Scipio's gender based pseudo psychology thread, split from Re: Female Cdn inf soldier in Afghanistan

[scoutfinch]

LOL

ushup:

Good point, Bruce.  Either way... I still hate 'em and I suck at them.  Oh well.  I will persevere reminding myself  "That which does not kill me, makes me stronger"!

 

[navymich]

Not in my eyes, neither of you are equal to Card, Scoutfinch, NavyMich, Muffin or any serving woman on this board, not even by half!
Let alone the others on here who have been in the forces longer then you have been a gleam in your daddy's eye!
*EDIT* I missed Muffin, and well that aint right

Thanks for the mention HoM

I understand completely that being a sailor doesn't compare physically with soldiers, so I'm not even going to add to the discussion on that.  But I would just like you to know Sciopio that the ship I currently am posted to has a female XO, a female coxn, and myself as a sr. navcomm.  Those are 3 very senior positions all filled by women.  They were not given to us because there was nobody else available for them.  They were given to us by merit because we have proven that we can do the job better then others.  My department is currently all male, and has been for a number of years.  They have no complaints about being led by a woman, and our department has risen above others time and time again.  Am I bragging?  You bet you a$$ I am.  I am proud to be a woman, I am proud to be a sailor, and I am proud to be a part of the Canadian Forces.

And if you are the man that you are trying to say you are, I dare you to find any of us women from the board and tell us face to face that we can not do our job physically or mentally. 

And now I too will back off because if I don't someone is going to have to hold me back.

 

[camochick]

I find it funny that scipio nor the ones who agree with him like aluc and calvinparks are not even in the military yet (or dont have anything in their profile to suggest that) yet they see fit to be arm chair judges of women in the military. I wont even argue this point because it seems to come up every few months or so. All I can say to these gentlemen is that women are in the forces and they will remain in the forces and if you cant handle it, i suggest you find different means of employment ie Tim Hortons (they are hiring for the new one in khandahar, probably the closest you will get to seeing any real action considering you cant even pass the minimum standards to get in the forces) >

 

[043]

Well, I am in the Military and after reading this...........he does have some points I agree with.  When it comes down to PT, IMHO, the BFT is too easy. Anyone can walk with a load on for 13km in 2hrs 26min or they should be able to. Me personally, I find the Express Test much harder than the BFT. I don't agree with what some people as about women in the combat arms either but I will get to that later.

Chimo!

 

[Pikache]

I am about hairwidth away from pressing the Big Shiny Button called 'Thread Closed'.

If it degenerates into waste of Bandwidth (btw female in military has been covered and beaten to death) I will close this.
-HF, some staff guy

 

[Glorified Ape]

Russian women manned flak guns at Stalingrad

They did a lot more than that at Stalingrad and elsewhere in Russia as well. I suggest you read "On the Road to Stalingrad: Memoirs of a Soviet Woman Machine Gunner" by Zoya Matveyevna Smirnova Medvedeva.

That being said, the only decent argument against women in the combat arms that I've heard is the low cost-benefit ratio to offering them the training, given their (generally significant) higher rate of failure, such as:

From: http://www.cmrlink.org/international.asp?docID=113

· In a test requiring soldiers to carry 90 lbs. of artillery shells over measured distances, the male failure rate was 20%. The female failure rate was 70%.

· In a 12.5-mile route march carrying 60 lbs. of equipment, followed by target practice simulating conditions under fire, men failed in 17% of cases. Women failed in 48%.

· Females were generally slower in simulated combat exercises involving lengthy "fire and move" situations, in which participants had to sprint from one position to another in full battle dress.

· In close-quarter battle tests, including hand-to-hand combat, women suffered much higher injury rates.

 

[Trinity]

You can call it childish and silly. 

Scipio

I've read the entire thread from start to finish, not following it
from its inception. You come out with a "gender theory" of the male
ego which makes indirect and direct statements about men and women
in the military.  Your statement *this theory, conflicts with the current
views of our current soldiers and they tell you directly they disagree.

Some, as in your quote, are calling it childish and silly.  Your response
to them was, "well you just don't get it". 

We get it.  You've tried in a few posts to explain your point.  I understand
exactly what you are trying to portray.  I would say most of this site understands
judging from their posts. 

Whats important to note, just because they disagree doesn't mean they fail to understand. 



You then state, there has to be factual proof out there to back up your claim.  There
very well could be and that would be fantastic to aid your argument.  However, its not
my job or the job of anyone else to provide that to bolster you argument.  You really
need to Google it yourself and provide a link. Otherwise your argument is going to get
cut apart due to the lack of evidence, EVEN if it sounded reasonable. 

Your argument has failed to meet or hold any type of water however true it may
be simply because you failed to present it with facts but simply compounded your
theory with more theory and personal opinion. 


I would like to think, as a Chaplain (look that word up if you need to), I have
given your theory a fair shake/consideration. With my background Masters
I often play in the realm of theoretical examples and ideas.  I have an extreme
difficulty with what you present because it seems very contradictory to everyday
military practices (which can be considered fact) and military personnel views (which
can be considered opinion).  It doesn't quite pass the litmus test. 



BUT.. now that we are playing in the theoretical

in response to your theory.. i will add my theory  ;D


Yes, instinctively we were threatened by women how many years ago.  As humans, we evolve.
Our consciousness grows, our understanding brodens.  We used to think the sun, moon and
universe revolved around earth and we were the centre.  Or the world was flat.  For humans
that was TRUTH through our instinct/faith and it couldn't be proven wrong during that time.

When it was proven wrong sure it was HUGE change to the entire world but we made it. Our
existence as we knew it was changed forever and we survived.  Women are no longer a threat
here in Canada and we are making that change.  Sure, not everyone is on board and there may
be a minority of people who vehemently reject women, but its more about attitude and social justice,
not politically correctness/liberalism.  However, for most people, they have adopted this social justice
change, (like Bruce mentioned earlier with blacks) and life goes on.  We minimize and then dismiss the
threat as we become used to it. 

Thus, I would suggest, we as men have accepted women in the workplace, minimized the threat in our
own minds, and have accepted and even enjoy the change. 

Sides, I love it when a women higher than me bosses me around.. but that's a different story!



EDIT.  My ramblings/theory are of my own and do not represent the thoughts, feelings, expressions, understandings,
religious affiliation, sexual preference, blood type of anyone else and I retain the right to amend, change, erase, deny, and
sit in the corner and cry if you don't like what I say. 

 

[Centurian1985]

Back from a days work interrogating local managers about training issues:

Unfortunately trinity has beaten me to the soapbox in summing up this issue and the generally poor logic and perceptions on the part of people 'not even in the military'

So, trinity can keep the soapbox for the time being.  And to show my disdain for the argument used by young 'im-not-in-but-I-would-be-if-I-werent-such-a-genepool-throwback' persons, I will purposely divert the topic back to 'scoutfinch':

I like the little smiley guy doing pushups, but what exactly is that luminous looking pool under him? Is that supposed to be a reflection, sweat, or some liquid bodily waste? 

 

[acclenticularis]

No one out there to answer the query re. entrance requirements other than PT?  Is it on a level playing field regardless of sex and race?  I am in the military and I don't totally disagree with scipio, just mostly.  I have encountered excellent troops of both sexes and trolls of both as well.  Didn't actually see much in parks' post that lead me to believe that he totally agreed with the scipio either.  Objectively, I think that regardless of perceived flaws in recruiting standards, there are plenty of great troops out there.  Interestingly, I don't really see many in the military complaining too much about females meeting standards (at least I have not encountered much in my brief time as a poster on ARMY.CA).  Without facts to back up arguments (for the arguments that can be factually supported) maybe scipio should avoid certain issues.  If he can prove that there are different entrance standards (other than PT), then provide the proof.  If there are quotas based on sex/race/religion/etc. then provide the proof first.  His post only shows his bias. 

 

[Scipio]

Trinity

My only factual statement was- men are stronger than women on average and that the most ideal male candidate is superior to the most ideal female candidate.  And if you don't believe that, then you've successfully ignored a very obvious difference between the sexes.  Sports, historical roles, violent crimes, physical stature etc... support my ‘theory’, which of course is not mine.  

I did not feel I needed proof to support my one grounded claim.  But to appease you:

http://www.hhp.ufl.edu/faculty/pbird/keepingfit/ARTICLE/STRENGTH.HTM.  

The paragraph basically says men are stronger, but women can produce the same effective force relative to their frame.  But that's the rub, relative.  The majority can't supercede a male’s effective force, only match it in relative size.  

As far as 'factual evidence' supporting my satirical take on a male chauvinists mind.  Before you dismiss it as tomfoolery, I want you to tell me what exactly is lacking.  The idea that maxim magazine exist in numerous incarnations, terms like sexism popped up, the romantic take men have on warfare through film, literature, and song, etc... All, I believe, support my claim. My point was more pointing towards "it does exist in healthy numbers in society"

I know what a Chaplain is, but thanks for your concern.  I often get confused by words I'm familiar with and become distraught. But rest assure, I'll look it up if I can't grasp it.  I'd like to think some one with a master degree would not be so redundant on the first half of their comment.  500 of your words told me that my comments are not supported by evidence. Be more concise (look that up under "C")

Since we are in agreement that the support of the claim rests entirely on the claimant.  Support the follow.

difficulty with what you present because it seems very contradictory to everyday
military practices.... It doesn't quite pass the litmus test.

 

As for your rhetoric - it does not at all serve well against my 'theory'.  Infact, you're not even on par with me.
You speak of wrong and right.  I speak of a current mind set that is popular in young males.  That being, the importance of being physically superior to women in a males mind, and the emasculation of not keeping the status quo. The Alpha male syndrome on top of which the sexual undertones that accompany fighting men.  Fire Fighters are also in this category.  I see it as healthy male silliness.  You see it as a problem which is hurting the few women out their interested in joining those institutions.

What a 'liberated' women can't have, she must have.  And men, such as you, will jump on their wagon in support.  You propose that men should not longer feel threatened by women.  Well, where do you draw that line?  Are you telling me that the sexes should not be threaten by one another at all, all is fair and equal?  Well it's not.  Almost every male institution in North America has been infiltrated by women.  Even boy scouts, which is now just scouts, fell victim to theory you subscribe too.  The very idea of a private male organization now lenda to eliteism and sexism, regardless of how obsucre it may seem.

Warfare, it's an occupation of the highest importance is historically seen as a male affair.  Men are stronger, so it stands to reason.  Men seem to be more prone to violence, wrote the books on gaining glory (romantic stuff) and generally see themselves as being slightly alpha male-ish as being in a warfare environment.

The whole bag.  Everything from physical aptitude to mentality are crucial to the social fibers within the military.  Lets say you're right, men should not feel threatened for every reason and plus some that you stated.  It will not change the fact that they ARE threatened and that some of the air is drained from service when GI Jane is next to you.  And since men are almost 99.9%, around the globe, more likely to enlist we should cater to their needs.  Let's say the issue is split 50/50 in the Canadian military.  That's still 50% distraught men, all for the sake of a small number of women.  I would be surprised to see a vote turn out that actually is in support of keeping women in combat roles.  I feel an anonymous vote would turn out in my favor among combat infantry members.  Just a feeling of mine.  Young men tend to think as I pointed out, ime.

be a minority of people who vehemently reject women, but its more about attitude and social justice,
not politically correctness/liberalism.

I'd argue that it's more than a minority, but I can't prove it and neither can you.  Moreover, attitude and social justice are tools which help fuel PC liberalism.  They are not independent entities. They claim social justice.  I think a good portion of the time it's not.  

Sides, I love it when a women higher than me bosses me around.. but that's a different story!

You actually had me there for a moment, you're as sexist as I am!

Bottom line is the training standards are not equal.  This means inferior candidates are joining.  A man that can only do 10 push ups is considered inferior and asked to come back later.  A female that can only do 9 push ups is considered superior and is given a job.  

The moral ambiguity is out in the open and at this point, rather embarrassing.

PS- Women were not getting into the CF in a capacity that the government wanted, they could not pass the entrance tests.  Therefore they dummied them down, to up the % of females.  It's dirty pool.  All things equal is not the case.  

 

[camochick]

" Everything from physical aptitude to mentality are crucial to the social fibers within the military."


Yet again, making statements about a military you are not qualified to join. Why not give up now and go for a run instead of wasting our time with your round about rhetoric about things which you have no clue. Your point has been heard and shot down, so time to move along. With that attitude it surprising that you know any women in which to judge. >

 

[Pea]

What a 'liberated' women can't have, she must have.  And men, such as you, will jump on their wagon in support.  You propose that men should not longer feel threatened by women.  Well, where do you draw that line?  Are you telling me that the sexes should not be threaten by one another at all, all is fair and equal?  Well it's not.  Almost every male institution in North America has been infiltrated by women.  Even boy scouts, which is now just scouts, fell victim to theory you subscribe too.  The very idea of a private male organization now lenda to eliteism and sexism, regardless of how obsucre it may seem.

PS- Women were not getting into the CF in a capacity that the government wanted, they could not pass the entrance tests.  Therefore they dummied them down, to up the % of females.  It's dirty pool.  All things equal is not the case.  

Why should men feel threatened by me? If you are so superior then what do you have to worry about? I am not threatened by men, at all. So we have "infiltrated" all your organizations. Oh no, women are now in places other than your kitchen and bedroom. If we are good enough to be there, then why can't we work along side you? Men are in our areas that were traditionally "female areas/clubs" too. In my legal assistant class last year there was a man. He didn't bother us, in fact he was very beneficial as he helped us realize how we can all do a job we want, if we really want it. Should I have told him he didn't belong in a class that taught us about working in an office? (since this is a traditional female role) Of course not, that would be stupid.

Women do pass the male entrance standards. I just finished telling you how I am currently ABOVE your fitness standard and meeting the male standard in all but one area. Would you be happy if we just let you apply to the female standards you so hate, so you could get in? Now, how about you go for a run so you can meet the male standard for the 2.4km and be eligible for entrance into the CF, and then be equal with me.

 

[HItorMiss]

*Ahem*

Scipio.......

At what point will you just be quiet? how dare you sit there and tell US (we these combat Infantry people) what we think and how we will vote!

Listen up Skippy (yup guess what I'm talking down to you) If your ever able to pass the fitness test to actually wear a uniform, they will teach you one thing, Respect. As in you may want to lip off to an Officer but you do not, and guess what Trinity is an Officer, you can disagree with him all you like but you will do so in a polite tone and manner, That Officer and Padre has been in the weeds with the mud and bugs, He would be the first person I would turn to if I ever had an issue I needed to talk about, That alone makes him better then you; not just the fact that he does have a Queen's commission in the CF.

Now I will give you one thing, your educated or at least seem so and your post though inflammatory to an Officer is at least well thought out. Wrong I will point out, but at least well thought out.

As I said you haven't got the experience to tell "us" how the combat arms type would vote, or what we think, cause your not us. Now sum up and concede that we don't agree with you, we wont agree with you.

 

[Trinity]

As far as 'factual evidence' supporting my satirical take on a male chauvinists mind.  Before you dismiss it as tomfoolery, I want you to tell me what exactly is lacking.  The idea that maxim magazine exist in numerous incarnations, terms like sexism popped up, the romantic take men have on warfare through film, literature, and song, etc... All, I believe, support my claim. My point was more pointing towards "it does exist in healthy numbers in society"

Ok..

so you make NO factual claim to the rest...

Then why are you getting so upset and defensive when everyone else isn't seeing your point.

Lets end this STUPID thread right here.

Scipio has given his opinion on Women in society and how men feel threatened.

Most everyone disagress with his opinion (in this thread)

End of Story.  Why are we continuing to argue with someone who not only
won't budge, but seems to troll?

So... We think you're wrong.. You think we're still ignoring you..

Mod.. LOCK!? Cause that sums it up

EDIt - minor addition

 

[the 48th regulator]

Warfare, it's an occupation of the highest importance is historically seen as a male affair.  Men are stronger, so it stands to reason.  Men seem to be more prone to violence, wrote the books on gaining glory (romantic stuff) and generally see themselves as being slightly alpha male-ish as being in a warfare environment.

:boring:

And you read this where??

I can't believe I fell into the troll trap,  hey people, does that look like troll poop on my boot?

frig can't wipe the smell on my boot off on the grass....

dileas

tess

 

[Michael OLeary]

As for your rhetoric - it does not at all serve well against my 'theory'.  Infact, you're not even on par with me.
You speak of wrong and right.  I speak of a current mind set that is popular in young males.  That being, the importance of being physically superior to women in a males mind, and the emasculation of not keeping the status quo. The Alpha male syndrome on top of which the sexual undertones that accompany fighting men.  Fire Fighters are also in this category.  I see it as healthy male silliness.  You see it as a problem which is hurting the few women out their interested in joining those institutions.

... ay, there's the rub ....

Perhaps the phrase you are trying to define is youthful immaturity, and too many of your correspondents are balancing their views with life experience and personal maturity.

If you feel that the CF's attitudes are so out of synch with the clarity of your vision, perhaps you should find another Army to join.  I hear the FFL are very manly in their treatment of soldiers.

 

[the 48th regulator]

FFL,

:rofl:

Very good one Sir,

Maybe he can learn to hold hands and compare the prettiest Rolex watch.....

Ah Scipio,

You are some good entertainment.

dileas

tess

 

[GO!!!]

ahh Scipio,

You have managed to resurrect the many, and hotly contested "female in the Military" threads.

While this has been demonstrated to be an argument that runs perpetually in circles, you have to realise that many of the members of this site fully "buy in" to the CF's idea of equality of the sexes, and they will argue this with you ad nauseum.

You can't win this battle, it is just too subjective.

You are obviously well read and articulate, take your efforts to the "current events" or "Canadian Army" threads, where you may have something to contribute, rather than have posters here dogpile you for disagreeing with them.

 

[HItorMiss]

Intresting Go....

You know me I'm usually on your side but not this time.

I'm not so much disagreeing with the woman in the forces concept in fact I stated earlier that I was against woman in Combat Arms for reason I'm not going into here.

What I took offense to was the sweeping generalizations and and Ideas that someone who is not even in the Forces could know what and I quote here..."Combat Infantry" types were thinking and why, I took expection to him being out of his lane by painting me with that brush.

 

[the 48th regulator]

Hehehehe,

Didn't take long for Scipio to find a champion,

Morituri te salutamus

dileas

tess