What do you guys think about this woman, Rachel, the one who won the Medal of Valor (or whatever medal it is that you get for service in combat) who is now on the Real World?

And the fact that another 4 or 5 got medals when she did and were all ignored?

And what do you think about the female hostage who got all the attention while all the other POWs were ignored?

And about the six people who died in the bombing a couple weeks ago when only the three women were talked about and the other three ignored?

I'm posting this as a new thread because I'm looking for more specific discussion.

Well, obviously the women are getting the attention because there are significantly fewer women in combat. That goes without saying.

But just because women were killed doesn't change the fact that men were to. Equality, remember? The men deserve to have their sacrifices recognized, as well.

I have a question: are women allowed on combat teams?

As far as i know they are only not allowed in specialist teams. Although that may have changed or be different viewing country. They are not as common but allowed.

Sad but true. Women tend to be recognised through lack of numbers, not exactly right but they have their reasons i guess.

I couldn't agree more.

It's plain wrong. Alright women can be tortured worse in diff ways and maybe less physically resistant but it is a load of rubbish to ignore the others. Everyone deserves to be recognised for overcoming a hardship (understatement i know but)


Although, childbirth puts one up on physical resistance, strenghtwise maybe but endurance should equal out.

I don't think that's true at all. Men can be tortured the same ways and it does happen...probably more often than we know about.

I really don't see what difference sex should make in combat. Everyone's there for the same reason, and everyone's taking the same risks and making the same sacrifices. And personally, I find the idea of women in combat being an attraction in the media circus a little insulting.

If I were to go into a combat situation with a group of, say, myself and five men, I would be pretty damned angry if we were all to die/get injured and the only one the media cared about was me. In fact, I'd be downright pissed.

And, I'm almost hesitant to say this, but I will anyway, I kind of feel like it's a bit degrading. It's sort of like "aww...look at what women can do...how cute...here's a cookie...and a book deal...*pat on the head*"

Maybe I'm taking it a little too personally, but you're talking to a woman who has an application to get into the infantry going through the system as we speak...er...type...

I think that the rule is that women aren't allowed in frontline combat units. I'm not sure as to the reasoning behind this, but there's probably one floating around there.

You're joining the military, Mara? Interesting.

KT

Okay, was holding my tongue earlier and decided that I am going to say this after all -

The mass media responds directly to the masses.

Meaning - these stories about women in combat, they sell. To be very blunt, men have been dying in wars and other violence since the beginning of the human race, and it's old news. But it's only been in the last century - World War 2, really - that women began to be involved in combat on any level, and they've only actually been where the heavy action is in the most modern of wars. Women dying on the battlefield is new, and it carries a certain shock value that the media networks literally can't afford to pass up.

Don't forget, it was only yesterday when women were one of four things: teachers, secretaries, nurses, or stay-at-home moms. Women who came into the workforce in the '70s were probably the first ones with even a chance at equal treatment, and realistically, equal treatment on a broader scale started appearing later than that.

Ha, it was 1972 before school sports opened up fully to girls with Title IX. So most of our parents grew up in a world where equal treatment for males and females wasn't even a reality in grammar school. And if it takes a generation or two for that stigma to disappear, it's only going to start fading when we start raising kids.

So it'll be a generation or two before the shock value of women dying in combat diminishes - and only when that shock value goes away will things change.

So, yes - what's happening with undue media attention is outrageous. But when you remember that two primary purposes of the mass media are to entertain and to make money . . . well, it's easier to understand. Not any easier to swallow, but, unfortunately, that's the way the world works.

The regulation states females can not be in frontline ground combat units. Now what is being done to circumvent this is that commanders will attach them to said units, or something like that where they're not part of the unit itself circumventing the reg. Now what also happens is that they're in combat zones, but aren't part of a 'combat' team. So they end up in the fighting anyways.

Now it says ground, so females can be chopper pilots, gunner,s you name it in the air and there is probably a female in that job. Hell there is some evidence that they're better fighter pilots because the female body is better at spreading blood then males. Oh and female fighter pilots are hot... :drooling:

I'm just going to stay out of this thread from now on, lol...probably best ;)

You're joining the military, Mara?

*salutes*

It's people like you who keep Canada the bastion for hockey and freedom that it is...

I'm not sure where I stand on this.

I'm all for equality, but I also like to look at things big-picture-like and try to see what effects things have on a larger scale. Should women be in combat? Should *anybody* be in a combat zone in a civilized world?

Anywho, the world isn't civilized, and having women in the military is an everyday thing. Women in the military means women in combat... no bones about it. Jessica Lynch is a prime example; the combat zones move. If somebody shouldn't be shot at, then they shouldn't be in the military, law enforcement, or public school system (somewhat joking about that last one). Female police officers have proven they can handle themselves in tense, hostile situations (something anyone who's ever been a mother already knows), and that's also backed up by women now receiving military commendations.

To be perfectly honest, I don't know what roles women should or shouldn't be able to perform in the military. There's the obvious physical demands, having to carry all that equipment and potentially another soldier, fighting, and everything else that soldiering involves. If a woman can do all that, not only do I feel that she's qualified, I'd like her phone number...

Add men into the mix. Not just the enemy, but friendlies as well. As a "hold the door, never hit a girl, women-and-children-first" kind of guy who knows a few of the same that are in the military, I know a common sentiment is "Hey, I'm supposed to be protecting *her*, not the other way around". Another is that female troops can be a distraction and a liability at times (not saying that this is fact, just a sentiment I've heard expressed).

Thus, the idealist and the gentleman within me war.

I'm certainly not opposed to putting women on the front lines in 'fic, though. :jenn: Gals in combat boots are hot. :drooling:

Very true.

As for women being a distraction, well, that's similar to one of the arguments about keeping gay men out of the military. And while I can understand the argument, I do not agree with it at all.

Anything can be a distraction; soldiers should be trained enough that they can focus regardless of who they're serving with.

About the physical limitations. Well in the US Marines female recruits physical training focuses a lot on the upper body so that they can do what is expected. Of course Marines are also the only branch that still separates 'em during Basic, but whatever.

Now about the men feeling chauvinistic, it could be done like it was with blacks, have them in separate units... of course that unit would probably do more infighting than fighting the enemy :pfft: And all that it takes is to teach them that the women aren't women, that they're soldiers, or airmen, or sailors, or Marines.

Just a note about physical limitations - it's very true, and a consideration to be taken into account.

An example, when women join the FBI, they still have to pass fitness tests at a certain level, and much of what they do is the same. However, since women naturally have more lower than upper body strength (and vice versa for men) they perform a different type of pull up - it's more horizontal than vertical, a bar a couple feet off the ground, and their feet rest on the floor (think a pull-up version of the push-up)

To that end, what Marines do, having women focus on building their upper body strength, is a good approach to dealing with that weakness.