Women in the Military

[Arrow Cross]

All right folks, after the quite surprising first poll (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=312), here comes Controversial Topics by AC Part II.

What do you think - and why - about the allowance of female military service in general? Note that little word 'general', so we're talking about the broad concept, not necesserly conscription, i.e.: professional soldiers volunteerly enlisting in wartime, as seen in the US Army in the recent years in quite high numbers.

This is certainly something against the conservative "old values", yet, it is a topic relatively rarely mentioned in rightist circles.
That's why I brought it up. Discuss.

[Eldritch]

In actual front-line combat, no.

In auxiliary/administrative positions, why not.

[Psychonaut]

I'm feeling lazy today, so here's a repost of what I said the last time this came up on another forum (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=92733&page=11): :eek:

I work in a joint service facility (Army, Navy and Air Force) in a strategic (non-tactical) environment. As far as my job in the Army goes, performance is based not at all on physical ability and entirely on intelligence and mental acuity. However, outside of a strategic military intelligence facility, none of that really applies. Every single time we go do field training there are a number of things that females are incapable of doing as well as males. Females cannot run as fast, which means that when your squad is attempting to move quickly, the entire group is slowed down and put in more danger. Females cannot carry as heavy of a load as males can; this results in either males carrying more than their fair share or in the females developing stress fractures in their hips (this is a very common problem for female soldiers). Females cannot carry the dead weight of their injured comrades. This is a vital point and cannot be stressed enough. In my three years in the Army, I've only run across two or three females that could consistently pick up the limp body of a male solder outfitted in all of their gear and run with him. If you are too physically weak to do this, then you have no business being a soldier, period. If you cannot save the lives of your injured comrades, then you are not fit to be anywhere near combat. Lastly is hand-to-hand combat; one of my duties is to work as the hand-to-hand combat (we call it combatives) instructor for my platoon. In this time I have met exactly one female soldier who was consistently capable of defeating male soldiers of average size in close combat.

There is a damn good reason that females are not allowed to enter into a combat MOS (Military Occupational Specialty), that's because the Army knows that females simply cannot do the job. However, many of the jobs that were once thought to be non-combat positions are turning into combat positions due to the nature of our current military engagements. I have no problem with women fulfilling traditional military roles that they are capable of doing (medical, supply, cooking, etc.) or working in stateside strategic units like mine that have no chance of deploying. But I would not, under any circumstances, want to put my life in the hands of a female soldier in a combat zone.

[Æmeric]

I've commented on this subject before so I'll just repost my previous comments:



No, I don't believe women should be in combat positions in the military. I think putting women in such roles de-feminizes them. And they are not the equals of men in combat. Let's say you have two battilions go into to battle against one another - they have the same training, same equiment but one is made up entirely of men & the other one entirely of women. Which one do you think would win?

Persons who advocate this sort of sexual equality are just like multiracialists who like to claim there is no such thing as race - they claim that gender doesn't matter but it does. Even though a large percentage of women, maybe a majority, may support the right of women to serve in combat nearly all females would be opposed to women having the legal obligation to serve in combat. In the US, all 18-year-old men have to register with selective service - the government agency that would handle a draft if it was ever reinstated. Women do not, and no females have been clamoring for young women to have this same legal obligation as men.

In spite of all the affirmative action programs to make the military attractive to women, women only account for 11% of the Army, 10% of the Navy, 5% of the Marines & 14% of the Air Force. 100 % of all jobs in the Air Force are open to women, yet they've only managed 14% female participation. About 38% of all women in the military are from racial minorities. This is another issue but non-Whites in the US military behave as if they simply had a cushy civil service job. Many of the White women in the military, especailly officers, are lesbians.

There have been other attempts to achieve gender equality in male dominated occupations. For example firefighting. Several liberal communities across the US have made a special effort to recruit female firefighters to their fire departments. For example; Minneaoplis, Minnesota 17%; Madison, Wisconsin 15%; San Francisco, 15%; Boulder, Colorado, 14%. Some people would point to these figures as a success, I say they are failures. In spite of having lower standards ( as opposed to White males) to recruit women & aggressively trying to recruit women firefighters, they all come in well below 50%. One reason is probably because most women are not interested in such a career & those that are, are probably lesbians such as Tracy Jarman, chief of the San Diego Fire Department;http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=356. another thing to remember about the military is you are suppose to conform. You should not expect to be treated like an individual. To make women conform in a military enviroment is to musculate them or you try to change the men to make them more sensitive - feminize them - or you try to make both into some androgynous type of creature.

As for reports glorifying the current role of women in the US military, they are mostly bullsh*t. Like the Jessica Lynch episode, were a young female soldier was wounded while driving a truck in Iraq. The Pentagon fabricated a story about how Pvt Lynch picked up a gun & fired at the iRaqis in combat. It was a lie, to promote the idea of women in combat & to applease feminists who needed a female war hero. It was a lie - Pvt Lynch herself said it didn't happen - but she was still awarded the Bronz Star..



The requirements for women are not as strenuous as for men. This is to help woman attain the same results as men. Allowing women into combat not only endangers the lives of women soldiers, but also the lives of men who have to rely on them. The choice as to whether women should be allowed in combat should not be seen as an individual choice.


I served on 2 combat ships before women were allowed to serve on them, so I have no firsthand experince of serving with women. But several of my fellow sailors did, & none of them were impress by the work ethic or stamina of female sailors. One of the biggest complaints was that most female enlisted sailors would feign illness or discomfort when having their period, to the point of being unable to work 5 days a month. They could never be called on it, because that would sexist.

About the only argument I heard in favor of women onboard ships was the sex angle. But even ships that had female sailors there was a ratio of 8 or 9 men for every woman so most male sailors had the disadvantage of female sailors who didn't carry their own weight, without the advantage of sex while at sea.

Actually, sexual relations were/are forbidden onboard ship but it still goes on & it was not unusual for many female sailors to return from long cruises pregnant - I think 25% was average in the 80s. But these were the enlisted female sailors. The female officers & NCOs generally did'nt care for sex - with men that is.:rolleyes:

On the subject of female menstruation cycles:

What you don't seem to understand is that women in the US military will use it as an excuse. To get out of work. For doing a job poorly. Because they can.;)


Another reason women shouldn't be in combat is rape. Whether or not the enemy would do it, the fear of being raped or gang-raped would undermine the performance of female soldiers, possible causing them to desert in the heat of battle.


Having had some experience in this matter I say women have no business in the military unless it is in seperate corps. This was the reality more then 30-years ago with WAVES & WACS. Women soldiers & sailors were in seperate units that provided support. Then they started integrating women into Armed Forces but with restrictions on ratings the could hold. The feminists in the military have been pushing for equal results but without regard to abililty or experience. Physical ability is important in the advancement of male servicement. Regardless of the mental level of the individual's rating he needs to prove himself physically & in the enlisted ranks there is a great deal of physical labor involved daily activities for seaman & privates, grunt work. I don't know how many unreps I saw with the male sailors doing the heavy lifting & the female sailors standing off to the side trying to look busy. Women soldiers & sailors just don't go through the same experiences. They don't earn promotions but are advanced on the basis of maintaining equality. Some advocates seem to think female servicemembers should just do mental tasks & leave the grunt work to the men. And then there is the matter of close living spaces & all the problems that entails. Some feminists like to claim that the majority of female servicemembers are sexual assaulted during their service but if that was true why would any reenlist? But basically if a feamle servicemember claims sexual harassment the accused has to prove his innocence. And they are not suited to actual combat situations, for example Jessica Lynch who was injured when she wreck her convoy truck & was taken prisoner but the Pentagon made a story about her being a war hero.

Women, in spite of the drive for equality, make up only about 1/7 or 1/6 of all members of the US Armed Forces. In the military everyone is suppose to conform - individuality is not an option (at least for men) - but special accomondations have to be made to allow women to succeed & some of those accomondations includes lowering standards for everyone, least the special allowances made for women in the military be even more glaring then they already are.

One more problem with women in the military is miscegenation. The first time I saw White women with Negro men on a widespread basis was in the military. The US Armed Forces have officially pursued a policy of total racial integration for 60-years & that enviroment resulted in common numbers of Negro male - White female couples at least a generation before it started to become noticeable in civilian society.

The US Armed Forces integration policy is maintained by force - it is simply a matter of adminstrative or judicial action against anyone not maintaining it. I knew a Navy Lt. who had just reenlisted who was force to resigned his commission because he blurted out the phrase "I hope he knocks that n*gger out" while watching a boxing match between a White Boxer & a Negro boxer being shown on the ship TV system. An unblemished career over in a heartbeat.

In spite of maintaining these anomologies of racial equality/integration for 60-years & of gender equality for 30+-years they still need to be maintained by leagl force because both are unnatural & are an added burden to maintaining a defence force. It is much more simpler to mode men in to a fighting unit then men & women, and also easier to form the commaradity & trust among men of similar racial background neccessary for a trustworthy fighting unit.

This comment was in response to someone (;)) posting "historical examples" of female warriors:


I couldn't help but notice that all the examples you posted of women fighting as soldiers... they were defeated in the end by the Romans. Maybe women in the combat ranks was a sign of desperation. In any case if women were any good at combat then why is it generally universally frowned on by all societies (not counting the extinct ones ;))? You can't blame Christianity because this predates the rise of the Abrahamic religions & applies to most civilizations that have ever existed, including the Chinese, Mongols, Indians, Amerindians - yes you posted the example of the Plain Indians but their women apparently were cooks & nursemaids not warriors. The fact that women in the military has been nearly universally rejected through time should tell us that it just isn't pratical. The only reason it is currently an issue is because of the Marxist/Feminist ideology that is so pervasive in & is the root cause of what is wrong with the West. Women are not in the military because they make good soldiers but because of political ideology about equality. Men get to fight & are rewarded medals & get to become generals & admirals, shouldn't women get the same opportunities ? :oanieyes

Btw, in the US all men are required to register with Selective Service within 30-days of their 18th birthday. It's the law but the toughest penalty (currently) for not doing so is a loss of benefits such as not being able to get student loans, being disqualified from getting government jobs etc.... Women are not require to register. Many women think it should be a right (for women) to join the military & participate in combat (regardless if that means putting the lives of their male comrades in greater danger) but when it comes to making it a legal obligation no thanks! They're girls & besides they don't want that much equality.:blueroll:

I'd like to point out that the special forces are still off limits to females. Not only are the Seals, Rangers etc.. off limits to females but you would be hard pressed to fine any non-Whites within their either, they are basically the domains of White males. Ditto for the silent service, e.g. the submarine fleet where service is voluntary for male sailors - virtually all-White during my time & still off limits to women sailors.

[Arrow Cross]

Nice to have some insider views. But let us also take into account the notion of segregated units, in which the inequality of raw physical force would not cause logistical problems.

Besides the obvious advance of technology with less and less reliance on strength.

[Æmeric]

Nice to have some insider views. But let us also take into account the notion of segregated units, in which the inequality of raw physical force would not cause logistical problems.

As long as you have segregated units there will be the urge by some social reformer to integrate the forces by becoming either racially neutral, like President Truman after WWII, or gender neutral which was done gradually.

One problem with female sailors before they were allowed on combat ships is that they were disproportionately assigned to shore duty. (Most ships were combat vessels.) This put male sailors at a disadvantage, especially those who made the Navy a career & had families, who might want to do a tour of duty at a shore command. Reserving administrative duties for females would give them a disproportionate advantage when it comes to staff experience. A career officer who wants to advance to flag officer realistically needs combatant experience or at least experience in the field in peace time, and addition to on the staffs of various commands. The only segment of the military were women could serve without interfering with the duties & career paths of male servicemen would be in the medical corps.

[Psychonaut]

Nice to have some insider views. But let us also take into account the notion of segregated units, in which the inequality of raw physical force would not cause logistical problems.

Besides the obvious advance of technology with less and less reliance on strength.

The benefits of technology really only apply to the Air Force and Navy. In the Army and Marine Corps, most of what we do is, and will be for a long time, a very very physical job. Most of the combat that our troops have been involved in in the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns has been small arms fire. Survival in small arms fights is largely determined by a unit's ability to move quickly as a single cohesive unit. Adding women into the mix of a male combat team will slow things down and get people killed. Women are just not capable of attaining the same levels of speed and athleticism that men are. This is a very important thing when you are carrying upwards of 80lbs. of gear, are being shot at and have to take cover as fast as is humanly possible.

You mention the possibility of segregated units. In a domestic support situation, that may be fine, but if you were thinking about female combat teams, I don't agree at all. An all female combat team would simply be slower, weaker, and less resilient than a male team. The military's function is not to be an equal opportunity employer, but to be the most effective fighting tool that it can be. Bringing females into combat reduces the efficacy of the military and that is why the U.S., thankfully, does not allow them in combat units.

[Fortis in Arduis]

Are there any advantages from having women in the military?

An example would be Israel where those extra women give an advantage in purely in terms of the numbers if nothing else.

[Arrow Cross]

Are there any advantages from having women in the military?
Of course. Just as much as having competent people in general, in military positions, if they can do the job well. Naturally, there'd be less females in more strength-oriented fields, but with those who can pass the single standard that should be in effect instead of lowering it for them... I don't see the problem. Especially in a population of hundreds of millions, which is represented in about 50% by women, there will always be special / deviant individuals who'd be both able and willing.

I frequently bring up the Scythian case, whose culture was heavily militarized and included combat training for every single individual - according to historians, the requirement of marriage for a woman at a point was bringing the head of an enemy to her would-be-husband. :D
Either way, their horseback-archer civilization persisted for about half a millenia - quite a feat in the antiquity.

So I'm with the first option here, though I certainly don't approve of lowering the standards for women's sake, as much as I don't approve of excluding them all based on gender. I'd also support a very heavy emphasis on physical education in schools - for both genders -, including pre-military training in the laters years of secondary school and college, to keep the entirely of the population at least able to defend their nation if an invasion arises.
Even if you disagree with sending women to the deserts of a foreign continent, you can't possibly object to them defending their homes... in an organized way.

P.s.: I see the entirety of our "female majority" here is too busy making Christmas cookies now to post on their own military thread. :D

[Absinthe]

I wouldn't join the military.

Not because I am afraid, but simply because it's not my talent. How else to phrase it? I can use my brains to do a lot of things well, military combat is not one of them.

Other women might be better at this, however. I have a friend (coincidentally? -a lesbian :p) who's been into this thing from a very young age.

She'd be playing with knives, trained in various martial arts (Muay Thai included -one of the bloodiest sports), weight-lifting and all that.

I've seen her getting into a fight in the street and beating up a man so badly :D, that I even felt sorry for him regardless the fact that he was a potential rapist. Poor bastard didn't see it coming :lol:

That been said, I think *she* would be a major asset to the army :D She would be more capable than most men, in fact, she's a killing machine.

Other women ...
-most women, do not have anything significant to offer to the army. In administrative positions, maybe. It would be just like any other white-collar job.

But in the end, I don't see the need of occupying women in the army, when there's a vast need for mothers, out there.

[Æmeric]

Are there any advantages from having women in the military?No.


An example would be Israel where those extra women give an advantage in purely in terms of the numbers if nothing else.


Israel is in a difficult position militarily. But having women in the IDF - there is a draft in Israel, women included - doesn't have so much to do with Israel's success in it's continue existance as the military, financial & diplomatic support of the US. Orthodox Jews btw, male & female, are excluded from military service in Israel.

Back when Israel was created, it was led by very leftwinged marxist Jews. That explains this radical equality in drafting females as well as males.

[Aemma]

P.s.: I see the entirety of our "female majority" here is too busy making Christmas cookies now to post on their own military thread.

Oh dear me, AC. You slay me. :p I should be baking cookies right now but am not eh? :D

Ya sure women should be in the military but as for being in active combat, I really don't know. I'd have fought tooth and nail that women have the right to be there as much as men blah blah blah when I was younger. But I like what Æmeric said
Women are not in the military because they make good soldiers but because of political ideology about equality. and I think that this is more reality than not. But having said that I would say it would entirely depend on a woman's ability--actually any human being's ability, let's take gender out of the equation altogether for a minute-- to begin with. As Absinthe reminds us, there are some men that can't make the grade either.

I appreciate the comments from the military male members here precisely because I have no idea how men feel about such things. I've often heard that women 'drag' men down in that men feel a sense of added responsibility towards a female member. I think it may be an issue of lingering chivalry perhaps or seeing one's wife or gf or mother or sister in every female. I really don't know.

Anyway, just a few thoughts for now (before I start baking cookies :D--oh how I love to rib you! :p)

Cheers!...Aemma

[Arrow Cross]

Oh dear me, AC. You slay me. :p I should be baking cookies right now but am not eh? :D
Note the kitchen-reference in the third option... and note the place of my vote. But it's likewise good to tease ya.

As for Israel and North Korea, where women are conscripted... they really don't have the numbers to be picky, and given proper training, they're almost as good as average male soldiers in a defensive war that both countries are focused on.

One should remember how close both states were to annihilation at a point of their history.

[GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS]

I think the answers are poorly made -- I don't think they belong in the army, but I don't think they should back to any kitchen. There's loads of jobs for them, just not in the military.

There weren't any women in the SS, that's fine by me. This is, however, just a sum of my opinions.

[Arrow Cross]

It's not my problem if you can't understand a friendly little sarcasm on stereotypical conservativism.

As for the S.S.: http://www.ww2f.com/wwii-general/9950-ss-women.html

More on the topic here: http://en.allexperts.com/q/20th-Century-History-3242/German-women-during-Nazi.htm

[Arrow Cross]

http://www.germaniainternational.com/images/silhonclasswomenaux03.jpg

http://www.germaniainternational.com/ss28.html

[Oresai]

There have been instances of women warriors in history..notably among the Celts...but these haven`t been common, and these women (Celtic society aside) were usually encouraged to NOT marry and raise a family UNLESS they gave up fighting first.
Nowadays?
Given physical fitness levels of todays women, I don`t see why not. Of course there are always going to be limitations, but I see what the Forces in the UK are accepting nowadays, with scant regard to fitness levels, and have personally seen women in the forces with greater physical endurance and fitness levels of men in the same area. ;)
So I would say it depends on individual dedication to the career, regardless of sex.
But...I do not think married women, or mothers, should be in the Forces simply because I know that raising a family is a full time task and needs to have commitment that can`t be given by any woman who also has a full time career outside the home.
And I speak from personal experience there. ;)

I believe that in a fighting scenario, a woman can and often will be, more vicious, more tenacious and as cold blooded as any man. Give her a cause to fight...for her family, for her country...and she will give it all she has.
I also believe that she has to work much harder than most men (the previous examples excepted) to keep the level of physical fitness and prowess at the standard needed to be a successful soldier. If she chooses that, and can commit to it, fine. :)
The Forces are different now...in times past there was every chance you would get up close and personal with your enemy. Now, with military advancements in warfare technology the chances you can even see who you`re shooting at is very much less. So surely the pertinent ability must be who can master operating the technology well?

I do think it`s a mistake to presume that in a warfare situation women work solely on an emotional level. Many women I know can and will be as objectional, and as emotionally controlled, as any man.
I myself have been in more than one situation in which I need a clear, cold head and kept it so, in a crisis situation. :)
Isn`t it a fact that, so far in the Iraq war, there have been instances of so called `friendly fire` by trigger happy soldiers living on adrenalin but lacking the discipline and hard experience that lets them keep a clear head in a furiously fast paced fight situation?
I mean no disrespect to any soldier, folks should know by now I fully support the war and in fact given the chance would be `fiercer` than the events happening right now...
We have a young family friend in the Royal Air Force stationed in Iraq at the moment. It`s his second tour over there, and he`s also served in Afghanistan. He loves the Forces, but will quite freely tell it like it is. There are British women over there, serving mostly in non combative situations, and they are treated, and are seen as no different to, the men. :)

To sum ( yup, I rattle on faaaar too long, sorry :p )
Yes, I think women should be in the military if that is what they choose, if they give up on a family whilst they serve, and if they can prove they can do the tasks given them.
When I left school I applied to join the Women`s Royal Navy here in Scotland. But back then they had height restrictions and I was told even though I was qualified enough, I was, at five foot, too short. :(
I think I`d have been damn fine, in the military. :D
Instead, I had a family and raised them, and worked, and still do work, and have accomplished much in different ways.

If you go far enough back in human history, you`ll find women have always fought, to defend their families, their territory, and their lives. Then , they had no choice. Now, they do. No big deal. :)

[GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS]

It's not my problem if you can't understand a friendly little sarcasm on stereotypical conservativism.

As for the S.S.: http://www.ww2f.com/wwii-general/9950-ss-women.html

More on the topic here: http://en.allexperts.com/q/20th-Century-History-3242/German-women-during-Nazi.htm

Obviously, we were talking of the military. So naturally I meant Waffen-SS.

I don't consider a woman serving food at a concentration camp a soldier.

[Psychonaut]

Given physical fitness levels of todays women, I don`t see why not...I believe that in a fighting scenario, a woman can and often will be, more vicious, more tenacious and as cold blooded as any man...
Now, with military advancements in warfare technology the chances you can even see who you`re shooting at is very much less. So surely the pertinent ability must be who can master operating the technology well?

Most combat is still done by the infantry or cavalry, which means small arms fire performed by a couple dozen troops at most.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the biggest thing that would worry me about going into combat with a woman would be her lack of ability to life heavy objects and lack of ability to sprint. It is not debatable that women are weaker and slower than men. This is why in pretty much every nation's military, the physical fitness standards are differentiated for genders. I would be just as loathe to go into combat with a woman as I would an old man. I've been stationed with four different units now and never have I seen a female soldier that, during the course of training, was able to pick me up and sprint. This is a fundamental skill. If one of your comrades is shot, it is your duty to pick his ass up and run like Hell until you reach safety. None of the women I've served with were nearly strong enough to pick up a male while both of them are wearing the required 60lbs. of combat gear. I've worked with women who are weightlifters, triathletes, etc. and none have been able to perform this basic combat skill, which is why, in the US Army, they'll never be sent to a combat unit.

[Oresai]

I see your point, and that`s why I stated they should be able to prove they can do the job required. However, here in Britain I`ve also seen the Forces take in and use men of appallingly low levels of fitness, with little improvement even after basic training. ;)
Perhaps then, there is room for women to be used in the military in those areas, not necessary catering or medic, which would be ideally suited for women`s particular skills and abilities? After all, wars aren`t all about combat. :)
Would you trust a woman to fly your plane? Navigate or pilot your battlecruiser?
:)

[Psychonaut]

I see your point, and that`s why I stated they should be able to prove they can do the job required. However, here in Britain I`ve also seen the Forces take in and use men of appallingly low levels of fitness, with little improvement even after basic training. ;)

Well, I can only speak for the US Army, but I've certainly seen people get chaptered out of the Army for repeatedly failing to meet physical fitness standards. Most of them just get sent to fat camp for a while and are fine, but every once in a while someone has to get kicked out.

The most important thing in regards to the military (and I'm specifically not talking about Special Forces or Seals here), is that most of what we do is based on the abilities of slightly above average individuals, not super-humans. Granted, there are probably a handful of women out there who could pick up me, 60 lbs. of their gear, 60 lbs. of my gear, both of our weapons and break out into a dead sprint, but the fact that the vast majority of women are no where near capable of that is, in my eyes, reason enough to exclude them from combat.



Would you trust a woman to fly your plane? Navigate or pilot your battlecruiser?

Both of these have specific gender related problems. I'm sure that Æmeric could speak better than I about what goes on aboard a ship. As for pilots, I'd certainly so "no" to female fighter pilots or females being aboard any vehicle that crosses over or through a combat zone. We've been very fortunate in the last few decades but in WWI, WWII, Vietnam and Korea we had massive numbers planes go down behind enemy lines. My uncle (http://www.af.mil/bios/bio.asp?bioID=7103) was shot down twice behind enemy lines during WWII. This is not only ground combat and movement, but possibly the most extreme sort that any troop can face.

[TheGreatest]

Well, I can only speak for the US Army, but I've certainly seen people get chaptered out of the Army for repeatedly failing to meet physical fitness standards. Most of them just get sent to fat camp for a while and are fine, but every once in a while someone has to get kicked out.

The most important thing in regards to the military (and I'm specifically not talking about Special Forces or Seals here), is that most of what we do is based on the abilities of slightly above average individuals, not super-humans. Granted, there are probably a handful of women out there who could pick up me, 60 lbs. of their gear, 60 lbs. of my gear, both of our weapons and break out into a dead sprint, but the fact that the vast majority of women are no where near capable of that is, in my eyes, reason enough to exclude them from combat.



Both of these have specific gender related problems. I'm sure that Æmeric could speak better than I about what goes on aboard a ship. As for pilots, I'd certainly so "no" to female fighter pilots or females being aboard any vehicle that crosses over or through a combat zone. We've been very fortunate in the last few decades but in WWI, WWII, Vietnam and Korea we had massive numbers planes go down behind enemy lines. My uncle (http://www.af.mil/bios/bio.asp?bioID=7103) was shot down twice behind enemy lines during WWII. This is not only ground combat and movement, but possibly the most extreme sort that any troop can face.


I believe there were cases in WW2, of American pilots being lynched by Germans. I'm sure enough the foreign government will treat them fine, but it always civilians and milita (not soldiers!) who find pilots.


If a female pilot was forced to bail out of her aircraft in a remote part of Afghanistan or even Iran, she most likely would be raped and stoned, or kidnapped and forced to become a concubine wife to a rich warlord.

[Æmeric]

I'm sure that Æmeric could speak better than I about what goes on aboard a ship.

In the 80s, on board non-combat ships, such as supply ships, repair ships & refueling ships, female sailors were allowed to serve. They would generally make up between 10% to 20% at most of the crew. Having male & female in tight quarters on long cruises makes for a lot of distractions. There is competition over females & the female sailors had a pregnancy rate of over 25%. It is against Navy regulations to have sex onboard ships or to fraternize between the ranks but obviously those rules were ignored which contributes to an overall lack of discipline. And like rules in regard to race, in gender relations females got away with a lot more then male crew members, otherwise they could claim sexual harrassment or discrimination.

Male & female sailors are suppose to have seperate berthing areas. But during the George H.W. Bush administration, under Secretary of Defense Cheney, the Navy experimented with having male & female sailors in recrujit training live together, supposedly to help improve the graduation rates of the female recruits but it was a disaster. They needed more supervision, alloting time for the use of the shower & head facilities were a headache - the female recruits always took longer - they did it once & then went back to seperate companies & barracks for males & females.

One reason they have never integrated submarine crews is because of the lack of privacy & the impossibility of having seperate crew quarters for females that would be private from the males. And when privacy is an issue, it is the privacy of females that is a concern, so much for the argument "gender doesn't matter".

Before someone brings up some nonsense like the Demi Moore film, "GI Jane", remember that is a scripted fantasy & not real life.

[Atlas]

Back to the kitchen bitch ? that's pretty rude, I've been a soldier for several months and I've had to deal with some women, you know, the masculine obnoxious/dykes type, definitely not my kind of girls but during the 2 months of training, they have been doing exactly the same thing as us men and they were not dumb or physically retarded so I'd say why not ?

[GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS]

Though, there's not much difference between French men and women.

[Psychonaut]

Though, there's not much difference between French men and women.

*loads a magazine into his M16*

What? ;)

[Loki]

Though, there's not much difference between French men and women.

I think French women are gorgeous and sophisticated. ;)

[Arrow Cross]

I think French women are gorgeous and sophisticated. ;)
Not the Communist Resistance. :p
Now lissin vehy cehfuly. Ai shel aunly link dis once.

HNStcseZMw0

[Silverfern]

I support women in the military. I served 13 years as an officer.

[Solwyn]

I did it. My father snuck away from his ship as they were getting ready to sail to the Persian Gulf in 90 so that he could watch me graduate. If I can get the grad picture from my mother, I'll post it. Yes, the days when I had a tiny waist.....:D

My experience was positive but overall, it wasn't for me. When I told my superiors that I wanted to put in my release because I was thinking of having a family, there was no grief at all because their general attitude was that I should have been home pushing out the puppies anyway.

What I learned in that time was that I had to do it right every time and I had to do it better than the men, because there was a fleet full of Old Boys looking down their noses at me, just itching for me to fail, so they could thump their chests some more and carry on about how people like me shouldn't be playing in their sandbox. I've heard every period joke, every crack about blonde hair, boobs, butts, and whatever else you can throw at me - I got an earful of it all.

There were good things that came out of it. I learned to become hyper-organized, something I never was beforehand. I learned how to take care of myself in many different situations that I never would have experienced as a civilian. For the time that I was in, I was also able to afford to take lifestyle courses that I was interested in (wine tasting, Scandinavian cooking, French pastry making, things like this) so I became more well-rounded socially at a young age.

Without going into personal details of travels, etc., my experience was positive overall, although as I said, not the career/lifestyle for me. I wouldn't re-enlist but I wouldn't discourage any young woman from joining herself:D

[Birka]

Not in combat roles.

[The Lawspeaker]

As I am lazy and tired I too will post a re-post my previous comment (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=92733&page=9) (slightly altered):


Women in the Armed Forces ? Rather not. Perhaps only in the non-combat branches or in the reserves. I do think that women should undergo military training though, along with the men. Let's say the women for 6 months plus 12 months of non-military service and 18 months military service for men.

The women could be trained to fire weapons in self defence, could be trained as medics, administrators, liaison officers and such and in case a war breaks out they will be put to good use and positioned FAR behind the lines. Because.. well what if a woman get's captured? She'll be violated mercilessly. Assuming that we will not fight European troops but that people like Russians or Muslims are still a possibility: we all know what they were like to women.

If a war would seem to break out I will make sure that my girl is on a ferry to Britain or even in the U.S before the enemy get's here.

[Sol Invictus]

Women can pull the trigger just as fast as any other man out there. Physically not equal, but with the technology they have now-adays there's no real need to run 15 kilometers full ruck in the desert. Unless your mechanized shit ran out of gas, of course.

Do I think women should be joining the army of today? Are you fucking insane? I don't think anyone should be joining the army because the army doesn't belong to us anymore. It's been hijacked by foreign interests and is being used for domestic take-over.

If you join the army, particularily the U.S army as an infanteer, you can bet your ass you'll be employed to be used against your neighbours in the event of civil unrest (domestic unrest will happen, rightfully so), for speaking out and to bring in martial law. If you don't mind shooting your own people, kicking down their doors and confiscating their guns then go for it.

[Psychonaut]

Women can pull the trigger just as fast as any other man out there. Physically not equal, but with the technology they have now-adays there's no real need to run 15 kilometers full ruck in the desert. Unless your mechanized shit ran out of gas, of course.

One question: have you ever tried to drag an unconscious (or injured) person out of a vehicle while both of you are wearing body armor and you're taking fire? A lot of our training involves exactly these types of scenarios, since it's one of the most common types of combat injuries. This is something that I've never seen a single female do successfully or in anything close to combat speed, period.

[Sol Invictus]

One question: have you ever tried to drag an unconscious (or injured) person out of a vehicle while both of you are wearing body armor and you're taking fire? A lot of our training involves exactly these types of scenarios, since it's one of the most common types of combat injuries. This is something that I've never seen a single female do successfully or in anything close to combat speed, period.

I never said women can perform physically equal to men, and I know what kind of training you guys do so I would never ever say that a woman can perform equally when it comes to physical feats. During those types of scenarios, a woman can become just as important laying down cover fire while the men go into situations that require physical work that women can't do. If only a woman is available at the moment to perform this task, that woman may suprise us in a real life scenario when actual lives are in danger and the adrenaline kicks in.

[Psychonaut]

I never said women can perform physically equal to men, and I know what kind of training you guys do so I would never ever say that a woman can perform equally when it comes to physical feats. During those types of scenarios, a woman can become just as important laying down cover fire while the men go into situations that require physical work that women can't do. If only a woman is available at the moment to perform this task, that woman may suprise us in a real life scenario when actual lives are in danger and the adrenaline kicks in.

But why even add a member to your team who is unable to perform so basic a task. Every member of a squad is required, in theory, to be able to perform every squad function. Having members who are only able to to A and B, but not C are simply lacking as soldiers.

[Sol Invictus]

But why even add a member to your team who is unable to perform so basic a task. Every member of a squad is required, in theory, to be able to perform every squad function. Having members who are only able to to A and B, but not C are simply lacking as soldiers.

Granted. Though is it a requirement that every single man in uniform is to perform these tasks? It's a sincere question, because not all men are the same strength, and I doubt every single man in every single squad was able to perform that sort of task equally, whether it's by nerves or strength, I still doubt it. I haven't heard of any requirements in the recruitment program that says you are required to drag a 200 lb. man out of a burning vehicle while under fire.

That's my understanding of a team , that everyone do their part together to reach a certain goal. If one is lacking in something, you do everything in your power to pick up the slack. If one woman can't perform the task, then you throw in two women. Afterall, we're talking about the Regulars right now. I would understand it if we were talking about Navy SEALS, Deltas, or SAS, which alot of the time requires alot of individual prowess in order to make the grade.

[Revenant]

I think it depends which role. There's plenty of evidence that suggests women make great Air Force pilots. There's also plenty of evidence they should be kept out of the regular Army. The head of the ADF said fairly recently that there was no place for affirmative action in the ADF which upset the PC crowd quite alot. I think this is such a issue because they're having (until recently) problems filling quotas. Everyone I know that's ex ADF, Army and Navy is against it, my grandfather who was a WW2 vet was the most staunchest that way. He saw what the Japs did to female POWs.

Maybe having parts of the regular Army segregated along gender lines, like Israel has is the way to go. I've no idea how well that works though.

[Psychonaut]

Granted. Though is it a requirement that every single man in uniform is to perform these tasks? It's a sincere question, because not all men are the same strength, and I doubt every single man in every single squad was able to perform that sort of task equally, whether it's by nerves or strength, I still doubt it. I haven't heard of any requirements in the recruitment program that says you are required to drag a 200 lb. man out of a burning vehicle while under fire.

The way our teams work is something like this: there are a set number of roles that are distributed throughout the team, including the team leader, medic, grenadier, machine gunner, etc. While there is one person in the team who specializes in each role, all members are required to be trained in the performance of each. The problem is that the base level of strength required for most of these jobs requires a male frame. Things like dragging comrades, kicking in doors, lugging saw machine guns, etc. are within the range of the average male, but not within the range of even most exceptional females. These are not entry requirements into the Army, but are requirements that are dictated by each individual squad, platoon or company based on their equipment, mission and composition.

[Jamt]

One question: have you ever tried to drag an unconscious (or injured) person out of a vehicle while both of you are wearing body armor and you're taking fire? A lot of our training involves exactly these types of scenarios, since it's one of the most common types of combat injuries. This is something that I've never seen a single female do successfully or in anything close to combat speed, period.


Have you done that?
Women in small number can help sometime.

[Sol Invictus]

The way our teams work is something like this: there are a set number of roles that are distributed throughout the team, including the team leader, medic, grenadier, machine gunner, etc. While there is one person in the team who specializes in each role, all members are required to be trained in the performance of each. The problem is that the base level of strength required for most of these jobs requires a male frame. Things like dragging comrades, kicking in doors, lugging saw machine guns, etc. are within the range of the average male, but not within the range of even most exceptional females. These are not entry requirements into the Army, but are requirements that are dictated by each individual squad, platoon or company based on their equipment, mission and composition.

I gotcha. I just don't see any problem with women taking on support roles when you have to kick in a door, or provide covering fire for soldiers dragging wounded or dead comrades out of a hot zone. Like you said yourself, your squadmates each have different roles that Infantrymen take on in combat situations.

Any squad leader with half a brain, wouldn't send in a soldier with a saw or M-14 slung around his shoulder to pick up a fallen soldiers on the field if he can avoid it. I would have him take up a position where he can use his equipment to it's most combat effectiveness and send in people who are more able to do what's necessary to get the job done. In most cases, a medic.

Unless you guys rotate your equipment around and switch up responsibilities in the field, I don't understand why a woman with an M-16 on your team who's watching your back is any less effective than a man with an M-16 watching your back. If I understand correctly, you're all suppose to be trained in eachother's roles in the event that the person who specializes in a certain role can no longer perform his task, and requires a comrade to pick up the slack.

But does that mean someone who is taking up the responsibility of a medic in replacement of the original one is going to perform equally well when he/she is called upon to close up a neck-wound and save someone's life?

I appreciate where you are coming from, but as far as I can tell, the U.S army has been doing exceptionally well ever since women were permitted to serve. For better or for worse, I don't know, but I don't know of very many times where a squadmate's life was in jeopardy because a woman doesn't do as well as a man does.

If someone does something to the best of their ability and couldn't hack it, then someone else who could do better would be assigned to do it in their stead. Working together.

[Sol Invictus]

Have you done that?
Women in small number can help sometime.

Actually, I'd bet my life that he has. Not that I am hitting on him, but he is pretty well built, so I wouldn't doubt his combat ability at all.

Ok, maybe I am hitting on him.

[Psychonaut]

VA, the problem with strictly assigned squad positions dependent on gender is that in the event that one single person gets shot, several people usually shift roles and must be able to do so at the drop of a hat. It's simply not good enough to have a soldier that isn't physically capable of doing what may be required of them.

[Jamt]

[QUOTE=Veritas Aequitas;30173]Actually, I'd bet my life that he has. Not that I am hitting on him, but he is pretty well built, so I wouldn't doubt his combat ability at all.

Ok, maybe I am hitting on him.[/QUO

[SPQR]

In my three years in the Army, I've only run across two or three females that could consistently pick up the limp body of a male solder outfitted in all of their gear and run with him. If you are too physically weak to do this, then you have no business being a soldier, period.

Perfect way to say it. So I don't support them, unless they are physically capable and really dedicated.

[Vargtand]

Do I even need to reply? Of course I oppose it, it is a mockery to all my forefathers and a mockery towards me to see the army being turned into some bloody career path for women who want something they can boast with.. to find them self’s etc.. bah..

[Heimmacht]

I think the prime job of a woman is to parent her children, we (in that same respect) white women are too valuable to get ourselfs killed without having any offspring.

(And raising them WELL! I might add)

[Tom Cat]

I fully support women in non-combat military units. But I would feel much more secure sharing a front-line foxhole with another masculine male grunt rather than I petite little sweetie.

I served in the 2/4th Field Artillery of the U.S.Army. The 9th Signal Battalion was composed entirely of women. They were constantly violating regs regarding male visitors after hours... No, I wasn't one of those males, darn it. ;)

I feel very protective towards women in general. It would be horrible enough to watch one of my male buddies writhing around with parts of him blown away, let alone a female.

[mymy]

I voted for last one... I can hardly imagine myself in military :)

[Stars Down To Earth]

I support women in the military, to a certain degree. Women are great as pilots and snipers, that's been proved by history. But no, I'd rather not see women as front-line soldiers.

The Soviet Union used lots of women in their army, mostly as snipers. They really mobilized their whole population against the Nazis, and it worked out great. (The Nazis never used female soldiers. It's weird to think of the Nazis as squeamish and old-fashioned, but in many ways, they actually were) The Russian girl soldiers were real killers, just like the men.

But that was the Soviet Union. If the current US did the same, most of these troops would be buzz-cut Hillarys and spoiled lesbians.

[Black Turlogh]

Are there any advantages from having women in the military?

An example would be Israel where those extra women give an advantage in purely in terms of the numbers if nothing else.

I wonder if it could be argued that men are less likely to shoot a woman than they would be to shoot a man. I imagine I'd think twice about it.

[Wanderlust]

I don't support them, but I tolerate them.

I can't imagine myself in the military either.More precisely concerning women in Greek army: it depends on how you see life,if it bothers you to change location every four years maximum,how you cope with possible abuse of power from your phallocrat superior,deal with very strong political environment and other insignificant details such us giving report for every step you take,inability to visit Turkey (I don't give a s*it about that but I'm just saying).
I don't blame women who chose to devote their life in the army but it's not for everyone.

[Lahtari]

Though, there's not much difference between French men and women.

True, a woman can hoist a white flag just as any man. :D ;)

[Barreldriver]

I'm of a state of mind where if women want to fight they need to do the same in the APFT as the men, prior to enrolling in ROTC I studied the APFT guidelines and the women have much easier strength/speed minimum standards, as such I say keep the women in support roles, equally useful, but if I'm going to be leading a unit I'd want those with me to have the same qualification standards, I can only hope that women do not get those combat positions, I'd hate to be killed because of it.

[Adalwolf]

Women have no place in the military besides maybe some kind of receptionist job. They cannot carry the physical load for most combat situations and that makes it dangerous when a fellow soldier is in need. They would also be a distraction sexually, which can lead to numerous problems or just general inefficiency.

[Boudica]

They would also be a distraction sexually, which can lead to numerous problems or just general inefficiency.

Please, I am SO tired of you morons that act as if men are superior yet talk about them as if they are animals and can't control their urges..

[Adalwolf]

Don't worry, I always have a good time offending clueless feminists like yourself.

[Debaser11]

S4Fd49_A61A

[Beorn]

I still stand by the truth that British women are fucking hard as nails, and any army benefits from their presence.

In modern warfare, the onus seems not to be on so much the physical side, but more the mental AND physical, of which women of a certain breed have seemed to excel in.

Good luck to them, say I.

[Debaser11]

In battle, you're only as strong as your weakest link. Women are just physically weaker. That's not some insult toward women the way a man should feel insulted for being weak. It's just acknowledging her nature in relation to men. Why do women insist on trying to be men? Why can't they just be content with being women for once?

[Aces High]

People who say they would be a distraction to the males have obviousley never set eyes on the women in the British army :eek:.

They are fucking mingers and they are all....and i mean all Y front wearing lesbians.

They basicaly drive trucks,cook,and do the admisistrative stuff leaving the men free to do what the men in the army do...ie...skive..hide in the stores or MT lagar,hide in the NAAFI and basically try and keep out of the way of the senior NCO's all day.

[Adalwolf]

Why can't they just be content with being women for once?

Because we live in a society which is avidly preaching ''gender equality''.

[Adalwolf]

People who say they would be a distraction to the males have obviousley never set eyes on the women in the British army :eek:.


That may be so in a lot of cases, but when sexual frustration is rearing its ugly head, it can be akin to wearing beer goggles...

[Debaser11]

There is bound to be sexual tension regardless of how homely we all know British women are. (Just kidding, but I couldn't resist.) At any rate, why take a chance of having such sexual tension come up when it's one headache that can easily be avoided? The military is a serious game. It's not a self-esteem program for bulldykes or even queers. (Yes, I'm also against openly gay men serving in the military.)

[Beorn]

I still reckon American men are in for a shock.

[Adalwolf]

This is common sense to us, but to liberals, we're a bunch of unfair misogynists desperately attempting to subdue the female ''liberation'' movement. lol

[Debaser11]

Liberals love their langauge manipulation. It's all they have.

[Boudica]

Don't worry, I always have a good time offending clueless feminists like yourself.

Yes dick-weed, I am a feminist because I find your statement to be idiotic and self contradicting.

[Arne]

Women aren´t born for "Millitary"
Why ?
In the Evolution females were always protected.
But today we let them die for a Country we´re not so quite convinced of ?
Is this the Future or Perdition ?

This all goes out from Middle Eastern Countries..like Jewrael.

[Boudica]

I would prefer it if women were not in the military, but it is legal for them to be. If these women choose to put their ass's on the line for their country then I think that they should be supported and respected no matter what sex they are because they are risking their lives for us.

[Arne]

I would prefer it if women were not in the military, but it is legal for them to be. If these women choose to put their ass's on the line for their country then I think that they should be supported and respected no matter what sex they are because they are risking their lives for us.

Horrrible Sick New World Ideas !!
Each part has its own place.


"I think they should be supported"
Lol that´s crazy, isn´t it ?
Is there a single Reason existing ?
Man can not give life.
That´s why it´s quite questionous to support them to go there !

[Peasant]

Women in the military? It worked for the Soviet Union.

[Adalwolf]

Women! Know your limits! :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjxY9rZwNGU

[Boudica]

Horrrible Sick New World Ideas !!
Each part has its own place.


Lol that´s crazy, isn´t it ?
Is there a single Reason existing ?
Man can not give life.
That´s why it´s quite questionous to support them to go there !


Shut the fuck up Celti, you pointless troll. How many god damn times do I have to tell you to stop using shitty internet translators in order to understand and speak english?
If you think that we should spit on anyone (even if they are women) that risk their lives and die to protect their country then you have "sick ideas"..

[Debaser11]

I would prefer it if women were not in the military, but it is legal for them to be.

The question was put to us whether or not we were for them being in the military, not for us to comment on the legality of them being the military.


If these women choose to put their ass's on the line for their country then I think that they should be supported and respected no matter what sex they are because they are risking their lives for us.

Does it not occur to you that the army is not supposed to be some collection of individuals thrown together, but rather, a cohesive fighting unit? One gender is going to be more cohesive than a mix. That's an inescapable truth! And if your unit is only as strong as its weakest link, why make your unit weaker and less cohesive by putting in women just to be politically correct? It seems like this is totally lost on you, but your putting your gender politics above the actual safety of people who are out there risking their lives. And that's why "oppressive" "bad" men from the past never wanted women. Not because they're just mean, but because it's less practical. And practicality in a life or death situation matters more to me than liberal ideas and it would to most people were these sorts of views actuality allowed to be aired in context within our mainstream media.

[Boudica]

The question was put to us whether or not we were for them being in the military, not for us to comment on the legality of them being the military.

Thank you for notifying me of this, I really do appreciate it, however I was commenting on the fact that it is legal for women to be in the military, which is not exactly irrelevant to this topic, I was stating a fact.




Does it not occur to you that the army is not supposed to be some collection of individuals thrown together, but rather, a cohesive fighting unit? One gender is going to be more cohesive than a mix. That's an escapable truth! And if your unit is only as strong as its weakest link, why make your unit weaker and less cohesive by putting in women just to be politically correct? It seems like this is totally lost on you, but your putting your gender politics above the actual safety of people who are out there risking their lives. And that's why "oppressive" "bad" men from the past never wanted women. Not because they're just mean, but because it's less practical. And practicality in a life or death situation matters more to me than liberal ideas and it would to most people were these sorts of views actuality allowed to be aired in context within our mainstream media.

Does it not occur to you that I never said any of this, and all I stated was a fact that it is legal for women to join the military and even though I don't think that they should be in the military I think that they should be respected because they are risking their lives for their country? And please, I'm pretty sure that there are women out there that are either equally as strong or stronger then some men and can physically out do them, although it is a norm for men to be stronger. If you deny that then you are living in denial. I never said I agreed with women being in the military, all I said was that they should be supported, so you might as well change the topic of your argument you have come forth with and change it around to a new one that is relevant to my point. I will find it very amusing when you say that no woman is physically stronger then any man and that we should hate women who die for their country.

[SwordoftheVistula]

Horrrible Sick New World Ideas

Aside from the muslim countries, the US is a 'laggard' in accepting women in the military


Please, I am SO tired of you morons that act as if men are superior yet talk about them as if they are animals and can't control their urges..

Well problems with both genders controlling their urges. It's one thing when it's a normal type job on a base in the US, but then overseas and on navy ships you basically have people living at work for months on end, problems are bound to result from having mixed genders in these situations.

[Debaser11]

**I didn't realize that my previous post went through, but this retooling bears repeating at any rate given that you want to trot out the lame line about some women being just as strong as some men. And no one is saying that women shouldn't be respected for their service. You want to bring up a tangental point because you have no real points relative to the actual question at hand.


I would prefer it if women were not in the military, but it is legal for them to be.

No one is debating about the legal status of women in the army as of the present day. The question was whether we supported such measures.


If these women choose to put their ass's on the line for their country then I think that they should be supported and respected no matter what sex they are because they are risking their lives for us.

Does it ever occur to you that the army is supposed to be a cohesive fighting unit for a reason? There are practical matters that make the difference between life and death when serving in the field. The more cohesive a unit is, the better the chance the soldiers make it out alive and accomplish their mission on behalf of the nation for which they're fighting. By nature, a mixed unit (and this applies to not only gender, but also race to lesser varying degrees) will be less cohesive and thus, less efficient even it's not immediately obvious. Again, such considerations can mean the difference between life and death. Why do you all those soldiers marching down the streets look the same? Why do the men all crop their hair the same? Because the generals are just "oppressive" men who aren't "tolerant"? Your liberal ideas about who should be able to serve within the army are not fair to them--the people actually risking their lives nor is it fair to their families. "A woman's choice" to be in the army is not fair to them either even if our government permits them to join and their heart is in the right place. We used to understand such simple and obvious matters once upon a time.

It's a disgrace that the army should be so politicized by such sanctimonious gender politics that none of us really believe in anyways--even in civilian life. Look at the Navy Seals--that's right, the people who got Bin Laden--the cream of the crop who truly can't afford to entertain any of these bleeding heart appeals about women and minority "equality" because of the intense nature of their missions. Nearly all white men. Sure, the military allows (race and gender) tokens into the military to keep liberal babies off of their backs, but when push comes to shove and lives and national security are *known* to *really* be at stake, who the knowledgeable generals actually select to carry out such intense missions is very telling despite the liberal lipservice we are given from politicians.

[Adalwolf]

I think that they should be respected because they are risking their lives for their country?

Quit twisting around the topic. This thread is about if they should be accepted to play roles in the army, not if they are to be respected...




And please, I'm pretty sure that there are women out there that are either equally as strong or stronger then some men and can physically out do them

Yawn.... That is an extremely weak argument to make considering the ratio of these supposed women would be like 1-2 percent; and even there, I am likely being too generous.


I never said I agreed with women being in the military, all I said was that they should be supported

Once again that is irrelevant to the topic.


and that we should hate women who die for their country.

No one here has even come close to expressing those sentiments. Now do yourself a favor and read Psychonauts posts at the beginning of this thread. Having served in the military, he is a reliable source. Quit acting like a childish feminist because you're fighting a losing battle.

[Boudica]

Do either of you remember/know what a vagina looks like? I highly doubt it. Although both of you express your hate for feminists quite frequently, you actually sound like them, but instead of hating men and bitching about them, you hate and bitch about women. Tell me, is it mommy issues or have both of you become angry after being rejected by women so many times? That will be all.

[Adalwolf]

Nice way to avoid the topic and resort to preposterous ad hominem attacks.

[Debaser11]

Do either of you remember/know what a vagina looks like? I highly doubt it.

You just can't stick to the argument, can you? You know your views have no weight to them so you've resorted to petty insults.


Although both of you express your hate for feminists quite frequently, you actually sound like them,

We sound nothing like them. If we sounded like them, you probably would not be throwing tawdry insults at us about "vaginas" or whatever else you think qualifies as some legitimate response because your delicate sensibilities have been shaken up by some honesty.


but instead of hating men and bitching about them, you hate and bitch about women.

No one is "bitching about women." We're simply pointing out how they are unfit for military service. Answering the question comprehensively in no uncertain terms is not us "bitching about women."


Tell me, is it mommy issues or have both of you become angry after being rejected by women so many times? That will be all.

Ah, back to the personal jabs because you can't debate the subject at hand intelligently. I'm embarassed for you.

[Peasant]

An Adalwolf Rep comment...

pfft. what because of that one sniper you read about.

WTF? Jump to conclusions. Theres atleast a few who acheived a high kill count to. :P

[Aces High]

Some of them had cast iron balls......metaphorically speaking of course.

[Arne]

Do either of you remember/know what a vagina looks like? I highly doubt it. Although both of you express your hate for feminists quite frequently, you actually sound like them, but instead of hating men and bitching about them, you hate and bitch about women. Tell me, is it mommy issues or have both of you become angry after being rejected by women so many times? That will be all.

Someone please have the mercy to ban this feminism-troll ! :coffee:
I can barely understand your American English.

[Blossom]

Women do a great job as nurses and doctors in Military services :) so I do support that idea. But maybe 'fighting' its more for the guys, at least I like to see things like that.

Well, maybe I'd also support air combat, ...for women, no idea thought. While its not a physically fight, you know.

[Barreldriver]

Well problems with both genders controlling their urges. It's one thing when it's a normal type job on a base in the US, but then overseas and on navy ships you basically have people living at work for months on end, problems are bound to result from having mixed genders in these situations.

Semen on deck! Oh wait Seamen! :D

For those stationed in SE Asia there are those prostitute things to vent with, though the likelihood of it being an actual female I'd bet is quite low. :D

Back on topic, I'm going to reiterate this:

Women who are currently in the military for fact have less strict physical fitness requirements and such, as a result their opportunities should reflect their limited standards.

[W. R.]

This thread needs moar lesbian cosplayers pictures of girls in uniform. Definitely.

Also I think that there must be jobs in the army that can be done by women as well (if not better) as by men.

If so, and if there are women who want to serve their country as soldiers, then give them the opportunity.


http://www.karjalainen.fi/karjalainen/Uutiset_maakunta/5018401.jpg

[Bridie]

I wonder if it could be argued that men are less likely to shoot a woman than they would be to shoot a man. I don't think so. :icon_wink:




I imagine I'd think twice about it.
Ah, single at the moment, hey BT? :D Don't worry, one day soon enough all you'll be able to imagine is shooting a woman. :wink


More seriously, I love the idea of women as paramedics in the armed forces, but don't agree with women being in any other role. Not even administrative.

[Laubach]

Well, I'm not a feminist, but I see no problems of women serving the armed forces. They can provide excellent services such as medical, nurses, and strategic and psychological. Women, in general, are calmer than men, more thorough,are interesting factors

[Heimmacht]

I know quite some millitary-women via the sport that I practice, one of them is an ex-bodybuilder (ex because she got in an accident and her leg muscle got damaged) despite that she still is terribly strong and will throw a full-grown man across her shoulder and walk around with him when it is needed. (I saw her do this while we were out drinking with the team ;) )

So on the question if women should be in the millitary I say yes and no, I know for a fact that not every woman is like her for example, but there are a few who will do well in it.

[Albion]

Would you trust a woman to fly your plane? Navigate or pilot your battlecruiser?
:)

No, no and no. :p


People who say they would be a distraction to the males have obviousley never set eyes on the women in the British army .

They are fucking mingers and they are all....and i mean all Y front wearing lesbians.

Yeah, its where all the butch Lesbians go to get a job. :D


Most women physically haven't got the same strength and endurance as a man, that's why men were the hunters and women were the gatherers. (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=432619#post432619)

I suppose men are also more reckless which can be a hindrance in many occasions, but at certain times it can prove useful such as when said reckless person charges at the enemy and makes a break for the rest of the army to follow suit.

[Crossbow]

I know quite some millitary-women via the sport that I practice, one of them is an ex-bodybuilder (ex because she got in an accident and her leg muscle got damaged) despite that she still is terribly strong and will throw a full-grown man across her shoulder and walk around with him when it is needed. (I saw her do this while we were out drinking with the team ;) )

So on the question if women should be in the millitary I say yes and no, I know for a fact that not every woman is like her for example, but there are a few who will do well in it.

We'll put her in the front line.

[Cail]

Certainly, in the positions that do not require man's strength and stamina. Women can be pilots, navy staff, snipers, artillery gunnery staff et cetera et cetera. If women are allowed to drive cars - why can't they drive tanks :D?

[Barreldriver]

If women are allowed to drive cars - why can't they drive tanks :D?

Tanks are a bit different from cars, from my understanding it's more like a bulldozer in a turtle shell. :D

On a more serious note, women with their smaller frames could make decent tank operators.

[Aces High]

Why do all the women seem to be getting alloted the cushy jobs...?...tank drivers...pilots...?

You want to join the army you fat cow....dig a fucking trench and stay in it for four weeks....ah its full of water...tough shit.

Or go hard routine for two months...eating out of a tube and shitting in plastic bags,getting covered in lice and fleas....then being piss wet through and freezing cold all the time.
Then when its time to bug out...a twenty five mile speed march with a hundred pounds on your back.
Keep switched on and your weapon clean.....watch your arcs you fat cow and stop falling asleep.

All for the same pay as a traffic warden.......the novelty will soon wear off.

[Cato]

I really don't see why not.

[Heimmacht]

Why do all the women seem to be getting alloted the cushy jobs...?...tank drivers...pilots...?

You want to join the army you fat cow....dig a fucking trench and stay in it for four weeks....ah its full of water...tough shit.

Or go hard routine for two months...eating out of a tube and shitting in plastic bags,getting covered in lice and fleas....then being piss wet through and freezing cold all the time.
Then when its time to bug out...a twenty five mile speed march with a hundred pounds on your back.
Keep switched on and your weapon clean.....watch your arcs you fat cow and stop falling asleep.

All for the same pay as a traffic warden.......the novelty will soon wear off.

Well from what I heared, they actually do that too, at least over here.

[Foxy]

Honestly I don't understand why we blame Islam for its treatment of women when 20% of our users here has voted "back to the kitchen" (even something more, considering that I voted that I support them).

[Arne]

Honestly I don't understand why we blame Islam for its treatment of women when 20% of our users here has voted "back to the kitchen" (even something more, considering that I voted that I support them).

As a matter of Fact the Mistreatment is more in the Army then in the Kitchen.
The Streets are already dangerous..
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/5755/znsplakat2004.jpg

Well,it seems the Feminists overtaken this Poll already.




So wie es aussieht sind Soldatinnen ein hohes Risiko für Soldaten der eigenen Truppe.

http://www.wgvdl.com/warum-sterben-nur-maenner-im-kampf-fuer-frauenrechte


Martin van Creveld – Frauen und Krieg: Die höhere Präsenz von Frauen in den Armeen der westlichen Industrienationen heutzutage hat kaum etwas mit der weiblichen Emanzipationsbewegung zu tun. Viel eher sei das ein Zeichen dafür, dass die Bedeutung des Militärs für die nationale Existenzsicherung immer mehr schwinde. Der Zustrom von Frauen beschleunige diesen Niedergang sogar.

[Crossbow]

As a matter of Fact the Mistreatment is more in the Army then in the Kitchen.
The Streets are already dangerous..
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/5755/znsplakat2004.jpg

Well,it seems the Feminists overtaken this Poll already.

Yes, it is gradually changing from Preservation Forum into Emancipation Forum.:D;)

[Albion]

Honestly I don't understand why we blame Islam for its treatment of women when 20% of our users here has voted "back to the kitchen" (even something more, considering that I voted that I support them).

By 'back to the kitchen' members who voted it mean that traditional gender roles should be upheld. I don't think it can be compared.

[Adalwolf]

Honestly I don't understand why we blame Islam for its treatment of women when 20% of our users here has voted "back to the kitchen" (even something more, considering that I voted that I support them).

Conservatives: vouch for traditional gender roles. Something our societies were built upon and lasted until the mid 50's.

Islam: women are mere property to be exploited whenever and by whoever. They don't even have the right to utter a word if their man forbids it.

Comparing the two is just ludicrous!

[Debaser11]

What's wrong with being in the kitchen?

[Debaser11]

Well, I'm not a feminist, but I see no problems of women serving the armed forces. They can provide excellent services such as medical, nurses, and strategic and psychological. Women, in general, are calmer than men, more thorough,are interesting factors

lol! Just....lol...

[Laubach]

lol! Just....lol...

What´s the problem? It´s my opinion. I don´t care about your opinion

[Debaser11]

What´s the problem? It´s my opinion. I don´t care about your opinion

No problem. Your opinion is just retarded. No one said you had to care about my opinion but the fact that you responded sure seems to indicate that you care enough to respond.

[Laubach]

No problem. Your opinion is just retarded. No one said you had to care about my opinion but the fact that you responded sure seems to indicate that you care enough to respond.

Its outdated view is that it is ridiculous and stupid and therefore had not even run a line to answer it, but from the moment you quoted me, I am obliged to do so.

So I think you better stay on his own and do not drive me to the word, because I'm so not to argue with a Neanderthal

[Debaser11]

Its outdated view

What constitutes an "outdated" view? You base the accurracy of your beliefs on how contemporary something is? Yeah, Plato, Socrates, Aristotle...what a bunch of "outdated" "sexist" morons. They have nothing on modern Louback who's totally "with the program."

And pray tell, why is it outdated to imply that women are less calm today but okay and fine to with you to say just the opposite?


is that it is ridiculous and stupid and therefore had not even run a line to answer it, but from the moment you quoted me, I am obliged to do so.

So I think you better stay on his own and do not drive me to the word, because I'm so not to argue with a Neanderthal

Oh, I highly suggest it. Start small and then work your way up to triple digit IQ range. Then maybe you'll eventually be able to attempt to patronize me without embarassing yourself.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Women don't belong in the military, period.

[Laubach]

What constitutes an "outdated" view? You base the accurracy of your beliefs on how contemporary something is? Yeah, Plato, Socrates, Aristotle...what a bunch of "outdated" "sexist" morons. They have nothing on modern Louback who's totally "with the program."

And pray tell, why is it outdated to imply that women are less calm today but okay and fine to with you to say just the opposite?



Oh, I highly suggest it. Start small and then work your way up to triple digit IQ range. Then maybe you'll eventually be able to attempt to patronize me without embarassing yourself.

You took so long to answer me and that's the most you can do? Using rhetoric of cheap and superficial insults to try to impose your opinion?

I was wrong, you still need to improve much to be a Neanderthal. And to think that Darwin theorized about evolution of species, you're the proof that he was wrong.

[Debaser11]

You took so long to answer me and that's the most you can do? Using rhetoric of cheap and superficial insults to try to impose your opinion?


You're the one who used rhetoric. Did you not say my opinion was "outdated"? Why is something that's "outdated" wrong?

You get all sanctimonious over the fact that I think women are less calm (because they are), but have no problem saying men are less calm. So it's only offensive to you when someone says men are stronger in an area? It's "outdated"? But it's perfectly fine to say that women are "more calm"?

How are women more calm? Most people I know, even women themselves, concede that women are more emotional. You don't seem to know women very well. In fact, I'd say you know women like you know the English language.

[Debaser11]

I'm waiting, slowpoke.

[Laubach]

You understand when I said no matter how you feel and what you think? You will not change my way of thinking, much less childish name calling. Does not interest me who you are, what you think because you mean nothing to me.

I could explain why this way of thinking, but I do not owe you satisfaction, keep your opinion and I stand with my

My English is bad? I am very happy, and I'm sure your Portuguese, Spanish, Italian, French and German would be bad or mediocre.

ahahahaa. I find it odd how some people become more "courageous" when they are on the internet, I'm sure in real life would not have the guts to say half of what they say

[Laubach]

I'm waiting, slowpoke.

I see that you really care about my opinion. Should take this time and learn more about female behavior, after all the doubt is yours and not mine

[Wyn]

Anyone who wants to truly find out whether or not women are more calm than men should try being around them when the building's fire alarm goes off in the middle of the night. ;)

[Debaser11]

You understand when I said no matter how you feel and what you think? You will not change my way of thinking, much less childish name calling.

You see, if I came to disagreements with that mentality like you do, I'd still think the same things I thought ten or fifteen years ago. We're about the same age. Yet, you sound like my fifteen year old PC self.



Does not interest me who you are, what you think because you mean nothing to me.

Well, I love you, too. But seriously, we're just having a discussion here. Not exchanging vows.


I could explain why this way of thinking, but I do not owe you satisfaction,

No, I don't think you can. Do you expect me to just take your word for it?


My English is bad? I am very happy, and I'm sure your Portuguese, Spanish, Italian, French and German would be bad or mediocre.

What does my inability to speak those languages have to do with the fact that you sound very dim on this thread, which is in English? I doubt you're exactly some Portuguese Wordsworth in your native tongue, anyways, given the nature of your syntax, overall. But anyways, I'm not wandering into German threads so your "point" is rather moot.


ahahahaa. I find it odd how some people become more "courageous" when they are on the internet, I'm sure in real life would not have the guts to say half of what they say

We're having a discussion. Not trying to prove how brave we are. That is futile over the internet so why bring it up?

How about you just answer the question I put to you previously?

[Laubach]

Anyone who wants to truly find out whether or not women are more calm than men should try being around them when the building's fire alarm goes off in the middle of the night. ;)

as a gun to your head:D

[Bridie]

Most people I know, even women themselves, concede that women are more emotional. Conceded.

[Debaser11]

Conceded.

:thumb001:

And such a characteristic has its positives. It's not all negative that women are more emotional. Women tell me this themselves and I quite agree. It's this trait in them that probably keeps men human and children pure.

[Laubach]

It seems that you still think like a child. It is well known for their messages. Even a 3 year old child would be better than you.

I'm having a discussion? I put what I think, based on what I see in my life and my profession and you disagreed, that is your problem, doubt is yours and you do not want to change my mind because I do not care what you think.

It is contradictory to you criticize my English, and this is the only language you speak. When you learn to express themselves in others without being your mother tongue, you try to criticize. But I think you can be very difficult, due to their inability to express themselves politely.

I think you need to interpret better, you want to argue, I'm not interested in discussing a subject which do not matter. If this is so important to you, study on the subject. I prefer to talk this matter with a stone than a project of being human.

I answered what I want when I want and to whoever I want. Surely you are not the most interesting person for me to have a debate.

Keep your archaic way of thinking and make good use, ok?

[Bridie]

:thumb001:

And such a characteristic has its positives. It's not all negative that women are more emotional. Women tell me this themselves and I quite agree. It's this trait in them that probably keeps men human and children pure.
Agreed again. And this is what makes women such good health care professionals.

Men and women's different natures create a balance in normal society. All male environments tend to get quite brutish. Good for a combat situation, bad for civilian life.

[Laubach]

ps:His behavior is very passionate. You then would be a woman?

[Hess]

:thumb001:

And such a characteristic has its positives. It's not all negative that women are more emotional. Women tell me this themselves and I quite agree. It's this trait in them that probably keeps men human and children pure.


Lyudmila Mykhailivna Pavlichenko (Ukrainian: Людмила Михайлівна Павліченко; Russian: Людмила Михайловна Павличенко Lyudmila Mikhailovna Pavlichenko) (July 12, 1916 – October 10, 1974) was a Soviet sniper during World War II, credited with 309 kills, and is regarded as the most successful female sniper in history.

309 kills

Your move :ranger:

[Debaser11]

Keep your archaic way of thinking and make good use, ok?


You keep saying my thinking is "archaic" and "outdated" but you can't tell me why it's wrong. Stop using rhetoric and just answer the question(s):

(1) How are men less calm than women?

(2) Why is it okay for you to say women are "more calm," but offensive and "outdated" for me to say that men are more calm?

[Debaser11]

309 kills

Your move :ranger:

Uh, outlier? (Also notice that she wasn't better than the best male.)

You show me a lady killing machine and I'll show you a magic negro! :D

[Laubach]

You keep saying my thinking is "archaic" and "outdated" but you can't tell me why it's wrong. Stop using rhetoric and just answer the question(s):

(1) How are men less calm than women?

(2) Why is it okay for you to say women are "more calm," but offensive and "outdated" for me to say that men are more calm?

Doubts about his behavior and thinking? Find a Psychologist. Incidentally, I am one, but do not consult for free

[Debaser11]

Doubts about his behavior and thinking? Find a Psychologist. Incidentally, I am one, but do not consult for free

You're on a discussion forum expressing your opinion yet you can not back it up.

[Adalwolf]

309 kills

Your move :ranger:

Ha! I was bugging Peasant about this earlier. It is easy for you to use an unordinary example against the status quo, to somehow give the argument some kind of legitimacy.

[Laubach]

You're on a discussion forum expressing your opinion yet you can not back it up.

You are very easy to irritate and demonstrates just how passionate and still want to argue otherwise. My opinion was expressed.

I have nothing further to add

[Hess]

Ha! I was bugging Peasant about this earlier. It is easy for you to use an unordinary example against the status quo, to somehow give the argument some kind of legitimacy.

She is of course an outlier, as Debaser pointed out. i'm not denying that.

However, if a woman displays exceptional talent in a certain field of combat (such as this sniper did), I believe she should be allowed to join the army.

i think that's a sensible position to take.

[Debaser11]

You are very easy to irritate and demonstrates just how passionate and still want to argue otherwise. My opinion was expressed.

I have nothing further to add

I just asked you to support your opinion. Who's says I'm irritated? I keep waiting for you to tell me why your opinion is something I should take seriously. Still waiting...

[Laubach]

I wonder, how much would you be able to fight a war? With that impulsive behavior, I would not survive even 5 minutes

Sure, assuming you are the fittest specimens male. Which I have serious doubts. Like I said, the Internet is all too easy

[Laubach]

I just asked you to support your opinion. Who's says I'm irritated? I keep waiting for you to tell me why your opinion is something I should take seriously. Still waiting...

I gave my opinion, you did not agree and I have no cause to be wasting my time trying to prove you otherwise. For all I said, it will not change his mind.

You have your opinion and I have mine and life goes on.

[Debaser11]

She is of course an outlier, as Debaser pointed out. i'm not denying that.

However, if a woman displays exceptional talent in a certain field of combat (such as this sniper did), I believe she should be allowed to join the army.

i think that's a sensible position to take.

This ignores that one of the factors that makes an army strong is its homogeneity which the mere presence of a woman upsets. It distracts men in often precarious situations. Furthermore, if you let one woman in, where do the floodgates stop? 300 kills? 250 kills? A "can-do" attitude? It's the epitomy of a slippery slope.

[Debaser11]

I gave my opinion,

I know. I asked you to support it. Still waiting...

[Laubach]

Keep waiting, I have more to do than waste my time on someone I do not add anything.

good night!

[Laubach]

ps: try to relax, ok? You´re so nervous!!

[Debaser11]

Keep waiting, I have more to do than waste my time on someone I do not add anything.

good night!

Well, that much you did do.

[Hess]

This ignores the fact that one of the factors that makes an army strong is its homogeneity. Furthermore, if you let one woman in where do the floodgates stop? 300 kills? 250 kills? A "can-do" attitude? It's the epitomy of a slippery slope.

I see your point, but it just breaks my heart to see such talent wasted :(

besides, snipers don't really affect the homogeneity of an army because they work separately from everyone else. The Russian soldiers fighting on the ground didn't know whether that sniper who was picking off enemies left and right from the top of a building was a man or a woman , and, if you ask me, they didn't care all that much.

I am not saying that women should fight on the front lines as foot soldiers, because that would indeed hurt homogeneity.

however, there are certain positions i believe they can take.

In order to make the slope less slippery, I offer a proposal: if a woman performs better in a certain field than 85% of the men in that field, I believe said woman should be allowed to exercise the talents given to her by nature.

I believe some viable positions are Snipers, tank commanders, artillery support, etc. Basically, anywhere where they are not directly seen by the bulk of the army.

[Debaser11]

I agree with the rhetoric if not the details of the proposal itself.

[Adalwolf]

besides, snipers don't really affect the homogeneity of an army because they work separately from everyone else.

Depends on the army actually. The German snipers would often break up into squads of half a dozen men. Sometimes more depending if they were occupying the Swiss alps.

[Aces High]

besides, snipers don't really affect the homogeneity of an army because they work separately from everyone else.

They dont actually,thats pretty much a myth.
There are no snipers roaming about with a mission to kill,and carving notches into the butt of their sniper rifles etc.They have no automony whatsoever.

In an infantry platoon you will find a few machine gunners and a few medics,some guys trained to a high standard in signals and maybe two or three people who have trained or done a snipers course.
At certain times they may be called out in a situation that needs their skills and asked to do what they do....they will then go back to being normal infantry soldiers.

[Blossom]

Women can do good job in army too as much as you guys will deny. Male and female, both human bodies can reach same or more strenght during trainings, but this all is just about an old-fashioned vision some got still during our century. Its a pity cuz things would go better with both sides allied.

I'm not a feminist, and I do thing some jobs are better made by males than females, of course. But same happens otherwise. There are many jobs (and I'm not talking about the machist vision ''woman cooks, I bring the money'' that's so fking odd) that may involve knowledge and patience, and females usually do better.

I think both genres got the same good qualities even different or not. Easy. And this should be accepted as a start of a progress, if you guys wanna do some progress ofc.


Not feminist not machist, just wise. That's all about it.

My father worked for army during many years, he has been educated in a military mood aswell since his 12, I know how it works cuz inconsciously he used some of his army habits on me somehow, like being strict enough with things I do, respect schedules, and mostly strict stuff, and I do like it. And I gotta say, as a female, I do like it. I would have liked to join Air Forces since I love aviation but well, I choosed another way...

[Psychonaut]

It's hilarious to see the fantasies that non-military folks have about the inner workings of the armed forces. These ideas are almost always wrong which is why it's a terrible idea for those outside the military to make policy decisions governing who should or should not be allowed entrance.

[Psychonaut]

Male and female, both human bodies can reach same or more strenght during trainings

That is absurdly false. Both median and upper limits on strength are vastly different between the sexes. No woman on Earth is ever capable of being nearly as strong as the world's strongest men; and, more importantly for the idea of military combat inclusion, median strength levels are also extraordinarily disproportionately in favor of men.

[Blossom]

That is absurdly false. Both median and upper limits on strength are vastly different between the sexes. No woman on Earth is ever capable of being nearly as strong as the world's strongest men; and, more importantly for the idea of military combat inclusion, median strength levels are also extraordinarily disproportionately in favor of men.

Well, maybe not that much as a man, and that's why I said there are jobs made for man more than for females. But Army is just not about all force. ;) Actually the most important thing in army is organization.

Soldiers without a map in their heads and without instructions would be just bunches of meat in the battlefield. Eventually is all about brains. And brains, every single human body got them, more or less developed... ;)

[Aces High]

Eventually is all about brains. And brains,

80% of the people in my battalion were as thick as shit,and had criminal records for all sorts of petty crime. (and no so petty)....and im talking about one of the elite (if not the elite) units of the British army....shit thats why they were in the army........................in fact thats why i was in the army.:cool:

One of the questions on the entrance exam to get in the British army was.

Q) What drink derives from cows...

I thought it was a trick question until i looked around the room and saw much furrowing of brows and scratching of heads.....ill never forget that question as long as i live.

If you have brains then you are in the RAF or Navy....or in a cockpit....but you arent up the front with the grunts.;)

[Albion]

80% of the people in my battalion were as thick as shit,and had criminal records for all sorts of petty crime. (and no so petty)....and im talking about one of the elite (if not the elite) units of the British army....shit thats why they were in the army........................in fact thats why i was in the army.:cool:

One of the questions on the entrance exam to get in the British army was.

Q) What drink derives from cows...

I thought it was a trick question until i looked around the room and saw much furrowing of brows and scratching of heads.....ill never forget that question as long as i live.

If you have brains then you are in the RAF or Navy....or in a cockpit....but you arent up the front with the grunts.;)

Most people in the military are people who did badly in school and went into it as a last resort or to better themselves. Its widely known.

[Aces High]

In my outfit we had an old Etonian....a kings scholar,he joined up for the adventure and action.
We thought he was fucking mental...a really nice fellow though and always pulled his weight,one of those English eccentrics that pop up every now and then.

[Blossom]

80% of the people in my battalion were as thick as shit,and had criminal records for all sorts of petty crime. (and no so petty)....and im talking about one of the elite (if not the elite) units of the British army....shit thats why they were in the army........................in fact thats why i was in the army.:cool:

One of the questions on the entrance exam to get in the British army was.

Q) What drink derives from cows...

I thought it was a trick question until i looked around the room and saw much furrowing of brows and scratching of heads.....ill never forget that question as long as i live.

If you have brains then you are in the RAF or Navy....or in a cockpit....but you arent up the front with the grunts.;)


Most people in the military are people who did badly in school and went into it as a last resort or to better themselves. Its widely known.

Well ofc lol, as I said, soldies still need some upper mega brain lol, and that's for people who got the knowledge. But what I mean, that the upper brain could be male or female..though many of you or whatever wouldnt accept it. ''huh orders from a female wtf?!'' ...

My father, Lieutenant General, had some female mates and they werent bad at all ..:)

[Aces High]

Well you respect orders given to you by officers who in their youth had been through the mill just like you.
Some bull dyke barking out orders who has never seen the business end of an AK47 would just get laughed at.

[Blossom]

Cmo guys :lol: well I dont care to much about all this stuff, but you guys make me wanna get in the Air Forces, and this year I was supposed to change to another degree since I'm bored about my last one...so dont you...dont you make me do smth like that haha, cuz I've always like aviation.

[Aces High]

^

What would you like to do in the air force.?

[Blossom]

^

What would you like to do in the air force.?

Pilot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAMET). :) Helicopter pilot or whatever other kind of aircraft...pilot. Actually the headquarter is pretty near where I live, same region, ...should ask for more info soon.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Spanish_Army_Chinook.jpg/799px-Spanish_Army_Chinook.jpg

[Aces High]

Meanwhile in Russia.....:eek:

[Arne]

Helicopter pilot

Nah, I can´t belive if Man can´t handle them good enough.. then .. :rolleyes:
http://www.wochenblatt.de/storage/scl/import/subdir/eins/60767_m1w522q75s1v64672_xio-fcmsimage-20101026115420-006014-4cc6a54c1a1ab.photo_1288071444772-1-0.jpg
Is there any Reason to trust more a female ?

[Foxy]

As a matter of Fact the Mistreatment is more in the Army then in the Kitchen.


Better to die in the army than live good in a kitchen. Definitely...

[Arne]

Better to die in the army than live good in a kitchen. Definitely...
Suicide isn´t an Answer.
People think it´s a funny game joining the Army as like they´d play warcraft.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mDd73OwIDKY/TY91Sl5hFDI/AAAAAAAAAA0/ljIdfp-yW9Q/s1600/selbstmord_big_DW_W_513749g.jpg

[Bridie]

Better to die in the army than live good in a kitchen. Definitely...The kitchen is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay underrated. :D


I love to look to the Queen of Domestic Goddesses herself, Nigella Lawson, for inspiration....


http://topscallops.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/nigella.jpg


http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/09_02/nigellaDM1409_468x500.jpg


http://porkknifeandspoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/nigella1_228x336.jpg


I love her!!!! :)

[The Lawspeaker]

Actually. I must admit that I fear a woman with a gun more then a division of male soldiers. You can reason with men, you can talk with their officers with are usually sensible human beings. A woman with a rifle however... I don't really want to know what abysmal torture I will go through when she gets her hands on me... :eek:

Because female soldiers will definitely chimp out in combat - with 2000 years of discrimination against them and after some 40 years of feminist indoctrination I can guarantee you that there is a shitload of hatred hidden between behind those beautiful eyes..... God spare us from the wrath of the Woman...

[Arne]

Actually. I must admit that I fear a woman with a gun more then a division of male soldiers. You can reason with men, you can talk with their officers with are usually sensible human beings. A woman with a rifle however... I don't really want to know what abysmal torture I will go through when she gets her hands on me... :eek:

Because female soldiers will definitely chimp out in combat - with 2000 years of discrimination against them I can guarantee you that there is a shitload of hatred hidden between behind those beautiful eyes.

So Guys who fear female Soldiers thank Veleda who is for it ?? :rolleyes:

[The Lawspeaker]

So Guys who fear female Soldiers thank Veleda who is for it ?? :rolleyes:
Yes. They will be effective killing machines.. while we on the other hand will probably crap our pants.

[Arne]

Male Feminists scare me !!
Had anybody of the Males lost his Testicles ?
Liberals are a threat.

[Foxy]

Suicide isn´t an Answer.
People think it´s a funny game joining the Army as like they´d play warcraft.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mDd73OwIDKY/TY91Sl5hFDI/AAAAAAAAAA0/ljIdfp-yW9Q/s1600/selbstmord_big_DW_W_513749g.jpg

My bestfriend joined the army after her high school degree. Actually army is according to her very funny in Italy: she must only answer at the telephone and she has discounts on every disco, club, restaurant & co. in the zone.
It's a not less important detail that her barrack is near Riccione, i.e. in the most touristic area of Italy full of discos and locals.

[Foxy]

CIVIS BATAVI, I WANT TO MARRY YOU!!! Cmon, you're Batavian I am Veleda!! It's a sign of the destiny!!!

[The Lawspeaker]

CIVIS BATAVI, I WANT TO MARRY YOU!!! Cmon, you're Batavian I am Veleda!! It's a sign of the destiny!!!
:D Sorry. I am off the market.

[Foxy]

:D Sorry. I am off the market.



I will poison you with my cuisine...:coffee:

[The Lawspeaker]

I will poison you with my cuisine...:coffee:
Like my cousin who married an Italian (he was from Apulia- shame they divorced though). :cool:

[Arne]

Like my cousin who married an Italian (he was from Apulia- shame they divorced though). :cool:

It´ll be a wonderful swarthy add to the dutch population..

[The Lawspeaker]

It´ll be a wonderful swarthy add to the dutch population..
Shut up. At least he isn't a gypsy like you, Celti. :)

I am very proud of my second cousin. A brilliant lad. He is completely bi-lingual so it's would be easy when you need to know something that can only be found in Italian sources.

[Foxy]

Like my cousin who married an Italian (he was from Apulia- shame they divorced though). :cool:

SPAM: the fault was obviously of the nordic protestant. Italian catholics are very serious when we come to marriages.

SOURCE: 3/4 of my friends have divorced parents.

[Arne]

Shut up. At least he isn't a gypsy like you, Celti. :)

I am very proud of my second cousin. A brilliant lad. He is completely bi-lingual so it's would be easy when you need to know something that can only be found in Italian sources.

Well, the only Gipsie i see is you. ;)

[The Lawspeaker]

SPAM: the fault was obviously of the nordic protestant. Italian catholics are very serious when we come to marriages.

SOURCE: 3/4 of my friends have divorced parents.
That's actually amazing as the Netherlands seems to have one of the lower divorce rates in Western Europe. But yes, not every marriage works, particularly not when there are a lot of cultural differences involved but usually the offspring of such a marriage balances the differences better then the two partners, I think.

[Psychonaut]

Actually. I must admit that I fear a woman with a gun more then a division of male soldiers. You can reason with men, you can talk with their officers with are usually sensible human beings. A woman with a rifle however... I don't really want to know what abysmal torture I will go through when she gets her hands on me... :eek:

Because female soldiers will definitely chimp out in combat - with 2000 years of discrimination against them and after some 40 years of feminist indoctrination I can guarantee you that there is a shitload of hatred hidden between behind those beautiful eyes..... God spare us from the wrath of the Woman...

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5232/5818698972_0a971e445f_b.jpg

[Adalwolf]

Soldiers without a map in their heads and without instructions would be just bunches of meat in the battlefield. Eventually is all about brains. And brains, every single human body got them, more or less developed... ;)[/B]

That statement pretty much contradicts itself. Intelligence has some significance, but the majority of the time infantry are just following orders. Which has more to do with discipline and courage rather than intellect. Generals and specific skill oriented soldiers would be more about ''brains''.

[Crossbow]

Actually. I must admit that I fear a woman with a gun more then a division of male soldiers. You can reason with men, you can talk with their officers with are usually sensible human beings. A woman with a rifle however... I don't really want to know what abysmal torture I will go through when she gets her hands on me... :eek:

Because female soldiers will definitely chimp out in combat - with 2000 years of discrimination against them and after some 40 years of feminist indoctrination I can guarantee you that there is a shitload of hatred hidden between behind those beautiful eyes..... God spare us from the wrath of the Woman...

Isn't that to prove they are in no way inferior to men, and can stand their ground? This happens not only in the military. To me it seems very artificial. It is overcompensation and it does not suit them.

[Adalwolf]

The kitchen is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay underrated. :D


My praises in this thread go to mymy and Mary Bryant! Two females with the right mindset. :)

[Blossom]

That statement pretty much contradicts itself. Intelligence has some significance, but the majority of the time infantry are just following orders. Which has more to do with discipline and courage rather than intellect. Generals and specific skill oriented soldiers would be more about ''brains''.

Soldiers who want to keep it being just soldiers got a reason and mainly because they dont want to think about some responsability. So no, its not contradiction.

If someone dont want to reach smth more than being a mount of meat is because they're lazyasses (or ofc they just like it being so!) or because they do have less capacity, but not an empty head. :)

[BeerBaron]

That statement pretty much contradicts itself. Intelligence has some significance, but the majority of the time infantry are just following orders. Which has more to do with discipline and courage rather than intellect. Generals and specific skill oriented soldiers would be more about ''brains''.

Pretty much, when I was in the military we were told "leave the thinking to the officers and do what you're told"

[The Lawspeaker]

It´ll be a wonderful swarthy add to the dutch population..
And by the way: my second cousin has two things that you lack: blonde hair and blue eyes (both come from his mother). He looks a lot more Aryan then you, gypo.

[Eliades]

Women have no place in the military besides maybe some kind of receptionist job. They cannot carry the physical load for most combat situations and that makes it dangerous when a fellow soldier is in need. They would also be a distraction sexually, which can lead to numerous problems or just general inefficiency.

This totally true, I agree. Plus, if a woman had a combat role, and she was in trouble, and some male soldier happened to have a thing for her. He'd go out of his way and jeopardize the whole mission. Not a bad thing, but that's one of the reasons women don't have combat roles.

[Blossom]

Pretty much, when I was in the military we were told "leave the thinking to the officers and do what you're told"

True. That's what I'm saying, guys...I think I need to improve my english, ..I guess you didnt get it when I firstly told it. Anyway, I think I've said everything I needed to! :)


Improve my english or...not gettin tipsy while posting here :lol:

[Adalwolf]

Soldiers who want to keep it being just soldiers got a reason and mainly because they dont want to think about some responsability. So no, its not contradiction.

If someone dont want to reach smth more than being a mount of meat is because they're lazyasses (or ofc they just like it being so!) or because they do have less capacity, but not an empty head. :)

You do realize that high ranking positions are very hard to reach, and there are limited spots available. A regular soldier could work his ass off to move up but it might not happen. Calling them lazy is a bit callous.

[Adalwolf]

And by the way: my second cousin has two things that you lack: blonde hair and blue eyes (both come from his mother). He looks a lot more Aryan then you, gypo.

I'm surprised you used the term Aryan here. If Celti is indeed a gypsie, than he would look more aryan, because it is a term that Iranians favor...

[Blossom]

You do realize that high ranking positions are very hard to reach, and there are limited spots available. A regular soldier could work his ass off to move up but it might not happen. Calling them lazy is a bit callous.

Nothing is impossible if you really want to get it. :)

[The Lawspeaker]

I'm surprised you used the term Aryan here. If Celti is indeed a gypsie, than he would look more aryan, because it is a term that Iranians favor...
I was being very cynical since I don't believe in Aryans (and I used it Hitler-style on purpose). Point is: my cousin looks like a Dutchman and he is a European. Unlike Celti who is a gypo.

[The Lawspeaker]

Cmo guys :lol: well I dont care to much about all this stuff, but you guys make me wanna get in the Air Forces, and this year I was supposed to change to another degree since I'm bored about my last one...so dont you...dont you make me do smth like that haha, cuz I've always like aviation.
No no, no, join the Army, not the Chair Force. :D
If you want to be tough then you have to do it right.

[Blossom]

No no, no, join the Army, not the Chair Force. :D
If you want to be tough then you have to do it right.

Oh trust me I'm all prepared after living 21 years in a military speech between my father and cousins...I'm all ears sometimes but sometimes it rly gets me annoyed lol. So I guess I'll need to think it twice, but what I want to is...piloting. Aviation. God. Always wanted it.

[Arne]

I was being very cynical since I don't believe in Aryans (and I used it Hitler-style on purpose). Point is: my cousin looks like a Dutchman and he is a European. Unlike Celti who is a gypo.


Trust me Shitter.
Take your pills,dude.

Lia.. i reported your offensive posts.
Don´t try to fuck with me.

[Blossom]

Trust me Shitter.
Take your pills,dude.

Lia.. i reported your offensive posts.
Don´t try to fuck with me.

My offensive posts? Where? :lol:

Uuuuuuh shivering, I'm all afraid, girlie! :lol:

[poiuytrewq0987]

Trust me Shitter.
Take your pills,dude.

Lia.. i reported your offensive posts.
Don´t try to fuck with me.

http://files.sharenator.com/trololol_RE_Highest_Rated_Post_Ever-s400x400-156799.gif

[Karl der Große]

I am not against women in the military specifically, but I am very definitely against women in combat, or combat support units.

Well my reason is very simple, if a unit on the line finds itself with a "deteriorating situation" and taking substantial casualties with the possibility of being over run, so the men will be more concerned about protecting the women rather than reversing the situation. This is very natural (sorry girls!).

For this reason I would not want women in my unit even if they volunteered.

[Boudica]

My offensive posts? Where? :lol:

Uuuuuuh shivering, I'm all afraid, girlie! :lol:

Celti's a bad ass man, don't "try to fuck with him"! He'll turn your ass into the apricity police.

He's a real internet warrior, just look at the damage he has already done to my visitor messages wall.

[Blossom]

Celti's a bad ass man, don't "fuck with him"! He'll turn your ass into the apricity police.

:cry cmon ooh dont say those things, I'm all shivering :cry so cruel!













:lol:

[Adalwolf]

Ladies... We have already settled this.... back to the kitchen for some delicious sandwiches! :D

[Blossom]

Ladies... We have already settled this.... back to the kitchen for some delicious sandwiches! :D

Sure thing, meanwhile you guys get back to the loutish work ;) ...

if I'd do sammiches for someone would mean 2 things: I love that someone or, I want to poison that someone. ;) That's clear enough.

[Debaser11]

It's interesting how women still expect men to be gentlemen (and rightfully so), but asking one of them to be a lady is simply too much.

[Arne]

It's interesting how women still expect men to be gentlemen (and rightfully so), but asking one of them to be a lady is simply too much.
Ladies would look like this.
http://content.internetvideoarchive.com/content/photos/1105/046419_5.jpg

[Blossom]

It's interesting how women still expect men to be gentlemen (and rightfully so), but asking one of them to be a lady is simply too much.

You're saying such things cuz I dont want to do sammiches? :( That's not nice.

Well at least myself, I do never expect any guy to br gentleman to me if I dont give him any reasons. I'm talking about real life. As a polite girl I am, I always try to give reasons to the other to act like a gentleman (in case I want to), but of course I also behave like a lady once I know you cant ask for flowers if they havent grown. :)

I think all's about education, you know? ..all this behaviour between the 2 genres and the difference or the resemblance of both. So this all male-female behaviour is a bit personal..dependig on your education. You cant see women as food machines, and women shouldnt see men as working machines or smth like that. Both are able to do both things more or less.

[poiuytrewq0987]

http://line6.com/community/servlet/JiveServlet/downloadImage/2-241876-20500/troll.jpg

[Debaser11]

You're saying such things cuz I dont want to do sammiches? :( That's not nice.

I didn't say anything mean.

How would you feel if all men stopped lending women their jackets? Or stopped complimenting them for their looks? Or stopped holding the door for them? Or stopped carrying heavy things (which they cannot carry) for them? Or stopped pulling up a chair for them? Or stopped walking them home to make sure they were safe? Or stopped buying them flowers? Or paying for dinner? Or doing romantic things that men are expected to do? How would you feel if men said "I'm not gonna go to work and provide; I'm going to be a house husband"? How would you feel if men said "you know, I'm not going to work with my hands and maintain the house, you use the power drill and figure it out instead"? How would you feel if men stopped doing any of the things that come to mind when you think "gentleman" or "provider"?

Well, that's very often how men feel about women when they act all indignant toward doing the most minimal things that refined ladies have traditionally done. Yes, this includes cooking. Which is something minor compared to what men are expected to do around the house.


Well at least myself, I do never expect any guy to br gentleman to me

So you don't respect yourself enough to expect a man to behave like a gentleman in front of you?


[I'm talking about real life.

So am I. I've lived in "real life" just a bit longer than you have too.


[As a polite girl I am, I always try to give reasons to the other to act like a gentleman (in case I want to), but of course I also behave like a lady once I know you cant ask for flowers if they havent grown. :)

I think all's about education, you know? ..all this behaviour between the 2 genres and the difference or the resemblance of both. So this all male-female behaviour is a bit personal..dependig on your education. You cant see women as food machines, and women shouldnt see men as working machines or smth like that. Both are able to do both things more or less.[/b]

I don't see women as food machines. I see women as being snotty towards the idea of doing the tasks that have traditionally been done by ladies in Western society. All of sudden, women of today largely think themselves too good to do the same noble things their grandmothers and great grandmothers and so on did for years without complaining that were so important.

[Blossom]

So you don't respect yourself enough to expect a man to behave like a gentleman in front of you?

Mmm dont know how you did understand it (of course you should see the whole thing not just that part to understand that I focus the issue from the education's side). So as I said, as they educated me, we should first behave and then expect for things. I cant turn into an animal and expect for someone to be nice. :) That's what I mean. For women or men, education is everything.

The reason why a man acts like a gentleman, the reason why a woman acts like a lady, education. :) That's why I said that this all is kinda personal, depending on their education.

For example, I met people who didnt have a too nice behaviour to me, but I did have, I did behave, though I didnt expect anymore any nice behaviour from them. Why I behave nice still when they dont? Education, of course I can feel fed up about someone's lack of education and turn myself into a grumpy one and stop acting 'like a lady', but I guess I'm too patient.

Anyway I think we're getting a bit off topic? :)


About the tasks, well, I dont know, I personally love cooking and keeping my home clean and tidy, so if I'd cook or so it will be because I enjoy doing it but I wouldnt do it if a man would ''force'' me somehow by telling ''its your task''. I dont plan my life as staying home raising kids. I plan my life as working, (...), raising kids and doing everything at once with organization.

[Stars Down To Earth]

Wow. This thread is quite amazing.

[Duckelf]

Thank God the feminists aren't ahead in this poll.

[GeistFaust]

From an historical perspective women have fought in militaries although this has been the exception. If a woman wants to protect her people than she should have every right to do so. On the other hand I think it should be the exception and there are better ways for women to serve than to be in combat roles I think especially if she joins labor unions on the homefront. There were quite a few good military leaders which were women but that should be the exception instead of the norm. Some of the ancient Celtic and Germanic tribes allowed women to fight naked I believe alongside some of their men. :eek:

[_______]

ferocity is unlikely to be
an issue
but strength probably is

[askra]

don't support women in the military is a discrimination towards we men, so i support them.
why should only men fight for own homeland, risking to be killed in war, and not also women? ;)

[Humanophage]

I strongly support them. Additional skilled and willing manpower is crucial.

Combat ability. Recent history shows that women make excellent snipers and good aviators. They are also comparatively good at the more military types of sports like biathlon. Many parts of modern warfare do not require exceptional physical ability, and are mostly about training with certain weapons and equipment. Ideally, the military should be physically undemanding and automated.

Segregation. As in sports, it is sound to keep women in the military entirely separated from men, both in combat and out of combat. It is difficult and unnecessary to tackle the psychological and social problems that arise from mixed units. Appropriate adjustments to equipment and strategy can be made for female military units, if that is necessary.

Ideology. I believe that race should prevail over sex, class, etc. An ethnically monolithic nation that disregards traditionalist notions for efficiency and well-being of its every member seems very pleasing to me. The desired message is, essentially, that even a European woman makes a stronger, worthier fighter than a non-European man. 5 lionesses are better than 500 buck goats.

[Stars Down To Earth]

Like I said before: women can make great pilots and snipers, which history has proven. But the frontline infantry should be all male. It's better for everyone that way.


ferocity is unlikely to be
an issue
but strength probably is

Such a nice haiku poem.

[Psychonaut]

LOL at those of you who think that snipers aren't infantrymen! Sniping is, in every military I'm aware of, a special skill identifier earned by infantrymen who are amazing shots. It's a special job that you do when the mission calls for it; when it doesn't you're an infantryman like everyone else.

[Rachel]

for me, i guess it depends, i know some women who can weild a gun just as well as any man. However for me personally i think that if i were drafted i would opt to do healing work, as a nurse or a doctor. Women don't need to be forced in to any roles, perhaps if society saw womens work as respectable and important to the survial of society as a whole, perhaps then women would be more content to do tasks that are deemed" womenly" But American society shames womens work, cleaning cooking raising kids and undermines the importance of the family unit. The woman of the household is central to a strong family unit and a proper running society.

staying on topic, Maybe women should do all the talking and the dipolomatic work, and men should do all the fighting i am okay with that :)

[Crossbow]

^You mean men should be some dumb women's servants?

[Rachel]

^You mean men should be some dumb women's servants?

Women who can negotiate politics of war are not Dumb... maybe in a naother country but here in America, playing politics is a hard won sport.

[Crossbow]

Women who can negotiate politics of war are not Dumb... maybe in a naother country but here in America, playing politics is a hard won sport.

I thought war was about defeating/destroying/annihilating the enemy, in the narrow sense of the word.

[Gaijin]

I don't know how it is for other countries.
But, in Portugal, women have always had the same rights as men, and the free will to make choices.
At least, to a good extend of discretion.

Since Roman times, Lusitanian women have made an example of themselves.
This is most notably in "War of Fire (or Lusitanian War)", where they voluntarily cemented the battle.

Today, that enduring character and symbol of honor is still carried in the Military.

Below is a picture of two Portuguese women militants.

http://www.operacional.pt/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/15-brr-ex-apolo-09-25jun09-235-copy.jpg

I totally support women joining the military.

[airawil]

There are many women that are capable to be in military. Military members get really good insurance coverage from the government, but that does not mean that every little thing is free when you are not on duty. If you find out you need some type of surgery, it is always better to save up beforehand. If you do not have the time to save up, military members can always get military payday loans (https://personalmoneynetwork.com/payday-loans/) to cover crisis expenses.

[Celxon]

Of course, they should be in the military, which isn't synonymous with combat. I go back and forth on that one. What I believe for certain is that there should be a single standard. Women should have to score as well as men on the fitness tests in order to get certain jobs.

[Äijä]

Of course, they should be in the military, which isn't synonymous with combat. I go back and forth on that one. What I believe for certain is that there should be a single standard. Women should have to score as well as men on the fitness tests in order to get certain jobs.

This is my stand also, there can be no different standards in war.

[SardiniaAtlantis]

Dames in War?...YOu mean Broads, skirts, birds joining the boys? Dames belong in the kitchen, see....
http://www.methodshop.com/picts/ads-1930s/chef.jpg

[Celxon]

This is my stand also, there can be no different standards in war.

Most female Marines can't meet the male standards of fitness. Few can do enough pull-ups to pass the test.