A Crash Course in Feminism Mk. II (or, why everyone should be a feminist)

[Psychosplodge]

Think how technologically impaired we'd be if there weren't though.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

A fair point.

Without religious fanaticism we'd have 1000 years MORE technological advance, so there you go.

[eldargal]

Think how technologically impaired we'd be if there weren't though.

Yeah it's kind of tragic when you think that war has historically been the major driving force behind technological development in the West. Though the big technological revolution of the last 40 years happened when we were generally at peace or involved only in stupid cabinet wars.

[Denzark]

Yes, it is. Otherwise you are stopping one group of people from serving their country because another group of people are badly behaved and the authorities too lazy to discipline them. It is completely unacceptable. You cannot argue that we live in a merit based society and have a merit based military and then ban people from serving because a minority of others are ****ing dicks.

Firstly I thought we were talking about dedicated combat troops specifically infantry. Women are not being stopped from serving in any capacity, just this specific one. As to the authorities being too lazy - don't be trite again. One can lead through fear of punishment but it is the last resort.



So provide women with their own gear that shifts where the weight is carried. It's no different than providing different sized uniforms for different sized bodies.

It is very different. We don't have a rifle that can be fired left handed in our military - and around 1/3 of people are left eye dominant! You would need 2 R&D programmes, with the procurement for females having a totally skewed scale of economy given you are procuring for a much smaller percentage of the force.

clearly the solution is to phase men out of the military all together. they cannot be trusted to do the job properly, so get rid of them and we will simply have an all female army.

I hope this is at least half a joke.

Yeah I'm not saying it wouldn't cost money at first but it would get cheaper as more women join the armed forces in these new capacities. The point is none of these obstacles are insurmountable, they are just thrown up to try and deflect from the main issue which is people (men) want the armed forces to remain the exclusive preserve of men. The really interesting thing is that men in the US and Canadian armed forces who have served alongside women are often some of the loudest supporters of these restrictions being dropped, it is civilians or people who haven't served alongside them that keep bringing this stuff up.


+1, they are clearly unfit for it emotionally and psychologically.

EG once again, you have digressed from a debate about females in combat dedicated units to females in the military. I quote you directly:

the main issue which is people (men) want the armed forces to remain the exclusive preserve of men

And this is clearly tosh since we have had women in the military for decades.

There is a huge difference between this 'main issue' (non existent) and women in combat roles.

[Kirsten]

not going to happen though

- - - Updated - - -

[COLOR="#FF0000"]I hope this is at least half a joke.

why exactly? the issue here, as you see it, is that women in frontline combat roles would cause difficulties for the men. clearly the solution is to get rid of the men. if they can't act with discipline then they can't do the job properly and we can replace them with women who can.

[eldargal]

rifle is somewhat more involved than a different system of straps that shift where the weight is carried. Again the point is none of these so called problems are really obstacles, they are smoke screens put up to try and keep women out of combat roles as long as possible and they will fail just like every other ridiculous exclusion. I mean most of these same arguments were used to try and stop women voting, driving, working, you name it.

why exactly? the issue here, as you see it, is that women in frontline combat roles would cause difficulties for the men. clearly the solution is to get rid of the men. if they can't act with discipline then they can't do the job properly and we can replace them with women who can.

It's a compelling argument.

Been over this military argument many times before though, should probably move on we aren't really covering any new ground.

[Psychosplodge]

We had an empire before they gave women the vote you know...

[eldargal]

We had an empire before they gave women the vote you know...

We'd still have it if you had given it to us sooner. Men can't be trusted to run an empire, every single one they have done has collapsed.

[Kirsten]

[Denzark]

Mmmm well rather than dazzle you with my knowledge of the nightmare that is the procurement system, and noticing you have declined to comment on your erroneously referring to a non-existent issue as the 'Main issue' I will check out until the next time someone says something entirely fatuous and I just can't help myself.