Kill the women first.

[Playing In The Water]

Main body of the issue; do people think women belong in the military. Personally?

No, I do not. It's not an environment suited to women.

Do I think men belong in the military?

No, I do not. It's not an environment suited to men.

Namely, I don't think ANYONE 'belongs' in any kind of armed forces. People 'belong' at home, at peace, with their families and loved ones. I'm pretty sure the multiple testaments of soldiers from all centuries describing war as 'Hell on Earth' lends some kind of credibility to my claim, anyway.

Not that the world will ever have the benefit of not needing to have anyone in the military, but I'm just saying; a warzone is as unsuitable to ANY human being as any other, regardless of muscle strength, regardless of size, and particularly regardless of what's between one's legs.

Peace, everyone?

[Anti-Social Darwinism]

Maybe we should kill the men first. After all, once they've made their "donation," they're no longer necessary.

Are you some kind of spider?

Spiders are scary.

Spiders are interesting and beautiful. Some are even cute. I have spiders. I have a Brazilian Black, a Mexican Redleg, a Rosehair, a Pinktoe and an Orange Baboon (aka an orange bitey thing). Oh, and I like Mantises, too>

[Playing In The Water]

Maybe we should kill the men first. After all, once they've made their "donation," they're no longer necessary.

Are you some kind of spider?

Spiders are scary.

Spiders are interesting and beautiful. Some are even cute. I have spiders. I have a Brazilian Black, a Mexican Redleg, a Rosehair, a Pinktoe and an Orange Baboon (aka an orange bitey thing). Oh, and I like Mantises, too>

This is true! Some spiders are just awesome; you've got a nice collection as is. ^^

Some that aren't tarantulas are nice too, though. Just don't go playing with random spiders in Oz; they aren't as friendly as those in other places, generally!

[Gimmadonis]

On topic:




j/k, j/k

[Fartsniffage]

Spiders are interesting and beautiful. Some are even cute. I have spiders. I have a Brazilian Black, a Mexican Redleg, a Rosehair, a Pinktoe and an Orange Baboon (aka an orange bitey thing). Oh, and I like Mantises, too>

Have you been spreading this idea? I have several tooth shaped scars in my head that I can't explain.

Also, "orange bitey thing"? Nothing with fangs is cute, they're just evil with venom. Notice they call them things like Pinktoe and Rosehair? Evidence that an advertising man has been at work and has got into you head with his clever names.

[Grave_n_idle]

Maybe we should kill the men first. After all, once they've made their "donation," they're no longer necessary.

Are you some kind of spider?

Spiders are scary.

Spiders are interesting and beautiful. Some are even cute. I have spiders. I have a Brazilian Black, a Mexican Redleg, a Rosehair, a Pinktoe and an Orange Baboon (aka an orange bitey thing). Oh, and I like Mantises, too>

I have spiders. I have big-ugly-black-spider-I-squashed, and dead-spider-near-the-door.

Eight legged bastards.

[Ryadn]

Maybe we should kill the men first. After all, once they've made their "donation," they're no longer necessary.

Are you some kind of spider?

Spiders are scary.

Spiders are interesting and beautiful. Some are even cute. I have spiders. I have a Brazilian Black, a Mexican Redleg, a Rosehair, a Pinktoe and an Orange Baboon (aka an orange bitey thing). Oh, and I like Mantises, too>

I have spiders. I have big-ugly-black-spider-I-squashed, and dead-spider-near-the-door.

Eight legged bastards.

Ever since we nearly killed ourselves with the flea bombs, spiders keep showing up around the edges of the dining room, dead on their backs with their little legs curled up. It's kind of extremely freaky, because, spiders! In the goddamn house! But they're always dead near the walls, so I like to think that we flooded the house with so much poison that it's actually contaminated the foundation and made it resistant to all living things, no matter how many legs they have.

Hey, we're moving, I don't care.

[Callisdrun]

Maybe we should kill the men first. After all, once they've made their "donation," they're no longer necessary.

Are you some kind of spider?

Spiders are scary.

Spiders are interesting and beautiful. Some are even cute. I have spiders. I have a Brazilian Black, a Mexican Redleg, a Rosehair, a Pinktoe and an Orange Baboon (aka an orange bitey thing). Oh, and I like Mantises, too>

I have spiders. I have big-ugly-black-spider-I-squashed, and dead-spider-near-the-door.

Eight legged bastards.

Ever since we nearly killed ourselves with the flea bombs, spiders keep showing up around the edges of the dining room, dead on their backs with their little legs curled up. It's kind of extremely freaky, because, spiders! In the goddamn house! But they're always dead near the walls, so I like to think that we flooded the house with so much poison that it's actually contaminated the foundation and made it resistant to all living things, no matter how many legs they have.

Hey, we're moving, I don't care.

You're moving? Still in the yay area or no?

[Czardas]

Maybe we should kill the men first. After all, once they've made their "donation," they're no longer necessary.

Are you some kind of spider?

Spiders are scary.

Spiders are interesting and beautiful. Some are even cute. I have spiders. I have a Brazilian Black, a Mexican Redleg, a Rosehair, a Pinktoe and an Orange Baboon (aka an orange bitey thing). Oh, and I like Mantises, too>

I have spiders. I have big-ugly-black-spider-I-squashed, and dead-spider-near-the-door.

Eight legged bastards.

Ever since we nearly killed ourselves with the flea bombs, spiders keep showing up around the edges of the dining room, dead on their backs with their little legs curled up. It's kind of extremely freaky, because, spiders! In the goddamn house! But they're always dead near the walls, so I like to think that we flooded the house with so much poison that it's actually contaminated the foundation and made it resistant to all living things, no matter how many legs they have.

Hey, we're moving, I don't care.

Aww. Poor spiders. :'(

Well, they're dumb nonsentient animals, but meh. I like them. Except when they get in my bed or something, then they get squashed, but I hope they don't take it personally.

[Cameroi]

"the female of the species is more deadly then the male"

but spare the sheep. always spare the sheep.

[Anti-Social Darwinism]

"the female of the species is more deadly then the male"

but spare the sheep. always spare the sheep.

Why do you think many Native American tribes turned their prisoners over to the women?

[Ryadn]

Maybe we should kill the men first. After all, once they've made their "donation," they're no longer necessary.

Are you some kind of spider?

Spiders are scary.

Spiders are interesting and beautiful. Some are even cute. I have spiders. I have a Brazilian Black, a Mexican Redleg, a Rosehair, a Pinktoe and an Orange Baboon (aka an orange bitey thing). Oh, and I like Mantises, too>

I have spiders. I have big-ugly-black-spider-I-squashed, and dead-spider-near-the-door.

Eight legged bastards.

Ever since we nearly killed ourselves with the flea bombs, spiders keep showing up around the edges of the dining room, dead on their backs with their little legs curled up. It's kind of extremely freaky, because, spiders! In the goddamn house! But they're always dead near the walls, so I like to think that we flooded the house with so much poison that it's actually contaminated the foundation and made it resistant to all living things, no matter how many legs they have.

Hey, we're moving, I don't care.

You're moving? Still in the yay area or no?

To the Live-No-More.

[Callisdrun]

Maybe we should kill the men first. After all, once they've made their "donation," they're no longer necessary.

Are you some kind of spider?

Spiders are scary.

Spiders are interesting and beautiful. Some are even cute. I have spiders. I have a Brazilian Black, a Mexican Redleg, a Rosehair, a Pinktoe and an Orange Baboon (aka an orange bitey thing). Oh, and I like Mantises, too>

I have spiders. I have big-ugly-black-spider-I-squashed, and dead-spider-near-the-door.

Eight legged bastards.

Ever since we nearly killed ourselves with the flea bombs, spiders keep showing up around the edges of the dining room, dead on their backs with their little legs curled up. It's kind of extremely freaky, because, spiders! In the goddamn house! But they're always dead near the walls, so I like to think that we flooded the house with so much poison that it's actually contaminated the foundation and made it resistant to all living things, no matter how many legs they have.

Hey, we're moving, I don't care.

You're moving? Still in the yay area or no?

To the Live-No-More.

Ugh... it's hot and buggy out there.

[Orlkjestad]

The problem with women on the front lines is their lack of strength. Women are 70% weaker than men in upper body strength and 33% weaker than men in lower body strength.
The "chivalry" effect would also be difficult to overpass. The classic "leave no man behind" thought process would be even more difficult to overpass with women. When male soldiers risk everything to help a female soldier, everything is jeopardized, the mission, the safety of other soldiers, and the safety of innocent civilians. The risks are simply too great for the small amount of help they would provide.

SEXIST ALERT! SEXIST ALERT!

[Maurepas]

On topic:




j/k, j/k

As Ive stated, Im all for women in the military, but I lol'd...

[Callisdrun]

The problem with women on the front lines is their lack of strength. Women are 70% weaker than men in upper body strength and 33% weaker than men in lower body strength.
The "chivalry" effect would also be difficult to overpass. The classic "leave no man behind" thought process would be even more difficult to overpass with women. When male soldiers risk everything to help a female soldier, everything is jeopardized, the mission, the safety of other soldiers, and the safety of innocent civilians. The risks are simply too great for the small amount of help they would provide.

SEXIST ALERT! SEXIST ALERT!

More like troll alert.

[Gojadhaar]

Maybe in the upper body. Their lower body strength is just fine for their size though. Plus, greater durability (stamina, pain tolerance, tolerance of extreme temperatures, etc.). It seems a good enough trade-off.

They still can't even run as well as male soldiers, so lower body strength is somewhat irrelevant since most of the physical conditioning needed for soldiering anyways.

Besides, the physical conditioning thing is a weak point, since it would be implied that females that could pass the men's standards could be accepted into combat arms. There are certainly a few women that can do that easily. The average female in the military, could not.

So even if we let these exceptional females as combat soldiers, I say there are still more problems with this idea then just physical strength and endurance.

And men, on average, can't show the kind of pain threshold that an average woman has. Nor can men show the adaptability to different temperatures that an average woman can. Nor can men demonstrate the level of olfactory sensitivity that women can. Nor do men show the sort of joint flexibility that the average woman can. Nor do men have the stronger immune systems that women have.

Seriously, for everything you can list that is physically "better" about men on average, we could list something that's physically "better" about women on average. Yes, if you decide that the only criteria that will matter just HAPPEN to be the things men are better at, then it's going to look like women are less fit to serve...but I'm not seeing any kind of justification for those standards so far.

Actually, men on average have a higher pain threshold/tolerance, and can easily show it. Men also can adapt to temperatures better because men are built to handle cold and hot. And immune systems have nothing to do with gender, women generally take care of themselves more which is why they don't get as sick. But I'd say men have a bit better immune systems on average.

Here's an article on pain tolerance/threshold...http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 040903.php

[Gojadhaar]

Maybe in the upper body. Their lower body strength is just fine for their size though. Plus, greater durability (stamina, pain tolerance, tolerance of extreme temperatures, etc.). It seems a good enough trade-off.

They still can't even run as well as male soldiers, so lower body strength is somewhat irrelevant since most of the physical conditioning needed for soldiering anyways.

Besides, the physical conditioning thing is a weak point, since it would be implied that females that could pass the men's standards could be accepted into combat arms. There are certainly a few women that can do that easily. The average female in the military, could not.

So even if we let these exceptional females as combat soldiers, I say there are still more problems with this idea then just physical strength and endurance.

Women will soon pass men in marathon speeds. So, your argument is bullshit.

Women's endurance is also somewhat better than men's. Also, carrying a pack is actually mostly lower body strength once the pack is on your back. On average. I'd post tons of stuff supporting this, but I've got to go to class. I'm sure one of the many posters on here who is in touch with reality will do so anyway.

"Women will soon pass men in marathon speeds."
No they won't, men are generally faster then women, it's not gonna change.

"Women's endurance is also somewhat better than men's."

Nope, men were built to last longer, the larger muscle mass helps. Therefore men actually have better endurance.

[Conserative Morality]

Hear, hear. If they can pass the same tests given to men, let them serve in the same capacity as men.

[Gojadhaar]

If women are going to be in combat situations in the military, then they should be in those areas that females are physiologically better equipped than males to handle.

Men are physically stronger than women. It's the way we evolved. Men have more muscle mass. If a woman can do exactly what a man can do in basic training (and I mean, EXACTLY...none of this "men do 100 pushups and women do 75 crap), then fine. Some women ARE able to do that. But truthfully, women have the edge physiologically, and men have the edge physically. That's just evolution.

For instance, the perfect fighter pilot is an overweight female. They aren't as affected by the Gs and the extra weight gives them a higher blood pressure, which means they're less likely to pass out at high altitudes.

And quite frankly, if I were a 200-lb man, I wouldn't want to have to worry that a 130-lb woman wouldn't be able to drag my ass out of a field of fire.

I would think, also, that women should consider the dangers above and beyond merely shooting and being shot at. As a general rule, men aren't raped in war. This is a legitimate concern that I don't think many women let themselves consider. They should, especially now, when we're fighting a group of people who consider women chattel.

It's just something I think women should think about.

If a woman can handle it, fine. Go into combat. If one thinks that they might cause disruption in the rank and file (ie, chivalrous behavior causing stupid actions on the part of men), put them in their own groups. Have female battalions. I don't see that it would really be a problem. I mean, really--a woman wouldn't have a problem killing someone. Women are more vicious than men give them credit for. We're just more subtle about it. To paraphrase Robert Jordan, "A woman will kill you faster than a man, and for less reason, though she may weep over it later."

I for one am glad I'm female, so that I have the choice whether to join the military or not. On the one hand, I come from a family with long military ties, and I respect and am thankful, and proud, of what they do. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to have to do it.

"women have the edge physiologically"
Nope. I've looked through many studies and none of them say that. They point out to men having the 'edge' physiologically as well, at least in most things.

[Gojadhaar]

I see that one of the first responses trots out the old "womenz ain't got teh muscles" argument against women in combat. I also see that it was quickly shot down (good) on the grounds that modern combat doesn't necessarily favor he who has the biggest pecs.

Yes, women tend, on average, to have lower muscle mass than men. Of course, women also tend to have better stamina, higher pain thresholds, better adaptability to extreme heat or cold, better sense of smell, and greater sensitivity to the emotional state/cues of other humans. All of which can be incredibly useful in both combat and field operations. A female soldier can provide you with a brain that is just as good as a male soldier's, yet she'll require 30% less food and 20% less water.

It's always a trade-off. After all, it's not like the military says that only 6' tall, 200 pound dudes can serve, as if being physically smaller somehow made one unworthy or incapable of serving. Ability to lift heavy shit isn't really the most needed capability in the military these days, and any country that limits its forces based on that criteria is going to lose out in the long run.

Exactly. That's what I was saying. Men and women have different strengths, and what they do should make use of those strengths. Incidentally, women can also hear higher and lower frequency sounds than men.

Women are physiologically stronger than men, and men are physically stronger than women. I hate the "men and women are exactly alike" crap, because it isn't true, no matter how many times someone says it.

"Yes, women tend, on average, to have lower muscle mass than men. Of course, women also tend to have better stamina, higher pain thresholds, better adaptability to extreme heat or cold, better sense of smell, and greater sensitivity to the emotional state/cues of other humans. All of which can be incredibly useful in both combat and field operations. A female soldier can provide you with a brain that is just as good as a male soldier's, yet she'll require 30% less food and 20% less water."

And all of that is proven where? Besides the muscle mass, the smell(debatable) and sensitivity to emotions. It's all Bullsh*t.
Men on average have a higher pain threshold/tolerance, men have better adaptability to extreme heat or cold, look at stats. men are more willing to work in extreme conditions like that then women are and they usually do a better job at it because men can adapt to extreme hot or cold better then women. Also men have much better stamina, they were built to last and keep going, the muscle mass helps too.

"A female soldier can provide you with a brain that is just as good as a male soldier's, yet she'll require 30% less food and 20% less water."
Nope, females have smaller brains because they, themselves are smaller. Also, I don't know where you heard the other stuff, but there's nothing that proves this, men generally are SUPPOSED to eat more, but that doesn't mean they will. Women have less durability, therefore a female soldier would need 30% MORE food and 20% MORE water.

Here's an article...http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 040903.php

[Gojadhaar]

I see that one of the first responses trots out the old "womenz ain't got teh muscles" argument against women in combat. I also see that it was quickly shot down (good) on the grounds that modern combat doesn't necessarily favor he who has the biggest pecs.

Yes, women tend, on average, to have lower muscle mass than men. Of course, women also tend to have better stamina, higher pain thresholds, better adaptability to extreme heat or cold, better sense of smell, and greater sensitivity to the emotional state/cues of other humans. All of which can be incredibly useful in both combat and field operations. A female soldier can provide you with a brain that is just as good as a male soldier's, yet she'll require 30% less food and 20% less water.

It's always a trade-off. After all, it's not like the military says that only 6' tall, 200 pound dudes can serve, as if being physically smaller somehow made one unworthy or incapable of serving. Ability to lift heavy shit isn't really the most needed capability in the military these days, and any country that limits its forces based on that criteria is going to lose out in the long run.

Exactly. Women are only physically "weaker" because women, on average, are smaller. It should go without saying that you can't fit as much muscle onto a smaller frame, but I guess some people in here need it spelled out for them.

Are we going to discriminate against smaller guys, too? I know for a fact that not everybody in the military is a hulking, 6' he-man, and that there are some pretty slightly built dudes on the front lines. So, unless people are going to argue that smallish men shouldn't be on the front lines, either, the whole "women R teh weaklings" argument is just bullshit.

And as you said, women might not on average have the same brute strength as men on average, but in some ways, they are more 'durable.' Which is something that I'd think also would be a valued attribute in a soldier.

They are weaker in the sense that they are less able to do things that require them to move their own weight, like push-ups and sit-ups and running. A 130 pound guy can typically do just as many push-ups as a 200 pound guy.

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/army/a/afpt.htm

Notice the wide descrepancy between female and male standards. They set those standards based on the averages of both genders out of the population. Women are not weaker because they are "smaller" they are weaker because they lack the testerone and muscle tone of men.

"but in some ways, they are more 'durable.' "
There's no proof of that whatsoever, there's only common sense, and that is that men are more durable in many more ways. They were built to last, which is ONe of the reasons for the bigger muscle mass, and of course because they're larger.

[Lunatic Goofballs]