Senate Let's talk about sexism.

Discussion in 'Community' started by Sith-Lord-Gunray, Sep 7, 2013.

  1. epic Ex Mod / RSA

    Member Since:
    Jul 4, 1999
    star 7
    i think there's something to be said about the woman's relationship with her baby -- which she has carried for 9 months and given birth to -- and the father's relationship with his baby, which may create an inbalance in the number of moms who choose, and want to stay at home to raise the child as compared to dads.
  2. EmpireForever Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 15, 2004
    star 8
    This is a terrible example, since the military uses a standard by which to evaluate physical strength, so it is wholly unnecessary(and wrong) to, in addition to that standard, specifically exclude women from the job. If a woman meets the physical requirements, then what is the problem?

    As to the so called psychological problem(of being a woman, I guess? I'm not even sure what problem you're talking about): because men really handle the stresses of war so fantastically--no they don't--as to be better at it than women?i

    And, trust me, I work with an infantry unit, and there are plenty of them in the infantry who do not meet the standard--and definitely didn't when they signed the contract yet were somehow allowed to sign it still--that are allowed to serve in that role; although they miss out on things like advancement and often get moved to a different role, the point is that they're still given the opportunity to attempt it; a woman isn't even allowed that.
    Last edited by EmpireForever, Sep 10, 2013
  3. Juliet316 Streak for Colors Bonanza Winner

    Game Winner
    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 7
    To be fair, I don't think Ender even knows the Human Centipede even exists.
  4. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    I do. I'm just not convinced that, on purpose, most of the men posting in this thread want to address the issue. 10 pages of obfuscation that only LoH has stayed away from is why I say this, in case it wasn't clear.
  5. Saintheart Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2000
    star 6
    Whoa there, hoss. I didn't say men and women should be held to different standards. I just said where physical strength is a requirement of the job that it's not a meaningless distinction between male and female. If you can't reach the physical standard, male or female, then you don't get the job. (I'd also add physical stamina to those requirements too). The point is, like it or not women can't as a statistical group meet the same physical achievements as easily as men. If you believe otherwise, I'd recommend you go and disabuse the various Olympic committees of their misguided creation of these things called "men's" and "women's" events. If Olympic athletes, or indeed athletes in general, can be regarded as peak specimens of each gender for the particular ability they are competing in, then the evidence is in: men statistically are stronger and faster than women, because our bodies are built differently. Compare the Olympic records, for example, in weightlifting, if you'd like a more plain example: the men's Olympic record is 263 kg for clean and jerk; the women's, 183 kg. Cycling, where the same event is participated in by men and women, women again come up short on Olympic records. Athletics, they are the same events -- and women always come up short.

    New Zealand, for example, is a pretty good example. All of its armed forces, combat or otherwise right up to Special Forces, are open to men or women. Have been since 2001. No woman's yet been able to meet the criteria for Special Forces. Presumably all the men have.

    Basically, the Band of Thebes effect -- leaving aside all the other entirely un-feminist concerns as the increased likelihood of rape for a captured female combatant. Band of Thebes is a major reason the Israeli Defence Force, often held up as a symbol of female participation in the armed forces, has not allowed women to participate in close combat military operations since 1948: because the men, shock horror, tend to prioritise saving the women over completing the objective. And at the end of the day, the objective matters more than the unit does; as I'm sure you know, a military unit draws its strength from being a team that can effectively respond to threats faster than its opponent -- not from individual heroes or white knights.

    I'm not here to debate the miserable state of readiness that is the US Army in general. (It derives from the fact Americans as a population would rather their wars fought by somebody else, or somebody else's child, but that's not the issue here). Either way it's not an argument to say "Hey, our recruitment standards suck, and we wave deficient male recruits through, so it's okay to wave deficient female recruits through." The standard needs to be the same for both genders. I have a big problem with women being given a lower standard than men to meet for entry to the armed forces for combat roles in combat units in particular, because that's the same as waving deficient male recruits through.
  6. Juliet316 Streak for Colors Bonanza Winner

    Game Winner
    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 7
    TBH, I don't think anybody really wants to touch the Human Centipede.
    Last edited by Juliet316, Sep 10, 2013
  7. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    Or not fought at all. Let's not fallaciously lump all Americans together into the same monolithic group.
    Last edited by Arawn_Fenn, Sep 10, 2013
    anakinfansince1983 likes this.
  8. Saintheart Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2000
    star 6
    Jells, I'm not going to take you on regarding military tactics :D -- but I'd have thought that all things being equal, a military which is more efficient than its opponent generally is going to respond faster and more effectively than that opponent, thus leading to a tactical advantage and subsequent victory. As I said, all other things being equal. To me, the military is the one employer which cannot afford inefficiency, because its prime purpose is winning the wars it gets into. If anyone needs to be results-oriented, it's an army. At the risk of being flip: we suspend societal norms against being able to carry lethal weapons when a person enters the armed forces; most militaries get their very own court system because it's acknowledged they're operating on a different set of rules and values to that of civilian society. Gender equality is well and good, but gender equality doesn't mean squat if the society that supports it keeps getting its ass handed to it in battle. Take Poland through the 17th-18th century or so: one of the first written Constitutions in Europe, had one of the first Parliaments, respected in a limited way the right to democracy -- but it kept getting steamrollered by its neighbours mainly because it couldn't turn those noble sentiments into a viable fighting force to protect it.

    On the other hand, as I indicated further up: if the appropriate standard of physical capacity for combat is equal between men and women, and women can meet that standard, then I see little reason to prevent women from being in combat roles in combat units. I'm not entirely convinced as to the Band of Thebes effect I've mentioned earlier on, and in the Iraq/Afghan theatres women happened to be useful attached to some units. But that suitability has to be assessed against physical limits. War is not always a contest of brains. Sometimes it is a contest of brawn.
  9. Saintheart Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2000
    star 6
    Which is why I said as a population, and not individually. Move on.
  10. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    Well, haven't you heard that two wrongs make a right?
  11. EmpireForever Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 15, 2004
    star 8
    @Saintheart: there's a physical standard, but women aren't even allowed to attempt it in the US, they're just flat out excluded. It doesn't matter if women as a whole cannot meet that standard, that's not what I said; I said if a woman, physically able to do so, wanted to, she would not be allowed to even attempt it--and just because all women wouldn't be able to meet it doesn't mean some of them wouldn't--the same as men. That's why you have a standard, and to exclude women who would be able to meet it (and I've known a few who could) is wrong. I don't know how you misunderstood that, or what the Olympics--which havea different set of standards--has to do with women in combat.

    And I never said the standard should be different for a woman attempting to acquire a combat role(although the standards, as they are now, are). I'm saying if a woman can meet the same standard as a man(and, again, I've seen them do it), she should be allowed to attempt it--but she currently is not.
  12. Saintheart Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2000
    star 6
    Not in the sphere of military readiness. It's the one area where principle has to give way to pragmatism virtually every time. Two wrongs of the kind you are contemplating make things four times as wrong in the long run.
  13. Saintheart Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2000
    star 6
    That was by-the-by on my part. If you're saying that women ought to be able to try and meet the standard, then we don't have a disagreement. My objection is having different standards for men and women in combat roles. After that point the psychological health of the unit is a matter for its commander, though I'm interested to see how one then deals with the Band of Thebes effect in presumably a mixed combat unit.
  14. EmpireForever Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 15, 2004
    star 8
    I don't see how it's a problem that actually exists; people stick their necks out for their buddies all the time; they risk themselves and the mission to protect the person to their right and left and, since women haven't served in a combat role in the US since ever, I don't know that the same "band of Thebes" thing applies since this is a different culture and also 70 years later.
    Adam of Nuchtern likes this.
  15. Saintheart Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2000
    star 6
    It's actually a very contemporary concern: as late as 1999 Australian soldiers at least have been recorded as having the same concerns. Melody Kemp puts it as "Thus while men might be able to be programmed to kill, it is not as easy to program men to neglect women."
  16. Saintheart Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2000
    star 6
    Double post because I can't seem to edit -- anyway, that's about as much as I had to add on the subject.
  17. Obi-Zahn Kenobi Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 1999
    star 7
    Pardon me for thinking that that response is better than sexually harassing their HR department.
    s65horsey likes this.
  18. harpua Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2005
    star 8
    I'm with OZK on this one... filing a discrimination claim is a far better method of dealing with the situation than a Goatse virus (though I don't think she was actually serious about the Goatse virus).
    MrZAP, Juliet316 and s65horsey like this.
  19. Obi-Zahn Kenobi Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 1999
    star 7
    I didn't think she was serious either. I really do understand that she wouldn't want to work there anyway, but I really don't think the company should get away with this. Again, I have been a victim of discrimination where I thought putting up with it was a better option than filing a claim too, so I understand where she's coming from. It's an annoying situation.
  20. epic Ex Mod / RSA

    Member Since:
    Jul 4, 1999
    star 7
    in Ender's world a man is not allowed to offer a woman advice on anything, as in doing so obviously makes him a sexist pig.
    Suzuki_Akira and s65horsey like this.
  21. epic Ex Mod / RSA

    Member Since:
    Jul 4, 1999
    star 7
    he references the societal barriers here:

    i'm struggling to find anything really sexist in what Suzuki was saying.
    Last edited by epic, Sep 10, 2013
  22. Lord Vivec Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2006
    star 7
    Ender constantly needs opponents to fight, even if he has to make them up.
    SithLordDarthRichie likes this.
  23. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    I think all Ender needs is a hug.
    Obi-Zahn Kenobi likes this.
  24. s65horsey Otter-loving Former EUC Mod

    Member Since:
    Jun 24, 2006
    star 7
    Fixed.
    Obi-Zahn Kenobi likes this.
  25. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    x2
    Saintheart and Obi-Zahn Kenobi like this.