G.I. Jane coming to a foxhole near you...

SDA1C

AsSiMiLaTeD wrote: »

If someone can prove that enough women applicants wash out and don't make the cut and that this failure rate is significantly higher than for men then we can have that discussion. But I've seen nothing of the like, only generalizations based on the whole population.

You are correct...there is no supporting data to verify the washout rate. Why? Because nothing this stupid has ever been done in a society that sees their women as more valuable that to serve them up on a platter to the enemy.

SDA1C

shawn474 wrote: »

if I was a soldier and was in combat, it wouldn't matter if it was a man or woman beside me as long as someone was beside me fighting with me.

About the time your leg is laying next to you, there is nape on the way, your issued hole hunny is a whopping 110 lbs with a wet head and your safe zone is 1.5k away you might be reconsidering that point of view...Just Sayin.

shawn474

SDA1C wrote: »

About the time your leg is laying next to you, there is nape on the way, your issued hole hunny is a whopping 110 lbs with a wet head and your safe zone is 1.5k away you might be reconsidering that point of view...Just Sayin.

Supreme sexist narrow minnded generalizations based on no real data or facts; just a point of view that has no basis in the real world. I know of 110lb guys and gals that are much tougher, stronger, faster than their frames would indicate. Your opinion may change if that "hole hunny" is dragging your pissing down your leg self from that foxhole when nape is on the way. Unreal......

txcoastal1

In the field special provisions will have to be supplied and rendered for females. So if a platoon of 50 men and 2 women, where do we draw the line providing special needs?

shawn474

txcoastal1 wrote: »

In the field special provisions will have to be supplied and rendered for females. So if a platoon of 50 men and 2 women, where do we draw the line providing special needs?

Why toe the line now? What are these special provisions? God forbid we say the word...............There is one special provision that I can think of and nothing more. Same rations, food, drink, water, clothing, etc. that the regular male / female soldiers have and no different field provisions than the men would need except for one obvious exception. We can be as sexist and explanatory as we want until we have to say the word tampon?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Give me a break man.

BlueFox

Didn't any of you guys watch Starship Troopers? As long as locker rooms, showers, bathrooms, barracks, etc. are no longer "seperate but equal" facilities, I have no problem at all with this change.

AsSiMiLaTeD

txcoastal1 wrote: »

In the field special provisions will have to be supplied and rendered for females. So if a platoon of 50 men and 2 women, where do we draw the line providing special needs?

That's actually a good point. I don't know the extent to which that scenario really exists, but if you're having to spend an extra 100% to maintain twice the facilities for an additional 1% headcount then that's something we'll need to figure out. We're pretty smart, I bet we can figure out a way to make it work without spending too much.

txcoastal1

Come on Shawn your a smart guy, there are men on both sides and entire countries that have little or no respect for women and the females will more than likely be a major target to expose weakness.

If there is capture, torture and/or killings of a couple of men we often call it collateral damage if the same happens with a woman or God forbid a group of women the media will have a field day possibly disrupting an entire military movement. There is already big protest for the battles we are already in, let's multiply that when the crap really hits the fan.

Not being sexist at all just common since and reality of human nature as we know it.

txcoastal1

BlueFox wrote: »

Didn't any of you guys watch Starship Troopers? As long as locker rooms, showers, bathrooms, barracks, etc. are no longer "seperate but equal" facilities, I have no problem at all with this change.

Yeah, but the show also wrapped around who was gonna nail the hot chicks:biggrin:

dkg999

Hasn't the Israeli military allowed women in combat roles for quite some time? I'd love to see the faces of a group of Taliban fighters when they realize they are being slaughtered by a squad of uncleansed females who had bacon for breakfast.

txcoastal1

dkg999 wrote: »

Hasn't the Israeli military allowed women in combat roles for quite some time? I'd love to see the faces of a group of Taliban fighters when they realize they are being slaughtered by a squad of uncleansed females who had bacon for breakfast.

They are used as border guards

"As Michal, a combat fitness instructor in the IDF, says, ‘No one wants to even think of the possibility of an Israeli girl falling into the hands of the enemy.’ Our history is already filled with too many such stories of atrocities.”

I don't have any problems with women in the military, let them fly drones, hell put them in a plane or a even a tank, but place them where they can be equal both morally and physically in any situation.

BlueFox

dkg999 wrote: »

Hasn't the Israeli military allowed women in combat roles for quite some time? I'd love to see the faces of a group of Taliban fighters when they realize they are being slaughtered by a squad of uncleansed females who had bacon for breakfast.

And drink beer at the end of the day!

SDA1C

shawn474 wrote: »

Why toe the line now? What are these special provisions? God forbid we say the word...............There is one special provision that I can think of and nothing more. Same rations, food, drink, water, clothing, etc. that the regular male / female soldiers have and no different field provisions than the men would need except for one obvious exception. We can be as sexist and explanatory as we want until we have to say the word tampon?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Give me a break man.

I wanted to take the time to thank you for your military service shawn474.

tonyb

I just wonder if it would be of benefit to only have women in combat that one week out of the month when they can be a raving lunatic....then back to support roles when they return to normal.:biggrin:

I really don't view this as a problem worthy of such tempered discussion. Like a few of us have said, once one or a few get captured, raped, tortured, and beheaded, it will all come to an end. Sad thing is, some woman somewhere will have to be that sacrificial lamb to revert back to common sense.

cnh

txcoastal1 wrote: »

Come on Shawn your a smart guy, there are men on both sides and entire countries that have little or no respect for women and the females will more than likely be a major target to expose weakness.

If there is capture, torture and/or killings of a couple of men we often call it collateral damage if the same happens with a woman or God forbid a group of women the media will have a field day possibly disrupting an entire military movement. There is already big protest for the battles we are already in, let's multiply that when the crap really hits the fan.

Not being sexist at all just common since and reality of human nature as we know it.

Is that "human nature" argument there based on an extensive analysis of cultural variations and conceptions across time and space using the greatest amount of "ethnographic" data available in the discipline that studies that, or just based on what modern Industrial, or our "own" society thinks human nature is? Because it is quite variegated, you know! So much variation in what people think in different spaces, places?

What we do know is that such nature is somewhat mutable and also, partially dependent on "nurture". So pure, raw biology...yeah I'd like to see what that even "is"?

One of the greatest anthropologists of the last century once said that "the most 'natural' is often the most 'cultural' of things".



cnh

tonyb

There are certain aspects of human nature that transcend cultures, not an issue in my book anyway. Boy, has this subject taken a left turn.

cnh

tonyb wrote: »

There are certain aspects of human nature that transcend cultures, not an issue in my book anyway. Boy, has this subject taken a left turn.

You can certainly take such a position but that then has to be scientifically "demonstrated" and supported by a cross cultural analysis. Generalizations that even exist in Biology textbooks that are used to teach in that discipline have been shown to contain, for example, gender bias in the description of even such seemingly OBJECTIVE phenomena as how a sperm fertilizes an egg? Somehow the sperm is rendered as a modern "male" acting like one and the egg a passive "female" receiving the sperm into herself. But if you actually described, without embellishing or anthropomorphiizing sperms and eggs interactions you would come to understand that the process is more complex and cannot be reduced to such erroneous, and obviously "cultural" descriptions.

The parameters of what "human nature" is or isn't are open to question. Even philosophers in our own Western trajectory cannot agree on what it is! Read from Plato on down to the present and see whether we are basically "good" or "evil". There IS NO agreement but endless debate?

cnh

shawn474

txcoastal1 wrote: »

Come on Shawn your a smart guy, there are men on both sides and entire countries that have little or no respect for women and the females will more than likely be a major target to expose weakness.

If there is capture, torture and/or killings of a couple of men we often call it collateral damage if the same happens with a woman or God forbid a group of women the media will have a field day possibly disrupting an entire military movement. There is already big protest for the battles we are already in, let's multiply that when the crap really hits the fan.

Not being sexist at all just common since and reality of human nature as we know it.

We are acting as if women haven't been killed in wars prior to this. They have been and will continue to be killed; and just as they defend my rights of freedom, I defend their right to be in combat if they so choose. I have a great deal of respect for our military (male and female); perhaps only second to my parents and my grandfather (a US Air Force veteran).

SDA1C wrote: »

I wanted to take the time to thank you for your military service shawn474.

Never claimed to be in the military and would never let anyone think otherwise as it would be disrespectful to those who do/did serve this great country. I am sure I have different viewpoints of a lot of people on here; if they happen to be current or former military I want to again say thank you for allowing me to express my opinion and for providing the freedoms that we enjoy today.

SDA1C

shawn474 wrote: »

Never claimed to be in the military and would never let anyone think otherwise as it would be disrespectful to those who do/did serve this great country. I am sure I have different viewpoints of a lot of people on here; if they happen to be current or former military I want to again say thank you for allowing me to express my opinion and for providing the freedoms that we enjoy today.

Did I thank you Shawn? I'm sorry ...I confused you with someone that actually has perspective. Thanks for clarifying that for me.

shawn474

SDA1C wrote: »

Did I thank you Shawn? I'm sorry ...I confused you with someone that actually has perspective. Thanks for clarifying that for me.

Exactly the kinds of posts that have no place on the forum or elsewhere. Keyboard commando types that love to be Tommy Tough Guy and flex their genitalia on a computer. Perspective? I think I explained quite clearly my position and my reasons for doing so. You, on the contrary, lend "perspective" by spewing out sexist "facts" that belong in 1950. Thanks for proving my point that not only do you lack the very perspective you claim to have, but also prove yourself to be a complete (fill in the blank) in the process.

SDA1C

I'll give you my perspective. 0451 Air Delivery USMC 1st LSB, 1st FSSG, A co 1990-. Women working living breathing and sleeping with and around the men. We took care of them as we would our mother. Do they have sharp minds? Yes very much so. Does it take them twice as long as ANY of the men to complete the same courses and training? Yep! Would I, or anyone else with experience, rather have a 110 lb girl in a roll simply to fulfill the equal opportunities act or would I, you, or any one else with a brain rather have the 250 lb navy seal combat vet watching their/your back? It's like picking Micky Rooney for a pickup Bbal game....

If you can't listen to experience then I suggest you follow Panetta! I do love the name calling though. Really shows your education through vocabulary.

http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/article/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal

SDA1C

P.s. Your hard drive couldn't handle the download for you to see me flex my genitalia so get that idea out of your head right now!:twisted:

SDA1C

In case the link doesn't work

http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/article/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal

shawn474

First of all, now that you mention it we can compare education anytime you want to do so.

However, I thank you (and everyone else) for your service.

Let me offer this - i have a great deal of perspective on many things in speaking with, knowing intimately and studying in detail my grandfathers (a WWII veteran) service (among others). I respect EVERYONE who has served regardless of whether or not your opinion matches mine. Does your experience make you more qualified to speak on the subject? Maybe so. Does it entitle you to belittle those who disagree or propose that you have the ONLY answer to a question that was posed on an audio forum? Hell no. People can disagree, be validated and not get you so angry that you have to feel validated by telling someone you dont know and never met that they lack perspective. So save me the lecture. And I must admit that it was a clever way to introduce yourself as USMC.

My position is and will remain that if a woman can complete the same training as a man and be willing to serve in combat, they should be able to do so regardless of what you think. People seem to forget that there are people much smarter than we are making these kinds of decisions. Do you think these decisions were over a beer saying, "Hey man, we should have women serve in combat!!!!" And the President saying, "Yep, good idea. Done!!!!" If you think there hasnt been detailed discussion, study and research for them to pass this, then you are all mistaken. Again, give me one good reason why a female who passes the saem tests and training than a male counterpart cannot participate in combat? And because N.O.W. will protest once a female dies isnt a valid answer.

SDA1C

shawn474 wrote: »

first of all, now that you mention it we can compare education anytime you want to do so.

However, i thank you (and everyone else) for your service. my pleasure!

does it entitle you to belittle those who disagree or propose that you have the only answer to a question that was posed on an audio forum?
i am not sure where a difference of opinion was met with belittlement and i do apologize if you took it that way. Not at all my intention.
people can disagree, be validated and not get you so angry that you have to feel validated by telling someone you dont know and never met that they lack perspective. Fact remains...you do lack perspective. No fault of your own but still the facts.

And i must admit that it was a clever way to introduce yourself as usmc. Not the first time i have mentioned it. So not all that sly of an introduction. But thanks you anyway.

My position is and will remain that if a woman can complete the same training as a man and be willing to serve in combat, they should be able to do so regardless of what you think. My position precisely.
People seem to forget that there are people much smarter than we are making these kinds of decisions. Do you think these decisions were over a beer saying, "hey man, we should have women serve in combat!!!!" and the president saying, "yep, good idea. Done!!!!" if you think there hasnt been detailed discussion, study and research for them to pass this, then you are all mistaken. no. I think it was made by an out the door (short timer if you will) with no repercussion as to the aftermath. Just let it fly and get out of town before it hits the fan.

again, give me one good reason why a female who passes the same tests and training than a male counterpart cannot participate in combat? And because n.o.w. Will protest once a female dies isn't a valid answer. Based solely on proportions and physical ability. Regardless of "women are equal", they are not physically. A 250 lb man will be exponentially more effective in combat than a 250 lb woman. If you need the muscle, which you commonly do in combat and small teams tactics, you wont get it from as much from a woman's physique and you will from a mans. Txcoastal laid it down. I really don't need to repeat it. If you are shipping a body shouldn't that body be the strongest we have? Pretty simple concept man.

polk

sucks2beme

I believe it's not study, but politics driving this.
And when it comes time to do it, a good pencil whipping
will ensue. Remove all barriers, and make it happen.
This is the fear we have. As other ex-marines have stated,
this issue is pretty big. No one I know of goes to USMC
boot camp and finds it enjoyable. Everyone has that
"what did I just get myself into?" moment. But all who
make it through understand why it's like that.
The watering down has already been suggested in
previous administrations. They really would also like
the Seals to have 100% pass rate, or darn close to it.
And normal grunt training for USMC builds upon these
skills. Clearly, there is a lot more women can do in war.
But most likely this thing is going to freefall.

shawn474

Not disagreeing with any you said per se. But not all combat soldiers are 250lbs. My question to you is do you know of any 170 lb combat soldiers? I do. And my point is, if thats your criteria, why shouldnt a similarly trained and tested female not have the opportunity to fight. Could a female not be a trained sniper? How much of actual combat is hand to hand combat these days? I am askin because i dont know. We hae female law enforcement officers, swat team members, etc right? Not saying they are the same, but women pass those tests and competencies the same way that men do right? In the military i dont think it would be common but why not give them the chance is my point.

sucks2beme

shawn474 wrote: »

Not disagreeing with any you said per se. But not all combat soldiers are 250lbs. My question to you is do you know of any 170 lb combat soldiers? I do. And my point is, if thats your criteria, why shouldnt a similarly trained and tested female not have the opportunity to fight. Could a female not be a trained sniper? How much of actual combat is hand to hand combat these days? I am askin because i dont know. We hae female law enforcement officers, swat team members, etc right? Not saying they are the same, but women pass those tests and competencies the same way that men do right? In the military i dont think it would be common but why not give them the chance is my point.

Once again. shooting isn't the problem. It's getting there with all your stuff.
At this point, it's going to happen. I have no delusions that it won't

But let's be clear. If someone standing next to you tells you they want to be a Marine,
take a step away. Not a lot of clear thinking going on there.
You want to be a Marine and go into combat? Better take more than a few steps.
That person clearly isn't right in the head!
Bad chow, bad quarters, hard training, and every time you go out into
the areas off base, everybody around you hates you.
Every time you walk next to someone, you find yourself walking in step.
You drink too much, curse about every other word, and pretty much
are the blunt instrument that you appear. The only people who get along
with you are other Marines. Other than longer hair, women Marines pretty much
fall into the same camp. And we don't have a lot of tolerance for nonsense.
You say something we think is useless, you aren't going to get a lot of
conversation. Bubba don't dance.
It's been a long time, but parts of that stick with me today.
That's the basis for this thread. It's not an adventure.
It's not summer camp. It's not being all you can be.
It's long periods of extreme boredom mixed with
short periods of crazy.
So please don't make it sound like a job over
State Farm Insurance. This needs to be done correctly,
but Uncle Sam will most likely do it in typical fashion.
FUBAR.

tonyb

Good post, time to get the bean bag game out and settle this ?

I propose the first female be Rosie Odonnel.....she'd scare the crap out of anyone.

Polkersince85

As Will Rogers said," Everybody can't be a hero, somebody has to stand on the side of the road to wave those little flags."