Mansplaining and Whitesplaining: or, Silence, White Male Hetero Satan

I recently became acquainted with the concept of "mansplaining." As I understand it, the term began as a way for feminists to describe a stereotypical situation in which a naïve, ignorant, or boorish man tries condescendingly to explain something to an intellectually superior woman. (Note: this is not bigotry, because Male Privilege.) Since its coining, though, the term has expanded as a means of invalidating any non-feminist opinion held by a man. If you have not been tutored in or have refused to accept the dogmas of a feminist worldview, then any objection you may voice to a feminist is necessarily ignorant and naïve. For example, suggestion that male brain chemistry, e.g. high levels of testosterone, rather than culture and privilege, is the cause of both male violence and male dynamism would be pooh-poohed on as flagrant mansplaining. Ditto on a rejection of Male Guilt because you have never oppressed a woman: the critical theory you-benefit-from-an-unfair-system-therefore-you're-guilty-too answer is the only right answer. If you've rejected this idea, either because you don't beleive that the system is as unfair as they say, or because you feel that it's just a rebranding of collective guilt, you're mansplaining. The same basic pattern goes for "Whitesplaining," "Christsplaining," or any other "explaining" from a non-leftist perspective (most tellingly, "rightsplaining").
This all boils down to intellectual and political orthodoxy, and the silencing of non-liberal opinions. Just like men are not allowed to question feminist opinions, a white person cannot cast aspersions on Michael Brown or condemn the lynch mob in Ferguson because of "White Privilege," straights can't go against orthodox opinions on homosexual issues, and so on. Conversely, a woman who goes against feminism is a stupid, brainwashed twit, conservative blacks are Uncle Toms, conservative gays are "chickens voting for KFC," etc.
The only real answer is a simple and unequivocal rejection of these ideas. The more we refuse to accept "white privilege," "male privilege," "mansplaining," etc., and the more we vocally out thes ideas as collectivist censorship and propaganda tools, the more they will be rightfully recognized by the public as leftist dog-whistle terms and not legitimate, much less revolutionary, ideas. As a good friend of mine was fond of saying, "Let collectivism burn in the light of day."

Taking out the "Mobile Infantry"

With all the new technology these days, I sometimes feel like it will soon be impossible for citizens in any developed country to challenge a tyrannical government.  Helicopters and tanks are susceptible to infantry, as we saw in Vietnam and Afghanistan, but what about drones? Satellites?  Night vision goggles?  And in the developed world,  (America excepted) there is very little wilderness to hide in. Cities are replete with security and traffic cameras.

All of that would make things difficult, but not impossible.

As I was discussing this with a friend one day, he brought up a story he'd seen on the news about the development of powered Armor, like the kind in the book Starship Troopers.  If you're unfamiliar with the concept, read about it here.

First of all, powered armor will never fully replace infantry and standard military vehicles. Even if they could come up with a power source light enough to sustain it for more than a few hours, its range and capabilities would still be too limited for most operations: if batteries were used to power the suit, the only way to use powered armor-soldiers would be in the defense, or in vehicles where they could have their batteries charging while approaching the enemy. Flexibility, range of motion, ability to accurately aim and perform fine motor tasks would likely never be perfected. Maintenence nightmares increase exponentially as technological complexity grows. In addition, a rotten and corrupt bureaucratic tyranny will find it difficult to afford such weapons, and will produce models of doubtful quality and reliability.

So how would you beat the ones they did field? The same way you defeat enemy vehicles: rockets and bombs.  Grenades would probably kill the operator, too, if delivered  accurately. In extremis rifle fire would break vision and hearing devices, damage moving parts, and degrade the machine's ability to fight, just like with a tank or IFVs. But it would be even easier than all that. Such weapons would rely on  massive amounts of maintenance by highly trained operators and technicians, and a steady supply system to deliver expensive batteries, fuels, and parts. Each unit you destroyed would be a multi-million dollar loss to the enemy. Disrupt the supply chain, break the machines and wipe out operators with IEDs and anti-tank weapons,  target maintenance personnel and facilities, and soon the whole program would implode. Cut the strings and the marionette will tumble, no matter how impressive or formidable he is.

OCP for All Services?

The Army announced this year that Scorpion II, a multicam-type pattern owned by the Army, will replace the ugly and ineffective greenish-gray digital camo currently in service (it's called OCP). This comes after congress passed a law last year calling for all four military services to return to a common camo pattern.

Some have suggested the Marine "Marpat" for all services, but I think something bigger is brewing. I think the Army's decision to start aggressively implementing a "new" camo, one that is already well-liked and widely used, is a signal that the battle-proven multicam will be pushed as the new military-wide camo. It's already being worn by all four overseas services in Afghanistan - a degree of universality that hasn't been seen since the BDU and DCU were dumped. And I think in a peeing contest between the tiny USMC and the Army Juggernaut, the Army will probably get its way. Either pattern (MARPAT and Scorpion) will serve our troops fine. But I really expect that, when the chest beating and anatomy measuring is all said and done, we'll see Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines in the brown and green spotted OCP.