Why women should not be allowed in combat roles

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cryptonic

So, you're saying that after a woman gets raped, she should blame herself for it happening because she could've taken preventative measures? Yes, that is a very healthy way of thinking for a victim of a physical assault.

True rape is 100% the perpetrators's fault. Women should not have to change their life style to prevent Men from being pieces of shit. Men just shouldn't be pieces of shit.

---

I mean if I walk in baltimore I would never wear the clothing/accessories I wear to class/social events because I am just asking to be robbed. It isn't my fault that I would get robbed, but I am an idiot for not reducing the risk by dressing down when I know I am going to be in high crime areas, aka agree with SJ/Firebreather.

SJ DON'T USE THEIR LIKE YOU ARE USING IT, THANKS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PLZLEAVEDUCKK

I mean if I walk in baltimore I would never wear the clothing/accessories I wear to class/social events because I am just asking to be robbed.

---

So, what you're trying to say is: "Girls who wear suggestive clothes are just asking to be raped"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Helz

Because its impractical to separate the units. Then when making a decision on how to move your troops you have to sit down and consider "Well I need to keep these two units separate or accept X issues." Even without that it applies logistical stress that diverts assets and increases cost. Why are you not pissed off that people with flat feet can't go infantry? Its not their fault they wont be able to carry heavy shit for long distances because they were born that way. How are they any different and what about the other countless factors that prevent people from serving in a combat role?
The other issue is that we can not control who we are fighting. Straight up most of our wars right now are against Muslims. Most Muslim extremists see women as inferior and would rather die than surrender to one. This means enemies who will fight to the death instead of surrendering which means more of our people die killing them.

Just take a pragmatic approach to the situation and you will understand what I am saying. Keep looking at it from an idealist perspective and we wont find any common ground. I do understand that its basically just not fair but It is much more unfair for someone who dies because of one of these issues than for someone that was denied the opportunity to serve in a specific capacity. Even from a utilitarian perspective this is ethnically required. Its not like I am saying "Women are inferior as fuck and should not serve" yet that's how people seem to be twisting it.

Totally remove 'sex' from the issue and there is no way in hell anyone would support the action:
If using group A can get the job done
And using group B has a higher cost and higher chance of casualties
Should we use group B?

I don't care if their black, white, male, female, smart, stupid, disabled, gay straight ect.. When lives are on the line tactical value supersedes some sense of whats fair. This is why I hold this view.

---

The flat feet thing is a non-argument. Especially since it's not true; you can join the Military with Flat Feet (only 3% of ppl with flat feet can't). But even if it was true, it's not like you're saying Flat Foot people can't join because Men can't handle Flat Feet.
No one is saying you're saying women are inferior. Well, at least I'm not. My point is that you're restricting what women can do because Men in the army are either white knights who will protect women, or rapists who force them into separate sleeping arrangements. Yet, somehow women are punished for this.

At the end of the day. The men can't handle the women. =/ it's not the women's fault. And it's going to take a long time to rip out all the sexist roots.

So right now, perhaps it's best if they don't share the front line. But as social views evolve it will then become more acceptable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperJack

At the end of the day. The men can't handle the women. =/ it's not the women's fault. And it's going to take a long time to rip out all the sexist roots.

So right now, perhaps it's best if they don't share the front line. But as social views evolve it will then become more acceptable.

---

Yes, exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cryptonic

The flat feet thing is a non-argument. Especially since it's not true; you can join the Military with Flat Feet (only 3% of ppl with flat feet can't). But even if it was true, it's not like you're saying Flat Foot people can't join because Men can't handle Flat Feet.
No one is saying you're saying women are inferior. Well, at least I'm not. My point is that you're restricting what women can do because Men in the army are either white knights who will protect women, or rapists who force them into separate sleeping arrangements. Yet, somehow women are punished for this.

---

I suppose I am. The major issues are centered around the negative way men react.
For example if your buddy dies you will get angry and want to murder the enemy. But if you end up scraping up pieces of some girl you were thinking about fucking the other day you just get depressed and it messes with your head in a different way.
I would say that men have an instinct to protect women because thats what studies reflect. I don't think its so much the guy being a white knight as something that has been a part of human nature for thousands of years.

So yeah. Women should be restricted mostly because men cant handle them. Life is just not fair.

But I still maintain that women are not as physically capable as men on average. I am sure there are plenty of girls who could outdo me physically in every way but there is a reasons sports are usually segregated. Its only specifically an issue for Infantry and mostly with Weapons company. Carrying a 50 cal is rough as hell and that burden is shared by the rest of the unit. Foot movements can easily be 15k and up especially if its to re position in areas mech transport is not viable. A normal combat load is at least 60 pounds and carrying that in full FR clothes when its 120 in Iraq is no joke. This is probably my only sexist point but I think it requires an abnormal girl to handle that kind of weight when your walking such long distances over terrain too rough to drive on. Plenty of guys have hell making it on those kinds of pushes. Its not like its a super common thing but its something any marine unit is expected to be capable of doing if required.

I really don't think threes anything wrong with the way things are now. Its not fair but its necessary. Women can serve in tons of different jobs. They can even fight and kill shooting CSW out of a helicopter or in dismounted combat from established combat in mechanized transport roles. I am just being pragmatic and saying that the fact 'its not fair' is not worth risking lives. We both have our own views on the subject and I accept yours, but I do not see myself swapping my position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cryptonic

So, what you're trying to say is: "Girls who wear suggestive clothes are just asking to be raped"

---

No, I am saying that if girls know they are going to be in a situation where the odds of being raped are higher than usual they should be trying to minimize the risk.

People suck and don't always act rationally, it doesn't matter who is at fault, it is about trying to prevent the situation from ever happening.

Women are 100% less likely to have their dick shot.