Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

All these differences are too individual to define something specifical for one group. Only differences, by which we can define them as a part, are those hormonally made. And soul, which defines human's divine purpose, but that's also in link with hormones.

Posted

I am just afraid that hillary clinton will become president(shudders)

I think I would move to canada if that happend.

But dealing with the military, most jobs should be open to women, as long as they can meet the same requirments as the men, there should be NO special circumstances at all where the women are allowed.

But there are places where women should not be allowed, mainly in submarines, and in Special Forces(Rangers, SEALs, SAS, Delta, etc.)

Posted

But there are places where women should not be allowed, mainly in submarines, and in Special Forces(Rangers, SEALs, SAS, Delta, etc.)

Why?

And there is no certianity that a captured women will be raped. Just because you are fighting against someone does not mean that they are inherantly evil. And in case your biology knowledge isn't tuned in to current wavelengths, men can be raped too. Current figures indicate that it happens just as much as women being raped, it just isn't reported so much.

Women prove every day that they are just as capable as men (this has kind of turned into a topic about sexism now, hasn't it?). At organising even more so. Even the jobs that the sexists would let them do; such as being a secretary, librarian, mother. I'm willing to bet that 18 years of raising a child is more difficult that any army training course.

Conclusion: Your arguments seem to be unfounded and unrealistic. Women are completely capable.

Posted

ok DustScout I'll let you, some women are capable just like some men aren't. However there will always be affirmative action in the army, and I can not tolerate it, if they want to be soldier they gotta do it the same way as men, and don't whine about it.

The fact is that when you are in battle you'll have to trust your buddie with your life, you can not run around holding a girl who is crying in the hand all the time.

oh I have another story, one of my friends from the time HAD a girl as buddie and on shooting try out they were standing in their fox hold, and she said: "if this was real and you were shot, I'd just sit down and start crying."

My opinion is that if women wants to be in the army let them run around as telle tubies.

Posted

hmmmm interesting theory Kirov. but what do you base it on?

I base it on experience?

Seeing how Females are equal to Males.

And seeing how female kickboxers fight.

If you encountered a female kickboxer with no fighting experience yourself or if you underestimate the female alot, you can expect a nice bleeding face.

I'm a kickboxer and I have to say that females are perfectly equal to their male counterparts, seeing how they fight and train.

Posted

Some women are great snipers, and you aren't in the front if you're a sniper most of the time, so there's less chance of being captured. In Russia in WWII, they sent out thousands of women snipers and did a great job.

If you encountered a female kickboxer with no fighting experience yourself or if you underestimate the female alot, you can expect a nice bleeding face.

I'm a kickboxer and I have to say that females are perfectly equal to their male counterparts, seeing how they fight and train.

But in your example, that was a woman with training versus a man without training. What's equal about that. If that's your reason for believing that women and men are perfectly equal (which is bogus, they are very different), then you need to rethink it.
Posted

Some women are great snipers, and you aren't in the front if you're a sniper most of the time, so there's less chance of being captured. In Russia in WWII, they sent out thousands of women snipers and did a great job.

If you encountered a female kickboxer with no fighting experience yourself or if you underestimate the female alot, you can expect a nice bleeding face.

I'm a kickboxer and I have to say that females are perfectly equal to their male counterparts, seeing how they fight and train.

But in your example, that was a woman with training versus a man without training. What's equal about that. If that's your reason for believing that women and men are perfectly equal (which is bogus, they are very different), then you need to rethink it.

With it and without it they are great fighters.

Women, however, does have more exposure to emotions.

While males are barely touched by it. ( Most of them then )

I'm meaning that females and males are equal to both, no matter what job they are doing.

(Hard Physical work is more for the men though)

Posted

another factor female soldiers have to take in mind is the possibility of rape if captured.

IMO they are not suited for the battle field.

well during the vietnam war, the north vietnarmese used a lot of female soldiers, and as far as I know they preformed no worse than their male counterparts

Posted

With rifle it makes no problem to fight. Everything else is just training. That's same for Kirov's kickboxing theory. One my female friend is in slovak representation of rapier fencing, but with my dragoon sabre she won't beat me... Thing of training, nothing else.

Posted

I'll admit that I'm generalising, however that does not change my view on women in the army, from what I've seen they have nothing to do on a battlefield, it should be way harder for them to be accepted in the army.

One more issue I could bring up, is that many of them can't tolerate the tone in the army. We had an Sgt. that wasn't allowed to go to Iraq because he told a woman: "get your fat arse of the ground and start moving". She thaought of it as sexual harrasment. If I were to file complaint every time that phrase was used at me, I'd have nothing else to do.

I'm sorry but I can't find any possitive things about women in the army.

Posted

The question is mainly one of which the party machines are most willing to support. I know little abotut the relative discrimination inherent in the politics departments of American big businessses, so I cannot really comment which.

But do remember it's not necessarilty going to be the left who are more likely to offer one up - Lady Thatcher (PM '79-'90) was a Tory...

Weren't the Tories also the first to put a jewish candidate forward?

But the Tory party and the US Republican party aren't much alike. The Democrats were the only to ever put a woman forward for the presidential election. Also, Kenedy, the first catholic president was a Democrat.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.