The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Interesting Poll: Should women join the infantry (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..13~14~15~16~17~18 [Next]
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
I am starting to get a clear picture. Not everyone is on the same page. Dread I think your numbers are accurate for our testing in the 80s. Of course elite and special units have higher standards. I, for example, did my test in shorts and running shoes while the weapons guys did in in cammies and boots. End of story is there isn't a standard that is same for all they have standards that they think makes things equal.

I like the bar exam question. I read some states wanting to improve the % of students passing test just lowered the passing score and amazingly the passing number of students went up, proof teachers did better as did students.

Lobo, thank you for the explanation on straw man. Like a scare crow the straw man distracts from the real point.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 17:37, Marlin1894 wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 17:33, acesover wrote:

But they don't have to. That is the issue.


Ok, now I'm lost. At present women can't serve in the infantry at all. By any standard, right? I thought this was a theoretical discussion at this point. Did I miss an annoucement from the Pentagon or something?


No. Acesover just keeps changing his argument. A few pages back he was saying that women should not be allowed in combat. Period. Now he has conceded that they should be able to serve if they can meet the same qualifications as men.

Whether or not women can be technically assigned to infantry or not is beside the point because, as has already been pointed out, they ALREADY serve in de facto combat positions because in modern urban warfare there are no front lines and the fight can be anywhere at any time.
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
Whether or not women can be technically assigned to infantry or not is beside the point because, as has already been pointed out, they ALREADY serve in de facto combat positions because in modern urban warfare there are no front lines and the fight can be anywhere at any time.


That is true. But only technically. It's not really beside the point because I don't believe a woman can have an 03 MOS in the Marines for example. So yes a woman may find herself in combat, or under fire. Just like a male cook or HVAC specialist might. But she cannot be a Marine Corp rifleman by MOS. Plus there is no guarantee that there could never be a war with a frontline situation in the future. Despite the ever changing nature of warfare no one can say that for sure.
George Ledo
View Profile
Magic Café Columnist
SF Bay Area
2909 Posts

Profile of George Ledo
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 17:43, MagicSanta wrote:
I am starting to get a clear picture. Not everyone is on the same page.

Yup.

Okay, just for the sake of (more Smile ) argument, let's say we re-state the question:

Do you believe a woman should be allowed into a combat unit if she wants to be there and can pass the same physical and mental requirements as the men for that particlar unit?
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net

Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here"
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3465 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 17:53, Marlin1894 wrote:
. . . there is no guarantee that there could never be a war with a frontline situation in the future. Despite the ever changing nature of warfare no one can say that for sure.

I think you mean ". . . because of the ever-changing nature of warfare . . . ."
Mr. Mystoffelees
View Profile
Inner circle
I haven't changed anyone's opinion in
3621 Posts

Profile of Mr. Mystoffelees
Women should be able to do anything legal that they want to do so long as they can reach whatever objective and relevant bar is set...
Also known, when doing rope magic, as "Cordini"
George Ledo
View Profile
Magic Café Columnist
SF Bay Area
2909 Posts

Profile of George Ledo
Okay, can we at least agree that the term "front line," as used here, is not literal, but refers to any combat position that may encounter the opposing force, i.e., during a raid, patrol, attack, and so forth?
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net

Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here"
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
My answer, sir george, is no. There are factors beyond ability and desire. I am only refering to front line infantry not tanks or artillery.

One thing that is beyond the scope of this discussion is the fact that evey female I met who wanted to be out in the mud shootin and lootin was a nut job that shouldn't be in the service or be cops which is usually their other dream. I am not saying they are ball nuts but I would like to discuss it with a rational one. Like I said the toughest most self disciplined woman I knew in the service was a diver and didn't feel the need to be a shooter. I have never met a rational one.
George Ledo
View Profile
Magic Café Columnist
SF Bay Area
2909 Posts

Profile of George Ledo
Fair enough, MagicSanta. Anyone else?

BTW, you don't have to call me sir - I work for a living. Smile
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net

Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here"
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
That is different thing George. Women should not be prohibited from a position just because they could be part of a combat situation. That would be far too limiting to the roles women take. For example women are on all types of surface ships now most designated as combat ships. Take the Stark, it had women killed on board but it was attacked and the potential didn't and shouldn't keep women off the ship. On the other hand, and I am sure someone will check, riverine (brown water) boats do not have women, again I am assuming, because they are tasked as close in assaault or SEAL platforms. Different gigs but more women were killed on the Stark than total riverine since reestablished.
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 17:58, S2000magician wrote:
I think you mean ". . . because of the ever-changing nature of warfare . . . ."


Indeed. That's exactly what I meant to say. Thank you.
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
George made a navy joke!
George Ledo
View Profile
Magic Café Columnist
SF Bay Area
2909 Posts

Profile of George Ledo
'scuse me... that was an Army joke. Smile
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net

Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here"
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1192 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Let me put this REALLY simply. And I believe I can safely speak for Bob here as well as myself, but I apologize in advance if I misstate his position (and I'm sure he'll correct me). But our position appears to be the same, and unless I'm badly misreading Bob's post, his seems to coincide with mine.

1. For the types of positions we're talking about, there should be a single standard, and it should be reasonably related to the job, i.e. not arbitrary and/or capricious.

2. Nobody who meets the standard should be excluded from the job on the basis of gender.

3. Nobody who fails to meet the standard should be included to the job on the basis of gender.

The end.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 19:05, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Let me put this REALLY simply. And I believe I can safely speak for Bob here as well as myself, but I apologize in advance if I misstate his position (and I'm sure he'll correct me). But our position appears to be the same, and unless I'm badly misreading Bob's post, his seems to coincide with mine.

1. For the types of positions we're talking about, there should be a single standard, and it should be reasonably related to the job, i.e. not arbitrary and/or capricious.

2. Nobody who meets the standard should be excluded from the job on the basis of gender.

3. Nobody who fails to meet the standard should be included to the job on the basis of gender.

The end.


+1
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Yes. That is exactly my position.
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Mens standard or womens?
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1192 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
The standard that is appropriately and reasonably related to being able to do the job.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
I think that something that is being overlooked here is the obvious fact that different combat jobs require different physical skills and characteristics. To make an analogy to American football, the physical qualities of a center or lineman are not the same as you'd find in the average quarterback.

In combat, the skills of a long range sniper, for example, are significantly different than those of a tank driver. Combat roles, like almost everything else in today's society, have become increasingly specialized. Hand- to-hand combat requires different skills than those needed to disarm IED's. Some roles would seem to favor men and others would seem to favor women or are gender neutral in regards to the physical skills required to carry them out.

The statement that men are better suited than women for all combat roles - particularly in today's military - completely ignores the different skill sets required in different combat related specialties.
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
We just got drunk and danced with big bottomed navy girls. Bob, I hope some day we can toss those gals into the fray.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Interesting Poll: Should women join the infantry (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..13~14~15~16~17~18 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.16 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL