Law School Discussion

Poll

Do you believe women should be placed into/allowed into combat situations in the US military?

No, the army is not societyís testing ground
No, itís unfair, but it is too much of a distraction for male soldiers in dangerous situations
No, other reasons
Yes, there is no justifiable reason women should be discriminated against
Yes, women can be more capable than men in this area
Yes, other reasons
Yes, but ONLY if they are held to equal standards

Women in combat situations

guyminuslife

Re: Women in combat situations
« Reply #20 on: October 27, 2006, 05:48:25 PM »
Maybe we should make "Charlie's Angels" military units. They would be dead sexy and could kill you as soon as look at you.

Oh, I'm a total pacifist, but I can't get over the idea of chicks in camo. I'll admit it, that's my real reason for wanting women in the military.

tzip

Re: Women in combat situations
« Reply #21 on: October 27, 2006, 05:51:26 PM »
i promise you that the women we're discussing here (those who would want to and be able to go and excelle in combat) are NOT the women you want to see in camo. they're more likely the girls who would kick your ass for stepping on their shoe.

guyminuslife

Re: Women in combat situations
« Reply #22 on: October 27, 2006, 06:08:06 PM »
...yeah, I kind of figured. I have this image of a hairy former-Eastern-Bloc gorilla with scraggly teeth and a Bowie knife crouching in a pool of sweat for days at a time. The woman who cut off her breasts for utility purposes. By herself, without anesthesia. Who will fly into a simian bezerker rage at the drop of a hat, who will claw through the arteries of her enemies, who will sink those razory chompers directly into the jugular and spit blood into the heavens, who will unload a clip into the corpse of a fallen enemy of comrade just to watch it twitch, who will despise every molecule that passes before those bulging, glazey eyes, who froths at the mouth at the prospect of getting to kill yet again.

I should probably stick with my goth girl fantasies.

h2xblive

Re: Women in combat situations
« Reply #23 on: October 27, 2006, 06:11:41 PM »
not all comat is the same. where i served, women serve combativly as artiliary and AA gunners, MPs, border police, combat medics, and pilots, and do just as well as their male counter-parts. even in artilarry where you gotta be strong enough to pick up shells, some women do well, but these same women can also probably play football for Cal. there are also women in combative infantry, and there exprience had proven pretty poor. the problem isn't with strength, its with putting men and women together in combat, with issues of disipline and authority. don't forget that today combat isn't always 24 hours of war, there are many hours of just sitting around and waiting, and two guys might pass dead hours in the middle of the desert differently from a guy and a girl. women can physically be in combat, but there are some jobs that benefit from having all guys. i was a tanker, and couldnt imagine having a woman on my crew, not because i think she would not be good crewmember (though to be honest, being a loader or driver could be very tough for most women), but because you spend sometimes a week straight in a tank together, and get so close that you can tell who farted by the smell alone. its very important for the survival of the team to be that close, and that kind of comfort can't exist in co-ed teams.

Why not?

redemption

Re: Women in combat situations
« Reply #24 on: October 27, 2006, 06:19:29 PM »
i served in the IDF, and i just addressed that topic.

Oh yes, so you did. The farts and whatnot.

->Soon

  • *****
  • 18818
    • View Profile
Re: Women in combat situations
« Reply #25 on: October 27, 2006, 06:24:21 PM »
i served in the IDF, and i just addressed that topic.

Oh yes, so you did. The farts and whatnot.

well, to be fair, if a girl is willing to fart around you, you can prob trust her to be there for you...

guyminuslife

Re: Women in combat situations
« Reply #26 on: October 27, 2006, 06:36:06 PM »
not all comat is the same. where i served, women serve combativly as artiliary and AA gunners, MPs, border police, combat medics, and pilots, and do just as well as their male counter-parts. even in artilarry where you gotta be strong enough to pick up shells, some women do well, but these same women can also probably play football for Cal. there are also women in combative infantry, and there exprience had proven pretty poor. the problem isn't with strength, its with putting men and women together in combat, with issues of disipline and authority. don't forget that today combat isn't always 24 hours of war, there are many hours of just sitting around and waiting, and two guys might pass dead hours in the middle of the desert differently from a guy and a girl. women can physically be in combat, but there are some jobs that benefit from having all guys. i was a tanker, and couldnt imagine having a woman on my crew, not because i think she would not be good crewmember (though to be honest, being a loader or driver could be very tough for most women), but because you spend sometimes a week straight in a tank together, and get so close that you can tell who farted by the smell alone. its very important for the survival of the team to be that close, and that kind of comfort can't exist in co-ed teams.

Why not?

I disagree with the conclusion but I think there's a grain of truth to that statement---not an absolute truth, but a smaller, more relative one. I've noticed recently in my own interactions that I tend to work better with males than with females. That's not to say that I work better with all males than with all females; this is not a rule, just a tendency. Some females I can work with much better than most males, but more often than not, the opposite is true. This isn't because females are less qualified to do the kind of work that we're doing, or that I dislike women, or even anything having to do with sexual tension. It's that because of the way that males and females are differently socialized, I have more common experience with most males and can more easily establish a rapport. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this.

However, I don't think that this pattern of interaction is pronounced enough to formulate any general rules based upon it---certainly not discriminatory policies. The same could be said about Trekkies; I don't have much rapport with them either. (Firefly FTW! Malcolm Reynolds pwns Kirk! This could quickly devolve into a fistfight.) So I don't see that as a valid rationale.

->Soon

  • *****
  • 18818
    • View Profile
Re: Women in combat situations
« Reply #27 on: October 27, 2006, 06:37:38 PM »
as an aside(i LOVE asides) i wonder if your avg woman feels like she can work better with women?

h2xblive

Re: Women in combat situations
« Reply #28 on: October 27, 2006, 07:02:29 PM »
not all comat is the same. where i served, women serve combativly as artiliary and AA gunners, MPs, border police, combat medics, and pilots, and do just as well as their male counter-parts. even in artilarry where you gotta be strong enough to pick up shells, some women do well, but these same women can also probably play football for Cal. there are also women in combative infantry, and there exprience had proven pretty poor. the problem isn't with strength, its with putting men and women together in combat, with issues of disipline and authority. don't forget that today combat isn't always 24 hours of war, there are many hours of just sitting around and waiting, and two guys might pass dead hours in the middle of the desert differently from a guy and a girl. women can physically be in combat, but there are some jobs that benefit from having all guys. i was a tanker, and couldnt imagine having a woman on my crew, not because i think she would not be good crewmember (though to be honest, being a loader or driver could be very tough for most women), but because you spend sometimes a week straight in a tank together, and get so close that you can tell who farted by the smell alone. its very important for the survival of the team to be that close, and that kind of comfort can't exist in co-ed teams.

Why not?

I disagree with the conclusion but I think there's a grain of truth to that statement---not an absolute truth, but a smaller, more relative one. I've noticed recently in my own interactions that I tend to work better with males than with females. That's not to say that I work better with all males than with all females; this is not a rule, just a tendency. Some females I can work with much better than most males, but more often than not, the opposite is true. This isn't because females are less qualified to do the kind of work that we're doing, or that I dislike women, or even anything having to do with sexual tension. It's that because of the way that males and females are differently socialized, I have more common experience with most males and can more easily establish a rapport. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this.

However, I don't think that this pattern of interaction is pronounced enough to formulate any general rules based upon it---certainly not discriminatory policies. The same could be said about Trekkies; I don't have much rapport with them either. (Firefly FTW! Malcolm Reynolds pwns Kirk! This could quickly devolve into a fistfight.) So I don't see that as a valid rationale.

Funny, I've never noticed that when working with men or women, whether it be in school or at work.

tzip

Re: Women in combat situations
« Reply #29 on: October 27, 2006, 07:09:13 PM »
Quote
Why not?

on the most basic level its the "can guys and girls truely be ONLY friends" question, which we all know too well from civilian life. now take that question and add life and death, and trusting someone completely, and very akward situations, and you see its probably not an ideal fit. its not that you can't trust a woman, but, well, its not uncommon to have to *&^% in a helmet infront of your crew when they're less than 2 feet away with nothing to cover you because you can't step out of the tank in the foreseeable future...you have to be more than just friends. there can be no bounderies of discomfort, no akwardness. how many girls would be willing to switch tempons or wipe (from front to back), infront of three guys? how many guys would be willing to do their business infront of a woman? and most importantly, how would this impact the performance of the crew? ive seen women who drive a tank better than i can, and know the names of all the small parts of the M2, but I'd still rather have three dudes be around me when I look, smell, and feel like crap.