What number of troops is considered militarily useful? Apparently it’s more than one, at least for the Navy.
You assume this. But repeating it doesn’t make it true.
Once again, there aren’t a limited number of spots, so women aren’t competing directly with men for positions. There’s no artificially induced scarcity to the number of available positions.
If a woman gets a spot, it doesn’t take one away from a qualified man. How many times does this have to be repeated?
But even worse, let’s say a woman does qualify under whatever set of rules. How is that a bad thing if the standards aren’t lowered? It seems you are assuming it’s a priori a lowering of standards if a woman even accomplishes it in the first place. What kind of completely fucked 19th century thinking is that?
I mean there’s no such thing as a militarily useful number (because female SEALS will presumably have the same skills and duties as males), not that women would not be useful.
I understand - I was actually addressing astro there, since it’s his choice of words.
So is there that little confidence in the military that some think that if women are allowed to try out, the standards WILL be lowered to let some in?
I assume the lack of confidence is in civilian leadership rather than the military itself. I think it’s pretty clear that some of the military brass have no use for women except as rape victims. It’s not entirely unfounded; Virginia Military Institute (though not actually part of the military) reduced its physical fitness requirements for women a few years after it was forced by SCOTUS to admit them.
I wonder if Klaatu has sobered up yet?
“Equality”
Yeah right toots.
I grew up with the whole “women are just like men but with holes rather that poles” propaganda.
Bullcrap.
Yeah, in some ways I’m a sexist bastard. But I earned it.
Ewww snakes. Ewww raw sewage. Ewww gutting fish. Ewww fucking everything. OMG this is dangerous. OMG that is dangerous… OMG you mowed the lawn on Sunday rather than Saturday and what will the neighbors think?
Women can procreate. Other than that I am not impressed.
I told you not to drink from the same container as Klaatu.
Dude, you never worked on a ranch with real cowgirls. I know “ladies” who can butcher beef, peel off the hide, and paint themselves fake moustaches with the blood. Snakes? They kill snakes by stomping on 'em.
Yeah, some women are weak. And some men are weak, also. Try to imagine Justin Bieber doing real work.
Generalizing like that is nothing but bigotry.
If they can’t hang with the SEALS, can they at least hang out with the SEALS? Those guys get lonely when they’re not killing bin Laden or beating up Jesse Ventura.
So can men. Actually, you generally need one of each to procreate. Perhaps the words you were drunkenly looking for were ‘become impregnated’.
Neither are we.
Was that last past by billfish678 sarcasm? I honestly can’t tell anymore.
Yeah, if it isn’t “OMG this is dangerous,” it’s
or
Ever since he went through his latest breakup (not telling on him here, he’s mentioned it more than a few times) he’s been extra eyerolly with his already iffy thoughts on women. Sometimes you just have to shake your head and move on.
The amount of sexism, racism and homophobia on a board ostensibly dedicated to fighting ignorance (and also ostensibly left-leaning) in the 21st fucking century is really depressing. Maybe I shouldn’t be surprised, but I am. Guess some people refuse to believe in evolving even socially.
When did I say they shouldn’t be allowed? I’m only here to stomp on the retarded “women can do anything that men can do, even if it involves upper body strength and we’re talking about the very top tier of exceptional men!” retardation. The only concern I’ve expressed towards the actual policy change is that if someone is trying to get a woman through there as a political statement then I’m worried that they’re going to bend the rules or change the requirements for her to get in, and that should not be done.
Give me a fucking break, you do a disservice to real bigotry with a comparison like this.
Women have less dense bones, less ability to build muscles, and various other physiological factors as compared to men. Now, the bell curves overlap, of course. So the strongest women are stronger than the weakest men. But we’re not talking about average. We’re talking about people who are exceptional, who are on the top tier of strength and endurance. There are genuine physiological reasons that this doesn’t include women.
Now to use your comparison to racial bigotry - for you to suggest that this is the same issue is to suggest that some races actually are inferior to others in certain categories, physiologically or otherwise. A college admissions board or a hiring director shouldn’t unfairly judge black people to be unsuitable for acceptance due to their race because there’s no difference in general between blacks and non-blacks. However, a guy building an Olympic powerlifting team would have reason to treat women differently from men. For you to say that these are the same thing is, since it’s obvious to anyone that men and women have actual physiological differences, is to imply that racism is based on actual merit, that there’s something legitimate there to discriminate against.
In general, this thread has a lot of people saying “I don’t know, maybe if they let women in 1-3 really exceptional people might make it” and I’m saying “it’s unlikely that any women would make it” and somehow they’re okay and I’m this massive bigot just because I have an interest in this stuff and I have a better idea than most of you about how difficult it is to become a SEAL. I mean, for fucks sake, several posters in this thread said things about how SEALs don’t require that much fitness because they only pull triggers, or that they don’t really need physical strength because they’re not UFC fighters.
SenorBeef, I think people are bothered because you came in and made a point that several others before you had already made, and did it with an air of “schooling the uneducated”. A great many people dislike being condescended to, and that was how you came across.
Not only that, but if you are basically saying the same thing as everyone else (which is your defense) then why go into all the ways most women won’t be able to make it, over and over again. It seems almost gleeful, and oftentimes when men gleefully and repeatedly point out the physical shortcomings of women, it’s because they are misogynists. I’m not saying you are, I don’t know. But it seems that way.
I think what bothers a lot of people about this, including me, is that if the vast majority men cannot meet these physical standards, well, hey, it’s a tough job. If the vast majority of women cannot OH MY FUCKING GOD YOU FEMINAZIS WOMEN CAN’T BE SEALS WHAT ARE YOU STUPID THIS IS BASIC SCIENCE GET IN THE KITCHEN AND MAKE ME A SANDWICH!!!
Let’s see what happens before we decide it cannot be done. All that’s happening is that women are allowed to try, and yet here we are on page 4 of this thread.
I posted it because the Marine Corps has already started the experiment, I felt it was an interesting data point.
I remember the decision being made awhile ago, and I remembered women starting - that is the article that reported on the first two. I fucked up the date, you fucked up the interpretation of my post.
I was trying to help identify another hard core branch of the military that had opened up to women, and was hoping to find one or two - but due to the exclusive nature of the Corps in general, and officers even more so - it makes for a decent analogous situation to the SEALs.
The Marine Corps is doing it right - keeping the same standards, and letting people try regardless of gender. It should be watched and encouraged.
You, however,