Maurice's barbaric YAWP

我在威尼斯的那個晚上，一直流連在聖馬可廣場及周圍如阡陌般水道交錯的市井。
不肯離去。
時間在指向十點的位子，天色仍泛著不明的藍色。
廣場上的露天樂團的鋼琴手就位，四周原本古舊的迴廊立牆漸漸亮起顯目的光點。
我想，這才是夜晚的浪漫吧。

下午萊登難得放晴，短暫的好天氣。
坐在窗邊，甚麼事都不做，雖然滿地的行李要裝箱打包。
但總似乎還留戀著，不想這麼早就把記憶存檔，然後關閉應用程式。

我的好友，應其要求，姑隱其名，簡稱「中S」。

1.2 Arms in hands: issues, approaches and structures
Part I will deliver an introduction of basic ideas and outline issues to be discussed in this thesis. In Part II, the author will give the whole picture of ECJ’s Dory decision and indicate the missing piece in the decision. Why ECJ in Dory brought to a standstill from its previous case law on application of Community law on organizations in the armed forces of Member States? The ECJ suggested in Dory that there is a distinction between national decisions concerning organizations in the armed forces and national choices of military organization for defense of their territory or of their essential interests. Is it really distinguishable between matters of military organization related to genuine decisions of national defense and those mere choices of employment policy? How to determine the so-called “primary and second choice” to organize and manage the national defense? It is crucial for application scope of Community law.

More important for application of EC sex equality law in the armed forces, Dory also remarked some issues ECJ avoided to deal with or failed to solve. First of all, Dory is concerned about the compulsory obligation served in the military. Secondly, the German national court referred the preliminary-ruling question to ECJ is whether or not the “male-only” conscription was contrary to Community law, as result of the military service delaying access to civil work or training. Does it discriminate men based on the ground of sex? In author’s opinion, Dory is a good chance for ECJ to redefine the notion of “discrimination” on the ground of “sex” within a collective angel or “group rights,” for example the sex role of women and men, lesbian and gay men.

Maybe the target nowadays is not to discover what we are, but to refuse what we are […]. The conclusion would be that the political, ethical, social, philosophical problem of our days is not to try to liberate the individual from the state, and from the state's institutions, but to liberate us both from the state and from the type of individualization which is linked to the state. (Emphasis added)

I. Introduction

1.1 Fighting begins…