[ChocoCoatedLemons]

(Original post by Dragonfly07)
No, that's a reason to give the men more discipline/give harsher punishments for rape. You can't deny someone their right to do something simply because they face a greater danger because law and order isn't particularly enforced there. That's the same reason women in some Arabic countries aren't allowed to leave the house unaccompanied by a male adult.

Your logic: women face a danger of getting raped if they serve in the front lines, so they shouldn't be allowed to serve in the frontlines.

Well guess what, EVERYONE on the frontline faces the danger of death because of war, and yet they still chose to serve there. If no one was allowed to do something based purely on the fact that it was dangerous to do it, then by your logic frontline military should be completely banned for everyone (I think death is worse rape).

In fact, as a white person you should be banned from going into black ghetto neighborhoods because you face the risk of getting shot. You shouldn't be allowed to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol or eat junk food.

I'm personally all for the person's individual freedom to do anything they want that's within their capabilities, regardless of how harmful it may be to themselves. As long as they don't harm anyone else, and as long as everything is done by the state to enforce rules that protect them against other potentially harmful people, then any risk they take is their own, including hard drugs, going to wars, getting abortions and even suicide.

I completely agree with everything you just said.

[ChocoCoatedLemons]

(Original post by NB_ide)
"Apart from biological differences..." which include every single possible difference there is..

No, it doesn't. Biology isn't everything - just because someone is a different gender to you doesn't mean that they are completely different.

[blu tack]

(Original post by Flyteryder)
I expect somebody without credible sources to not get involved at all.

What are your credible sources?
You know the original report originates with the Pentagon right? I'm sure you'll find a fault with that too though.

Did you read the guardian article I posted by the way? Full of sources and credible information.

[NB_ide]

(Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons)
No, it doesn't. Biology isn't everything

Wut? You said there are no differences between m+f except the biological. I then said "biological differences" include all possible differences there could be anyway. You're now saying it doesn't? So... there ARE other differences?

u mad?

- just because someone is a different gender to you doesn't mean that they are completely different.

mind = BLOWN

[ChocoCoatedLemons]

(Original post by NB_ide)
Wut? You said there are no differences between m+f except the biological. I then said "biological differences" include all possible differences there could be anyway. You're now saying it doesn't? So... there ARE other differences?

u mad?



mind = BLOWN

You said there are differences. I said there aren't aside from biological ones. You then said that includes every possible difference. I said it doesn't - because it doesn't. Biological differences would be genitals etc, other differences could be, in the context of the military; the right to choose their career, the right to defend their country, their loyalty. I am saying that men and women both have these rights. I don't understand what you don't understand...

That is why being a different gender doesn't necessarily mean they are completely different. They could have the same likes and dislikes, have the same IQ or strength. Just because someone has different genitals doesn't mean they are a different species.

[arnoob]

Women have a thinner bone structure hence why a lot of women aren't as physically capable as men


I am so going to get negged for this :/

[NB_ide]

(Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons)
You said there are differences. I said there aren't aside from biological ones. You then said that includes every possible difference. I said it doesn't - because it doesn't. Biological differences would be genitals etc,

Yes, and everything else

other differences could be, in the context of the military; the right to choose their career, the right to defend their country, their loyalty. I am saying that men and women both have these rights. I don't understand what you don't understand...

So you mean different opportunities afforded to them rather than actual differences between the people.

That is why being a different gender doesn't necessarily mean they are completely different.

What does "completely different" mean? Are any two things completely different?

They could have the same likes and dislikes, have the same IQ or strength. Just because someone has different genitals doesn't mean they are a different species.

Are you one of them biology scientist people??!?!

[xXxiKillxXx]

What do you expect in the world's biggest terrorist army?

[ChocoCoatedLemons]

(Original post by NB_ide)



So you mean different opportunities afforded to them rather than actual differences between the people.



What does "completely different" mean? Are any two things completely different?




Are you one of them biology scientist people??!?!

1) Yes. That's what I've been trying to say. That there are no differences in what men and women can do.
2) Yes. Slugs and people have no similarities apart from biological ones.
3) Umm... What sort of biology scientist person? O.o

[desijut]

(Original post by DontJudge)
You could say the same with 'risking' yourself by visiting your relatives in East London, because you might get mugged. It is against the law to mug someone, but doesn't mean it will happen, because it 'shouldn't' happen. Therefore you will continue to visiting, because that was your intention.

LOL, the risk is VERY low if you're just there visiting relatives, it's nowhere near the same. Unless you wander the streets alone when you visit relatives (which i seriously doubt) there's literally no risk. Bad analogy imo.

Im not saying there's anything wrong with wanting to join the army, but this should be factored into that decision

[Dalek1099]

(Original post by kingsarecool)
Look.. there are certain jobs that women just shouldn't do. Its common sense its unsafe!!
secondly men and women are designed differently the average man is stronger than the average women.(you can look that up)

BTW there are plenty of other jobs out there that women are more then capable of doing.

Being in the army is not a full test of strength and some women are stronger than some men,so should these women not be counted?The main thing the army tests is gun-shooting and women are just as good at targeting with firearms as men and they might have more strategy because women are more intelligent than men.

[Vampire90210]

Awful, truly awful. Factor in the amount of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan that have been tortured,humiliated or in some cases killed and a very disgusting picture of the US army emerges. Oh and not to mention the poor animals. The puppy incident was infuriating.

[hopingtobeadentist]

WHY ARE WE ALWAYS GETTING ****ING RAPED, WHY CANT MEN JUST CONTROL THEIR ****ED DICKS FOR ONCE. WHAT HAVE WE DONE TO DESERVE THIS?
Does God hate us that much?

[Brandmon]

What are fully to blame are not the women themselves for joining the Army (anyone who thinks so is an idiot) but the relevant command. Most cases are found out and could be easily dealt with, but are instead ignored for the respective unit to keep face - pursuing a case of sexual assault simply generated bad press. Therefore they not only turn a blind eye, but instead turn against the victim in order to deter actual surfacing of such cases in the first place. Such laxity with regards to sexual assault simply encourages it to happen in the first place.

Oh and RT can't report about the US without sounding like Goebels as he did with regards to the UK. Sexual Assault is not rape - only 50% of such cases are remotely rape or aggravated assault. And the 1 in 3 statistic is very likely exaggerated; considering that a good 15% of the US Armed Forces is made up of females. That is about 214,000 - not counting reserve forces. About 3,000 sexual abuse cases are reported each year on average in the past few years. And most are repeat offences involving the same female. That is a far cry from what RT is claiming.

But yeah, it is old anyway (a good 3 years), long debunked and your average RT material (even less objective than the Daily Mail)

[Cannotbelieveit]

(Original post by xXxiKillxXx)
What do you expect in the world's biggest terrorist army?

Oh FFS, piss off.

(Original post by Dalek1099)
Being in the army is not a full test of strength and some women are stronger than some men,so should these women not be counted?The main thing the army tests is gun-shooting and women are just as good at targeting with firearms as men and they might have more strategy because women are more intelligent than men.

Wow, how am I going to unpick this.

First off, the most basic aspect of the army is fitness, if you're not strong enough or fit enough you don't get in, be it a man or a women.

Secondly, the army is a lot more than just being able to shoot a gun straight.

And finally, Women are more intelligent than men? Please provide evidence for such a outlandish statement.

[So Instinct]

Ever heard of a 'Desert Queen'.

[xXxiKillxXx]

(Original post by Cannotbelieveit)
Oh FFS, piss off.




Wow, how am I going to unpick this.

First off, the most basic aspect of the army is fitness, if you're not strong enough or fit enough you don't get in, be it a man or a women.

Secondly, the army is a lot more than just being able to shoot a gun straight.

And finally, Women are more intelligent than men? Please provide evidence for such a outlandish statement.

Like I am going to listen to a weirdo's demands..

[Dalek1099]

(Original post by Cannotbelieveit)
Oh FFS, piss off.




Wow, how am I going to unpick this.

First off, the most basic aspect of the army is fitness, if you're not strong enough or fit enough you don't get in, be it a man or a women.

Secondly, the army is a lot more than just being able to shoot a gun straight.

And finally, Women are more intelligent than men? Please provide evidence for such a outlandish statement.

Women have outperformed men,in all forms of education,including GCSE,A-Level and University and Women will certainly have other qualities needed for the army and men and women can work together with a varietry of different skills.

[Brandmon]

(Original post by Dalek1099)
Women have outperformed men,in all forms of education,including GCSE,A-Level and University and Women will certainly have other qualities needed for the army and men and women can work together with a varietry of different skills.

How is educational performance an indication of intelligence? The reason females on average do better at school than males is because most males are too busy either playing MMOs or getting drunk. And last I heard the likes of Newton, Einstein and Hawking are men. The claim that one gender is smarter than the other is stupid.

[icedragon]

(Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons)
1) Yes. That's what I've been trying to say. That there are no differences in what men and women can do.
2) Yes. Slugs and people have no similarities apart from biological ones.
3) Umm... What sort of biology scientist person? O.o

I have complete respect for women's rights and think that they should be able to do what they want to do etc., but your first point is ridiculous. Do you see male and female 100m sprinters competing together? No, because men are faster. That's the same reason why I don't think employers in certain sectors (e.g. manual labour) should be punished for employing a man over a women, because in all likelihood the man would be better at the job because he is physically stronger. That is why "biological differences" do have an effect on what women can and can't do as well as men.