JCC Women in combat: US Ban to be lifted

Discussion in 'Community' started by Juliet316, Jan 23, 2013.

  1. Juliet316 Streak for Colours Bonanza Winner

    Game Winner
    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 7
    So Joan of Arc is just a story with no actual facts huh?

    And women are getting killed in combat anyway, just that it's usually as a result of them being ambused on support units, so if they want to be fighting on the front lines, I say they have that right. Not every woman is going to suddenly be rushing out to enlist in the military as a result of today's news.
    GenAntilles likes this.
  2. GrandAdmiralJello Community and Lit moderator person

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 28, 2000
    star 10
    Or worse: superior officers. The "boys will be boys" attitude towards assaults from fellow soldiers is bad enough, but if you look at the shenanigans that went on at Lachland, it was the officers responsible for training these women who were accused of these crimes. That's appalling on so many grounds. Just to list a few: I. training officers are placed in a position of trust, and the trainees are therefore uniquely vulnerable to these mentor-type figures; II. as I understand it, this type of basic training instills obedience in people and helps them be part of a well-oiled machine, breaking down their ordinary ability to refuse; III. the power differential means that it is difficult to report these incidents, because of fear, because of their colleagues siding with them, or because these complaints are supposed to be passed up the chain of command so victims are placed in a position of having to report to their own attacker; IV. victims of these assaults tend to be shamed by their peers.
    Last edited by GrandAdmiralJello, Jan 23, 2013
    MarasFire likes this.
  3. Rox Administrator Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 24, 2000
    star 6
    Should have happened sooner. I don't see why woman can't fight for our country just like any guy can.
  4. beezel26 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 11, 2003
    star 7
    I hope in the future we see squad of female combat pilots calling themselves NachtHexen aka The Night Witches. A group of Russian women who piloted bombers during WW2. They got their name from the German guys who were bombed out of their barracks at night.
    http://www.seizethesky.com/nwitches/nitewtch.html
  5. Juliet316 Streak for Colours Bonanza Winner

    Game Winner
    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 7
    Actually women have been allowed to fly in air combat missions for at least two decades now.
  6. DantheJedi Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 2009
    star 5
    [IMG]

    "Hey, Vasquez, anybody ever confuse you for a man?"

    "No, have you?"
    TrakNar likes this.
  7. Mustafar_66 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 20, 2005
    star 5
    If anything, you're the one who's promoting baseline human actions by wanting humanity to reflect any base evolutionary traits such as men being in a hunter-gatherer role and the women a nurturer. Indeed, that is assuming that is an evolutionary imperative and not merely a cultural one.

    Of course if you wish for humanity to merely reflect its baser evolutionary traits then go ahead, but personally I'd prefer it if humanity moved past that and embraced a society where women could choose to do what they wanted and actually engaged our higher brain functions to operate on a more rational level. Presumably these woman are physically capable having passed basic training well enough to be deployed in "support" roles. In that case, I can see no real reason why they can't be deployed on the front line.
    Juliet316 and anakinfansince1983 like this.
  8. LandoThe CapeCalrissian Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 30, 2012
    star 3
    I shouldn't have to answer this because I made it quite clear already...

    from a strictly biological standpoint people have 1 main purpose, to procreate the species. now because we are more advanced and modern we, as a society have different functions other than just that. as humans we stand for more than base biological functions, but in evolutionary terms humans don't have to do anything but make babies.

    and I am a believer that women and men can do the same things. By "same things" I mean things that use your brain and not brawn. Women can mentally do anything men can do, but physically women are not built to be able to do what men do..

    sure there are exceptions to the rules, the few women who walk planet earth that are bigger than most men, but tat isn't the norm, nor will it ever be the norm... Biologically speaking women are not built to be physical fighters. the proof is in the pudding, women by nature are more docile and less physically aggressive than men.
  9. LandoThe CapeCalrissian Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 30, 2012
    star 3
    see in society we live in a fantasy world in which we look to movies and comic books as examples of women being tougher than men...

    [IMG]


    you can take the most badass women on earth, hell take 20 of them and let them face this man, none of the women would leave the room standing.
  10. LandoThe CapeCalrissian Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 30, 2012
    star 3
    its always easier to label someone something, sexist, mysoginist, bigot, racist, than actually form an argument based off of fact and real world applications...

    by calling someone racist is like writing a term paper without doing any of the real work.. its the slow minded way of debating.
  11. beezel26 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 11, 2003
    star 7
    Dude if you are not gonna pick up a rifle yourself then put your woman hating attitude away.
  12. Mustafar_66 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 20, 2005
    star 5
    I can't see any drill sergeant worth his salt passing a woman who was physically incapable for military service. Besides, combat has changed over the last several decades. Whilst obviously it is still a physically demanding role, I'd wager that the requirement for pure brute strength such as that required by pre-Industrial Revolution warfare has diminished somewhat.
  13. Alpha-Red Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 25, 2004
    star 5
    The average female may be less physically capable than the average male, but aren't soldiers qualified for combat on an individual basis?
    darthhelinith and Valairy Scot like this.
  14. Mustafar_66 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 20, 2005
    star 5
    Yes in hand-to-hand combat women may well be at a physical disadvantage. Though I expect many female soldiers will have taught themselves some sort of martial arts or techniques to nullify that advantage at least somewhat.

    But of course that misses the point that modern warfare is less about hand-to-hand, close quarters combat.
    Jedi Merkurian likes this.
  15. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7

    Right. Because "the purpose of a woman's existence is to reproduce" is an argument based on fact. [face_laugh]

    Of all the things I've done with my life, the two occasions on which I reproduced were the two occasions on which I actually needed a man's help...
    Jedi Merkurian and Valairy Scot like this.
  16. Mustafar_66 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 20, 2005
    star 5
    I can't be the only one who finds the thought of anybody's purpose in life being solely reproduction depressing, right?
    Last edited by Mustafar_66, Jan 23, 2013
    Jedi Merkurian likes this.
  17. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
  18. Obi-Zahn Kenobi Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 1999
    star 7
    Sexist? Yes.

    Misogynistic? No.

    "women fighting and killing is a step backwards on what separates us from more base line mammals."

    He is clearly evidencing a belief that women are inherently more valuable than men on the basis of their being female. How horrid would it be for a female to die, right? But it's a man's job to die. The sexism cuts both ways, yes ("one of their main biological functions is to be the nurturer of children."), but the favor clearly skews towards women in this circumstance. Let's reverse the sexes.

    "One of the male's primary biological functions is to be the nurturer of children."

    "Of the the female's primary biological functions is to kill others and be killed by others for the benefit of society."

    I'm certain that most people would view this as more misogynistic, as opposed to misandristic.

    This isn't hatred of women; it's hatred of men. He considers women too inherently valuable to be placed in combat positions where they might be maimed and killed, and you have the gall to claim that this belief is primarily disparaging to women.


    As for the topic in general, I would be inclined merely to go with the status quo, as in history, protecting fertility by not having women in combat situations, combined with the overall average advantage that men have over women in hand-to-hand and melee situations, the assigning of combat to men made sense. However, if women want to give up this status of privilege and be maimed and killed with men, who am I to object?

    Maybe one day we'll have equality of the draft.
    Last edited by Obi-Zahn Kenobi, Jan 23, 2013
  19. Mustafar_66 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 20, 2005
    star 5
    I'd say his viewpoint is simply anti-Enlightenment. An irrational concept that humanity is little more than its evolutionary basis and any concept that clashes or is deemed secondary to its biological imperative is of little or no importance.
  20. Juliet316 Streak for Colours Bonanza Winner

    Game Winner
    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 7
    Nope, not the only one.
  21. Point Given Mod of Literature and Community

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Dec 12, 2006
    star 5
    This guy is definitely Flare.
  22. GrandAdmiralJello Community and Lit moderator person

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 28, 2000
    star 10
    Just because it's patronizing doesn't mean it's "in favor of women" FYI
    Last edited by GrandAdmiralJello, Jan 23, 2013
  23. Obi-Zahn Kenobi Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 1999
    star 7
    He obviously considers the lives of women to be more valuable than the lives of men.

    Apparently, that's what goes for misogyny these days.
  24. GrandAdmiralJello Community and Lit moderator person

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 28, 2000
    star 10
    It's what went for misogyny for the past two millennia, too.
    Last edited by GrandAdmiralJello, Jan 23, 2013
  25. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    Yeah, along the lines of we're too fragile and need big strong men folks to fight our battles for us.

    Thinking that someone else is weaker than you are solely because of gender may not qualify as "hate" in the eyes of some, but it certainly qualifies as condescension.