[iamzack]

What's with all the physical stuff? Did anyone read Dilmah's link?

There are women who can pass the most rigorous tests that men are ever given, but they should not be put in an intense combat situation with men. Men are generally wired to be attracted to women, which can impair judgment. Fix it with training? Yeah, whatever... maybe. Can you be sure that the training will hold under all possible stressful situations? As that "Women in the Armed Forces" paper said, maybe, but we'd have to get some empirical data, and that means some people will die.

So yeah, it's sexist. But it ought to be, since sex is the fundamental difference here. And it has nothing to do with what women can or cannot do, but how the relationship between a man and a woman is different from that between two men. I suppose you could quantify and actively correct for that, but I suspect that the "correction" would just be pulling women from the front lines.

However, as modern militaries start incorporating more automation and unmanned gizmos, that will open up even more non-front-line positions. Even today, most killing is done from afar, not face-to-face.

EDIT: Where's iamzack?

I'm BACK.

Anyway, I've noticed that people always seem to point out that "OH NOES MEN WILL BE ATTRACTED TO THE WIMMENZ EVERYTHING WILL SUCK."

I mean, come on. Really? We can train dogs to not hump people's legs, but we can't train soldiers not to rape other soldiers just because they have vaginas?

[Colonol Dekker]

Long duration working environment + high pressure + constant proximity + gradual familiarity - (office politics +  regular tension release) = mutual consent.

[iamzack]

Yeah, I was going to say something about "women have sexual urges too" but it's kind of pointless because women are trained from an early age that they're supposed to dislike sex, because only whores like sex or whatever.

[Nuclear1]

Long duration working environment + high pressure + constant proximity + gradual familiarity - (office politics +  regular tension release) = mutual consent.

Desert love   That's about all the bunkers actually get used for these days

[Qent]

I'm BACK.

WOOT!

They don't actually have to have sex. If they just draw more of one man's attention than their comrades are counting on, someone could get killed. And it could work in the opposite direction too. But of course I'm just speculating and folks here who are actually in the military don't think members of the opposite sex are that distracting.

[iamzack]

If we can train people to shoot rockets at children, we can train them to not turn into retards because there's somebody with different bits around.

[NGTM-1R]

Anyway, I've noticed that people always seem to point out that "OH NOES MEN WILL BE ATTRACTED TO THE WIMMENZ EVERYTHING WILL SUCK."

I don't think it's the rape angle that's considered the problem so much as the possiblity of favoritism or the damage to unit cohesion (read that: jealousy) that could result from consensual relationships. Ultimately the existence of the DADT policy and its repeal means this argument isn't going to have a leg to stand on, but that's the claim.

(I wouldn't necessarily hold up the Israelis as a standard either, but that has more to do with the view of most people I've talked to that their regular army is a bit of a ****up these days.)

[StarSlayer]

Last time I checked people weren't rutting in the streets or at work like animals.  Folks do have the ability to keep it in their pants you know, especially when their ass depends on it.  Plus I totally imagine sitting in a muddy fox hole whiling away hours engrossed thinking "I bet she's totally hawt under all that MOPP gear and kevlar" instead of watching my fire lane.



Yeah it's totally like looking at a centerfold.

[IceFire]

It's the same thing with DADT.  The military is barring homosexuals/women from serving based on what they think might will eventually happen, rather than what actually happens. 

Fixed.  If it's allowed it will happen eventually, humans are human and do stupid stuff.  Personally, I think soldiers should take libido suppressors for the duration of service.

Humans, like most other species link their libido with a variety of other factors including aggression (for both males and females).  Take away the sexual drive and you'll probably remove those aggressive tendencies and instincts that you want out of your soldiers too. So I don't think that's really a solution... there isn't too much of a solution except that people need to stop making big deals out of things and get on with it.

[Qent]

They wouldn't be having sex or gawking like idiots, it's just... they might see a certain set of facts about a situation that's different from what everyone else expects, because they know there's a woman there.

DOESN'T THIS HAPPEN TO ANY OTHER GUY HERE?

[General Battuta]

They wouldn't be having sex or gawking like idiots, it's just... they might see a certain set of facts about a situation that's different from what everyone else expects, because they know there's a woman there.

DOESN'T THIS HAPPEN TO ANY OTHER GUY HERE?

It's called dual-attitude-component sexism, and it's very common - I'm sure it happens to everyone, women included.

This doesn't mean it's not a problem that needs to be addressed. And, believe it or not, the best way to address it is to break down the frequency-based prototypes that underlie it. And in turn the best way to do that is to put women in situations that disprove the prototypes.

[Qent]

Wikipedia fails me. What do those terms mean? Or is this more scientology?

[iamzack]

Battuta's just showing off.

[Scotty]

DOESN'T THIS HAPPEN TO ANY OTHER GUY HERE?

It does.  To my great frustration, it does.

EDIT:  Fixed to be less confusing.

[General Battuta]

This article is somewhat out of date, but provides a decent layperson's window into the topic.

It's worth noting that our data suggests it works against men as well (men are both strong, decisive and intelligent and violent, crude and stupid.)

It does.  To my great frustration, it does.

What does?

[redsniper]

Someone post that story about that badass lady who was dragging her wounded squad-mates to safety while under fire and stuff.

[Nuclear1]

Sergeant Leigh Ann Hester you mean?

There's Monica Lin Brown too (who, btw, is one of the few women to actually look good in ACUs).

Or even Shoshana Johnson, who on top of being wounded several times, was held captive for three weeks.

[General Battuta]

Worth noting she worked with a male soldier under fire with no apparent problems.

[Qent]

This article is somewhat out of date, but provides a decent layperson's window into the topic.

It's worth noting that our data suggests it works against men as well (men are both strong, decisive and intelligent and violent, crude and stupid.)

Ah, thank you. A very interesting read. So my fears were that benevolent sexism in combat would lead soldiers to think of each other subconsciously as men or women instead of as fellow soldiers.

But that doesn't explain frequency prototypes. Do I reverse the polarity of my libido?

[redsniper]

badassery

Yeah yeah, Brown was the one I was thinking of.