We live in interesting times...

[marv]

While there is a push for more legislation to prevent violence against women, women are being cleared for front-line combat duty...

There is a Democrat president who only compares himself to past Republican presidents like Lincoln and Reagan, never Democrats like Carter or Wilson...

I feel like Rip Van Winkle. Have I missed something?

[NJCardFan]

No you didn't. We now live in a world where this is Superman:

[marv]

...and from Retread's thread...

America is capitalist and greedy – yet half of the population is subsidized.
Half of the population is subsidized – yet they think they are victims.
They think they are victims – yet their representatives run the government.
Their representatives run the government – yet the poor keep getting poorer.
The poor keep getting poorer – yet they have things that people in other countries only dream about.
They have things that people in other countries only dream about – yet they want America to be more like those other countries.

[DumbAss Tanker]

The road to Hell is paved by union labor working for Obama bundlers under sweetheart government contracts that call it an 'Investment.'

[Odysseus]

While there is a push for more legislation to prevent violence against women, women are being cleared for front-line combat duty...

There is a Democrat president who only compares himself to past Republican presidents like Lincoln and Reagan, never Democrats like Carter or Wilson...

I feel like Rip Van Winkle. Have I missed something?

I actually had this argument with a feminist years ago. She was in favor of women in combat, and demanded to know my arguments against it. My primary one was that the Israelis discovered that the presence of female Soldiers had a bad effect on the men around them. The fear of female casualties made the males more protective of them, to the detriment of the mission. They were either overcautious, resulting in mission failure, or reckless in trying to protect them, resulting in higher losses. They also discovered that Arab armies found losing to women to be dishonorable, and fought harder against them, and took it out on them when they were captured. The result was that the presence of women on the battlefield led to higher casualties on both sides. When confronted with this, the feminist demanded to know if we could somehow train men not to react this way, at which point I asked her point blank if she was suggesting that we desensitize men to violence against women. She didn't have an answer, and apparently, as long as her side had enough power to overwhelm the facts, she didn't need one.

Another of pair of her positions was that the risk of rape in POW situations was "part of the risks of the job", but that a stray comment or joke by someone in a woman's own unit was unconscionable sexual harassment. She saw no conflict between these two statements.

I just don't get how these people can cross the streets by themselves, much less get elected to high office.

[DumbAss Tanker]

I just don't get how these people can cross the streets by themselves, much less get elected to high office.

Only the first of those two propositions is actually surprising.

[JB]

I actually had this argument with a feminist years ago...

I had the conversation regarding women firefighters.

If they can't lug 80 lbs of shit up three stories then they don't get to be firemen. She tried to argue that even for men the qualifications were unreasonable so they should be altered to allow more men (and women) into the service. ??? Huh ???

If some men can meet the qualifications and some can't, guess what dude, you can't be a fireman. And neither can you sweetcheeks.

These Liberals are constantly trying to make women physically equal to men. It's not gonna happen. Stop trying.

[RobJohnson]

I guess if they don't mind gay men waiting for their fingernail polish to dry between combat missions, they might as well let the ladies fight as well.

[noonwitch]

As far as women in combat go, I know I would not have been able to meet the physical requirements when I was 18-20 years old, not that I had any interest in military service. There are a few women who probably could-women are bigger than they used to be. I'm 5'10", which I always thought was tall for a woman. Then I moved to Detroit.

I know a lot of the issues in physical abilities has to do with upper body strength, though, and even a women who is 6 feet + tall might not have the same level of strength that a man of the same height would have. Then again, she might-watch Venus Williams when she's having a good match. She serves like a man.


As far as vulnerability to rape is concerned: if you are talking rape by the enemy in combat or as a pow, men are as vulnerable to rape as women are. As far as rape by their male peers, I have a major problem with blaming that on the nearness of females, and not on the violent impulses of men who should be in control of their impulses. It cuts very close to the way that Islamists view women-put them in burkas so men won't be tempted by them.

[SaintLouieWoman]

I had the conversation regarding women firefighters.

If they can't lug 80 lbs of shit up three stories then they don't get to be firemen. She tried to argue that even for men the qualifications were unreasonable so they should be altered to allow more men (and women) into the service. ??? Huh ???

If some men can meet the qualifications and some can't, guess what dude, you can't be a fireman. And neither can you sweetcheeks.

These Liberals are constantly trying to make women physically equal to men. It's not gonna happen. Stop trying.

My cousin was a captain in a large metro fire department. He took early retirement because they were messing around with the qualifications for new firemen, dummying it down due to pressure from the minorities. He said he wasn't going to put his life on the line, because he couldn't depend on them to carry their share of the load. It's a shame with all this PC stuff.