NATION

PASSWORD

-

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Ragnarum
Senator
 
Posts: 3889
Founded: Dec 17, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Ragnarum » Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:38 am

Tekeristan wrote:Just don't have a draft, done. We're a democracy.

Whether or not women can serve in combat roles?
If they can pass the same physical standards that men have to go through.
That's equality.


I did used to think the same way. But its a lot more complicated than just physical standards.
Don't copy and paste anything you see in a sig you fucking normie scrub
I deliberately made the star asymmetrical.
AUF GEHTS KAMERADEN
Here are my factbooks (Lots of WIP)

Ragnarum is not communist or even particularly socialist, just so you know.

User avatar
Stagnant Axon Terminal
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16621
Founded: Feb 24, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Stagnant Axon Terminal » Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:50 am

No draft, no problem.
TET's resident state assessment exam
My sworn enemy is the Toyota 4Runner
I scream a lot.
Also, I'm gonna fuck your girlfriend.
Nanatsu No Tsuki wrote:the fetus will never eat cake if you abort it

Cu Math wrote:Axon is like a bear with a PH.D. She debates at first, then eats your face.
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:THE MAN'S PENIS HAS LEFT THE VAGINA. IT'S THE UTERUS'S TURN TO SHINE.

User avatar
Tekeristan
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5344
Founded: Mar 08, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Tekeristan » Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:52 am

Ragnarum wrote:
Tekeristan wrote:Just don't have a draft, done. We're a democracy.

Whether or not women can serve in combat roles?
If they can pass the same physical standards that men have to go through.
That's equality.


I did used to think the same way. But its a lot more complicated than just physical standards.


How so?

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:54 am

Caracasus wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:Could you explain what you mean by this?


Sure. Modern conflict has changed significantly from the idea of front line warfare - the idea that these two armies will engage at this point here, for example - a kind of conflict that is at its most extreme trench warfare (like WW1) where you've got maybe a mile or so of no-man's land, trenches and not as much danger or things happening behind that. In modern conflicts (think Afghanistan for example), fighting tends to be asymmetrical, with conflict happening pretty much all over the place. You don't really have an advancing force in the same way, and neither does your enemy so it's mostly used to describe areas where there's a lot of fighting. The difference being of course that non-frontline soldiers are at a much higher risk, and need to be able to fight, a lot more than they would have been a few decades ago.

That's not really true, as the Iraqi security forces discovered in 2014. It's a line of reasoning that's peculiarly endemic to military theorists, that The Next War Will Be The Same As The Current/Last One.

Lessons being learnt about the IS conflict is that it is far more like what we know in the west as "conventional warfare" rather than "insurgency", what we keep mistakenly calling it. The Iraqi security forces were built, trained and structured to fight an insurgency.
But IS isn't an insurgent militia anymore.

More generally, that assertion as to why women are being considered for combat roles doesn't actually make any sense. If anything, that would be an argument to remove women from the services entirely.
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Chessmistress
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5161
Founded: Mar 16, 2015
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Chessmistress » Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:56 am

Alvecia wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:Female privilege.

We don't like to talk about it, but it does exist in certain respects.

Historically, the draft simply excluded you if you were female. The approach wasn't a gender-neutral test ''Do you meet thresholds of physical rigour necessary for armed service'' with the end result being that most females were excluded through the test. No, the draft just as a matter of presumption, excludes you from the risk of getting draft just because you are a girl. In the Vietnam war, men lived in fear of being drafted into the jungles to die (and ironically, because of patriarchal leanings of society, it was seen as ''un-manly'' if you admitted to this to the public in general; even those who were protesting the war had to frame it in terms of the general unethical-ness of sending people to die as opposed to the human fear of being drafted and sent to a place where you could be bombed). Meanwhile, the women were completely free from this terror.


If there's female priviledge in this case, then it is not women who are perpetuating it.


Meh, apart from few women who are subtly trying to suggest that not being drafted is still fair since we weren't, in the past, allowed to a combat role.
Such subtle implications can be traps.
My idea is that not being allowed to a combat role was both a privilege and a discrimination, but much more a discrimination, meant to keep away women from a position of power and perpetuating the stereotype of women as weak. On the other hand it's even true that having the chance of a career without having to deal with the risks of a combat role can be viewed as a privilege. But, as I said, the balance is not good for us, is a zero-sum game.
Exactly the same for the draft.

Stagnant Axon Terminal wrote:No draft, no problem.


But the draft is still in place, so we cannot avoid the issue.
Last edited by Chessmistress on Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
OOC:
Radical Feminist, caring about the oppressed gender, that's why I have a strong sense of justice.

PRO:
Radical Feminism (proudly SWERF - moderately TERF),
Gender abolitionism,
birth control and population control,
affirmative ongoing VERBAL consent,
death penalty for rapists.

AGAINST:
patriarchy,
pornography,
heteronormativity,
domestic violence and femicide.


Favorite Quotes: http://www.nationstates.net/nation=ches ... /id=403173

User avatar
Olerand
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13169
Founded: Sep 18, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Olerand » Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:30 am

Isn't it a little odd to refer to women as females? In French you really wouldn't call une femme une femelle, it's very weird. Is this common in English?

Anyway, if you think this is unjust -which is true- then you should advocate for expanding the criteria. Although you might find that it is actually right-wing politicians in America who will most strongly oppose this measure.
French citizen. Still a Socialist Party member. Ségolène Royal 2019, I guess Actually I might vote la France Insoumise.

Qui suis-je?:
Free Rhenish States wrote:You're French, without faith, probably godless, liberal without any traditional values or respect for any faith whatsoever

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:35 am

That may be for the simple reason that two different languages have different language rules.
"Woman" and "female" are synonyms. We don't have substantial modifiers for terms unlike in French and other European languages, so there is no difference in saying "woman" or "female".
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Natapoc
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 19864
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Natapoc » Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:36 am

Imperializt Russia wrote:That may be for the simple reason that two different languages have different language rules.
"Woman" and "female" are synonyms. We don't have substantial modifiers for terms unlike in French and other European languages, so there is no difference in saying "woman" or "female".


Sometimes there is. Sometimes women is intended to suggest gender whereas female is intended to suggest sex. Sometimes they are different things.
Did you see a ghost?

User avatar
Olerand
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13169
Founded: Sep 18, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Olerand » Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:46 am

Imperializt Russia wrote:That may be for the simple reason that two different languages have different language rules.
"Woman" and "female" are synonyms. We don't have substantial modifiers for terms unlike in French and other European languages, so there is no difference in saying "woman" or "female".

But isn't it odd? Technically, une femme is une femelle...But une femelle is a plant, or an animal, a human would be une femme.

Is it not similar in English, is it normal to qualify humans in everyday speech as male and female, instead of woman and man?
French citizen. Still a Socialist Party member. Ségolène Royal 2019, I guess Actually I might vote la France Insoumise.

Qui suis-je?:
Free Rhenish States wrote:You're French, without faith, probably godless, liberal without any traditional values or respect for any faith whatsoever

User avatar
Alvecia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 19942
Founded: Aug 17, 2015
Democratic Socialists

Postby Alvecia » Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:55 am

Olerand wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:That may be for the simple reason that two different languages have different language rules.
"Woman" and "female" are synonyms. We don't have substantial modifiers for terms unlike in French and other European languages, so there is no difference in saying "woman" or "female".

But isn't it odd? Technically, une femme is une femelle...But une femelle is a plant, or an animal, a human would be une femme.

Is it not similar in English, is it normal to qualify humans in everyday speech as male and female, instead of woman and man?

Only typically when speaking scientifically I would imagine.
British
Atheist
IT Support
That there is no exception to the rule "There is an exception to every rule" is the exception that proves the rule.
---
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll stop asking you to catch his fish.
That's not happening
That shouldn't be happening
Why is that happening?
That's why it's happening?
How has this ever worked?

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:59 am

Olerand wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:That may be for the simple reason that two different languages have different language rules.
"Woman" and "female" are synonyms. We don't have substantial modifiers for terms unlike in French and other European languages, so there is no difference in saying "woman" or "female".

But isn't it odd? Technically, une femme is une femelle...But une femelle is a plant, or an animal, a human would be une femme.

Is it not similar in English, is it normal to qualify humans in everyday speech as male and female, instead of woman and man?


It's fairly common to use both terms interchangeably in English.

As someone who's bilingual in English and French, it took me quite a while to get used to the differences in both languages.

User avatar
Olerand
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13169
Founded: Sep 18, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Olerand » Wed Jan 06, 2016 12:00 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
Olerand wrote:But isn't it odd? Technically, une femme is une femelle...But une femelle is a plant, or an animal, a human would be une femme.

Is it not similar in English, is it normal to qualify humans in everyday speech as male and female, instead of woman and man?


It's fairly common to use both terms interchangeably in English.

As someone who's bilingual in English and French, it took me quite a while to get used to the differences in both languages.

Interesting. A little uncomfortable, but I see.
French citizen. Still a Socialist Party member. Ségolène Royal 2019, I guess Actually I might vote la France Insoumise.

Qui suis-je?:
Free Rhenish States wrote:You're French, without faith, probably godless, liberal without any traditional values or respect for any faith whatsoever

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Wed Jan 06, 2016 12:03 pm

Olerand wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
It's fairly common to use both terms interchangeably in English.

As someone who's bilingual in English and French, it took me quite a while to get used to the differences in both languages.

Interesting. A little uncomfortable, but I see.


Yeah, the distinction never really developed in the English language. I don't know the etymological history behind it, but for whatever reason both words remained entirely synonymous.

User avatar
The Empire of Pretantia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 39273
Founded: Oct 18, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Empire of Pretantia » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:02 pm

Olerand wrote:Isn't it a little odd to refer to women as females? In French you really wouldn't call une femme une femelle, it's very weird. Is this common in English?

Anyway, if you think this is unjust -which is true- then you should advocate for expanding the criteria. Although you might find that it is actually right-wing politicians in America who will most strongly oppose this measure.

In BCT and AIT we don't call them women.
ywn be as good as this video
Gacha
Trashing other people's waifus
Anti-NN
EA
Douche flutes
Zimbabwe
Putting the toilet paper roll the wrong way
Every single square inch of Asia
Lewding Earth-chan
Pollution
4Chan in all its glory and all its horror
Playing the little Switch controller handheld thing in public
Treading on me
Socialism, Communism, Anarchism, and all their cousins and sisters and brothers and wife's sons
Alternate Universe 40K
Nightcore
Comcast
Zimbabwe
Believing the Ottomans were the third Roman Empire
Parodies of the Gadsden flag
The Fate Series
US politics

User avatar
Infected Mushroom
Post Czar
 
Posts: 38837
Founded: Apr 15, 2014
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Infected Mushroom » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:05 pm

Alvecia wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:Female privilege.

We don't like to talk about it, but it does exist in certain respects.

Historically, the draft simply excluded you if you were female. The approach wasn't a gender-neutral test ''Do you meet thresholds of physical rigour necessary for armed service'' with the end result being that most females were excluded through the test. No, the draft just as a matter of presumption, excludes you from the risk of getting draft just because you are a girl. In the Vietnam war, men lived in fear of being drafted into the jungles to die (and ironically, because of patriarchal leanings of society, it was seen as ''un-manly'' if you admitted to this to the public in general; even those who were protesting the war had to frame it in terms of the general unethical-ness of sending people to die as opposed to the human fear of being drafted and sent to a place where you could be bombed). Meanwhile, the women were completely free from this terror.


If there's female priviledge in this case, then it is not women who are perpetuating it.


Does it matter?

User avatar
Olerand
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13169
Founded: Sep 18, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Olerand » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:07 pm

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:
Olerand wrote:Isn't it a little odd to refer to women as females? In French you really wouldn't call une femme une femelle, it's very weird. Is this common in English?

Anyway, if you think this is unjust -which is true- then you should advocate for expanding the criteria. Although you might find that it is actually right-wing politicians in America who will most strongly oppose this measure.

In BCT and AIT we don't call them women.

In what?
French citizen. Still a Socialist Party member. Ségolène Royal 2019, I guess Actually I might vote la France Insoumise.

Qui suis-je?:
Free Rhenish States wrote:You're French, without faith, probably godless, liberal without any traditional values or respect for any faith whatsoever

User avatar
The Empire of Pretantia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 39273
Founded: Oct 18, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Empire of Pretantia » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:11 pm

Olerand wrote:
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:In BCT and AIT we don't call them women.

In what?

Do you even IET bro?

BCT is Basic Combat Training (Boot Camp), AIT is Advanced Individual Training (We learn our specific MOSes).
ywn be as good as this video
Gacha
Trashing other people's waifus
Anti-NN
EA
Douche flutes
Zimbabwe
Putting the toilet paper roll the wrong way
Every single square inch of Asia
Lewding Earth-chan
Pollution
4Chan in all its glory and all its horror
Playing the little Switch controller handheld thing in public
Treading on me
Socialism, Communism, Anarchism, and all their cousins and sisters and brothers and wife's sons
Alternate Universe 40K
Nightcore
Comcast
Zimbabwe
Believing the Ottomans were the third Roman Empire
Parodies of the Gadsden flag
The Fate Series
US politics

User avatar
Crusader occupied mecca
Envoy
 
Posts: 249
Founded: Oct 14, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Crusader occupied mecca » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:12 pm

Because female pows might get raped. Isn't the whole point of America's welfare state to protect the least and weakest among us? That would be why liberals favor this. Conservatives would believe that wome are better in supporting roles in the military like nurses or administration, so that's why they would favor this.
The Baghdad "battery" was just a jar to store scrolls over-hyped by a self-serving archaeologist.

The crusades were a counter-attack called for by the legitimate government of the relevant lands, the Byzantine Empire.

User avatar
Olerand
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13169
Founded: Sep 18, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Olerand » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:13 pm

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:
Olerand wrote:In what?

Do you even IET bro?

BCT is Basic Combat Training (Boot Camp), AIT is Advanced Individual Training (We learn our specific MOSes).

I don't even know what IET is. So in the military -American I presume?- you refer to women as females? Men are males? I guess.
French citizen. Still a Socialist Party member. Ségolène Royal 2019, I guess Actually I might vote la France Insoumise.

Qui suis-je?:
Free Rhenish States wrote:You're French, without faith, probably godless, liberal without any traditional values or respect for any faith whatsoever

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:14 pm

BCT and AIT are phases of US military training.

I suspect their point is "gender doesn't matter here".
Last edited by Imperializt Russia on Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
The Empire of Pretantia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 39273
Founded: Oct 18, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Empire of Pretantia » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:14 pm

Olerand wrote:
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:Do you even IET bro?

BCT is Basic Combat Training (Boot Camp), AIT is Advanced Individual Training (We learn our specific MOSes).

I don't even know what IET is. So in the military -American I presume?- you refer to women as females? Men are males? I guess.

Yes. At least in Initial Entry Training; I haven't graduated yet.
ywn be as good as this video
Gacha
Trashing other people's waifus
Anti-NN
EA
Douche flutes
Zimbabwe
Putting the toilet paper roll the wrong way
Every single square inch of Asia
Lewding Earth-chan
Pollution
4Chan in all its glory and all its horror
Playing the little Switch controller handheld thing in public
Treading on me
Socialism, Communism, Anarchism, and all their cousins and sisters and brothers and wife's sons
Alternate Universe 40K
Nightcore
Comcast
Zimbabwe
Believing the Ottomans were the third Roman Empire
Parodies of the Gadsden flag
The Fate Series
US politics

User avatar
Great Sofannia
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 105
Founded: Nov 30, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Great Sofannia » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:15 pm

"Have one woman and one man left, and you only get two babies for the next generation of warriors.
Have ten women and one man left, and you get 200,000 babies for the next generation, along with extremely high divorce rates."
Prime Minister: Leah Tarantea, National Democratic Party
...meh. UCE PUPPET
Make America Great Britain Again

User avatar
Olerand
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13169
Founded: Sep 18, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Olerand » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:16 pm

Imperializt Russia wrote:BCT and AIT are phases of US military training.

I suspect their point is "gender doesn't matter here".

I guess. But to me it's still weird to use male and female. A male human is a man, a female human is a woman. It's odd, that's all.
French citizen. Still a Socialist Party member. Ségolène Royal 2019, I guess Actually I might vote la France Insoumise.

Qui suis-je?:
Free Rhenish States wrote:You're French, without faith, probably godless, liberal without any traditional values or respect for any faith whatsoever

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:19 pm

Olerand wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:BCT and AIT are phases of US military training.

I suspect their point is "gender doesn't matter here".

I guess. But to me it's still weird to use male and female. A male human is a man, a female human is a woman. It's odd, that's all.

Yeah, but French language rules are obtuse, charitably speaking.

Female and woman, male and man, are synonymous in English. Because we have very few modifiers for terms, I suspect.
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Saiwania
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22269
Founded: Jun 30, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Saiwania » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:20 pm

Imperializt Russia wrote:I suspect their point is "gender doesn't matter here".


It is a more impersonal term that is suited for a military. The whole purpose of recruit training is to strip people of their individuality and have them instead think of themselves as part of one unit, and to harden them enough to be moderately prepared for fighting on a battlefield.
Last edited by Saiwania on Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sith Acolyte
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken!

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aguaria Major, American Legionaries, Arval Va, Baidu [Spider], Democratic Martian States, Dumb Ideologies, Hauthamatra, Jerzylvania, Juansonia, La Xinga, Legatia, Molchistan, Mtwara, New Texas Republic, Port Caverton, Republic of Mesque, Shrillland, Southern Floofybit, Stellar Colonies, Tarsonis, The Jamesian Republic, The Rio Grande River Basin, Xind

Advertisement

Remove ads