Leon Panetta planning to lift the ban on women in combat

[Neezar]

I'm all for women's rights. But I want them to be womanly rights.

I don't want them to be equal to men's rights.

I want more rights.

[NateR]

Originally Posted by Neezar

I'm all for women's rights. But I want them to be womanly rights.

I don't want them to be equal to men's rights.

I want more rights.

I know you're just joking, but I actually believe that's the ultimate goal of the modern Feminist movement. It's not to make women equal to men, it's to turn the tables and make men subservient to women. Radical Feminists don't want equality, they want dominance.

[adamt]

how else should gender equality be adjusted in society? I know that women get precedence in custody cases, generally speaking, maybe that should change. I know that child support is predominantly for men to be paid to women. Fathers don't have the rights they ought to. Maybe men need the right to stop the abortion of their child, or else, the woman is charged with murder. Maybe fathers ought to have the right to abort the child? ( definitely not my opinion, just making a point) I mean there are instances that women have tricked men into getting them pregnant and then sued for child support.

maybe women should always go dutch on every date?



maybe it should be unfair to base any type of insurance premium on gender. i had to pay twice what my sister paid, cause i was male. gender equality would scream that i shouldn't have to do that.

[Neezar]

Originally Posted by NateR

I know you're just joking, but I actually believe that's the ultimate goal of the modern Feminist movement. It's not to make women equal to men, it's to turn the tables and make men subservient to women. Radical Feminists don't want equality, they want dominance.

Well other people get special treatment because of their genetic make up. Why shouldn't I?


I'm special.

lol

[Tyburn]

Originally Posted by adamt

besides what nate and flo already said i would just emphasize that sexual abuse includes harrassment. you could imagine the amount of unwanted attention that a female gets in a male platoon, but honestly what are they going to do about it, i mean, the female themself won't do anythinga\ about it due to not wanting to be ostercized

No...actually...I cant. How is it the Military can train a man for war...but not install the discipline and maturity needed to avoid unwanted sexual contact with a female collegue.

I think its outrageous and disgusting...and far from "oh, better not put women in coz that will make the sex worse" how about dealing with the actual problem, which doesnt appear to be the woman in this situation now does it.

You know...if you cant trust a soldier with a woman collegue...how do you know they can do any of their duty?

Perhaps if its too hard for the males to cope with a female in their midst, then the armed forces oughta do same sexed groupings?

[NateR]

Originally Posted by Tyburn

No...actually...I cant. How is it the Military can train a man for war...but not install the discipline and maturity needed to avoid unwanted sexual contact with a female collegue.

I think its outrageous and disgusting...and far from "oh, better not put women in coz that will make the sex worse" how about dealing with the actual problem, which doesnt appear to be the woman in this situation now does it.

You know...if you cant trust a soldier with a woman collegue...how do you know they can do any of their duty?

Perhaps if its too hard for the males to cope with a female in their midst, then the armed forces oughta do same sexed groupings?

I'm not saying it's okay or condoning the behavior in any way, but that's just one of the ugly sides of human nature. People are inherently evil and no amount of discipline is going to erase that fact. When you drop a woman into the middle of an environment where she is surrounded by young, strong men who's lives are in constant danger, what do you expect to happen?

Back when military discipline was based on Judeo-Christian values, this wasn't as much of a problem. But then again, the military leaders knew enough to not even present the temptation to their men in the first place. Nowadays, with an increasingly secular and godless military, this kind of thing is starting to become the norm.

[Tyburn]

Originally Posted by NateR

1) I'm not saying it's okay or condoning the behavior in any way, but that's just one of the ugly sides of human nature. People are inherently evil and no amount of discipline is going to erase that fact. When you drop a woman into the middle of an environment where she is surrounded by young, strong men who's lives are in constant danger, what do you expect to happen?

2) Back when military discipline was based on Judeo-Christian values, this wasn't as much of a problem. But then again, the military leaders knew enough to not even present the temptation to their men in the first place. Nowadays, with an increasingly secular and godless military, this kind of thing is starting to become the norm.

1) I expect an ounce of self discipline. Thats like trying to say the recent paedophilia in the Roman Catholic Church is because the Vatican dont let the clergy get married...When you drop an altar boy into the middle of an environment where he is surrounded by old letcherous men, whose lives are full of enforced celebacy, what do you expect to happen?

PUH-LEASE!

I hope our military doesnt have this kinda problem. You know I strongly believe that the Military is a calling, and the highest outside of the Church...and yet if what your saying is true universal of military misconduct around women, it would appear that the armed forces match the Church on the par of complete degredation and corruption


2) then instead of campaigning against women in combat...perhaps you should start campaigning FOR those principles to return. Lets face it...regardless of temptation, you should be able to resist. You might not be able to control whether the powers that be place women in your midst, but you absolutely CAN control whether you use that as an excuse for whatever reason to rape, or harras.

Ironically of all insitutions, it is those in the Armed Forces, and those in the Church who should bloody well know better.

I hasten to add...before you go and blurt that im just being argumentative and difficult...that I aggree that women should not be put into combat roles where possible. I dont say thats because of a lack of self control in the men, like you...I dont say it because I think that women given the training, couldnt do that same, probably just as well.

I dissagree with it because it goes against my basis of ettiquette, that says, frankly, women shouldnt be put in danger. There are ways that Men should treat women which I hold quite strongly to. You should always make sure, for example, if you are walking along a road and spot a woman coming the other way, that YOU move to the curb so as she passes you she is nowhere near the road. If the pavement is too thin, then YOU step into the road so she doesnt have to. When ladies come in to a room you are supposed to stand up, if you are seated, to greet them. If there is no space on the bus, you give up your seat and let them sit instead....You should let the board first even if they arrived at the stop after you (I personally tend to ussher everyone onto a bus first, but thats just me) You should be opening and closing car doors for them.

Now...for someone in that position, why would you ever want to put them in a situation where they would have to fight? I dont mind them being in support...but they should never be on the battlefield unless they are some kinda Amazonian, who would take offense at the above ettiquette, and so out of respect for their belief, you would suspend it when dealing with them.

I dont even like the thought of Women MMA I'm afraid...I'm horrified its now a part of the UFC, and I wont be watching it Personally.

Like I said...if women want to do MMA, or go into combat, that is their decision...but I dont have to support it, nor do I have to like it.

[NateR]

Originally Posted by Tyburn

1) I expect an ounce of self discipline. Thats like trying to say the recent paedophilia in the Roman Catholic Church is because the Vatican dont let the clergy get married...When you drop an altar boy into the middle of an environment where he is surrounded by old letcherous men, whose lives are full of enforced celebacy, what do you expect to happen?

PUH-LEASE!

I hope our military doesnt have this kinda problem. You know I strongly believe that the Military is a calling, and the highest outside of the Church...and yet if what your saying is true universal of military misconduct around women, it would appear that the armed forces match the Church on the par of complete degredation and corruption


2) then instead of campaigning against women in combat...perhaps you should start campaigning FOR those principles to return. Lets face it...regardless of temptation, you should be able to resist. You might not be able to control whether the powers that be place women in your midst, but you absolutely CAN control whether you use that as an excuse for whatever reason to rape, or harras.

Ironically of all insitutions, it is those in the Armed Forces, and those in the Church who should bloody well know better.

I hasten to add...before you go and blurt that im just being argumentative and difficult...that I aggree that women should not be put into combat roles where possible. I dont say thats because of a lack of self control in the men, like you...I dont say it because I think that women given the training, couldnt do that same, probably just as well.

I dissagree with it because it goes against my basis of ettiquette, that says, frankly, women shouldnt be put in danger. There are ways that Men should treat women which I hold quite strongly to. You should always make sure, for example, if you are walking along a road and spot a woman coming the other way, that YOU move to the curb so as she passes you she is nowhere near the road. If the pavement is too thin, then YOU step into the road so she doesnt have to. When ladies come in to a room you are supposed to stand up, if you are seated, to greet them. If there is no space on the bus, you give up your seat and let them sit instead....You should let the board first even if they arrived at the stop after you (I personally tend to ussher everyone onto a bus first, but thats just me) You should be opening and closing car doors for them.

Now...for someone in that position, why would you ever want to put them in a situation where they would have to fight? I dont mind them being in support...but they should never be on the battlefield unless they are some kinda Amazonian, who would take offense at the above ettiquette, and so out of respect for their belief, you would suspend it when dealing with them.

I dont even like the thought of Women MMA I'm afraid...I'm horrified its now a part of the UFC, and I wont be watching it Personally.

Like I said...if women want to do MMA, or go into combat, that is their decision...but I dont have to support it, nor do I have to like it.

I'm about 150% positive that this would be a problem in any military that allowed women to fight side by side with men. However, I'm not using that as a reason that women shouldn't be allowed into combat. I think they shouldn't be allowed into combat because they physically aren't able to do the job. Which will require the military to lower their standards and result in a less effective military.

I fully believe that a male soldier should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law if he rapes a woman. However, the Pentagon is clearly hesitant to do that, so it's not right that they would force women into that scenario if they are not serious about solving the problem.

Also, for the record, I do believe that years of sexual repression are a contributing factor behind Catholic priests molesting young boys. I don't think many of them started out as sick perverts, but the legalistic and un-Biblical standards of the Catholic Church gradually turned them into that.

[adamt]

i wonder if the women are going to have to pee standing up?

[Bonnie]

Originally Posted by NateR

I'm about 150% positive that this would be a problem in any military that allowed women to fight side by side with men. However, I'm not using that as a reason that women shouldn't be allowed into combat. I think they shouldn't be allowed into combat because they physically aren't able to do the job. Which will require the military to lower their standards and result in a less effective military.

I fully believe that a male soldier should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law if he rapes a woman. However, the Pentagon is clearly hesitant to do that, so it's not right that they would force women into that scenario if they are not serious about solving the problem.

Also, for the record, I do believe that years of sexual repression are a contributing factor behind Catholic priests molesting young boys. I don't think many of them started out as sick perverts, but the legalistic and un-Biblical standards of the Catholic Church gradually turned them into that.

I do think the biggest problem will be of the sexual kind when you mix women and men together like this in these situations, whether consensual or rape. There are already numerous rapes that take place in the military, and sadly there seems to be little that is being done to help these women, in fact, they seem to be the ones who are punished instead of their offenders. This problem will surely only get worse with women being put into combat situations along side men.

I really don't see much of anything positive coming from this decision especially for women. I see an increase in rapes, affairs, broken marriages and families, and lots of unplanned babies. Not to mention an increase in the murder rate--anytime you combine men, women, sex and emotions, there's the increased possibility for a combustible situation, and these people have easy access to weapons. Uh oh, what are they going to do if these type of incidents happen, take away their guns?