Related Information to G.I. Jane - Women Soldiers

G.I. Jane - Women Soldiers - Page 4

Nighthawk below is the quote with which I took/take offense:

QUOTE

The purpose of the Army (Navy, Air Force, and especially the Marines) is to kill people and break things.  I have yet to see any type of evidence that having women in the military enhances, in any way, this mission.

1st.  You said you saw no evidence that having women in the military enhances, in any way, this mission.  You did not appear to limit this statement to combat roles.  Having women in support roles does enhance the military's mission even if only by freeing up men to fight.  

2nd.  The purpose is not to kill people and break things.  The purpose is to defend our country.  That is why they call it the Department of Defense.   In defending our country there are many supporting roles that women fill and fill very well.

QUOTE

There is a lot of evidence that having women in combat degrades the overall mission.

I would like you to provide this evidence with sources so I can verify it because I do not believe we have a lot of experience with women in combat roles in this country since they are not allowed in direct combat roles.

As far as how it will affect a soldier when they learn a women is captured, that is for the soldier to resolve.  It isn't right to hold back a woman because a man might have problems with the issue.  That is similar to the excuses used to prevent gays from being in the military and I don't accept either of them.  Men are all effected when their fellow male soldiers are captured or killed as well.  An unpleasant side of war, they just have to get toughened up to it.  Sorry, but that is war and it isn't pleasant.

Black men in WWI in the Navy weren't even allowed weapons.  They were assigned to menial tasks like cooking and cleaning.  When they were finally allowed in combat roles, it was in segregated units.  Again the reasons were similar to the ones used against women now.  No white soldier would ever take an order from a Black soldier.  It is wrong.  

If you have a problem with an issue it is your problem and you don't have the right to make it mine by telling me I can't do something because the ultimate result may be difficult for you to accept.

QUOTE

Great!  Set the standard and keep it!  But that doesn't happen.

Because this doesn't happen is not an excuse to keep women from roles which they may be qualified to fill if they want to fill them.  The problem is with those who don't keep the standards or don't set them properly, not with the women in the military.  I would like to see that kind of resentment directed at those responsible for it.  I believe the women held to a lower standard are just as much victims of the lower standard as are the men.

QUOTE

Finally, what does it do to the military, and to our society in general, when a single mother of two ships off to Iraq, with no idea when she will return?  Or, better, how about the woman who ships out pregnant?  What does it do to the mission when a woman assigned to a navy ship gets pregnant on the voyage, gives birth while stationed in the Persian Gulf, and then gives up her infant?  What does it do to the father of four when he sees that any woman who wants to go home just gets herself "knocked up"?  (Believe me - it happens)  She gets to go home, yet he may not see his children for months or years.

I am aware that this happens.  I witnessed it myself.  However, I would simply remind you that these women don't get pregnant on their own.  The man is equally responsible for these pregnancies.  They could just as easily wear a condom.  In fact, for health purposes, they should.

QUOTE

It is a very different matter in homeland defense, such as Israeli women who serve in combat roles to protect their homes.  There, if they lose, they will be raped, tortured, and murdered.  In our (US) case, we purposely place women in roles (such as pilots) so that they will be captured, raped, tortured, and murdered, in foreign lands.

If women aren't trained for this roles in non-war times, they will be ill equipped to fill them in war time.  I believe it is the women's choice if she wants to risk being captured, raped, tortured, etc., in a foreign land.  No one requires any women to fill a combat role such as a pilot.  They are required to ship overseas in support roles such as motor transport and do end up in harms way.  If you don't require this of women you will certainly have a bigger morale problem because the men will resent that they are the only ones to go.  More men would have to go if no women went.  I wouldn't mind that personally.  I am willing to take every advantage given me. ;D  I don't ask for special treatment, though, but if you want to give it to me fine.  I have nothing to prove.  However, I do not agree that anyone has the right to hold me back from accomplishing whatever it is I might accomplish if I choose.  Every one of the women killed or captured in Iraq have been their in "non-combat" roles as support.

In fact, most men in the active military do complain when they feel a woman isn't held to the same standard or doesn't have to fill the same roles.  I think they should complain, but then they need to be willing to accept that the answer isn't going to be to put women out of the military, but to allow them into all fields and hold them to the same standard.  In other words, they should be careful of what they ask, because they just might get it.

QUOTE

My main point in agreeing with Nighthawk is the politics involved with making GI Jane. I see it being pushed so much. Looking at it on a global level it is only the USA that is doing this. You have to step back and think why other nations are not pushing it as much.

I don't think it matters one bit why other countries do or do not have women in combat roles.  What matters in the US is the US constitution and US law.  What matters in other countries is their concern not mine.  However, I believe a number of other countries have women in the military, in fact some draft them, and I don't believe they are all excluded from combat roles.  Israel comes to mind.  You can say that is for homeland defense, but it is their military, period.  We viewed the Iraq war as a homeland defense issue too, by the way.

I am all for only engaging the US military in homeland defense.  So, I say let women fill whatever role they want to in the military, so long as they are qualified, and then only use our military for homeland defense.  Then we have no issues?

Finally, Jessica Lynch.  It is not her fault that the media made it as big an issue as they did.  She was a soldier.  She was caught and rescued.  That is part of being in the military.  Are you suggesting that the only reason a rescue was attempted is that she is a women?  This certainly is not true.  Yes, the story was made bigger because she is a women, but who does that hurt?  Or, is it that some man is jealous that he didn't get the same attention in the media that she did?

Soldiers Women Jane GI

I have the feeling if you stuck with it you would be a Sgt. Major or Kernel by now Really I have nothing more to contribute to this thread since I already established my point.
[offtopic]Wow, good thing we ain't at war with you Tenaheff. *thinks to make a thread now called, 'Should Women be allowed to Vote?' :laugh: Tenaheff, I herby dub thee... GI Jane of the forum [offtopic]

G.I. Jane - Women Soldiers History & Civil Business Politics

Tena I agree with your posts 100%!!!!!!!!!!. Nighthawlk and JB I agree with some of your statements too. I read through all this thread (wow it was long)
I think both and men and women should have the same standards, women should not have less than the men and viceversa. Any woman who decides they want to be in the military, they need to be aware of this and know they're not going to be treated 'special' just because they're women and if the standards are not met like Tena said, the superiors must held accountable not the women themselves since they just follow orders. Is easy to just blame the women or try to move them to another area of work but the men are also responsible if the woman get pregnant for instance, why we have to remove the woman? why is not the man accountable?. Women may not have the same physical abilities than men in general (some they do!) but if they met the standards they should allow to fight in combat like any other soldier, if they don't, they should not of course!.

QUOTE

Look at this year's example.  Jessica Lynch was in a horrible situation.  She was in an accident, captured, then later rescued. But there are some real problems with her story.  At first, the media were all over it, putting her right up there with Audy Murphy, as being a prime candidate for the CMH.  As more details came out, we learned first that the Iraqi doctors were taking very good care of her, that the Iraqi military hadn't mistreated her in any way, or that she was in any immanent danger.  Now, there are stories that she was raped, yet once again, this story is learned to be false.

You said the Media Nighhawlk, but let's remember that the story of Jessica was used by the US government politically as a way to promote the war against Iraq. She even admitted that. This is plain sickening to me, to use a story like this and the life of this young girl to fulfill their own political agendas! *shaking head*

Page 4 Soldiers Women Jane GI

Tenaheff, I apologize if I have offended you.  However, I still stand by my opinion that women do not belong in combat, or in combat zones.

LDS, I detest all of what was done with the Jessica Lynch story, and what is being done with it now.  CNN, FOX, MSNBC, and all the other usual suspects jumped onto the bandwagon like you wouldn't believe.  If the government used it, that came after all the rest.  She was not heroic, she was not raped, she was not tortured.  She, and her unit, took a wrong turn, and had an accident.

Since I stopped following the story out of disgust, I don't know whether any of them were actually attacked, or if the others were killed in the accident.

I am not saying that I disrespect her.  I am saying that I disrespect the media and anyone else who used her story for propaganda.

I disrespect the women who get pregnant so that they can get out of their units (I personally knew some).  I disrespect the woman who got pregnant while aboard ship, and had her baby on ship.  I disrespect the men who chase the women in combat situations.

I detest the political correctness that has lowered the standards of behaviour and the physical standards of the military.

So, we will have to disagree, because I think GI Jane is a very, very bad thing.

NightHawk

Soldiers Women Jane GI

Nighthawk, don't worry about having offended me.  I wasn't personally offended, I just found your statement (the one specifically that I highlighted) offensive.  I didn't take it personally because at no point did you attack me personally.

Yes, we will have to disagree on this one, but we probably aren't as far apart as you might imagine.  I just don't agree with a lot of the reasons you mentioned.  I do, however, enjoy the opportunity to discuss them with you.  

On the one hand, I don't want to see anyone force a woman into combat, but on the other, I don't want someone to say she doesn't have all the same rights a man has including the right to go into combat if she wants to.  For me it is a rights issue.  Whether or not it is a good idea is a different issue for me.  

As a women, I don't want to be told I can't do something simply because I am a women.  That isn't right.  In my opinion.  Whether or not it is a good idea for me to do it is something that should be left to me to decide.  I know you don't agree with that last statement and that is fine.  I just know how many things in the past women have been prohibited from doing because some man didn't think it was a good idea.  **says I, as I step off my soap box while still wearing my bra (having never burned it)** ;D

G.I. Jane - Women Soldiers

QUOTE

LDS, I detest all of what was done with the Jessica Lynch story, and what is being done with it now.  CNN, FOX, MSNBC, and all the other usual suspects jumped onto the bandwagon like you wouldn't believe.  If the government used it, that came after all the rest.  She was not heroic, she was not raped, she was not tortured.  She, and her unit, took a wrong turn, and had an accident. I am not saying that I disrespect her.  I am saying that I disrespect the media and anyone else who used her story for propaganda.

That's not correct Nighhawlk, the US government used the story Ms. Lynch to make propaganda of the war in Iraq. She even did admit and blame the government for this. The Media covered the whole thing after the US officials make this huge deal about her case. I'm very surprised you believe it was only the Media.

QUOTE

I disrespect the women who get pregnant so that they can get out of their units (I personally knew some).  I disrespect the woman who got pregnant while aboard ship, and had her baby on ship.  I disrespect the men who chase the women in combat situations.

I hope you disrespect the men also who make this women pregnant...because as far as I know, there must be two people in order to conceive a child and the rules must be applied to everyone. It's easy to blame the women who is the one who gets pregnant but the man broke the rules also. Let's not forget that.

G.I. Jane Women Soldiers - Page 4

QUOTE

I hope you disrespect the men also who make this women pregnant...because as far as I know, there must be two people in order to conceive a child and the rules must be applied to everyone.

Read again what I said:

QUOTE

I disrespect the men who chase the women in combat situations.

That was what I was trying to say.

You are right about the propaganda.  That is one of the worst things about having women in combat, they will always be used for propaganda.  Anytime one is captured, raped, tortured, and/or murdered, there is going to be a new cry of anguish from the government and from the media.

The politics of getting women into uniform, and now getting them into combat, is all about using them.  Feminists use them to promote their agenda of destroying the family.  Liberals use them to further their agendas of social engineering.  Conservatives use them as well.

NightHawk

G.I. Jane Women Soldiers Politics Business Civil & History - Page 4

Here is an article that speaks about some of my points:
https://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...q_soldier_mom_2
Army: No Punishment Set for Soldier Mom


https://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=32339
Military women slaughtered by Congress?
A commentary by Jane Chastain

https://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=31981
Mothers at war: The American way?
Some more commentary

NightHawk