Women Soldiers

[InPersonaChriste]

[quote name='Cam42' timestamp='1308931006' post='2258108']
So....you're saying this is a bro-mance thing....much like what jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) and I have?
[/quote]

I dont think I am catching on to your meaning...

[Cam42]

[quote name='InPersonaChriste' timestamp='1308973108' post='2258387']
I dont think I am catching on to your meaning...
[/quote]


You said:

[quote]As for men, they are wired to be protectors, at least when you are with a bunch of guys you dont have to worry about protecting them in that *manly* way. Its more of a brotherhood thing.[/quote]

To which I responded:

[quote]So....you're saying this is a bro-mance thing...[/quote]

From the Urban dictionary...

The intense love shared between heterosexual males. A form of male bonding and usually invisible to the naked eye. This bond is normally only shared between two males that have a deeper understanding of each other, in a way no woman could ever realise.

[url="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bromance"]source[/url]

It was a joke, sorry to confuse.

Edited June 25, 2011 by Cam42

[InPersonaChriste]

[quote name='Cam42' timestamp='1309000716' post='2258543']
You said:



To which I responded:



From the Urban dictionary...

The intense love shared between heterosexual males. A form of male bonding and usually invisible to the naked eye. This bond is normally only shared between two males that have a deeper understanding of each other, in a way no woman could ever realise.

[url="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bromance"]source[/url]

It was a joke, sorry to confuse.
[/quote]

Lol sorry! haha I know what bro-mance is.. I have just never heard it typed.

[Lilllabettt]

I am opposed on moral grounds to the involvement of women in direct, front-line combat.

There is a special privilege granted to women. Women generate other human beings. Violence against them therefore [u][b]especially[/b][/u] violates that which human beings should hold most sacred: Life.

The push to subject women to every form of brutality is a sign of the decay of our society - both the failure of men to be men and all people to appreciate the power and beauty of life.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Lilllabettt' timestamp='1309020560' post='2258630']
I am opposed on moral grounds to the involvement of women in direct, front-line combat.

There is a special privilege granted to women. Women generate other human beings. Violence against them therefore [u][b]especially[/b][/u] violates that which human beings should hold most sacred: Life.

The push to subject women to every form of brutality is a sign of the decay of our society - both the failure of men to be men and all people to appreciate the power and beauty of life.
[/quote]

But isn't that sexist and discriminatory?

And in "our society" I don't see women pushed, I see them running toward it. So, with them being human persons and with them holding equal footing with men on the human person part, if that is what they want to do, let 'em. But the criteria above which I listed still applies, in the application as I would have it.

[InPersonaChriste]

[quote name='Cam42' timestamp='1309021568' post='2258633']
But isn't that sexist and discriminatory?

And in "our society" I don't see women pushed, I see them running toward it. So, with them being human persons and with them holding equal footing with men on the human person part, if that is what they want to do, let 'em. But the criteria above which I listed still applies, in the application as I would have it.
[/quote]

I think it is a mindset now. They were pushed before. now they are in a mindset where they think they have to be a certain way.

[Lilllabettt]

[quote name='Cam42' timestamp='1309021568' post='2258633']
And in "our society" I don't see women pushed, I see them running toward it.
[/quote]


No one is standing there with a gun to their heads. But pop culture is as big a push as anything.

Women's bodies have the potential to gestate new human beings. Because of that they are symbols of life, and peace, and safety, and hope for the future. Violence against them is an attack on all these things. The effect on morale is tremendous. And it undermines the cohesion of our society in irreversible ways.

[Nunsense]

Personally, I selfishly wish my daughter weren't in the US army, especially as she is on her second tour of the Middle East. I am happy however that she is a cook, and stays behind the lines. She isn't exposed to deadly fire, but there are always stray bombs and land mines here and there so I'll be a lot happier when she is back at home again.

Generally, I agree with Lillibettt - women have a very important role in bearing children, and they should leave the fighting to the men.... but I have to support those women who are already in the military because I think their intentions (however misguided) are honourable and all of the military deserves our support. Our society is so upside down that it seems like a good thing to them! If they are rushing towards it, they have probably been 'brainwashed' into thinking that it is right.

[Cam42]

I say let 'em fight....

A uterus doesn't a person make.

[Nunsense]

I don't know if it's harder for parents to send a daughter off to a war zone than it is sending a son... any parents have both in the military? I just hate her being over there, especially as she just had a baby [s]earlier this year[/s]. My bad - how time flies - she had the baby last June but it seems like just yesterday.

It still seems unconscionable that the military would post a new mother to the Middle East, even if she is a cook! But is that sexist? Is it harder on the child for the new mother or father to go? And I guess it's just as hard on either parent to be separated from the baby.

Edited June 25, 2011 by nunsense

[InPersonaChriste]

[quote name='nunsense' timestamp='1309035477' post='2258723']
I don't know if it's harder for parents to send a daughter off to a war zone than it is sending a son... any parents have both in the military? I just hate her being over there, especially as she just had a baby [s]earlier this year[/s]. My bad - how time flies - she had the baby last June but it seems like just yesterday.

It still seems unconscionable that the military would post a new mother to the Middle East, even if she is a cook! But is that sexist? Is it harder on the child for the new mother or father to go? And I guess it's just as hard on either parent to be separated from the baby.
[/quote]

Yes, but they still have conciously volunteered to be sent wherever the government need them most.

[Adele]

I am a woman who was a US Army MP (Military Police) for three years and a US Army CID (Criminal Investigation Division) agent for three years. I think that women make significant contributions to the Armed Forces in combat support roles but I agree that they should be restricted from joining combat MOS's (Modes of Service). We have unique strengths but physical prowess isn't one of them - and physical strength is important on the front line. I won't go deep into other reasons why women should not be routinely exposed to combat situations (even combat training) except to say that men commonly talk in a vulgar way about women in the field, swearing is common, and bathing is infrequent. I am glad that society still protects women from combat situations (and training) in limited ways, even if young (and sometimes very young) women think they want exposure to such things. Thanks for reading this opinion of mine.

[MithLuin]

Thank you for sharing, [b]Adele[/b], and thank you for your years of service

[MithLuin]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' timestamp='1308918391' post='2258043']

There are a few combat arms jobs women are allowed to hold now, but I honestly don't believe that foot-patrol-infantry is ideal for a woman. I'm not against women in the military at all, but there are undeniable differences between men and women; our strengths and weaknesses are different. We need to play on those strengths. All soldiers are going to learn the same basic stuff, but a female soldier who is, for example, doing a computer related job, isn't going to have as much field training as a man who is in the infantry. (I can say this with confidence because my husband has worked both of those jobs.) I'm not poo-pooing women in the military, I'm just trying to have a realistic view of where most of us women would fit best into the military. [b]For the vast majority of us, I don't think it's the front lines.[/b]
[/quote]


Agreed. And even if there are a handful of women who can handle it, why put them in that situation?



As for new parents being deployed to war zones....my brother-in-law was deployed 3 weeks after the birth of his son, and he'll be deployed about one month prior to the birth of his 3rd child.

[InPersonaChriste]

Thank you Adele :D

[Adele]

Another consideration is that front- line troops are the ones most often taken captive by the enemy. Remember what we went through (as a nation) when those women were held during Desert Storm? Rape of a female POW is a very real possibility and I don't think we should be so accepting of that risk by allowing female combat troops. I do appreciate the opportunities extended to women by the military (I took advantage of them myself) but unless we are desperate (like attacked at home or something), I think we should leave the front lines to the men.

[MithLuin]

Male POWs can be raped, too, but I certainly understand your point. Female POWs are not a concept we're comfortable with. I don't think it's a coincidence that Jessica Lynch's story struck the chord it did. And same with [url=http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/35196926/ns/today-today_people/t/first-black-female-pow-sets-record-straight/]Shoshana Johnson[/url], though fewer people may have heard of her.

Edited July 2, 2011 by MithLuin

[infinitelord1]

[quote name='InPersonaChriste' timestamp='1308781053' post='2257423']
Since I was little i have always had respect for the Canadain Soldiers who serve our country. I know that they have had their problems, but I still think that CF is really respectable.

But,
If I was a man in Infantry and had to count on women on the front lines. Well I would prefer a tobacco's chewing jerk, to a femenazi.

I personally think that if you are going to be a woman in the Canadian Forces, be something like a Nurse, Doctor, Med Tech, Lab Tech, or social worker. And leave the leadership and crazy artillery to the guys. Sometimes I think that women like these tend to attract to much attention to themselves. Sure they want to be just like the guys, but really, they are women.

So if their is a woman out their, take into consideration that a well balanced workspace (equal amounts of men and women) is good if you are considering a military carreer.

Or just leave it up to the men :D


BTW
I love guns, I love war, and I am all for the equality of women. I guess I just get so pissed off when people are talking about how horrible it is to have women soldiers. I am not a femenist, but I do know that in emergency situations, it should not really matter who you are fighting with. As long as they know their duty in the field, all should go well. I totally did not mean to make this offensive in any way. I just know how pissed all my brothers get when I beat them at sports (more like halo...) and how I can be a distraction when I play gruesome manly games (dont worry I dont dress offensively, but a woman did tell me that I can serve as a distraction....).
[/quote]

Are you referring to Female Infantry? or women soldiers period? Because in the US Army we have Women Soldiers. We just aren't allowed to put Females into Infantry roles. But it looks like that will change soon.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Adele' timestamp='1309288492' post='2259815']
I am a woman who was a US Army MP (Military Police) for three years and a US Army CID (Criminal Investigation Division) agent for three years. I think that women make significant contributions to the Armed Forces in combat support roles but I agree that they should be restricted from joining combat MOS's (Modes of Service). We have unique strengths but physical prowess isn't one of them - and physical strength is important on the front line. I won't go deep into other reasons why women should not be routinely exposed to combat situations (even combat training) except to say that men commonly talk in a vulgar way about women in the field, swearing is common, and bathing is infrequent. I am glad that society still protects women from combat situations (and training) in limited ways, even if young (and sometimes very young) women think they want exposure to such things. Thanks for reading this opinion of mine.
[/quote]


[quote name='Adele' timestamp='1309477841' post='2261295']
Another consideration is that front- line troops are the ones most often taken captive by the enemy. Remember what we went through (as a nation) when those women were held during Desert Storm? Rape of a female POW is a very real possibility and I don't think we should be so accepting of that risk by allowing female combat troops. I do appreciate the opportunities extended to women by the military (I took advantage of them myself) but unless we are desperate (like attacked at home or something), I think we should leave the front lines to the men.
[/quote]


[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1309575393' post='2261934']
Male POWs can be raped, too, but I certainly understand your point. Female POWs are not a concept we're comfortable with. I don't think it's a coincidence that Jessica Lynch's story struck the chord it did. And same with [url=http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/35196926/ns/today-today_people/t/first-black-female-pow-sets-record-straight/]Shoshana Johnson[/url], though fewer people may have heard of her.
[/quote]
Good points.

I was going to bring this point up much earlier, but never got around to posting in this thread. Female soldiers captured by the enemy [i]will[/i] be raped, and likely brutally and repeatedly. I don't see it as merely a possibility, but a certainty.
And that is in addition to a variety of other issues involved in putting women in front-line combat roles.

Combat is not a game of Halo. Obviously, being a POW is no picnic for male soldiers either, and not a situation we'd wish on anyone. I'm sure many will call me hopelessly old-fashioned and sexist, but I believe a society should not willingly put women in such dangers, and that protecting them from such is the duty of every civilized society. A society which willingly subjects our women to the dangers of front-line combat in the name of "sexual equality" will have fallen into barbarism of the worst kind.

[MithLuin]

My best friend's sister will get back from Afghanistan in a few weeks. She was there in a support role with the US Army, and has also been stationed in Qatar, Bulgaria, and Germany. My aunt recently returned from the South Sudan and has been to Afghanistan many times in the past 10 years. She's a civililian, but specializes in helping to jump start struggling economies, so is often sent in conjunction with US aid to a nation, whether that was behind the Iron Curtain or in the 3rd world.

Sending women into dangerous situations is not necessarily bad, but I agree that that is a distinct call from sending them into the front lines and combat situations. I don't see any reason to do that, and certainly some reasons to avoid that, so...why should we change our current policy?

As for the OP, I think she should clarify her goals and desires. If she wants to be a gun afficianado, then she can work towards buying a weapon and practicing at a range or something. If she wants to be in humanitarian aid and relief, she can look into joining an organization that does that, either as a volunteer or employee/career. And if she wants to serve her country by supporting the military...then she should do that. If she thinks the only 'real' soldiers are the ones who shoot people, then I don't know what to tell her.