Women to be Allowed in Combat Roles
- Thread starter kingofsp
- Start date
Women in combat, makes total sense.
Now, not only do the men have to worry about the enemy, they have to worry about what Susie the soldier is doing and if she is in any danger or not.
Just fucking stop already.
Now, not only do the men have to worry about the enemy, they have to worry about what Susie the soldier is doing and if she is in any danger or not.
Just fucking stop already.
Meh, if some woman has the guts to go potentially get her limbs blown off by an IED, God bless her.
Well, at least they seem to know it's retarded. So what is all of this being done for? To please radical feminists who actually think they are physically equal to males?
Great. Now every guy is going to be doing stupid shit and getting their heads blown off so they can impress the girls.
Who the fuck cares? They'll be expected to pull their own weight just like anyone else. This isn't the 1950s. They should be able to do whatever they want to.
It's not rape if they are accepting the niggas' paychecks!
J/k. that wasn't politically correct to say.
J/k. that wasn't politically correct to say.
They do. What is it? When you're 16 I think, everyone in the US signs a draft card in high school.
If they were serious about it they would start 3 division types, Women divisions, Mixed, and all male and test their effectiveness in areas with similar levels of danger.
Equality means both sides getting the same shot at something, and being able to use their differences to an advantage, and may the best side win. Equality IS NOT about pairing the better skilled for a certain task with the less able for that task in the hope that the lesser able be propped up at the expense of the better able.
Somehow I doubt they will do this. Because their decisions aren't based on what is right, what is progressive or what is best. They are based on silly human emotions. Most people just hear the headline, women get in and either think "that sucks" or "that is great" without any real curiosity as to the reality of what would be best. In my opinion, anybody who made up their mind as to whether this is good or not without honestly thinking 'it would be good to split test this' is responding based on indoctrination. And even after split testing it would be good to constantly test shit, since conditions change and therefore what is best now might not be 5-10 years from now. Change is reality.
Equality means both sides getting the same shot at something, and being able to use their differences to an advantage, and may the best side win. Equality IS NOT about pairing the better skilled for a certain task with the less able for that task in the hope that the lesser able be propped up at the expense of the better able.
Somehow I doubt they will do this. Because their decisions aren't based on what is right, what is progressive or what is best. They are based on silly human emotions. Most people just hear the headline, women get in and either think "that sucks" or "that is great" without any real curiosity as to the reality of what would be best. In my opinion, anybody who made up their mind as to whether this is good or not without honestly thinking 'it would be good to split test this' is responding based on indoctrination. And even after split testing it would be good to constantly test shit, since conditions change and therefore what is best now might not be 5-10 years from now. Change is reality.