The Feminism Thread

[BlueStarLizzard]

in responce to women in combat.

1. i think that if the military is lowering standards so the weak little woman can pass it is just retarded. if i went through training, i would want to trained at the same level as the men. its a double standerd and its bogus. if you can't hack it, you can't hack it. thats not the fault of women, its the fault of those in charge going... "oh but they're WOMEN, they can't do that..."

2. women can be just as effective in combat then men. women have better lower body strength, higher pain tolerance and are better at multitasking. diffrent strenths. training is ment to improve you at stuff your already good at as well as to get you to learn new stuff. if the military could (and yes i relize that this would be an insane amount of work) could learn to train women as opposed to training women to be men, things might work better in intregrating the military.
another note, if they can't intergrate the military at this point, why not have FEMALE and MALE combate units, as opposed to co-ed?

i am insulted by ANY rule/law/group who thinks they need to make it 'easier' for the women to provide intergration. i just want the option open. if a women doesn't pass, she doesn't pass, but don't pass her just based on her sex.

(BTW, i hate that equal oppertunity BS. if i'm gonna get a job or into a school, it damn well better be cause i was the best canadate, not because i'm female!)

[BlueStarLizzard]

I used to work with a very nice lady who called herself a feminist. We both agreed that she should get the same pay for doing the same job at the same quality level as men. She didn't like the idea of men doing things like paying for dates and opening doors for ladies.

She used to bug me starting in the Spring about coming over to her house on the weekend and mowing her lawn (mowing the lawn guys - not a euphemism for sex - at least I'm pretty sure mowing the lawn is what she wanted)...

Anyway she made this request quite often until I finally got fed up and said, "Belinda, you guys fought for years for the right to mow your own damn lawns. You got what you wanted so mow your own damn lawn."

Her response:"We fought for the right, Michael, to mow our own lawns not to actually have to do it".
My response: Well, we won't go there. Needless to say she never asked again.

There's just something so fundamentally wrong with "We fought for the right, not to actually have to do it". I have observed this attitude in not a few so called feminists.

If women want to be the equal of men then they should be subject to everything we are be it good or bad, pleasant or unpleasant. Pretty simple really - can't have equality and accept the good only.

It seems to me though that many so called feminists are a bit hypocritical about their cause when something that goes along with being equal may not be to their liking.

and you can't ask someone else to mow your lawn?

i get what your saying, but its a bad example...

[The Annoyed Man]

Hmmm... women in combat.

 Personally, I can't think of anyone I would rather have at my side on the front lines than Tamara. And yes, I've know plenty of Spec ops types (I was stationed aboard a gator freighter). I'd take Tam over any of them.

 Maybe we should discuss MadMike's daughter for a moment? After all, she already outshoots the infantry at the range...

 Make the requirements the same across the board, and things are fine.


 I used to run my dad's polishing shop. We had an odd requirement for employees: no breasts. Got called out on that a couple times. But you're working with a wheel using a 60 grit belt, spinning at a couple thousand RPMs, and pushing against it with your belly. Had to demonstrate to a couple of girls that breasts would get in the way of visibility, creating an unsafe set of conditions...


 To me, the chick mentioned in the firefly post is a feminazi: militant, and a detriment to the cause of feminism

[TF_FH]

and you can't ask someone else to mow your lawn? (Typically a 'Mans' job)

i get what your saying, but its a bad example...(Not really)

When I was military I used to work in an office full of women.  Not feminists, but women.  I was the only guy.  God forbid they did anything that was typically something a guy did.  Like when it came up to lift something heavy, they went and got me because I was a guy and even made jokes about it.  Now could you imagine the shitstorm that would have happened if I turned around and said, "As long as you bake me a cake because you're a woman."?  Feminist or not, there are a lot of women in this world (NOT ALL) that have the viewpoint of, "It's only equal as long as its not negative for me.".   Drives me nuts, but if I say anything about it people get all pissed off at me.  Oh well, but there's my take on that.

[TF_FH]

Now back on track, yes, Feminism has really gone towards the crazy man-haters in my opinion.  There are espcially quite a few amonst the lesbian population.  My roommate happens to be homosexual and although she is not a crazy man-hater, shes got a few friends that are.  They get quite shocked and amazed when they find out she lives with a *GASP* MAN.  All kidding aside though there seems to be a lot of inequality in the battle for equality.

[BridgeRunner]

Lots of women, like, oh, me for example, tend to go a little too far in the opposite direction.  I definitely try too hard to be all things to all people.  Used to sell computers.  Show up in heels and a skirt, because sex sells (I was thinner then), then climb up to the overhead storage and throw freight to prove I can pull my weight.  Bake pies for the store for July 4, haul stuff out to deliver to customer sites. 

I can mow grass and maintain the car.  I can cook and sew and clean.  I can make a decent living. I can raise a child.  I spent too long never asking for help with anything because I am good at and enjoy the "womanly" things, and feel like a useless, helpless woman if I don't do the "man's job" as well.

[BlueStarLizzard]

the heavy hauler where i work is not the guy. its me.

BTW, my mom mows the lawn. she WON'T let her husband do it. according to her, he doesn't do it right.

[HankB]

I used to work with a very nice lady who called herself a feminist . . . She used to bug me starting in the Spring about coming over to her house on the weekend and mowing her lawn (mowing the lawn guys - not a euphemism for sex - at least I'm pretty sure mowing the lawn is what she wanted) . . .

Mowing her lawn on a weekend, no sex . . . unless you were only 14 or 15 at the time, this sounds very weird . . .

[Werewolf]

I used to work with a very nice lady who called herself a feminist . . . She used to bug me starting in the Spring about coming over to her house on the weekend and mowing her lawn (mowing the lawn guys - not a euphemism for sex - at least I'm pretty sure mowing the lawn is what she wanted) . . .

Mowing her lawn on a weekend, no sex . . . unless you were only 14 or 15 at the time, this sounds very weird . . .

Others have said the same - she really didn't want the grass mowed - but they weren't there and I was - 90% sure she just wante the grass mowed. Plus I was 46 and happily married then, still am 10 years later to the same woman for almost 29 years.

[Ben]

I can mow grass and maintain the car.  I can cook and sew and clean.  I can make a decent living. I can raise a child.  I spent too long never asking for help with anything because I am good at and enjoy the "womanly" things, and feel like a useless, helpless woman if I don't do the "man's job" as well.

Very much like the Heinlein quote:

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly."


I believe anyone who is capable of doing a thing should be able to pursue it, and treated equally while doing so. The "feminist" who gives feminism a bad name is not the 180lb woman who is at least as strong as many of her male competitors that applies for the firefighter job; it's the 100lb woman that insists the rules be changed so that she can qualify, and then can't drag a downed person out of a burning building.

[Iain]

The "feminist" who gives feminism a bad name is not the 180lb woman who is at least as strong as many of her male competitors that applies for the firefighter job;

This is going to sound sexist, but I've met very few women in that category.

We talked about this somewhere a while back, but for me the most bizarre thing that seems to have come about from 'ladette' culture is this notion that your average girl can take your average lad in a fight - even girls who seem determined to prove it. Sure there is a continuum with some gender overlap, but I'll back the 180lb male against the 180lb female any time. Especially if they are both going for a firefighters job.

The IST consists of performance tests involving pull-ups, abdominal crunches, and running. To pass, a male recruit must complete at least 2 pull-ups, 44 crunches in two minutes, and run 1.5 miles in 13:30 minutes or less. The female recruits must hold a “flexed arm hang” (hanging on a bar with their arms bent) for at least 12 seconds. They must also complete 44 crunches in two minutes, and run 1.5 miles in 15:00 minutes or less.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps_Boot_Camp

That accurate? Those are very different standards for pull-ups, both probably equally difficult for each gender, but not equal to each other.

[Ben]

This is going to sound sexist, but I've met very few women in that category.

My point wasn't really a direct comparison, just that if a woman can complete all the same tasks a man has to for that firefighter's job, there's no reason for her not to have it. Maybe the 180lb muscular woman only has equal strength to a 120lb man, but if they can both pass the test, they should both be able to get the job.

I just don't believe it's right to use any "affirmative action for equality" that involves dropping standards to fit political agendas, especially in occupations related to protection of life.

[Perd Hapley]

My wife has a few words she would like to say about the joy of Biblical submission to one's husband.  Unfortunately, the stove and the computer are on opposite ends of the house, and her chain does not reach far enough.

I believe that we saw the term 'Feminazi' coined to distinguish between a person who believes that women should have a more or less equal shot at life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and those that believe that females should be help superior to males, by their own vision of superiority.  That no relationship, as a matter of course, between men and women can be healthy.  The whole 50% of men are rapists - the other 50% just haven't had the chance yet type.

The following is from Wikipedia.  It can be confirmed by anyone who has listened to Rush Limbaugh for the past decade or two.   

The term was popularized by conservative talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, who credited his friend Tom Hazlett, a professor of law and economics at George Mason University, with coining the term.[4] Limbaugh originally stated that the word feminazi not only referred to an extreme feminist but to a woman whose goal was that there should be as many abortions as possible, saying at one point that there were fewer than twenty-five true feminazis in the U.S.

Though Limbaugh has claimed these limits to the definition of the term, in practice he has employed it in a much wider context.

[Tallpine]

The basic definition of feminism is:
1. Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.

Except from my observation, many "feminists" don't believe in that at all - they believe women are superior 

Heck, they could even be right 

If I believe in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes, can I call myself a "masculinist"  

Men are generally better at some things, and women are generally better at some others.  So what...?

Women are a lot prettier than men, at least IMO.

As far as personal relationships between men/women couples, you should be able to arrange it anyway the two want: man in charge / woman in charge / equal vote / draw straws / whatever ....

But the wife's chain ought to be long enough so she can change a flat on the car instead of just being stuck in the kitchen    (joking!)

[MechAg94]

My wife has a few words she would like to say about the joy of Biblical submission to one's husband.  Unfortunately, the stove and the computer are on opposite ends of the house, and her chain does not reach far enough.

As my pastor said a few times, the woman was not intended to be the slave.  The man is supposed to be a leader and act like it. 

I agree with most of the sentiment.  Equality is fine with me as long as you are talking about equality and not advantage.  I do agree somewhat that some women want the equality of an asexual society yet want to retain all the advantages of being a lady among gentlemen. 

Other than that, I don't have any personal issue with the original intent. 

[roo_ster]

Army Physical Fitness Standards for Men & Women, by age.

Three events: push-ups, sit-ups, 2 mile run.
Max score: 100pts/event for total max of 300pts

Army standard to exit Basic is minimum of 50 pts per event.  Army standard to pass after that is 60 pts/event.

The standard at my unit was 80pts/event, but you would get hell if you didn't get 90pts/event.

There are other physical performance standards, such a the 15 mile ruck march at a 15min/mile pace with all gear & 45lb pack.

Source:
http://www.la.ngb.army.mil/156BAND/apft.html

PUSH-UPS



SIT-UPS



TWO MILE RUN


I think I will let the data speak for itself in this post.

Note, that the other services have similarly, uhh, "equal" performance standards.

[Perd Hapley]

But the wife's chain ought to be long enough so she can change a flat on the car instead of just being stuck in the kitchen  grin  (joking!)

I've considered that, believe me.  However, a longer chain may become too heavy for the weaker sex to bear.  This is why I believe the future is in shock collars.  Of course, we must bear in mind that shock collars were not used in the Bible, so may be suspect and actually a tool of Satan. 

[roo_ster]

I, too, have met some exceptional women who were impressive physical specimens with above-average strength, stamina, & the like.  Being in power-lifting, body-building, and kickboxing subcultures will expose one to some pretty exceptional gals.

I respect what they have done, especially considering that (all else being equal) a woman is going to have to put much more effort and time into strength training to get results, given their lower level of testosterone* relative to a man.

Thing is, our military was not constituted as a self-actualizing organization for exceptional females to get their Maslow on.  It is also not supposed to be a social engineers' plaything.  It is to be an instrument of policy used to inflict violence on our country's enemies. 


There are the other issues that no one has attempted to refute:
1. Higher incidence of injury
2. Higher incidence of illness in field conditions
3. Greater hygiene requirements unit commanders are required to provide
4. Now that pregnancy is not an instant-out, the issue of picking up the slack when a unit member is on light duty for nine months.
5. Increased time & money required to physically train a female to the same standard as a male

Then, there is the bright idea of deliberately placing a largely young-adult population in close proximity to other sexually attractive unit members in a high-stress environment.

Anybody care to find out the percentage of service women on aircraft carriers that end up pregnant before the end of the deployment?


Women in the armed services is a sign of either luxury or desperation.  Luxury, in that the service has not been and does not look to be in an existential struggle for some time.  Desperation, in that a country's population is so small that it does not have enough able-bodied young males to satisfy manpower needs.


* This includes lower-body strength, which is still weighted toward males, just not as wildly skewed as with upper-body strength.

[gaston_45]

The IST consists of performance tests involving pull-ups, abdominal crunches, and running. To pass, a male recruit must complete at least 2 pull-ups, 44 crunches in two minutes, and run 1.5 miles in 13:30 minutes or less. The female recruits must hold a flexed arm hang (hanging on a bar with their arms bent) for at least 12 seconds. They must also complete 44 crunches in two minutes, and run 1.5 miles in 15:00 minutes or less.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps_Boot_Camp

That accurate? Those are very different standards for pull-ups, both probably equally difficult for each gender, but not equal to each other.

Close, that is what you have to do just to start boot camp.  This: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps_Physical_Fitness_Test  is what you do every six months once you are in.

"The minimum a male Marine must complete are three pull-ups, 50 crunches, and a 28 minute 3-mile run. The minimum a female Marine must complete are 15 seconds on a flexed arm hang, 44 crunches and a 30 minute 3-mile run.

To earn a perfect PFT score for males, one must do 20 pull-ups, 100 crunches in less than two minutes, and complete the three mile run in 18 minutes or less. For females, a perfect score is 70 seconds on the flexed arm hang, 100 crunches, and a 21 minute three mile run. This will earn a 300 point PFT. Marines who score above a 285 receive certifications as an award for their higher than average fitness."


I got in a bit of trouble over this actually.  I was overheard bitching about how easy the women had it by a staff sergeant.  He decided I should do the flex arm hang for the full 70 seconds or face an njp for insubordination.  Well, this made me even more mad and I finally dropped off the bar after 137 seconds. Luckily, even though it made him even more mad he honored the deal.  The women do have it easier and what makes it worse is that PFT score is a major portion of the points you have to get to get promoted, so women get promoted easier.

[Iain]

* This includes lower-body strength, which is still weighted toward males, just not as wildly skewed as with upper-body strength.

I have a suspicion that this idea that women are "stronger" in the lower body is a relative assessment made after looking at trained individuals. We've all seen that in gyms the typical male workout is bench/curl. Women have different priorities - usually hips/bum/thighs. In my experience your average female gym-goer is probably nearly twice as likely to do significant lower body training. Where a male and a female have trained lower body equally - he is going to be stronger in near all cases.

Gaston - I don't know that it is easier for a your average gal to do a 12 second flexed arm hang than it is for your average male to knock out 3 pull-ups. As a test though, they do not equate to each other at all.

Crossfit girls doing muscle-ups on the rings though - that's something else.

[LadySmith]

I am glad I am not a woman.  They cannot win.

No matter what decision they make someone is telling them that they are wrong.

True.
Doesn't mean we have to listen. You know that I don't. 

[LadySmith]

Ever since I was aware the feminist movement has been in the psychotic stage.

Question, LS. Do you think:

1) Women should vote?
2) Women should be eligible for the draft?

Answers:
1. Yes. All mature citizens should. This has already been resolved in this country, so why do you ask?
2. Yes. There are many reasons to exclude someone from mandatory military service. Gender alone should not be one of them. However, I don't care much for the concept of conscription. The gov't placing its needs above your own chaps my hide a bit.

[LadySmith]

A feminism thread hijacked by men talking nonsense.

The smell of patriarchy around here is nauseating.

I see it as the usual thread drift that occurs everywhere else here. Completely egalitarian. 

[Iain]

A feminism thread hijacked by men talking nonsense.

The smell of patriarchy around here is nauseating.

I see it as the usual thread drift that occurs everywhere else here. Completely egalitarian. 

But still nauseating eh?

[gunsmith]

I didn't read the whole thread.
So I'll just pipe in sounding arrogant.
I like modern lesbians a lot more then modern feminist.
Except for a few things here and there, Tammy Bruce is the greatest.
I held a door for a lesbian, she said "thanks" a feminist scowled and said "I can do it myself"

Lesbians see the logic in "taking back the night" with a shotgun or a 1911, feminist with a frown and a police state.