US Women: Would you sign up for the selective service if required?

[mlp]

II think some mandatory military service can actually be a good thing, especially if it means less need for a standing army.

I agree. I think that we, as a nation, are taking advantage of economic groups whose only opportunity to *better* themselves (given the inequalities of our educational systems) is to sign up for the military. That's ethically wrong. Also, our standing army is being overextended and overstressed; the high suicide rate should be sufficient evidence of that. That too is ethically wrong.

It's easy to be oblivious to the cost of war if you have no skin in the game.

 

[Lord Snot]

I hold some unpopular opinions. I realize it and am prepared to *defend* my positions because I believe in them, having given them a great deal of thought. It's possible to do that.

Yes, that's the difference. If you're unable to defend your opinions then don't post in a debate forum, don't post something then duck out when challenged and put the blame on the other person.

 

[Envy]

Then no women could have passed, and they wanted to hire women. Many men who weren't strong enough before they lowered the standards became firefighters, however, so I guess the standard-lowering helped weaker men as well as the 2 women who joined.

I'd rather see no women than hiring unqualified personnel.

 

[mlp]

I'd rather see no women than hiring unqualified personnel.

The question is, are they unqualified? Are people dying or getting hurt, is there more property damage, because the physical strength standards were lowered? If not, then those standards were unnecessarily high.

 

[beancounter]

Here's my unpopular opinion. Women should be allowed to serve in combat positions if they can meet the current physical standards that men have to meet. There is far less hand to hand combat than there was in the past, but it still exists, and anyone who engages in it, should be able to meet the standards.

In fact, I'll go as far as to say that, lowering the standards is misogynistic, because it assumes women can't operate at the same physical level men can.

 

[Spang]

Also, our standing army is being overextended and overstressed; the high suicide rate should be sufficient evidence of that. That too is ethically wrong.

In 2012, suicide killed more soldiers than the so-called enemy:

 

[ledboots]

Yes, that's the difference. If you're unable to defend your opinions then don't post in a debate forum, don't post something then duck out when challenged and put the blame on the other person.

Sorry, but I don't WANT to defend my positions against a roomful of people who each has exactly the same mindset. It was my huge mistake to enter the thread.

As a woman who has been a feminist since I marched for the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s, to be called a misogynist is simply too much for me.

I *will* duck out of this, but I *will* accept 100% of the blame. I have not changed with the times. I still see differences between the genders, from newborn behaviors on up. But these are now invisible differences to others, I guess, or unimportant, or unpopular. I just hope they don't draft my daughter.

 

[Envy]

The question is, are they unqualified? Are people dying or getting hurt, is there more property damage, because the physical strength standards were lowered? If not, then those standards were unnecessarily high.

Yes, I thought about that as well, albeit after making the post.

But that would mean that we'd have to take a risk on that matter.

In 2012, suicides killed more soldiers than the so-called enemy:

At least it was due to deaths in military action decreasing dramatically instead of the rates of suicide increasing.

 

[Freesia]

I think that a number of women do decide to go into the military voluntarily and it should be left at that. And the reason that I wrote that post last night is that I know a woman who was married and had 2 kids, one aged 2 and one 4. She went to work on a base in Afghanistan for 6 months last year leaving the children with their grandparents. The father was away too. They did this to earn money but it just kind of bothers me that parents would go and leave little kids and go to such dangerous places where they could get killed. And the little baby kids would be orphaned and those wars in the Middle East are pointless anyway, I dont even understand why they are still going on.

 

[Freesia]

As for strength, well it varies. I think women are at some disadvantages in some ways, for example I am too short to be an airline stewardess. But having said that I now women who are shorter than me who have great upper body strength, my mother for example, who was a ward nurse and had to help lift large men, and she is only 5"1, and my exes mother who is probably about 5"2, she had amazing upper body strength and did all sorts of heavy lifting.

me on the other hand, I think I am built differently from both, even though I have a sort of long thin body, I dont have short sturdy arms like both of these ladies, I have sort of long, weaker arms, my strength is more in my legs and hips.

When I was carrying my backpack I would always adjust it so that the weight was mainly been carried by my hips, if I tried to carry it via my shoulders it would hurt a lot.

So I think all people are different.

 

[Eleven]

I guess it isn't here. Because, you know, honesty is insulted. If someone holds opinions diffetent from the board's, someone is either called a misogynist, or made fun of for being a conspiracy theorist.

I will get back to just commenting on the food and lovely recipes here.

Back to the kitchen, as it were.

I gotta say, this place makes the other board look friendly and welcoming. And it's the same people here who use to be there that do it. I'm glad they ran away. Just saying.

 

[Freesia]

I gotta say, this place makes the other board look friendly and welcoming. And it's the same people here who use to be there that do it. I'm glad they ran away. Just saying.

What do you mean. We are nice.

 

[beancounter]

I gotta say, this place makes the other board look friendly and welcoming. And it's the same people here who use to be there that do it. I'm glad they ran away. Just saying.

OK, let's just leave it at that....

 

[beancounter]

STEWARD POST
Just a reminder folks...
No personal attacks, direct, or passive-aggressive are allowed. Let's be respectful of differences in opinion.

 

[mlp]

Yes, I thought about that as well, albeit after making the post.

But that would mean that we'd have to take a risk on that matter.

Well, in the fire department case that ledboots cited, there is now a history with the lowered standards for physical strength. Just pointing out that the lowering of physical standards does not *prove* anything - the proof would be in the impact, if any, about which no mention was made.

At least it was due to deaths in military action decreasing dramatically instead of the rates of suicide increasing.

It looks as though there's been a roughly 50% increase in suicides in the span of four years. I would call that extremely significant.

The recent dramatic decrease in deaths is, I would assume, largely due to the end of our active operations in Iraq and the scaling back in Afghanistan, as well as on our increased reliance on drones rather than face to face combat, which is so much decried by certain portion(s) of our membership.

 

[mlp]

I still see differences between the genders, from newborn behaviors on up. But these are now invisible differences to others, I guess, or unimportant, or unpopular. I just hope they don't draft my daughter.

I see differences in the sexes, but those don't disqualify women across the board from jobs/professions/careers, nor do they disqualify men from raising children, cooking, cleaning, teaching, nursing or being secretaries. I also see differences in individuals, and there is no reason whatsoever that I can see why someone's fitness for any task/job/career should be judged on their sex rather than on their abilities as an individual.

 

[Freesia]

Also, I have a question. One day Science and technology will find a way to allow men to carry a child to term in their bodies. Now when that time comes, will men sign up for this in equal numbers to women? Will men put their bodies through all that in the name of equality?

 

[Freesia]

 

[mlp]

Also, I have a question. One day Science and technology will find a way to allow men to carry a child to term in their bodies. Now when that time comes, will men sign up for this in equal numbers to women? Will men put their bodies through all that in the name of equality?

I question that assumption. An awful amount of physical re-arranging would have to be done in order to permit men to carry a child to term and give birth. I suspect we'd see babies growing in tanks before that.

 

[Freesia]

Arnold Schwarzenegger did it.