Another equality fail : few army women want combat jobs
Less than 8% of army women who responded to the survey said they wanted a combat job. Of those, an overwhelming number said they’d like to be a Night Stalker – a member of the elite special operations helicopter crews who perhaps are best known for flying the Navy Seals into Osama bin Laden’s compound in 2011.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/25/us-army-women-combat-jobs-survey
Once again, women are very equality shy when it's inconvenient. Just let the guys do the dangerous and hard work. Are women socially conditioned to dislike guns and violence? What can we do about it? Give baby girls toy guns instead of dolls? Encourage teenage girls to get into more fist fights? How can we achieve equality?
(edited 10 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
Why is it a matter that people want different things?
After a million years of evolution it's unsurprising that there's some difficulty in women fully embracing and coping with what has been evolutionarily a very male preserve (the fighting and killing of other group's men).
Then again if you've ever seen a woman properly angry it can instil abject terror, or at least a sense of dread and impending reckoning.
Then again if you've ever seen a woman properly angry it can instil abject terror, or at least a sense of dread and impending reckoning.
Original post by jamieTT
What happens after we feminize our boys and nobody will want to be an armed PC or a soldier? Dismantle armed police units and the army?
Yes!
I doubt hugging armed robbers or enemy soldiers works.
Neither Haiti nor Iceland has an army, and they cope well enough.
How do you know state institutions aren't more of a cause of crime rather than a preventor of it/
Original post by anarchism101
Yes!
Neither Haiti nor Iceland has an army, and they cope well enough.
How do you know state institutions aren't more of a cause of crime rather than a preventor of it/
Neither Haiti nor Iceland has an army, and they cope well enough.
How do you know state institutions aren't more of a cause of crime rather than a preventor of it/
Probably best to scratch out Haiti. Don't think that country can be fairly described as doing well.
Most women don't want close combat roles.
Women aren't allowed in the close combat roles.
Where's the problem?
Women aren't allowed in the close combat roles.
Where's the problem?
Original post by anarchism101
Yes!
Neither Haiti nor Iceland has an army, and they cope well enough.
How do you know state institutions aren't more of a cause of crime rather than a preventor of it/
Neither Haiti nor Iceland has an army, and they cope well enough.
How do you know state institutions aren't more of a cause of crime rather than a preventor of it/
Your enemies won't be feminized and there will always be armed robbers.
Haiti is the poorest nation in the western hemisphere and a complete dump with 80% of population living under the poverty line, not having an army is the least of their problems. Iceland is an island in the middle of nowhere and is part of NATO.
Original post by JollyJelly
Most women don't want close combat roles.
Women aren't allowed in the close combat roles.
Where's the problem?
Women aren't allowed in the close combat roles.
Where's the problem?
Because those who want nothing to do with a combat role in the military don't have to worry about the aging and unacceptable personal protection equipment that will be the result of a tighter defence budget.
A tighter defence budget created as more funds have to go towards: training people who are more statistically likely not to be able to reach the level of physical and mental endurance necessary to maintain utmost combat effectiveness, training people who might be less likely to do multiple tours of duty and leave the military at an earlier age maybe due to being overwhelmed by it or from deciding that they want to start a family, and the potential rise in compensation and medical expenditure needed for anyone suffering from psychological distress as a result of their service.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Mockery
Because those who want nothing to do with a combat role in the military don't have to worry about the aging and unacceptable personal protection equipment that will be the result of a tighter defence budget.
A tighter defence budget created as more funds have to go towards: training people who are more statistically likely not to be able to reach the level of physical and mental endurance necessary to maintain utmost combat effectiveness, training people who might be less likely to do multiple tours of duty and leave the military at an earlier age maybe due to being overwhelmed by it or from decided that they want to start a family, and the potential rise in compensation and medical expenditure needed for anyone suffering from psychological distress as a result of their service.
A tighter defence budget created as more funds have to go towards: training people who are more statistically likely not to be able to reach the level of physical and mental endurance necessary to maintain utmost combat effectiveness, training people who might be less likely to do multiple tours of duty and leave the military at an earlier age maybe due to being overwhelmed by it or from decided that they want to start a family, and the potential rise in compensation and medical expenditure needed for anyone suffering from psychological distress as a result of their service.
I don't follow? A huge majority of women don't want to be in combat roles. (Yank survey, but probably applies to the UK as well)
At the moment, women aren't allowed in close combat roles (infantry) in the US or UK.
How does this cause a problem of substandard equipment?
Again, I don't follow you.
Original post by jamieTT
Your enemies won't be feminized and there will always be armed robbers.
Haiti is the poorest nation in the western hemisphere and a complete dump with 80% of population living under the poverty line, not having an army is the least of their problems. Iceland is an island in the middle of nowhere and is part of NATO.
Haiti is the poorest nation in the western hemisphere and a complete dump with 80% of population living under the poverty line, not having an army is the least of their problems. Iceland is an island in the middle of nowhere and is part of NATO.
This is why we need robocop
Original post by JollyJelly
I don't follow? A huge majority of women don't want to be in combat roles. (Yank survey, but probably applies to the UK as well)
At the moment, women aren't allowed in close combat roles (infantry) in the US or UK.
How does this cause a problem of substandard equipment?
Again, I don't follow you.
At the moment, women aren't allowed in close combat roles (infantry) in the US or UK.
How does this cause a problem of substandard equipment?
Again, I don't follow you.
Many of whom claim that women should be allowed in such a role simply because a minority might want to, and their thirst for 'equality' overrides understanding and accepting any negative implications that might be the result. This is because it won't be affecting them directly, they're not the ones being put in a combat zone potentially underprepared, it's the 95% or so of men who will be in this role who will have to suffer.
Scrolling down your 'created threads' list makes me a little concerned about you. In a nice way, I think you would be happier off the internet doing something you enjoy, with people who don't anger you so much. Sometimes it's fun to debate and discuss the same things over and over and be 'right' or know that there's some truth in your anger, and that other people agree and will fuel you... but sometimes it's just not worth doing it so much in the long run, I'm sure it's unhealthy after a while. Go play tennis or something. P:
On topic - unsurprised by the results. I imagine it will alter over time, the percentage will get a little higher. Who wants to be in a life-threatening situation in which they are already a minority/often set up 'to fail'?
On topic - unsurprised by the results. I imagine it will alter over time, the percentage will get a little higher. Who wants to be in a life-threatening situation in which they are already a minority/often set up 'to fail'?
Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori. I don't blame the women, who wants to be at risk of getting shot to pieces? It's men who swallowed the dog-whistle politics of nationalism when the modern paradigm for warfare was being established around WW1. No sympathy whatsoever I'm afraid.
The vast majority of women simply aren't, and can never be, fit for combat roles. So the fact that most military women don't want to be in combat roles doesn't concern me. It's simply an inequality we have to deal with. Men and women share equal rights but it's the men who have to bear the burden of safeguarding those rights.
Original post by awe
Scrolling down your 'created threads' list makes me a little concerned about you. In a nice way, I think you would be happier off the internet doing something you enjoy, with people who don't anger you so much. Sometimes it's fun to debate and discuss the same things over and over and be 'right' or know that there's some truth in your anger, and that other people agree and will fuel you... but sometimes it's just not worth doing it so much in the long run, I'm sure it's unhealthy after a while. Go play tennis or something. P:
On topic - unsurprised by the results. I imagine it will alter over time, the percentage will get a little higher. Who wants to be in a life-threatening situation in which they are already a minority/often set up 'to fail'?
On topic - unsurprised by the results. I imagine it will alter over time, the percentage will get a little higher. Who wants to be in a life-threatening situation in which they are already a minority/often set up 'to fail'?
If you mean set up to fail by biology and evolution, then I agree.
Original post by MissNix
From your post OP it doesn't seem like you read the whole article, which is a shame. I urge those looking at this thread to read it all as it's pretty interesting.
I did. What's the problem?
Original post by Algorithm69
The vast majority of women simply aren't, and can never be, fit for combat roles. So the fact that most military women don't want to be in combat roles doesn't concern me. It's simply an inequality we have to deal with. Men and women share equal rights but it's the men who have to bear the burden of safeguarding those rights.
Perfectly put. Very few women seem to want the privilege of returning home in a body bag, blinded or without limbs.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
