Scipio's gender based pseudo psychology thread, split from Re: Female Cdn inf soldier in Afghanistan

[Scipio]

As long as the females have to meet the EXACT requirements as men, then I have no problem with it.  Well, that's not true.  There is a thing that lies in every single man.

It's his birthright, since the dawn of time, to wage war, start fights at bars, and generally do violent things A LOT better than women.

Even if we can't do it a lot better, we like to think we can.  You see, this is very important to the male.  Females have called it chauvinism and sexism, but to males it's just the way it is.  We feel like we're super heroes in our own right, and that physical feats and fighting heroically in war are all just means to an end----- Female admiration and increased chances at getting laid.

Ok, so males will not join the CF to get laid.  But the one thing they won't tell you, that all of them are thinking, is that it COULD and hopefully will get them laid more.  And having women in your ranks kind of drains any romance that men want out of war.  What's so heroic and manly about fighting in a battle with women, this is the mental block that will confuse us, and make us question wether we got short changed in our wartime experience.  Will women admire me when they can join this once manly institution?  What will I have on women?  Why would they bother respect me or acknowledge my attempt at waxing manly if women can join up?

Yes, men are romantic about war.  WE love the idea of dieing for our women and kids.  We want to be champions and knights.  We want to be regarded as brave and strong, characteristics that men since the dawn of time have strived for and will continue to do so.  We really take these things seriously.  Much more than women. 

You can call it childish and silly.  I don't question the female mind.  Some things about it I find silly too, but I let them be, because nothing in the world will change them, no PC pandering, government legislation, or social engineering will ever change women in our society.  ANd the same goes for men.  We see war as a mans game.  It's not personal, it's nature.

 

[scoutfinch]

...not SHARP trained yet, are ya???

Oh that's right -- you haven't been sworn in yet because you wouldn't be able to pass a physical exam (unlike the women who are currently serving in uniform).

Birthright, my ass. :

 

[Scipio]

Well you failed to see my point.  Wether a man is as strong as a women or not was never my agrument.  But thanks for the comment.

 

[old medic]

  WE love the idea of dieing for our women and kids. 

Speak for yourself.

 

[scoutfinch]

Well you failed to see my point.  Wether a man is as strong as a women or not was never my agrument.  But thanks for the comment.

Funny, I have never had a problem with reading comprehension before... so what was your point?

Besides,  I wasn't commenting on male v. female strength either ( :) but on the fact that you aren't in the forces so you might want to change the univeral *we* to a more personal reference.

 

[aesop081]

scipio,

just stop now before you dig yourself in all the way to China

 

[HItorMiss]

It's his birthright, since the dawn of time, to wage war, start fights at bars, and generally do violent things A LOT better than women.

It's my birthright to do what now? you can't seriously believe that, What happened to evolution of a species past it's base instincts my friend?

Even if we can't do it a lot better, we like to think we can.  You see, this is very important to the male.  Females have called it chauvinism and sexism, but to males it's just the way it is.  We feel like we're super heroes in our own right, and that physical feats and fighting heroically in war are all just means to an end----- Female admiration and increased chances at getting laid.

And here I thought I joined to protect my country and it's intrest...Wow must be my manly way of getting high on testosterone, and female adoration...No wait i did join for protecting my country and its intrests.

OK, so males will not join the CF to get laid.  But the one thing they won't tell you, that all of them are thinking, is that it COULD and hopefully will get them laid more.  And having women in your ranks kind of drains any romance that men want out of war.  What's so heroic and manly about fighting in a battle with women, this is the mental block that will confuse us, and make us question wether we got short changed in our wartime experience.  Will women admire me when they can join this once manly institution?  What will I have on women?  Why would they bother respect me or acknowledge my attempt at waxing manly if women can join up?

I could careless about getting woman in my bed, I'm married, my wife was with me long before I put on this uniform, she'll likelye be with me the day I take it off. I don't need admiration from woman of even civvies, I have the respect of my peers that's all that matters to me.

Manly institution? it's a job and great one one I have devoted a lot of time to but I didn't join to be more manly.

What will I have on woman, same as I have now....absolutely nothing.

Wax manly...dude I think your not even thinking this through at this point in your argument your just throwing out words.

Yes, men are romantic about war.  WE love the idea of dieing for our women and kids.  We want to be champions and knights.  We want to be regarded as brave and strong, characteristics that men since the dawn of time have strived for and will continue to do so.  We really take these things seriously.  Much more than women. 

Nothing is romantic about getting shot at, or seeing your friend as burnt up hunks of meat, or a very close friend who you have known your whole career, who was the first to great you when you came back in theater as a body filling a coffin, do not come on this site and preach to real soldiers that have done the nasty business that is war about how brave we want people to think we are or how manly. You know what just stop completely, you haven't earned the right to tell us what motivates us, your not in your not in uniform and so you haven't got a clue!

You can call it childish and silly.  I don't question the female mind.  Some things about it I find silly too.

Your almost right here, you are childish and silly...I question your mind I find it and you silly.

 

[Scipio]

Of course you did, don't recant the comment this early, I can still see the previous post. 

By pointing out that I'm still under achieving my 2.4 km run and subsequently pointing out that there are women in the CF right now that have successfully master it- you're most definitely highlighting a physical issue. An issue which will forever stick in the craw of females when it comes to BMQ requirements (9 push ups with respect to17 etc...)

My previous comment simply stated:  Regardless of how qualified a woman is (i.e. read over qualified), men will still feel slighted at the sight of a female combatant.  And it has nothing to do with skill or worth.  It has to do with what women have come to call 'chauvinism'.  Men would simply ignore labeling the phenomena and let it go as a truism, something we see as natural.  It's silly in your eyes, and perhaps in some men's eyes.  But it stands nonetheless, and trying to kill it or over come it is not possible, the rift will always exist.  It does in the States and the UK, and women are not even allowed in combant roles in those countries.


But to take it on a physical level-

I do believe men are both stronger in the means and extremes.  I don't think it can be denined.  Now, I would like to believe only the best men make it into the armed forces.  Of course they don't.  Not all male candidates are top quality and in that light, women would not be at a disadvantage if they applied. 

Consider this, If the ARMY only did take in the cream of the crops, like say a Seal,SAS, or perhaps a JTF2 BMQ selection pool, then women would be at a major disadvantage.  And so it stands women are inelgiable for those positions. 

So when a Military starts recruiting women in combat, it says something.  It says so few quality selection pools are being brought forth, that we need to take in what we can get.  The Canadian government may have thought about this, but more likely they would rather have  PC army that makes them look friendly than actually build a killing force which can live up to it's prime directive, to protect Canada.

 

[Centurian1985]

Scipio....

How the youth of this country can still think that dieing for your country is a heroic act is beyond me! When the excrement hits the objects rapidly moving in a circular pattern very few people think about dieing for their country.

Go see the movie 'Patton': "You dont die for your country, you make the OTHER poor bastard die for HIS country!"

Even better see 'Blachawk Down', the line from Hootch the delta soldier is one of the truist statements ever uttered: "Why do we do it? We dont do it for our country..we do it for our buddies."  

Basically, we shoot and kill to save ourselves and our fellow soldiers.  When you get into a tight situation, you couldnt care frigging less about the flag (heretical and disloyal as that may sound); what matters is getting you and your team out in one piece, your brothers AND sisters, men AND women, who you spend more time with than even your wife, getting out alive and preferably a single piece.  

 

[scoutfinch]

Scipio is a troll. He is not worth my time, your effort or Mike's bandwidth.

 

[aesop081]

My last entry in response to this troll,

scipio,

just stop now before you dig yourself in all the way to China

Remember when i told you this ?


Come back when you have some experience to back up your.......er......BS.  Right now you are just looking to piss people off and that will not be received well here.

 

[Pea]

Consider this, If the ARMY only did take in the cream of the crops, like say a Seal,SAS, or perhaps a JTF2 BMQ selection pool, then women would be at a major disadvantage.  And so it stands women are inelgiable for those positions. 

So when a Military starts recruiting women in combat, it says something.  It says so few quality selection pools are being brought forth, that we need to take in what we can get.   The Canadian government may have thought about this, but more likely they would rather have  PC army that makes them look friendly than actually build a killing force which can live up to it's prime directive, to protect Canada.

Are you freaking kidding me?! You are saying that because the Military is recruiting females they are "just taking what they can get". I don't get all feminist and angry over stupid comments often, but I sure am glad there is a computer screen between us right now. And before I say something that will get me banned from a site I really love, I am giving myself a time out!

 

[Centurian1985]

AAAAANNNDDD,

I was in the 3 VP when the first female infanteer came in to the unit.  The unit opinion was split n half; half said get rid of the ***** and the other half said 'let her prove herself'.  Let me tell you, she had guts and drive and determination, and was a better soldier than a lot of the guys I worked with.  The problem was almost all of the CSMs refused to have her in  their rifle coy's, so she got put into the maintenance pool until she finally said ''I am friggin out of here".

Since then I have worked with a lot of female service members, and they are just like the guys.  Some of them cant pull their weight, but a lot of others were good leaders and kicked ***.  The same goes for female soldiers I worked with in the US.  

Strength isnt everything. You're supposed to work smarter, not harder!

I will admit only ONE exception that I know of - artillery: youve got to be strong to move those damn big shells around!    

 

[Centurian1985]

Card_11:

"You go girl!"

If it gets into a fight, Im putting my money on Card

 

[scoutfinch]

My money is on card too.

 

[vonGarvin]

My money is on card too.

Ditto
:argument:

 

[2 Cdo]

Of course in a fight between man and women I will always take the women! : Stupid comments, stupid thread, always breaks down into PC bullsh*t!

On a final note, on AVERAGE, men are stronger than women period, end stop!
Centurian, said female was in my section in A Coy when she showed up in Vic and while she could pull her weight she was the EXCEPTION, and not the rule when it comes to females in the combat arms!

Now I think it's time to go because the wife is calling!

 

[Scipio]

Yikes, those are some ugly comments.  Not one person here actually gave a good retort and all I got was flack.  Automatic defense mechanisms light up like fire crackers, but no real argument was made in defense. But prove me wrong.  Prove to me that women can match men in means and extremes.  There must be some sources out there.  That was my only real factual point.  The latter half of the comment was just extraplated points based on the latter principle.

My comment prior was simply dealing with the mentality of a typical young male.  As I pm'd one person, it could read as a satire, it's silly but also holds truth.  It merely explained why this chavenism exists.   

But sure, women can fight.  Castro had female fighters, Russian women manned flak guns at Stalingrad, British girls stood fast on AA cannons during WW2, even some females were noted to fight by tacitus during the Roman conquest of the tin islands.

All the above events were worst case scenarios that called for desperate measures.  Anyone with a pulse in their veins were eligable and hired on the spot, if not forced.

I think women can fight.  I think men can fight better.  I think many men out there do have mental problem with trying to come to gripes with the idea of a female commado sharing his fox hole.  I think an army that hires women is up todate.  I think an army that lets them fight is a bit pretentious.  I'm told women have to get the same results as men early in this thread.  But every other source I've seen, from the CF to the Royal Brit Military and the US military all say otherwise.  They say females have easier requirements.

I don't care for the spliting of the previous thread. I also find it in poor taste to put my name in the thread title with some negative tag like "pseduo" following it. 

I never once attacked any one here, but voiced an opinion.  And your first move is to demonize me and try attract negative comments.  Troll?

I also don't understand how almost every one here can't analyise a comment and find the underlining point.

Are you freaking kidding me?! You are saying that because the Military is recruiting females they are "just taking what they can get"

I'm saying that is the impression it gives, with respect to my theory (which is a popular one that holds strong in the UK and US). Re-read.  Wether the Canadian army is doing it or not is debatable.  But image is important to a military.  And certain things speak volumes about it's soldiers.  If you step through my logic in the last post, perhaps you will see my conclusion.

 

[Centurian1985]

2 CDO,

I was speaking of women across the service.  If however, you restrict the category to 'combat arms only', where upper body strength is more important due to combat loads of 65-120 pounds (depending on arm, specialty, and mission being performed), then I am forced to grudgingly concede a minor point. 

 

[monika]

Good grief.

I have no idea how old you are, but you have some serious growing up to do.

Women don't want men who will die for them; we want men who will *live* for us.

Scipio, I would love to see you go head to head on the BFT with our female troops.

No doubt the average male has more physical strength than the average female, but training, passion, perseverance and a focused mind are not exclusive to either sex.