusive and dominant thing for a man to say to a woman in that situation. So the point is that when design is ignored, consequences result from the individual level to the national level. And that's what we're seeing here in this proposal for 2025 for the national defense.

So that's all I have. Thanks for listening to Strength and Dignity. This is Michaela Estruth, and you're listening to Radio Free Hillsdale 101.1.7 FM.