View Full Version : Should Women in uniform be able to.....
lunchbox
01-18-2007, 08:47 AM
Oh? It is? So explain the don't ask don't tell policy.
Why, do you have a problem with homosexuals in the military? Personally, I think it is a grotesque policy. However, it is a policy, and it grants permission to keep a secret.
Don't ask, Don't tell, does not apply heterosexual relationships, nor does it supersede any codes that dictate the conduct between ranks.
Sirona
01-18-2007, 10:25 AM
Why, do you have a problem with homosexuals in the military? Personally, I think it is a grotesque policy. However, it is a policy, and it grants permission to keep a secret.
Don't ask, Don't tell, does not apply heterosexual relationships, nor does it supersede any codes that dictate the conduct between ranks.
As usual the point went right over your head. Or bounced off it... either way.
Jenny
01-18-2007, 10:32 AM
This could just be me - but dude already said that he broke the rules and didn't get caught. That obviously implies a certain amount of dishonesty that he has already stipulated to. I don't think it materially changes his point - that a certain standard of behaviour is expected, and that military governs the personal lives of its people. I mean, is this even really contentious?
Sirona
01-18-2007, 12:33 PM
This could just be me - but dude already said that he broke the rules and didn't get caught. That obviously implies a certain amount of dishonesty that he has already stipulated to. I don't think it materially changes his point - that a certain standard of behaviour is expected, and that military governs the personal lives of its people. I mean, is this even really contentious?
I don't disagree, however to make the blanket statement that ommiting or not offering information equals lying is a steaming pile of crap. It depends on the situation.
I'm glad you could address the comment I made rather than going off on a tangent about gays in the military or some other non-related crapola btw. :)
christian211
01-22-2007, 09:55 AM
Geez. All those idiots at the ACLU who think that people who sign up for military duty still deserve constitutional rights. What a completely idiotic and untenable position.
Well, I think more to the point, you might say that it is, frankly, undignified. And while you might find nothing morally wrong with posing nude for playboy (or posing at all for playboy), it would be be a challenge to characterize it as dignified. And while she is allowed to have sex with as many whores as she wants, she isn't allowed to be photographed and publicized doing it. Not consistent with the dignity of Armed Forces.
I don't think she would be shocked and surprised to learn that it was conduct unbecoming. Really - does anyone think that she did this, and was then all "What? What's the problem? Do I look fat?" when called on the proverbial carpet?
Well, here's a question. If it was an oil painting, or an artistic shot would it be more contentious? I don't know, by the way. The nudity itself may not be the end all be all of the discussion.
I don't know how to only quote one sentence, your last sentence. I have no issues with nudity, but rather how this may be perceived by other nations. Almost a show of weakness, lack of serious purpose?? Like some flighty little party boys instead of the mean killing machines we should be;)
WEEZO
01-30-2007, 07:51 PM
ITS A FREE COUNTRY that's all I have to say.
Paris
01-30-2007, 10:28 PM
ITS A FREE COUNTRY that's all I have to say.
Not really...
How about the right to cohabitate openly with a person of the sex of your choice? How about simple equality rights? Can women serve on submarines yet?
Why would a self-respecting woman want to serve on a submarine with a bunch of men who haven't gotten any in a while and see her as a woman rather than a neutral equal? I think (Merely a supposition) they probably can't serve on subs because of a combative element, and for their safety.
Jenny
02-01-2007, 04:49 AM
Why would a self-respecting woman want to serve on a submarine with a bunch of men who haven't gotten any in a while and see her as a woman rather than a neutral equal? I think (Merely a supposition) they probably can't serve on subs because of a combative element, and for their safety.
Honey, considering this entire question is about giving up your natural, god-given right I think you could viably question why any self-respecting person would join the military - yet a whole lot do. As to why a woman would want to serve on a submarine - I don't freaking know, the same reason men do. That's like saying "Why do women want to go into combat?" Why does anyone? Love of god and country. Career aspirations. Whatever reasons people normally have for this kind of thing. And what do you mean by "their safety"? How is their safety, in particular, a concern?
Their safety is a concern when they are a singular or one of very few women in a seriously male environment. I think one of the primary reasons the military won't let a woman serve on a sub because men can become very aggressive and sort of trap a woman in a very bad situation. There is a serious risk of rape or sexual assault.
Unfortunately, the military is still very male-dominated, and women aren't afforded the same opportunities in terms of how they serve as men do. And there is no doubt that there are plenty of women with more balls than some men and could kill the enemy with as much ease as a man. The problem with it is it's a moral deflater for the males to see women dying on the battlefield. There's reasons behind it.
The whole issue behind the Sgt. posing for Playboy is that she is in a position of authority, and she is not representing the military in a professional manner. It'd be the same if a woman from a high profile corporation talked about the business, and then posed nude...she'd probably be fired. It's not about her posing...if she'd not associated herself as military, there probably wouldn't be much of a public stink over it. The issue lies in her presenting an unprofessional image of the military.
Yekhefah
02-01-2007, 09:09 PM
Female soldiers are being raped in Iraq too, and yet they are still volunteering to go. I don't see any reason why a submarine should be different from any other mission.
I read some study several years ago where the Navy did an all-female submarine mission and concluded that women are better adapted to submarine conditions than men are. It floated the idea that perhaps in the future, men might be banned from submarines instead of women. I don't really see that happening though.
I understand women are being raped in Iraq. But why create a situation within a submarine where there's no where to run, no outside help, and a more enclosed, trapped, potentially sexually violent environment? It would make no sense to have a co-ed submarine crew.
Yekhefah
02-01-2007, 09:42 PM
Right, because men in pent-up, potentially violent environments never rape or abuse each other. ::)
I never said that they don't do that. But I think the risk is higher for a woman in that situation. That's my point. It's not difficult for a man, or several men or overpower one, two, or even three women, even if the women are trained by the military. Men are naturally stronger than women physically. That's how our species works. We are talking about women's safety, and I'm stating that women are risking their safety in certain occupations in the military (Such as submarine missions). I've explained my point, if you don't think there's a safety issue for one or two women to be on a subful of sexually aggressive males who haven't had sex for an extended period of time, then petition the military for equal rights or whatever floats your boat.
*shrugs*
Jenny
02-01-2007, 10:15 PM
Their safety is a concern when they are a singular or one of very few women in a seriously male environment. I think one of the primary reasons the military won't let a woman serve on a sub because men can become very aggressive and sort of trap a woman in a very bad situation. There is a serious risk of rape or sexual assault.
Personally, I'm not so attached to protecting the rights of men in the military to sexually assault their colleagues so as to limit the career aspirations of women.
Unfortunately, the military is still very male-dominated, and women aren't afforded the same opportunities in terms of how they serve as men do. And there is no doubt that there are plenty of women with more balls than some men and could kill the enemy with as much ease as a man. The problem with it is it's a moral deflater for the males to see women dying on the battlefield. There's reasons behind it.
But those are bad reasons, based on sexism and stereotype. It is generally accepted that sexism and stereotype are not viable reasons for introducing policy.
The whole issue behind the Sgt. posing for Playboy is that she is in a position of authority, and she is not representing the military in a professional manner. It'd be the same if a woman from a high profile corporation talked about the business, and then posed nude...she'd probably be fired. It's not about her posing...if she'd not associated herself as military, there probably wouldn't be much of a public stink over it. The issue lies in her presenting an unprofessional image of the military.
I actually think you're wrong - I think she would still be disciplined when it was brought to someone's attention. And as I said before - I don't think she is shocked and surprised by it, and I don't think that the right to pose nude while in the military is one we need to get worked up over - I think equality - sexual, racial and orientational - is still the big one there.
I actually think you're wrong - I think she would still be disciplined when it was brought to someone's attention. And as I said before - I don't think she is shocked and surprised by it, and I don't think that the right to pose nude while in the military is one we need to get worked up over - I think equality - sexual, racial and orientational - is still the big one there.
And you're entitled to your opinion. But I don't think there would have been so much public recrimination directed at both her and the Air Force had she not made it a point to capitalize on her being in the military. She may have faced a demotion, and a pay decrease to accompany the demotion, and may have had to pay a fine. But I think at this point she may possibly be facing a harsher punishment if her superiors find that the punishment is appropriate.
As horrible as it is to say, I don't think there will ever truly be equality in this country. Equality is an ideal, and ideals do not truly exist, IMO. Not saying we should give up and be like, "Ok, well screw it, it'll never happen so why try." Just saying that yes, there's a good deal of sexism, and there's a good deal of discrimination, but I don't think we'll ever be completely rid of it,
ArmySGT.
02-01-2007, 11:06 PM
Why would a self-respecting woman want to serve on a submarine with a bunch of men who haven't gotten any in a while and see her as a woman rather than a neutral equal? I think (Merely a supposition) they probably can't serve on subs because of a combative element, and for their safety.
Why? Target rich enviroment..... Intelligent, Fit, Employed, and a Captive audience..... It's like the genesis for a harelequin romance.
The Squids problem with women on submarines? Logistics. They would have to build an new submarine class and it would have to be larger. To accomadate separate sleeping quarters, showers, head, and a additional or crosstrained Doc to handle medical issues peculiar to female physiology. There are females on Surface warships now. Advances in technology made this possible whensyetems were done away with or shrunk significantly opening space for separate and equal facilities. I am curious as to what it was like for a Guy on a support vessel at sea. Most of the crew would be female and the special accomadations would be for Men.
Oy, harlequin romances....LOL! "They're passions could no longer be contained as they rushed into each other's arms, not caring that their superior was right next door and could hear her desire-filled moans of ecstacy!" It's a sex addict's dream come true.