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.
But really, can anybody be surprised that the Right is the side opposing female representation in the armed forces? After they opposed female police officers, firefighters, workers, students, and black soldiers, officers, firefighters, workers, students...?
There are two issues here that keep being confused:
Female representation in the armed services. I won't argue this one, Americans continue to surprise me in how they want to ignore female and male biology.
If that representation has to be integrated or segregated. I say segregated because integrating does all that I mentioned above and makes our combat units less effective and jeopardize national security.
There is no way to address this issue since it's rooted in biology and no amount of social engineering can reverse our biology.
You know what?
If there are actual physical requirements that are necessary in the field of combat, then EVERYONE should be held to the same standard. Men and women.
Let 'em in and let 'em fight. But they have to be able to pass muster. And muster should be something relevant to the job.
From personal experience on this one, Desert Storm and far forward during the fighting, women can handle it mostly. I had more males fall out than women. The women dropped trou and relieved themselves beside their vehicles like the rest of us. They went without showers for months just like the guys. There were no his and hers latrines.
As for serving as infantrymen, a few might try it, the vast majority won't just like the vast majority of males don't want infantry. It will be mostly junior officers who will want to give it a go.
As for lifting weight, there are a lot of males who cannot lift that much and sustain it. And in Afg there have been women moving with the forward troops and used as interface with Afg females. Our male soldiers cannot approach Moslem women so it is left to female teams to do it. Often, the info from the women is better than from men.
The fact is, Panetta only wants to put into policy what has been in practice since Desert Storm.
Why do I get the feeling you've never done serious manual labor your entire life?
I'd guess it's because you make an assumption based on no evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
Women can definitely do combat, there are however certain roles in the military that regardless of sex one has to meet certain physical specifications for that task.
Agreed. And those specifications should ensure that the individual can perform the task.
From personal experience on this one, Desert Storm and far forward during the fighting, women can handle it mostly. I had more males fall out than women. The women dropped trou and relieved themselves beside their vehicles like the rest of us. They went without showers for months just like the guys. There were no his and hers latrines.
As for serving as infantrymen, a few might try it, the vast majority won't just like the vast majority of males don't want infantry. It will be mostly junior officers who will want to give it a go.
As for lifting weight, there are a lot of males who cannot lift that much and sustain it. And in Afg there have been women moving with the forward troops and used as interface with Afg females. Our male soldiers cannot approach Moslem women so it is left to female teams to do it. Often, the info from the women is better than from men.
The fact is, Panetta only wants to put into policy what has been in practice since Desert Storm.
Yeah, I think the naysayers are usually the ones that have only preconceptions to work with and no actual experience.
IMO, women who are under such scrutiny and who have been judged as wanting before they've even started, tend to over perform, not under.
At least until things settle down and everyone just gets on with the job.
If that representation has to be integrated or segregated. I say segregated because integrating does all that I mentioned above and makes our combat units less effective and jeopardize national security.
I will not accuse you of being sexist or racist. I will point out, however, that your argument is effectively equivalent, word for word with some context substitutions, with statements against racial integration of the military and female integration into the workforce.
People tend to overestimate biological differences between groups.
People tend to overestimate biological differences between groups.
I don't think there is a way to overestimate the biological differences between a man and a woman. A man cannot get pregnant. That's already a profound difference. But this isn't about women can't lift so much weight or do so many push ups, that's a factor but not an important. The important factor is man's intentions towards women and vice versa. They're profoundly different than that to other men and this upsets the dynamic. If you're a man you can appreciate this.
Anyways to my best knowledge, there have never been successful integrated armies of men and women. There are cases of women fighting. It happened to some degree in Chechnya but they never were in a small company of men, it was always separate. If you know of some historical example please share.
That being said, if you were consistent you could use that logic to integrate prisons and pro sports.
Have all that are for women in combat been in combat yourselves?
Do any of you remember when the iraq war forst started and the there a young female captured? I forget her name.
I don't think we want our women subjected to treatment like that.
I am personally against it but, I am willing to let it happen only to prove that it shouldn't be. Just remember when a women IS captured and is repeatedly raped, tortured and murdered, it is on your heads
So the only place anything awful like this could happen is Iraq?
The important factor is man's intentions towards women and vice versa. They're profoundly different than that to other men and this upsets the dynamic. If you're a man you can appreciate this.
I'm a man, I'm a vet, and being a liberal/decadent Scandinavian, I have also experienced plenty of non-sexual co-ed nudity - saunas, showers after sports events, ocean swimming etc. It's a matter of conditioning, and it seems to me that if there's one thing the military excels at, it's instilling specific mindsets in young people. If you can train people to overcome their fear of storming into gunfire, you can bloody well train them to overcome their baser urges when faced with an undressed member of the opposite sex.
FWIW, my unit did in fact have 2 female NCOs, and it was a standing order that in matters of modesty they were to be treated like their male counterparts.
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.
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.
