Post: #1

   

Link: http://www.trueactivist.com/14-powerful-...ampaign=sh

Quote:"Can you imprison a man’s choice and call it free living?"

On May 11th, 2015, more than 37,000 men between the ages of 19-26 woke up to find their surnames on Lithuania’s compulsory military service list. 3,000 were needed for the first wave of recruits, but 2/3 of the first group were filled by volunteers. Some of the men took to social media to express their thoughts on what was being called a sudden and random ‘lottery.’

But perhaps most disturbing was the public’s response to the expressed feelings of those men who did not want to join the army. They were called “unmanly,” “cowardly,” “disgraceful,” etc. This negativity caught the attention of two women in Lithuania who decided to use photography to lend depth into the very controversial topic.

Lithuanian Actress and TV host Beata Tiskevic-Hasanova and Lithuanian photographer and political science student Neringa Rekasiute began capturing portraits of men suddenly conscripted into the Lithuanian army just a few short months ago.

The two women gathered 14 random men, aged 17-28, and took their photographs. In the portraits, the men are captured crying in military uniforms. It’s an understatement to say the images evolve beyond words and are very moving.

Beata and Neringa thought this project would be a good way to show how dangerous gender expectations are: a man is expected to be rational, emotionless, and aggressive. But if that is the gender stereotype we accept and allow to rule our masculine-driven world, little will be resolved through the way of conflict.

It is very important that we, as a collective, teach men to express their emotions and not force a stereotypical archaic role onto them.

Every picture is accompanied by the models’ quotes. They are expressing their opinions about what it is to be manly and how it relates to going to the army.

JAUNIUS, 18: A gun in your hands doesn’t define your manliness.


VYTAUTAS, 27: Army won’t make a man out of you – if you are a dumbass, you will stay a dumbass.


DOMINYKAS, 26: It’s my choice what kind of man I want to be.


JUSTAS, 18: The real strength is the ability to make your own mind. Let us be strong.


VYTENIS, 18: I could go to the army. Sometimes I lack courage and stamina to do things. Army is good if you can handle it. I was inspired by my friend, a girl, who became a voluntary soldier.


EDVINAS, 17: Can you imprison a man’s choice and call it free living?


DANAS, 28: In my opinion, the archaic times when a man was supposed to kill a buffalo and drag it home to his family are long over. I think that army is not a bad thing in general, but a compulsory one is definitely not a good thing either. Especially when the government announced it so suddenly without any public debate or preparation. A system should be introduced, one should know at school that there is a possibility to serve in the army, one should grow up with this idea.


DENISAS, 23: In today’s free society there is no space for coercion. Compulsory things should be the ones you choose with your free will.


MARTYNAS, 22: It’s manly to be able to choose for yourself.


JEGOR, 25: Only when fighting you lose.


ROKAS, 17: It is manly to work for your goals and ideas, and defend your values. I guess, everyone can go to the war, but army is not for everyone.


MINDAUGAS, 25: When I was still at school, conscript army was removed. I was very happy then, but when I look back, I realize it was a better time to go to the army than it would be now when I have my own agency and when I have created jobs for other people – I need to look after all of it.


JUSTAS, 27: Army is a waste of time. How many more soldiers do we need?


LUKAS, 25: If I was called to the army, I would try to find a way to avoid it. I have a wife, we are so good together and family for me is first. We have created so much, I wouldn’t want to leave it.

While I think that countries should have professional armies and conscription is generally a waste of time, I hate to see just another example of feminists trying to emasculate men. Also, let's not forget Lithuania has a tiny minority of ethnic Russians. In the unlikely event that shit hit the fan and Russia decided to mess with Lithuania like they did with Crimea, they would want a strong army to defend the country (NATO would probably get involved, WW3... who knows chances of it happening are almost zero but still). It also seems to me that these Lithuanian hipsters are not very aware of their recent past, their sovereignty was never simply given and not so long ago, people lost their lives in the hands of the soviets (see January Events) Even then, these guys are not even going to war, some of their grandparents/great grandparents probably died in WW2 while fighting or in the gulags, they should be ashamed to be pictured like this when they still have it so much better than their elders.

Thoughts?

Post: #2

I can understand these men crying. Their lives will never be the same, and in some cases with personal relationships, a lot can happen at one time.

Still, I'd rather be shot than let some bitch photograph me with but a tear in my eye.

G

Post: #3

(06-10-2015 06:20 AM)Luisaceo Wrote:  I hate to see just another example of feminists trying to emasculate men.

I do not really see an emasculation there. Once read an article that said it was often women that called men unmanly when they did not go to war. There are reports from WW 1. Even women unions support that men volunteer back then.
What was the result? A lot of men died for nothing and just not be be called unmanly. Its a nice try to take away the masculinity of a men by saying when you don't join the military you are not a real man.

Personal I can think of one million better things then join the military and to fight in a war or conflict some politicians started.
Call it wimpy but I prefer a picture taken of me crying and live instead of die in a war that is lead with reasons out of my understanding.

Post: #4

Most of them don't look fit enough to be soldiers anyway.

I think militaries should be volunteer and personal , otherwise you end up with lots of people unfit for service and under motivated.

I don't think there is really anything wrong with not wanting to be in the military, but if you are going to cry over it... How will they act when they have to protect the person besides thems life?

Will there be a commissar behind the troops to stop retreat and deserters ?

M

Post: #5

Lithuania has a woman president, who is sending men to fight and possibly die in future wars.

Women presidents are often times much more cruel and heartless than any man

Post: #6

I'd run from war and have no shame in saying it, fuck losing your limbs, sanity or life over a governments game of chess. Wasting my life and time for a society that in the future generation would turn out like what we have today. Nazi's invading too bad, I'll just learn to speak German.

edit: I wouldn't cry like a bitch and have a feminist photograph me though, I'd tell her to join, for the sake of equality

Post: #7

The elephant in the room question is: how did they made them to cry at the exact moment of photography? I doubt these men were photographed moments after recruiters interrupted their daily lives grabbed and drew them to barracks without warning.

These tears are artificial and all of this is staged to make men appear bad. I will not analyze que bono from this art project but it is clearly some propaganda.

Regarding conscription: it would be fine from men to demand to protect their country, but only if it is also demanded that women are chaste and faithful and politicians are honest and act in the best interests of nation's people. Nobody is motivated to protect whores and thieves.

Post: #8

And thus they have proven to sorely need some military service to not be such wimps.

Post: #9

How has no one posted this yet. 37,000 men have just been removed from the player pool in Lithuania...a place with not unnattractive women. Women are most likely anxious about the social disruption.

Its a poosy paradise paradigm.

Get ye your plane tickets players!

Post: #10

(06-10-2015 07:40 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  How has no one posted this yet. 37,000 men have just been removed from the player pool in Lithuania...a place with not unnattractive women. Women are most likely anxious about the social disruption.

Its a poosy paradise paradigm.

Get ye your plane tickets players!

Lithuanian men fighting for American interests while American men sleep with their women.

I don't see how getting conquered by Russians is any worse.

Post: #11

(06-10-2015 07:40 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  How has no one posted this yet. 37,000 men have just been removed from the player pool in Lithuania...a place with not unnattractive women. Women are most likely anxious about the social disruption.

Its a poosy paradise paradigm.

Get ye your plane tickets players!

That's the spirit. You've got a point there

Post: #12

I made a quick search to see how long does their military conscription last and it's only 9 months. I did more than that and I can honestly say that no more than 9 months is actually going to do some good to them.

They will learn to appreciate a full 8 hours of uninterrupted comfortable night sleep, waking up without getting your rifle and gear every fucking morning for standard routine. Not having to stand outside in the cold windy winter nights or the blazing heat of the summer for guard duties. The fact that doing your house chores are much better than cleaning everyone's shit literally and figuratively speaking. Not having to deal with annoying people (soldiers and officers) everyday. These are things we take for granted if we never experience them in one form or another.

As long as they don't fuck up and do no more than 9 months they are going to be fine.

Post: #13

A lot of those guys look like SJW misfits and/or homos. The ones who don't look like that don't appear to have actually cried at all but probably just want to get out of their obligation.

Can't say I blame them, but to degrade yourself by letting feminists use you in this way is pathetic.

Post: #14

I think some of you guys are missing the point here. They are not going to war, they are just doing military service. The chances of there being another major conflict in Europe involving Lithuania (a NATO member) are close to zero and as Andreas mentioned, it's only 9 months long. Obviously, I'd be very pissed off if my plans were messed up by it but I wouldn't make such a big deal of it. I'm not surprised that in the past, men who refused to join the army were shamed and seen as unmanly, since back in the day sex roles were very defined i.e Men were providers/protectors and women were mothers and care takers. I'm not defending conscription, my dad did a forced military service in Spain for 2 years in the 70s and he has always told me how much of a waste of time it was. Even then, if during those 9 months they teach you some discipline, to work out and to defend yourself I reckon that many young guys would actually benefit from it.

Post: #15

What a joke.

Conscription was reintroduced two months ago under Lithuania´s female president Dalia Grybauskaitė. What do we know about her? From wikipedia:
She is 59 years old without children, never married. (Also strong supporter of LGBT rights, likely a lesbian.)
Studied political economy at the Leningrad State University. After that, taught political economy of socialism and finance at the Vilnius Party High School. Was a member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and later the Communist Party of Lithuania. Did her PhD in Moscow. In 1990 she flip-flopped and went to Washington DC to study at Georgetown University´s School of Foreign Service. ().
She then returned to Lithuania and after some work in the Foreign Ministry, where she led negotiations ending in the country´s participation in the EU free trade agreements, and a few years working in the US embassy in Vilnius, she became Minister of Fincance. When the country joined the EU in 2004, she was named as EU commissioner the same day. In 2009 she ran for president of Lithuania and won. Reelected in 2014.

Quite the career, isn´t it? That´s her official CV. There is also an unofficial biography written by a Lithuanian journalist about her: Red Dalia.
And if only half of it is true, she was very red.

She has a blackbelt in karate. Nicknamed the Iron Lady and Steel Magnolia. Political rolemodels are Margaret Thatcher and Gandhi of course.
Boyotted the Winter Olympics in Sochi, mainly because of Russia´s stance on LGBT rights, as she is involvd in NGOs that promote this cause in Russia and Lithuania. (Human rights violations didn´t seem too important to Lithuania though when they allowed the US to operate secret CIA prison camps, torture and everything included, on their territory.)

Her comments on Russia:
"[Putin] uses nationality as a pretext to conquer territory with military means. That's exactly what Stalin and Hitler did."
Russia and Putin were "characterised by aggressiveness, violence, and a willingness to overstep boundaries."
She also called the Russian Federation "...a terrorist nation that should be stopped...".
Which apparently received widespread support from the Lithuanian parliament and media.

Now, to conscription.
She said, the reason conscription was reintroduced is "as a response to threats in the region", and that the country (member of EU and NATO!) is "already under attack".
The country needed to be able to protect itself as it was in the "frontier". She said her country bordered Russia and there were "threats and exercises practically every day".

How does Lithuania´s mighty army look like? About 15,000 soldiers, no military aircraft or tanks. So why are these young men forced to serve in the army? With conscription, it will grow to an impressive 20,000 soldiers. That will scare the Russians away, for sure. On a more realistic note, in case of conflict, the Lithuanian armed forces will be annihilated without the slightest chance.

So what´s the point of reintroducing conscription then?
Demonstrating what a tough, unyielding hardliner Grybauskaitė is. As good a president as any man. Compensatory behaviour.
It´s nothing more than a populist measure to contribute to her image as the Iron Lady and increase her popularity.
And for this, thousands of innocent young men have to be stripped of their rights and freedom.
She doesn´t have a problem with that. She´s not a man. She has no sons. Why would she.

I´m not a radical libertarian, but I want to end with a quote from Ayn Rand:
"Of all the statist violations of individual rights in a mixed economy, the military draft is the worst. It is an abrogation of rights. It negates man’s fundamental right—the right to life—and establishes the fundamental principle of statism: that a man’s life belongs to the state, and the state may claim it by compelling him to sacrifice it in battle." (An attitude that certainly seems natural to a former cadre of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.)

Conscription is slavery.

Post: #16

Maybe someday they will be able to use their military training to fight the Red Dalia.

Post: #17

Conscription is an interesting question, because it drives a wedge into the Right who focus on national and state defense, and the Right who just see it as state violation of individual rights.

If a state conscripts to defend from an invasion, it's a case of 'we take your liberty or they do'. A right-winger should be nationalistic in this case, as its better to submit to your own people's authorities than to the invaders.

If it conscripts for other reasons (fucking around in Iraq and Vietnam etc), the Right should be libertarian and resist conscription, since it's mostly young men being thrown into the grinder to make certain lobbyist-armed businessmen rich at their expense.

This really is where the pure libertarians fall down. There is no way a 'voluntary service' country can repel conquest from a 'massive conscription' state like the Mongols under Genghis Khan, or the Germans under Hitler. It's pure fantasy and nonsense.

Post: #18

(06-10-2015 10:08 AM)Luisaceo Wrote:  I think some of you guys are missing the point here. They are not going to war, they are just doing military service.

I see. Well in general I support the idea of military or civil service. We had it a long time in Germany. In the past it was a good way for young men to see something different then their used environment.
Now we have the situation that kids spend their youth in school and social circles and go direct to university. Even there they hang around with the same bunch of people. When they then hit for the first time the real world when they have to do interns or take their first job, some are shocked.

Also now young people have to make their live choices more early. Maybe military service is not necessary any more it was a good why to connect the army with the population. General I also like the idea of a society that attribute social service for the community.

For Germany I would prefer a 1 year social service. Either you can go to the military or do some other stuff. For both, men and women. We have a volunteer social year and a lot of people do it.
Make it a duty for young people will increase their live experience and help them to grow up.

Post: #19

(06-10-2015 07:27 AM)Mage Wrote:  The elephant in the room question is: how did they made them to cry at the exact moment of photography? I doubt these men were photographed moments after recruiters interrupted their daily lives grabbed and drew them to barracks without warning.

These tears are artificial and all of this is staged to make men appear bad. I will not analyze que bono from this art project but it is clearly some propaganda.

Regarding conscription: it would be fine from men to demand to protect their country, but only if it is also demanded that women are chaste and faithful and politicians are honest and act in the best interests of nation's people. Nobody is motivated to protect whores and thieves.

Yeah it looks like they used eye drops to induce the tears. They use these pretty often on movie sets.

Post: #20

(06-10-2015 10:57 AM)Celtic_Austrian Wrote:  What a joke.

Conscription was reintroduced two months ago under Lithuania´s female president Dalia Grybauskaitė. What do we know about her? From wikipedia:
She is 59 years old without children, never married. (Also strong supporter of LGBT rights, likely a lesbian.)
Studied political economy at the Leningrad State University. After that, taught political economy of socialism and finance at the Vilnius Party High School. Was a member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and later the Communist Party of Lithuania. Did her PhD in Moscow. In 1990 she flip-flopped and went to Washington DC to study at Georgetown University´s School of Foreign Service. ().
She then returned to Lithuania and after some work in the Foreign Ministry, where she led negotiations ending in the country´s participation in the EU free trade agreements, and a few years working in the US embassy in Vilnius, she became Minister of Fincance. When the country joined the EU in 2004, she was named as EU commissioner the same day. In 2009 she ran for president of Lithuania and won. Reelected in 2014.

Quite the career, isn´t it? That´s her official CV. There is also an unofficial biography written by a Lithuanian journalist about her: Red Dalia.
And if only half of it is true, she was very red.

She has a blackbelt in karate. Nicknamed the Iron Lady and Steel Magnolia. Political rolemodels are Margaret Thatcher and Gandhi of course.
Boyotted the Winter Olympics in Sochi, mainly because of Russia´s stance on LGBT rights, as she is involvd in NGOs that promote this cause in Russia and Lithuania. (Human rights violations didn´t seem too important to Lithuania though when they allowed the US to operate secret CIA prison camps, torture and everything included, on their territory.)

Her comments on Russia:
"[Putin] uses nationality as a pretext to conquer territory with military means. That's exactly what Stalin and Hitler did."
Russia and Putin were "characterised by aggressiveness, violence, and a willingness to overstep boundaries."
She also called the Russian Federation "...a terrorist nation that should be stopped...".
Which apparently received widespread support from the Lithuanian parliament and media.

Now, to conscription.
She said, the reason conscription was reintroduced is "as a response to threats in the region", and that the country (member of EU and NATO!) is "already under attack".
The country needed to be able to protect itself as it was in the "frontier". She said her country bordered Russia and there were "threats and exercises practically every day".

How does Lithuania´s mighty army look like? About 15,000 soldiers, no military aircraft or tanks. So why are these young men forced to serve in the army? With conscription, it will grow to an impressive 20,000 soldiers. That will scare the Russians away, for sure. On a more realistic note, in case of conflict, the Lithuanian armed forces will be annihilated without the slightest chance.

So what´s the point of reintroducing conscription then?
Demonstrating what a tough, unyielding hardliner Grybauskaitė is. As good a president as any man. Compensatory behaviour.
It´s nothing more than a populist measure to contribute to her image as the Iron Lady and increase her popularity.
And for this, thousands of innocent young men have to be stripped of their rights and freedom.
She doesn´t have a problem with that. She´s not a man. She has no sons. Why would she.

I´m not a radical libertarian, but I want to end with a quote from Ayn Rand:
"Of all the statist violations of individual rights in a mixed economy, the military draft is the worst. It is an abrogation of rights. It negates man’s fundamental right—the right to life—and establishes the fundamental principle of statism: that a man’s life belongs to the state, and the state may claim it by compelling him to sacrifice it in battle." (An attitude that certainly seems natural to a former cadre of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.)

Conscription is slavery.

This is the most cogent post in this thread. Very insightful.

Post: #21

I lost all sympathy for that long-haired freak when I read it was only for 9 months.

Nut-up you pathetic little queef. I'm deeply opposed to conscription, but I'll make an exception in his case.

Post: #22

They're conscripting men into a possible scenario with Russia?

Did they not witness a conscript army in Ukraine get its ass handed to them or are they that blind?

Post: #23

Eastern Europe is one of those regions where i'd never criticize the apprehension of young men with regards to war.

The U.S. and Canada has never experienced the civilian decimating impact of two world wars. North America has always been insulated. I don't think these guys are pussies.

They are just realistic about what it means to be conscripted. Maybe some are babies but I really don't think it's all. They are part of the millenial generation but i'm sure they have heard stories and have some rudimentary understanding of their country's place in history to know what conscription really entails if things go bad. If you look at the last 1,000 years things go bad in the eastern european region quite often.

Post: #24

When you let women define masculinity for you, you are in a world of pain.

Post: #25

(06-10-2015 07:40 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  How has no one posted this yet. 37,000 men have just been removed from the player pool in Lithuania...a place with not unnattractive women. Women are most likely anxious about the social disruption.

Its a poosy paradise paradigm.

Get ye your plane tickets players!

Feels wrong.