Women in combat not 'a big deal'

dlowan wrote:

Hmmmm - seems we women canna win. To some, if we are NOT in combat we are shirking and failing to take up equality - wanting the benefits and none of the sacrifices. To others, we want to be there only because we view it as another job market, caring not a whit about the awful effects and the ruination of the military.

The feminists do not want an equal position in society for women, but rather a superior one. That's why you never see feminists demanding women be drafted. They're perfectly satisfied to let men do all the storming of the beaches. They're not much interested in levelling the field where they have the advantage. For example, you don't see women crusading to raise their lower car insurance payments up to the level of men's.



It is perfectly true that feminists view introduction of women into the military in terms of the advantages they can gain, not the responsibilities they can bear. Virtually all the arguments made by feminists are about getting goodies for women. And when the women screw up when subjected to the same standards as men, they are protected by feminists who scream sexism. The result is to pull the standards down for all women, who become trophy soldiers there as ornaments to satisfy the politicians.

Tantor

Lol, Tantor, you appear to have missed, just for one, my argument that if anyone has to be drafted, we ought to be also. Guess you might miss a lot that goes against your view.

Who says we want a superior one? You?

As for the insurance thing, that is hilarious. I don't know if anyone is able to influence insurance number crunchers, women just have fewer crashes. Will you take lower insurance when you are older, or refuse to accept the unfair advantages of your age? You ageist money grabbing beast!

As for the goodies - how many men join the military with the express intent of dying in bloody agony on a beach? Hmmmmmm?

Might they join because they can't think of/qualify for anything else? Because they want the help with the education? For other benefits? How many join because they want to suffer? Hmmmm.....?

Tantor,
You said: "Your argument that men join to suffer is a straw man."
You clearly misunderstood her. She was saying that most don't. This was a response to the implication that women don't want to suffer.

2) For many people the military does indeed respresent the only shot. The only reason I considered it is because I did not have other options.

3) Many feminists pick up the tab. Heck meny normal human (feminists are aliens) women do.
Who have you been dating?

Her argument that men join to suffer is a straw man argument. Obviously nobody joins the military to die. She sets up this false premise and then knocks it down, proving nothing.

Craven de Kere wrote:

2) For many people the military does indeed respresent the only shot. The only reason I considered it is because I did not have other options.

If you are able enough to qualify for the military, you have opportunities for you in America. It just may involve decisions you don't like, such as leaving your hometown support network to move where the opportunities wait. There are a thousand paths to success in America.

Craven de Kere wrote:

3) Many feminists pick up the tab. Heck meny normal human (feminists are aliens) women do.
Who have you been dating?

That's a rather weak argument, isn't it Craven?

Many is not a majority.

My experience is that perhaps one out of fifty women offer to pick up the tab.

Asking a woman to pick up the tab is a sure way to nip a relationship in the bud. Heck, pulling out coupons to pay for a meal will probably kill the relationship. Women want you to pay full price for them. They hate being courted at a discount.

Now I don't object to any of that. That's the way it should be. I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy between women's expectations of preferred treatment by men while expecting a pass on equal responsibility.

Tantor

dlowan wrote:

Lol, Tantor, you appear to have missed, just for one, my argument that if anyone has to be drafted, we ought to be also. Guess you might miss a lot that goes against your view.

Lip service. There is no action from feminists to share equal responsibility with men for the defense of the nation.

Who says we want a superior one? You?

As for the insurance thing, that is hilarious. I don't know if anyone is able to influence insurance number crunchers, women just have fewer crashes. Will you take lower insurance when you are older, or refuse to accept the unfair advantages of your age? You ageist money grabbing beast!

It's about as hilarious as demanding women be given the vote.

However, you make a good point that there is a good reason to treat women and men differently, rather than equally, based on their behavior. Where women deserve privilege, they should receive it. Where men deserve privilege, they too should receive it, just like the women.

dlowan wrote:

As for the goodies - how many men join the military with the express intent of dying in bloody agony on a beach? Hmmmmmm?

If you ask a room full of young men if they would consider joining the military, a substantial proportion of them would think that it's a cool idea. Ask the same question of young women and you would get a room full of sour faces. Women, in general, have no interest in joining the military. They don't think defending the country is their responsibility. However, the same women demand equality with men in everything, without accepting the same responsibility.

dlowan wrote:

Might they join because they can't think of/qualify for anything else? Because they want the help with the education? For other benefits? How many join because they want to suffer? Hmmmm.....?

This is an argument based on ignorance. The military provides more training and delegates more authority to its young recruits than the equivalent civilian jobs. It's a fabulous opportunity. Military people are better educated and better trained than their civilian equivalents. Your goofy argument is like saying a kid went to college because he couldn't qualify for anything else.

Your argument that men join to suffer is a straw man. However, most young men do join so that they can experience something physically hard, something tough, something that will challenge them. Women, in general, want no such thing. They want it easy.

When I see feminists picking up the tab on a date, I'll believe women want to be equal with men. Until then, it's pretty obvious that they want men to pick up the tab in society yet claim their place at the table as equals.

Tantor