Women in the Military? - Page 2

Lancer · March 31, 2003, 19:39

Ned, might it have been a case of don't ask, don't tell?

Or, as I say, 'don't ask for gawds sake, and I don't wanna friggin know, bud'.

Lipstick though...:sigh:.

Pekka · March 31, 2003, 19:45

Lancer, Well they did sleep with the guys there, I mean some of them did. I think they are too much of distraction for the guys. I don't know if we had a pro army, maybe it would be little different then..

VJ · March 31, 2003, 19:55

Quote:

Tuomen, and unless you point out what was it I said that you don't agree with, I'll take that as a troll.

Attitude problems? Tiredness? I, honestly, can't see any trolling there. Care to clarify? Or were I just an ass there?
Don't take it so seriously, maybe this smilie will cheer you up:

It seems that you want really simple answers, so:
[quote]Do you agree, that war is physically tough?[quote]
When comparing to the so called 'usual living' in the present years, yes.

Quote:

Do you agree, that if it gets longer and longer, it's even more tougher, even with modern technology?

Yes.

Quote:

Do you agree, that it is more tough for women to get their authority and respect amongst them men, if they are leaders?

Yes. But I don't think that it's kind of thing that you should just ignore, or to say 'oh, it's natural, impossible to cure, you know, boys are boys'.

Quote:

Do you agree, that if a woman can't carry her own stuff and some guys have to do it, the men will complain about it, because it's a woman in situation?

Yes, if they're morons, because they're obviously volunteering to help the women there. You could try to tell it to them.

Quote:

I'm 89 kilos heavy, and with full combat gear, wouldn't you agree that most women could not effectively drag me away, or carry me?

'Most women'? Yes, I would dare to agree with you here.

Quote:

I don't like those whiny guys either who don't give their effort.

Ever tried to do something to this? If guys have attitude problems, should women not be allowed to be in there? That's the thing what I mostly wonder here.

Pekka · March 31, 2003, 20:13

Tuome, I came on you little hard. I'm not tired though, I just watched Thin Red Line or what ever and thought it was a war movie. Before that? Pearl Harbor. I wanted to have an action night, instead I got this romantic night and had to pay 10 euros for it.

I mostly agree with you here. First of all, women not getting the authority or the respect they would deserve is a problem in the guys most of the times. And it shouldn't be ignored, it's a problem. It makes the unit not effective but bad, and gives too much problems for the woman leader there. I did give few long speeches about it to the guys too, but what can you do.. the lady had more balls there than her guys. I saw this many times, too many times. And the guys are the problem there. And as long as guys attitudes are like that, it won't work. To change the attitudes? It's another thing. Would be more easier just have to guys do the job, for the time being. I would be satisfied with the solution of them having the same requirements and standards though, as then it would be assured that they are able to do every job they need to do in their position and more, so they can be examples as it should be, and is a great way to gain that respect and authority needed.
And when she came to me and told the problem, what happened naturally was that her authority diminshed into zero because the guys thought she can't handle the situation but she has to come for other ncos or trainers. They didn't realize, that they are being stupid, and that they were the real problem then. They were pushing their limits and being jerks, and then felt some kind of victory after that. Talking about bad attitude 'you can't control me!'.

And yes of course they need to carry all the stuff if it's needed. We just can't leave it there. So, we pick it up and carry it, and then be small about it and blame it on the woman

. Maybe most hated people are the guys who do that same stuff too, making others work more because of them.

And yeah, most women couldn't do that. Some could, but most couldn't. But sure, if we do lots of testing, women being strong enough, fast enough and what ever, then by all means welcome. But our model is not like that at the moment, and I don't see any changes in the future.
Sure, even some guys couldn't drag me, but most still could. I don't like lottery

. I bet the safest bet.

And as your last one... I have to agree. If I see a strong guy, who is just too lazy and is slacking all the time, and then there is this tiny little girl, who can't do it, but sure is trying as hard as possible, popping few vaines in her head while doing it, almost passing out.. it's pretty clear whose ass I'm about to kick soon. I don't care if someone is slim, fat, white, black, ugly, pretty, smelly, christian, atheist, gay, straight, rich, poor.. but I will give my respect to anyone who is trying their best, and in normal service that is always enough in my opinion. And if there is the rambo guy who can fly and speak 114 languages and kill with stare down, but is not doing it the best way he can.. I'll be sure who gets to clean the toilets

.

I'll say lets give them the same standards, and it's ok, but not as front line combat troops. They still would do combat for almost sure, but I'd still keep the front line stuff with the guys.

Alexander's Horse · March 31, 2003, 21:11

Maybe the question should be "would you prefer to have Lancer in your unit or a woman?"

Lincoln · March 31, 2003, 21:22

My nephew is in the military and he is getting out now because of the women. I was in submarines so we didin't get to have women on board. It would have been nice though instead of being around a bunch of smelly men. My views on women in the military are that they should only be in support roles way behind enemy lines. They make good secretaries for generals too!

Lancer · March 31, 2003, 21:36

Lincoln, "he's getting out now because of the women". Can you elaborate?

Alexander's Horse · March 31, 2003, 21:40

Duh Lancer! He's gay.

Zero · March 31, 2003, 21:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Pekka
And they MUST have the same requirements as the men do. We have dual standards in physical side, and that can't be right. They must be able to do it like the rest of the guys and not get any extra points because they are women. If they accomplish with the same standards, then sure.

I agree with this editted statement. My only disagreement is that I'd rather be with a scary women who mow down bad guys and cove r my back then to be stuck with a whimpy boy.

Lincoln · March 31, 2003, 21:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Lancer
Lincoln, "he's getting out now because of the women". Can you elaborate?

I guess quite a few women officers have a chip on their shoulders and they like to humilate the men under them if they do not bow in submission. The military is a perfect place for your typical bull-****. She has the full force of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) backing her when she pretends that she is a man. We had an ensign once who had an attitude like that and a friend of mine called her "ensign no tool". Of course he would be drawn and quartered now for even thinking such a thing.

General Ludd · March 31, 2003, 22:03

I think men should be barred from the military. Judging from the responses to this thread, they're the ones who can't handle being around a woman and cause the problems.

Alexander's Horse · March 31, 2003, 22:04

I'd like to know how having tits affects combat effectiveness.

Nubclear · March 31, 2003, 22:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Osweld
I think men should be barred from the military. Judging from the responses to this thread, they're the ones who can't handle being around a woman and cause the problems.

Aren't there more men in the military?

MichaeltheGreat · March 31, 2003, 22:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Maybe the question should be "would you prefer to have Lancer in your unit or a woman?"

Horsie, you know you gave us all an opening there so wide you could push the entire US V Corps through it?

MichaeltheGreat · March 31, 2003, 22:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
I'd like to know how having tits affects combat effectiveness.

Ever seen a woman with D-cups try to hump an ALICE pack?

(Note for you zit-popping adolescents and non-US gruntspeak challenged types, "hump" has a very different meaning than the one that went through your dirty little minds.

)

MichaeltheGreat · March 31, 2003, 22:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln

I guess quite a few women officers have a chip on their shoulders and they like to humilate the men under them if they do not bow in submission. The military is a perfect place for your typical bull-****. She has the full force of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) backing her when she pretends that she is a man.

So women have a monopoly on chickenshit officers?

General Ludd · March 31, 2003, 22:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Tassadar5000

Aren't there more men in the military?

Only because they haven't been kicked out yet.

Nubclear · March 31, 2003, 22:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Osweld

Only because they haven't been kicked out yet.

Except for the gays

Pekka · March 31, 2003, 22:17

Osweld, that is one of my main points. It's like a hockey team. If the season starts to suck, you fire the coach. Why? Because you can change the coach, but you can't change the whole team

.

Ok, I'm willing to change my opinion here. If and only IF there are women who can physically be equal with the men in the same job (talking about front line combatting), do everything at least as good, or as it states in the requirements AND the guys are willing to accept her/them as one of the guys in their group, then I have no problems what so ever. I will follow women or men, but only after they have met the same requirements we have. Or if their results where in mens level, mostly in physical challenges, then I think no less of her but accept her. Actually I have done that before, didn't hurt much

. But every guy, or at least the vast majority must accept them too. Before that, I can't see any future in it. Because it comes down to winning and results. If many guys think less of them, it can effect on the coming results, and that's not good. Even if it would be a question if equality and all that, it must not have any effect on the results. It can not weaken down the groups, or it's morality, or trust. If some guys don't trust women leaders for example, then we can't have them, even if they are big headed guys like that. But if they accept and she has all the skills.. sure no problem, even to combat.

I just doubt this is the trend now. In some groups it could work, in some groups it won't. Maybe in pro army it could work, in army like we have, it won't work.

Lincoln · March 31, 2003, 22:22

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

So women have a monopoly on chickenshit officers?

No. Infact I was going to reinlist in the navy but a certain male officer and me did not get along too well. He expected me to qualify in submarines again when I came aboard his particular sub. That part was fine because it was a different class but he insisted on the humiliation part (if you know what I mean). I didn't play along with his game and we both provided the crew with hours of entertainment with bets on who would win the battle of wills. Well he won! After all this was the military. I left when my enlistment was up, pretty much because of him. But I think he was gay.

cazzie · March 31, 2003, 22:25

Both of my cousins are in the armed forces. One male, a Navy Seal, and the other a female armed with a tank.

Just put it this way...I wouldn't want to upset either one of them.

Pekka · March 31, 2003, 22:31

Plus with women there are always special rules. You just can't walk in, they might be naked. If it's the guys, I can walk right in no problem. If it's a woman leader, she can walk in to guys if they're naked. That's not equality.
They can use all the dirty language the want, but the guys have to be careful, so they won't bring out harrasment etc card up. Been there done that. It's ok to yell about mens private parts, but if you mention breasts and how they must not float on the table in the case of sitting straight.. well that's just talk that degrades women, thus punishable. And so on and so on.
Well these are not real problems of course, but they made my work hard because I like to talk with little humor and straight face, so it wouldn't be so boring and it would be remembered and not forgotten right away.
Why was it ok to say 'Don't move! Even your pubic hair won't grow!' loudly, but banned to say 'Don't move! Even your tits can't shake!'. Both are not to taken too seriously naturally, but other one is banned because it's sexual talk. Hmpff... they're both not, or both are.
It gets too PC after that. Again, not real problems but anyway.. it should mean real equality then.

Pekka · March 31, 2003, 22:33

But again, this is not the fault of the women, but too PC officers who are afraid to get punished by some sexual harrasment panda thing. Let's face it, guys are the biggest problem.. but I guess that's the way it is.

Lancer · March 31, 2003, 22:38

Lincoln, yup, well said. Of course all the guys who got stepped on because they are guys are mean as hell by now and taking it out on the Republican Guard...

I've heard from others that what you describe is a real problem. Poor troopers going to work and getting ragged by raving rampant ***** women officers out to prove themselves by abusing their authority and their subordinates...and if the trooper replys he's sexist. A career officer replys and his career is finished.

***** =Five star

Lincoln · March 31, 2003, 22:38

The military is not supposed to be a social experiment. It is not an equal opportunity employer. The idea is to kill people and destroy things. This new wave of touchy-feely equality is a distraction to the mission.

Pekka · March 31, 2003, 22:43

Lincoln, I agree with you 100%. It's in everything.. soon we all have some individualist armies, where everyone can lead and take turns, everyone gets to say what they think about the situation and how they feel about it. Punishments are forbidden and about every job can be degrading or not necessary, or does not have direct educational purpose. Everyone can be suing you or complaining, it's not a shame to complain, it's watching your rights! ARrrrrghh.. I can feel it coming already.

Lincoln · March 31, 2003, 22:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Lancer
...and if the trooper replys he's sexist. A career officer replys and his career is finished.

***** =Five star

That is pretty much my objection to the whole idea. There is a double standard now and a lot of resentment. Of course it works both ways with good women being harrassed by simple minded men but I don't understand why we need to weaken the military by playing these games. Good officers left by the droves during the Clintoon

era. Now Bush ought to kick some ass and take some names!

Alexander's Horse · March 31, 2003, 22:50

Men work for women in the civilian workforce. Why should the military be any different?

MichaeltheGreat · March 31, 2003, 23:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln

That is pretty much my objection to the whole idea. There is a double standard now and a lot of resentment. Of course it works both ways with good women being harrassed by simple minded men but I don't understand why we need to weaken the military by playing these games. Good officers left by the droves during the Clintoon

era. Now Bush ought to kick some ass and take some names!

Yep, we should go back to the days when this was a Christian, white male military. We had much better forces then.

Alexander's Horse · March 31, 2003, 23:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln

It is not an equal opportunity employer.

I think you'll find it is