Page 48 of 97 FirstFirst ... 38464748495058 ... LastLast
Results 471 to 480 of 967

Thread: Navy will soon let women serve on subs

  1. #471
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Navy will soon let women serve on subs

    The government wants women in the military to succeed and the only way that can happen is to lower the physical standards.....If you did not do that then there would be few women in the military, with the exception of your medical field because very few can handle the physical standards set for a man....

    I know a couple of people are going to slam me for this but it is the truth.....

    its like the old joke where you have a bunch of men and women in formation and the Sgt says we have this dangerous mission...6 men step forward so that happenes and then the Sgt says any women that want to volunteer for this mission step forward..........

    I hope everyone can see the hypocrisy.......
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  2. #472
    Lurker
    iangb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 02:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,927
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Navy will soon let women serve on subs

    Quote Originally Posted by Caedon View Post
    Can anyone present any evidence that the direct benefits to allowing women to serve on subs will outweigh the direct costs?

    So far, I've seen posts primarily comprised of "but but but some girls have big muscles too!" and "it's so nice when we all get along and have one fair standard." Hardly convincing. When it comes to the military, I'm less concerned about being fair and more concerned about maximizing a unit's efficacy.
    Well, so far it seems we cannot even agree on what the direct benefits or the direct costs would be, never mind quantifying them into a directly comparable manner. Analogies might work though - one analogy I can think of which supports women on subs is the fact that women have been (successfully) resident on places such as the international space station - although this doesn't have such a requirement on brute strength, there are equally high qualification levels to get into space, and it's equally a potentially claustrophobic and undeniably isolated situation.

    As I said before, the biggest benefit I can see would be that increasing the number of applicants (as long as standards do not falter) is mathematically likely to benefit you - as long as a single woman is chosen over a man, you have benefited from the system (not because she's a woman, but because she must have been better than the man she replaced in order to get selected).

    As to the "it's so nice when we all have one standard" - that isn't a direct benefit for the military, but by further undermining the patriarchal/chauvinistic/misogynistic (pick your euphemism) ideal that 'a woman should be kept nice and safe away from harm', it'll benefit society as a whole. The sometimes thinly veiled comments in this thread about 'a woman in a combat zone will just menstruate all over the place, ho ho' could do with a good kicking.
    Last edited by iangb; 02-25-10 at 07:19 PM.
    The truth may be out there, but lies are in your head. ~Terry Pratchett

  3. #473
    Educator nerv14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    02-07-11 @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    601

    Re: Navy will soon let women serve on subs

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    The government wants women in the military to succeed and the only way that can happen is to lower the physical standards.....If you did not do that then there would be few women in the military, with the exception of your medical field because very few can handle the physical standards set for a man....

    I know a couple of people are going to slam me for this but it is the truth.....

    its like the old joke where you have a bunch of men and women in formation and the Sgt says we have this dangerous mission...6 men step forward so that happenes and then the Sgt says any women that want to volunteer for this mission step forward..........

    I hope everyone can see the hypocrisy.......
    Do you have any evidence that physical standards have been reduced (as to reduce military effectiveness) because of women in the military?

    It is important to remember that increased technology in warfare means that a certain level of physical fitness that was needed in the past may not be needed today.

    On top of that, you also need to compare the gains to a military from having more soldiers (women) with any loss of efficiency... which may or may not exist.

    If this is about making the military stronger, then it isn't about opinion, its about whatever studies have been done.

  4. #474
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Navy will soon let women serve on subs

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    The government wants women in the military to succeed and the only way that can happen is to lower the physical standards.....If you did not do that then there would be few women in the military, with the exception of your medical field because very few can handle the physical standards set for a man....

    I know a couple of people are going to slam me for this but it is the truth.....
    Then having one standard should solve all of the problems you guys are continuously here bitching and moaning about. One standard, less women. So where's the ****ing issue having one standard? Why are all of you whining guys so opposed to have an equal and fair standard for ALL? It's absolutely baffling to me. If such a teeny tiny percent of women would actually pass, wouldn't that just suit the sexists just fine? If no woman could EVER pass the requirements to be on a sub, then it seems you guys would welcome one set of standards.

    And yet, you guys persist in getting your panties in a wad about even THAT. We want to make the requirements fair for all, decrease the burden on the men, increase the strength of the women who serve and according to you guys, decrease the amount of women who would be serving. Why are you guys opposed to any of that?


    its like the old joke where you have a bunch of men and women in formation and the Sgt says we have this dangerous mission...6 men step forward so that happenes and then the Sgt says any women that want to volunteer for this mission step forward..........

    I hope everyone can see the hypocrisy.......
    What I see is your sexism and ignorance.

  5. #475
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,268
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Navy will soon let women serve on subs

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    Then having one standard should solve all of the problems you guys are continuously here bitching and moaning about. One standard, less women. So where's the ****ing issue having one standard? Why are all of you whining guys so opposed to have an equal and fair standard for ALL? It's absolutely baffling to me. If such a teeny tiny percent of women would actually pass, wouldn't that just suit the sexists just fine? If no woman could EVER pass the requirements to be on a sub, then it seems you guys would welcome one set of standards.

    And yet, you guys persist in getting your panties in a wad about even THAT. We want to make the requirements fair for all, decrease the burden on the men, increase the strength of the women who serve and according to you guys, decrease the amount of women who would be serving. Why are you guys opposed to any of that?



    What I see is your sexism and ignorance.
    Despite claims to the contrary, most(but not all) jobs in the navy do not even require physical standards, other than the most basic that most women can handle.

    Those jobs with physical requirements don't have them for either sex mostly. I was in naval aviation, and aviation ordinanceman is a job that requires a significant amount of strength to accomplish(we where not the airforce, with machines to load all the bombs and missiles), but neither sex had to pass a special physical to do it, and there where the occasional guy who came along who could not do the work. Now, in the cases of both the men and women who could not physically do some of the work, there still was work they could do, and they where expected to get into shape so that they could do more. And women can do the physical work when needed. Three unexceptional women loading 500 pound bombs is a good example of this.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  6. #476
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Navy will soon let women serve on subs

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    The government wants women in the military to succeed and the only way that can happen is to lower the physical standards.....If you did not do that then there would be few women in the military, with the exception of your medical field because very few can handle the physical standards set for a man....

    I know a couple of people are going to slam me for this but it is the truth.....

    its like the old joke where you have a bunch of men and women in formation and the Sgt says we have this dangerous mission...6 men step forward so that happenes and then the Sgt says any women that want to volunteer for this mission step forward..........

    I hope everyone can see the hypocrisy.......

    Nah, nobody stepped forward.

    Everyone knows NAVY stands for Never Again Volunteer Yourself.

  7. #477
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Navy will soon let women serve on subs

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Nah, nobody stepped forward.

    Everyone knows NAVY stands for Never Again Volunteer Yourself.
    And how do we know the sergeant didn't say "A1, A2, B5, and C6, you 4 women just volunteered."
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  8. #478
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Navy will soon let women serve on subs

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    Then having one standard should solve all of the problems you guys are continuously here bitching and moaning about. One standard, less women. So where's the ****ing issue having one standard? Why are all of you whining guys so opposed to have an equal and fair standard for ALL? It's absolutely baffling to me. If such a teeny tiny percent of women would actually pass, wouldn't that just suit the sexists just fine? If no woman could EVER pass the requirements to be on a sub, then it seems you guys would welcome one set of standards.

    And yet, you guys persist in getting your panties in a wad about even THAT. We want to make the requirements fair for all, decrease the burden on the men, increase the strength of the women who serve and according to you guys, decrease the amount of women who would be serving. Why are you guys opposed to any of that?


    1. Like I said if you had one standard there would be very few people in certain fields where strength and fitness is required......You can argue all you want but that is a fact......Tht is not what the suits want........They want women to be able to compete in all fields..that is why they lower the standards........


    What I see is your sexism and ignorance.


    1. Like I said if you had one standard there would be very few people in certain fields where strength and fitness is required......You can argue all you want but that is a fact......That is not what the suits want........They want women to be able to compete in all fields..that is why they lower the standards........


    2. I call it hypocrisy or showing favoritism to women in any case whether its what you say or what I say its the truth......
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  9. #479
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Navy will soon let women serve on subs

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Despite claims to the contrary, most(but not all) jobs in the navy do not even require physical standards, other than the most basic that most women can handle.
    LOL So where's the issue?

    (although, if there are any standards, they should be the same for all people)

    Three unexceptional women loading 500 pound bombs is a good example of this.
    Of course. It wouldn't be hard at all for three people to load 500lbs. If that's all that's required, then wtf are these guys bitching about?

  10. #480
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Navy will soon let women serve on subs

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    1. Like I said if you had one standard there would be very few people in certain fields where strength and fitness is required......You can argue all you want but that is a fact......
    The numbers that would qualify are *irrelevant*. How many times does this need to be said. It. doesn't. matter.

    That is not what the suits want........They want women to be able to compete in all fields..that is why they lower the standards........
    Well then, your issue is with the 'suits' who are apparently working very hard to weaken the military by lowering standards of performance. Stop bitching about women, and start bitching about the ****tards who are actually causing the damn problem.

    2. I call it hypocrisy or showing favoritism to women in any case whether its what you say or what I say its the truth......
    Favortism? WTF? Making a sexist comment about how there aren't any courageous women is 'showing favoritism to women'?
    Last edited by rivrrat; 02-25-10 at 08:20 PM.

Page 48 of 97 FirstFirst ... 38464748495058 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •