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

[GO!!!]

Morituri te salutamus

So much for an "open exchange" of ideas...

 

[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.

Ah yes such an open exchange of ideas,

dileas

tess

 

[Sh0rtbUs]

GO!!!!

We need you in chat, I need backup.  :rofl:

 

[Cliff]

Scipio,

Your ideas about men and women needs some work. This is old line thinking that has little relevance in today's culture.

 

[Glorified Ape]

" 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. >

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) >

Not to be contrary, but judging from your profile, you're not in the military either. If I'm wrong, please correct me. If you're going to throw stones at one's lack of military service (or aptitude) when discussing military issues, you should probably accrue some sort of service first.

I believe that stating: 

As lame as it is, I think a quote from GI jane fits in here "She isnt the problem, we are". If men feel the need to hold a womans hand through their military career, or praise them for every little thing then that is their issue. I just wish people who get over the whole male/female thing. It's great women are making it in the forces but the more people make a big deal out of it the more it becomes an issue. Just let people be, to do their jobs, men, women, in between, who the heck cares.

is making statements about a military you do not serve in. Does that invalidate your point? Absolutely not, and that's the crux of my point.

Certain topics require service to comment on legitimately, others do not. I don't believe this is one which requires service - after all, the driving force behind the acceptance of women in the combat arms was a human rights tribunal, the members of which I doubt had any past military service, judging from their unrealistic "complete integration in 10 years" demand. 

 

[Screw]

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.

So you are bragging about ALMOST meeting the minimum standards? I disagree with this whole gender bias in the combat arms. But I dont think meeting the bare minimum and almost the minimum in other areas garners much support in your argument. When i was in I knew lots of females who exceeded the male standards and were good to go. Im sure you will eventually succeed in your goal and will be a better troop because of it! Good Luck.

Screw

 

[Screw]

A female can pull a trigger just as easily as a male can. :fifty:

Its interesting you choose a .50 there. I recall my first course after basic and learning the .50. I remember 3 of the 4 females being unable to rack the action. However I suppose there was one male who couldnt either. I think everyone needs to wake and admit that you( men and women) dont DESERVE to do whatever you want. If you wont bust your ass to do better then you shouldnt be in. Like the threadstarter who needs to bust his ass on running- or the females in my .50 class. Which eventually 2 figured out away to rack it using a little technique- the other one didnt care because she knew they wouldnt flunk her for it anyways. Kudos to anyone striving to be the best. But military service is not your god given right.Its earned in blood and sweat, and learning little tricks here and there to reduce the two.....

Screw.

 

[camochick]

Glorified Ape, No, I'm not in the forces and I have never claimed to be. But I didnt come into a thread and slag women for having lower standards when I cant even meet them myself, which is my point.

This discussion is going no where as it always seem to whenever it is brought up on the forums. I'm gonna throw scipio and his followers in the ignorant pile and go reshackle myself to the stove where I belong, or perhaps I will pine away for my husband at war, hmmm whats a good woman to do.  >

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Gee, what a suprise....another locked topic on the sexes that I will have to merge with the other hundreds of pages on the same topic...........can we stop chasing our tails and lay down now?