Let’s have a look at a few facts relating to all of that (from the playlist of man, woman and myth).

Equality — War

[1] Part 1 of 3[2]
[3] Part 2 of 3
[4] Part 3 of 3

Here is another idea that is used over and over to re-write history (the people doing the rewriting call it “herstory”):

Hilary Clinton: “Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat. Women often have to flee from the only homes they have ever known. Women are often the refugees from conflict and sometimes, more frequently in today’s warfare, victims. Women are often left with the responsibility, alone, of raising the children.” — in a [5] speech at the First Ladies’ Conference on Domestic Violence, San Salvador, El Salvador, November 17, 1998

A question arises out of that.  If Hilary Clinton is so terribly concerned about all the poor women who have to raise children all by themselves, how come she does so much to fuel the war against the family, a war that deprives far greater numbers of women and children of husbands and fathers now and each year than any war during the last century ever did?
Well, things could be worse.  Let’s be grateful she’s only a junior senator and not a military justice.

The point made by Hillary Clinton was made even more forcefully by Louise Arbour, former Canadian Surpreme Court Justice, now involved in the persecution of Bosnian war criminals at the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague, when she commented on the mass murder of Croatian men:

“My mental image of a mass grave was that it would be more of a trench, where the bodies would be lined up almost in file,” she recalled last week. “But these bodies were thrown together indiscriminately in a hole. Then I noticed their clothes. They were young men, and the first thing I thought about was their mothers.” Arbour is a mother of three herself, although “it would be too corny, too sentimental, to suggest that you go back to work suddenly fired up. But it made the tragedy very human, and that’s not something you get here in the office every day. I watched the bodies come out of the ground and it was like they were coming alive again. They were demanding to be identified. They were demanding,” she said, and there was not even a hint of sentimentality in her voice, “that their mothers be told.” ([6] Full Story)

See how that works?  We must not mourn the men who lost their lives.  We must not have concern about the tortures they experienced and their killing.  We must mourn the pain of the mothers who lost their sons, for the simple reason that the primary victims of that war were the mothers who lost their children.  The children, especially given that they were almost exclusively men who were killed, are not what matters as much as does the pain of their mothers who survived and are therefore the primary victims of the Bosnian War.

More at “[7] The execution of men who show cowardice in the face of the enemy”
____________
Today I went to participate in the Remembrance Day ceremonies at the Bruderheim Community Centre and at the cenotaph at the Bruderheim Moravian Church. A few speeches were given, and the sacrifices of men  and women who gave their lives in two major wars were duly recognized.  Exact statistics were not offered, except for those that were included in a handout, in which the sacrifices made by men were duly normalized down to those made by women.  In doing so, the fact that it was virtually and exclusively only men who made those sacrifices is duly and politically-correct obscured.  That is the purpose of the re-writing of history that began some decades ago and is continuing today.

Of course, if you watched the three video clips identified above, you know how that normalizing-down of men’s sacrifices, down to the level of women’s sacrifices in wars, cheapens the sacrifices and suffering by men. So, for the sake of keeping the correct history alive and not having anyone indoctrinate us into accepting what they wish us to come to believe in, let’s take a look at some of those numbers for the sacrifices made by Canadian men and women.  Let’s [8] take an honest look at their respective contributions.

Quoting from that web page:

Canadian Casualties in World War II

Not only was Canada’s war effort in World War II far more extensive than that in World War I, it also had a much more lasting impact on Canadian society. By the end of the war, more than 1,000,000 Canadians (about 50,000 of whom were women [who were employed exclusively in service positions]) had served in the three services. Casualties were lower than in the previous war, with approximately 42,000 killed or having died in service and 54,400 wounded. [Source: [9] Encyclopaedia Britannica]

The more-than 21,000 women who served in the Canadian army during World War II filled an array of roles, although they were excluded from combat duty. More than 2,000 were posted overseas and at least 25 lost their lives in the line of duty. Source: Toronto Star, Sep. 19, 2004. 01:00 AM “[10] Amid fond memories, army women disband Proud wartime service created lifelong friends“

In contrast, more than a million Canadian men served in the Canadian Armed Forces during Word War II, and about 50,000 of them died in the service of their country, one out of every 20 that served, as opposed to the 25 women that died, one out of every 840 women that served, according to the numbers published in the article by the Toronto Star.

More: http://fathersforlife.org/hist/wwiicas.htm#Canada
_____________
Canada never had military draft or military draft registration for women.