Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

1 - 20 of 108 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
951 Posts
This a great thing for military women, no doubt about that. However, if they're putting them there just because they're women and they need to be politically correct, they need to rethink. Women are physically and mentally slightly different to men, though this needs not be considered for all of it. If the woman's better for the job, hire her. If the man's better, hire him. Simple as that.

Political correctness and sexism need not apply.
 

·
Executive Nitpicker
Joined
·
8,276 Posts
The last thing I saw on it said that they wouldn't be lowering any standards. If a woman wants to try out for the rangers or seals, etc, they're going to have to do the exact same stuff a guy would do, which is cool.

I don't understand what some military people are losing their shit over.

Just look at the Israeli Defense Forces, those guys have been integrated for ages and nobody disputes the ability of the IDF to brutally curb-stomp anyone dumb enough to take them on. Just look up the 6-day war. Anyone who can fend off simultaneous attacks from all its neighbors, AND triple the size of their own territory in the process and still be done in time for a nice relaxing Sunday bruch is not to be fucked with, and they had women on the front lines then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
I don't understand what some military people are losing their shit over.
Probably a reasonable belief that what they say isn't going to be what we get. They say they will not lower standards to allow women into the group now... to buy support most likely. I don't believe that standards will stay the same. Even if they initially did, how before those who hate our military start accusing our military standards of being discriminatory?

Are women prepared to use the same facilities without special privacy considerations? Will that have to change? Will the spec ops guys be charged with sexual harassment for reading a Playboy in their barracks or in the field?

What particularly strikes me as odd is that the same people who loath the military are the same people who want to see women on the front lines.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,889 Posts
Would you shower in a women's shower block? Would you like it if one of your mates was putting up the posters from Neo Nazi Monthly ?
 

·
Heresy Online's Pet Furby
Joined
·
8,723 Posts
Just look at the Israeli Defense Forces, those guys have been integrated for ages and nobody disputes the ability of the IDF to brutally curb-stomp anyone dumb enough to take them on. Just look up the 6-day war. Anyone who can fend off simultaneous attacks from all its neighbors, AND triple the size of their own territory in the process and still be done in time for a nice relaxing Sunday bruch is not to be fucked with, and they had women on the front lines then.
This a thousand times.

As previously said: Do you want the job? Yes? Can you do the job? Yes? The job is yours! :so_happy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
Would you shower in a women's shower block? Would you like it if one of your mates was putting up the posters from Neo Nazi Monthly ?

Why wouldn't I show in a woman's shower block? No, I wouldn't like seeing Nazi crap in circulation. What's your point? That we need political correctness in the military? How about circulating Gordon Ramsay recipes in the barracks? Do we have to stop doing that because of the vegans who are offended by that too?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,270 Posts
Would you shower in a women's shower block? Would you like it if one of your mates was putting up the posters from Neo Nazi Monthly ?
Ummm, yes to the first and no to thr second. Next............................

How about circulating Gordon Ramsay recipes in the barracks?
Woah :shok: Don't bring that to my barracks, my guys would have had a field day with it.


Honestly, having been through the military, we need more women. Women bring a touch that can help alot of front line troopers deal with issues that men in military society just cannot share with other men for issues of pride and privacy. Women are also tough, agile, and can shoot just as well as us. They also bring motivation to the troops............in ways...........that we need. Plus it's alsways reassuring to have a sexy counterpart with a gun, and I for one am all for it. Better than the other issues were dealing with like the homosexual cases and suicide rates occuring.

However I will admit we do have an issue with sexual abuse and rape in the military, especially among the US Marines and Army. Many women are abused while on deployments and the issue has risen as of late. Additionally the family costs may go up if alot of married or single mothers join front line combat troops and ask for deployment pay to cover for the kids. I am afraid these issues might become rampart and the opponents of females in combat units might use this against them. We shall see, it will certainly be interesting.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,889 Posts
The point is that in any close knit team the members of that team are mindful of the sensitivities of the others.

Some women find porn offensive and so too some men.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,195 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Probably a reasonable belief that what they say isn't going to be what we get. They say they will not lower standards to allow women into the group now... to buy support most likely. I don't believe that standards will stay the same. Even if they initially did, how before those who hate our military start accusing our military standards of being discriminatory?

We shouldn't bother because eventually it might change things is what you are implying with this.

Are women prepared to use the same facilities without special privacy considerations? Will that have to change? Will the spec ops guys be charged with sexual harassment for reading a Playboy in their barracks or in the field?

And what special facilities are we talking about? If a special forces unit is in action there is no special anything. If you are talking about at home garrison training then it is already in place and would not change anything. As to Playboy, that has been off the allowed list since before I got out in 99. If your argument is that they should not be allowed to be in combat arms because a guy can't read smut mags........


What particularly strikes me as odd is that the same people who loath the military are the same people who want to see women on the front lines.

You have a article showing the numbers to back that claim? Because this is much more than a simple issue and your 'personal' experiences on it are not enough to make claims like that valid.
Honestly, having been through the military, we need more women. Women bring a touch that can help alot of front line troopers deal with issues that men in military society just cannot share with other men for issues of pride and privacy. Women are also tough, agile, and can shoot just as well as us. They also bring motivation to the troops............in ways...........that we need. Plus it's alsways reassuring to have a sexy counterpart with a gun, and I for one am all for it. Better than the other issues were dealing with like the homosexual cases and suicide rates occuring.

However I will admit we do have an issue with sexual abuse and rape in the military, especially among the US Marines and Army. Many women are abused while on deployments and the issue has risen as of late. Additionally the family costs may go up if alot of married or single mothers join front line combat troops and ask for deployment pay to cover for the kids. I am afraid these issues might become rampart and the opponents of females in combat units might use this against them. We shall see, it will certainly be interesting.

Sexual abuse and rape are issues that need to be cracked down harshly and this has nothing to do with allowing women into combat arms. Allowing women into combat arms should not be the reason to tighten the reigns on that issue. Family costs with deployments is something that already happens with men deployed, why should it change or become worse with women. There is many single fathers, and there is many married men. Why should this matter more because of the women?

The majority of your arguments against this smack of discrimination and intolerance. There is multiple military forces out there in the world that prove that women can be integrated into all aspects of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
The majority of your arguments against this smack of discrimination and intolerance. There is multiple military forces out there in the world that prove that women can be integrated into all aspects of it.
What arguments would those be Scofield? Were you under the impression I was opposed to women on the front?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,195 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I responded to your quote in green text, those are your arguments that are 'against' it. If you are for it you have a poor way of showing it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
You're a funny guy. I was just answering a question about why anyone would be concerned. I'm not opposed to women in the combat units, but there is all kinds of room for concern. Is it a sign that a person who recognizes the concerns is against something? Perhaps you should consider assuming less.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,195 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Do you have responses to what I wrote in green regarding your 'concerns' otherwise this conversation is off topic and not needed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
Do you have responses to what I wrote in green regarding your 'concerns' otherwise this conversation is off topic and not needed.
Any response other to your green highlighted text would be off topic? What are you talking about?

Your first comment was a knee jerk reaction that resulted from an assumption. It is a very legitimate concern. Not sure why you are taking issue with it.

Your second comment was half knee jerk as well. It wasn't about smut mags. It's about the uniqueness of American culture, in which a pb&j sandwich can be deemed racist, talk about a Seinfeld episode at the water cooler can be deemed sexual harassment and a kid biting the shape of a gun into a sandwich at school can be deemed a gun crime. These are social problems that are practically invented in spite of the fact that we already have plenty of real problems. Mix women into the male dominated special forces and what do we get? Enhanced national security or is this just a liberal social experiment... for the fun of it? Like you said, there are no special considerations and like Mags said, these units are tight. These teams live together, work together, train together, fight together. In the field they will be pissing and shitting together. There isn't room for the kind of sexual harassment that we deal with in civilian life where the merest perception of sexual harassment can ruin a persons career. The women who join are going to need some thick skin and a good sense of humor, or they have no business being part of these units.



If you need proof of my last comment then perhaps you haven't been following the news for the last 1 to 50 years to know what I'm talking about.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,889 Posts
I have served in and commanded mixed gender units and call tell you your "concerns" are ill founded and not born out in reality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
I have served in and commanded mixed gender units and call tell you your "concerns" are ill founded and not born out in reality.
In Australia? Yeah. Not the same thing at all. To make your point stand though I'll agree with a correction... not born out in Australian reality. If you want to comment on the curious social issues in the US, then perhaps you should be born and raised here so you at least have an idea what I am talking about.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,889 Posts
Xenophobic much ? I spent enough time in the company of the USMC to know your jarheads are not much different to my diggers.

Don't kid yourself, people are people wherever you go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
Xenophobic much ? I spent enough time in the company of the USMC to know your jarheads are not much different to my diggers.

Don't kid yourself, people are people wherever you go.
Not even a little xenophobic. What else do you have, aside from lack of knowledge about US culture and our political environment? The curious thing has been and remains about a core group of you guys is that you will habitually gloss over critical points to make personal cheap shots against people you don't like. For example, I am not opposed to women in the special forces. More than that, I believe their inclusion could bolster national security and yet you treat my posts as if I am opposed. The concerns I listed at absolutely legitimate. Perhaps the big difference is that to me, the US military is about national security and to you it's just a fun social experiment. You are free to disagree which I'm sure you will :)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,195 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
This is going to happen, the military leaders know this. The simple fact is military culture is what the military dictates it to be.

There will be no discrimination based reductions of the physical standards in place for those units for the simple fact that there are men that can't cut it also.

As to your other concerns about interactions, guess what the guys will just have to grow up and be adults. If it isn't acceptable behavior in common day to day civilian life, why should it be acceptable on the military that is there to protect that way of life?

Or do you feel that the guys in the military do not have the discipline to toe the line and follow rules?

I was combat arms, tanker, and there was no reason a woman could not do that job.
 
1 - 20 of 108 Posts
Top