U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-03-2009, 10:19 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,915 posts, read 7,086,025 times
Reputation: 948

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
"Separate but equal" is okay when it applies to gender, but not when it is applied to race?

Why segregate berthing?
To avoid embarassing you. The women would laugh and no one would get any sleep.

 
Old 10-03-2009, 07:58 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 40,273,555 times
Reputation: 10915
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
To avoid embarassing you. The women would laugh and no one would get any sleep.
Why would they laugh, I slept in my clothes while in the service. Easier to roll out of bed and report for duty that way.

Care to give a REAL answer? You can include "separate but equal" in your response if you like.
 
Old 10-05-2009, 03:15 AM
 
Location: NZ Wellington
2,782 posts, read 3,638,064 times
Reputation: 591
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
But their standards are much less than their male counterparts. If done fairly, it would be EQUAL, equal expectations. But of course, men aren't going to be sent home from the front lines pregnant either.
The standards should be equal. I agree.
People get sent away from the front lines all the time, why would this convince me that women shouldn't be there?
 
Old 10-05-2009, 04:48 AM
 
Location: On a Long Island in NY
7,624 posts, read 8,117,782 times
Reputation: 6949
Over 1,000,000 Russian women served in the Soviet military during WWII. Over 200,000 were decorated for valor in combat and almost 100 were awarded the Hero of the Soviet Union (the HSU/HRF is Russia's version of our Medal of Honor) - many for actions in direct combat including women who went hand to hand with German soldiers, medics, pilots, etc. One of the awards went to a Russian Navy female medic assigned to a Naval Infantry unit who participated in a commando style raid on a German fort in Croatia for saving the lives of dozens of wounded and protecting them (by killing several German soldiers) during a German counterattack. Several Russian female snipers had hundreds of kills. I think that ends this debate.

http://www.amazon.com/Heroines-Sovie...4739765&sr=8-1

Women can be twice as brutal and deadly as men and more then a few German soldiers found that out firsthand between June of 1941 and April of 1945.
 
Old 10-05-2009, 07:58 AM
 
1,158 posts, read 1,545,561 times
Reputation: 1150
When ever you put men and women in tight quarters, in close proximity they will have a natural tendency to get together. When they are getting "together" they are not thinking about their jobs...their duties...the ship, the plane their fellow troops.
Men and Women will always, when in proximity with each other gleefully and without any thought engage in all the various permutations of the endless variety of relationship "games" that make dating and loving and marriage and divorce...etc...such fascinating day time T.V. show subjects....do we need that in the military? No!
The US military functions fine w/o gays and w/o women in Priority One combat units. The real question should be....will having women in more and more combat units make the combat units better? How will having women on Subs make the day to day operations on the Sub better?.....HOW?
The Soviet or similar example of 'combat' women is a poor one because it is founded on half truths and socialist propaganda. The soviets made good use of women in the Red Army as a propaganda tool...their effectiveness in the actual fighting was marginal at best....The socialist world loves tall tales of the young soviet hottie former ballerina who killed single-handedly five million fascists with a sniper rifle. blah blah blah...
The truth is the Russian people suffered from such horrid purges at the hands of the soviets prior to the war, where professional military men and leaders were murdered by the million.....and horrid losses during the war as a result of mindless ego-maniacal patently stupid communist "leadership" that there were literally not enough men LEFT to fight...so women were INVOLUNTARILY pressed into service. True to form with the soviets, as is the case with every dictatorship...women and children were militarized....and this move is ALWAYS white-washed as being for "equality".....BS!
The sycophant western press and left-ie college student media never talk about the women who where herded by the tens of thousands out to the fields to dig tank traps....or as slaves in coal mines.....not as romantic....in a "true socialist person" context...
As for women in the western military organizations... again, how will having them in combat units make those units BETTER? What job will they do....that they can do so much more effectively than the males already here....that we must turn the system (that is already taxed)...completely upside down to accommodate them?
What we will have....like what we have now with the women that are already here in support units...(a very flexible definition) is plenty of sexual activity, endless harassment complaints....jealousies...affairs...broken marriages....ruined careers...women getting pregnant....because they've had enough and want to go home....Wow...now that will help esprit de corps....(NOT).....the girl gets tired of living her "rambet" I wana be a man fantasy....so she gets knocked up so she can go home....nice. All of this at immense cost to the government....and therefore.....to us.
O.K.
Women on Subs. How stupid. Stupid enough that they're on ships.
What will it cost to add facilities to the Subs for women? Bathrooms, Berthing, medical support, emotional support etc etc.
How many careers can the Navy afford to have ruined by BS harassment suits brought forward by women whose presence was hitherto not an issue?
The working environment on Ships and Subs and in Combat units can be intensely stressful...its already bad enough.......now some idiots are seriously considering adding one of the most stressful human elements to the mix...that of sex.

REALLY?
REALLY?

It is not clear how adding the sexual element will make it better...Think....all those hormone crazed people...in their late teens and early twenties...now the boys and girls are together. What do YOU THINK will happen?...
Yeah...that's right....they're gonna F--K!
What will all this cost the taxpayer? Will the nation see some sort of realistic benefit from this? What will be the time lost to all the activities designed to support women in units where their benefit is negligible? The time lost is time that could have been better spent training troops to conduct military operations...not dealing with EO or 'gender' issues. Has anyone done any sort of study on the number of sexual harassment complaints in the military now...and what that all costs????
One reason why the US military has functioned so well for so long is that we have resisted the stupid temptations of mutant politicians to use the military to forward their social engineering objectives.

I really wonder how long we will have to suffer all this stupid social engineering crap....how long the system will continue to function before we realize that the experiment of trying to make men women....and women men....was a failure...

EPIC FAILURE!

Last edited by Happy Cells; 10-05-2009 at 08:09 AM..
 
Old 10-05-2009, 11:49 AM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 20,311,199 times
Reputation: 8606
Quote:
Originally Posted by WIHS2006 View Post
Over 1,000,000 Russian women served in the Soviet military during WWII. Over 200,000 were decorated for valor in combat and almost 100 were awarded the Hero of the Soviet Union (the HSU/HRF is Russia's version of our Medal of Honor) - many for actions in direct combat including women who went hand to hand with German soldiers, medics, pilots, etc. One of the awards went to a Russian Navy female medic assigned to a Naval Infantry unit who participated in a commando style raid on a German fort in Croatia for saving the lives of dozens of wounded and protecting them (by killing several German soldiers) during a German counterattack. Several Russian female snipers had hundreds of kills. I think that ends this debate.

Amazon.com: Heroines of the Soviet Union 1941-45 (Elite) (9781841765983): Henry Sakaida, Christa Hook: Books

Women can be twice as brutal and deadly as men and more then a few German soldiers found that out firsthand between June of 1941 and April of 1945.
I agree, but the russians were in a slightly different situation than we are right now.

The Russians were in the possibility of having their country taken over by the Germans. The Russians almost lost in WWII. Just like the United States, if we were invaded by a foreign force capable of overtaking us (however unlikely that is today), every man, woman, and child would probably take up arms and fight.

I have no problem with women in the combat situations we have today, as long as they can meet the exact same physical standards as the men they serve with.
 
Old 10-05-2009, 05:10 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 40,273,555 times
Reputation: 10915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gplex View Post
The standards should be equal. I agree.
People get sent away from the front lines all the time, why would this convince me that women shouldn't be there?
Because pregnancy is a preventable condition, and shouldn't be a "free pass".
 
Old 10-05-2009, 05:17 PM
 
Location: NZ Wellington
2,782 posts, read 3,638,064 times
Reputation: 591
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
Because pregnancy is a preventable condition, and shouldn't be a "free pass".
Boo hoo, women might be able to get a "free pass", sounds more like jealousy then logic.
 
Old 10-05-2009, 05:22 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 40,273,555 times
Reputation: 10915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gplex View Post
Boo hoo, women might be able to get a "free pass", sounds more like jealousy then logic.
But men don't have to leave. So logic would dictate to just keep the one affected pejoratively off the battlefield to begin with.
 
Old 10-05-2009, 05:46 PM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,321,196 times
Reputation: 2558
Quote:
Originally Posted by th3vault View Post
Military may lift ban on women in submarines - Yahoo! News--

Now the Pentagon wants to the lift the ban on women serving on submarines. What do y'all think about women serving in combat roles in the military?

I wouldn't have a problem with it.....if the physical standards are equalized. To me, giving women much lower PT requirements results in less qualifications for the same job. There should be one set of PT requirements, I simply do not understand how a man can fail and be deemed unfit for the job....yet a woman can score lower and be deemed fit for the job. It's the same job, right? Same tasks, same duties....

If women are to be allowed in all the roles in the military, then the PT standards should be equalized to the standards the job requires.

Equality also means equal qualifications.
They can vote, they should serve if right beside men.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top