Feminism and Gender Equality

[Sinbi]

You have yet to bring evidence forward to explain how the wage gap is false.

Spoiler: Pure, Concentrated Shitposting

http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender Wage Gap Final Report.pdf
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576250672504707048.html
http://money.howstuffworks.com/gender-gap1.htm
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-13/don-t-blame-discrimination-for-gender-wage-gap.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/04/16/its-time-that-we-end-the-equal-pay-myth/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/davidgreen/9666597/The_gender_pay_gap_does_not_exist/
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505125_162-28246928/the-gender-pay-gap-is-a-complete-myth/
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-gender-wage-gap-is-a-myth-2012-07-26
http://www.businessinsider.com/actually-the-gender-pay-gap-is-just-a-myth-2011-3?op=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/opinion/22Sommers.html?_r=1&hp
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/the_wage_gap_myth.html
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/biggest-shock-fridays-payroll-report-sorry-men
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/07/share-of-men-in-labor-force-at-all-time-low/?src=recg
http://www.businessinsider.com/women-in-tech-make-more-money-and-land-better-jobs-than-men-20
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennago...young-women-earn-more-than-men—news-800761492
http://www.womensviewsonnews.org/20...le/domesticNews/idUSN0752118220071107?feedTy…
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-05-04-equal-parenting_N.htm
http://www.payscale.com/career-news/2009/12/do-men-or-women-choose-majors-to-maximize-income
http://social.dol.gov/blog/myth-busting-the-pay-gap/

Now I have. But like someone said before, we are both going to find evidence for what we're looking for because it's a complicated situation. I at least gave the information people have shown me a once over, and found flaws and inaccuracies and half-truths. Not convinced in the existence of the looming darkness, friendo.

Women who are viewed as aggressive rather than assertive is going to be viewed as a negative trait, the sexism comes into play when individuals cannot distinguish between the two. Its not just a behavioral trait of the field. I would expect any nurse, male or female have compassion, and its not just in nursing, in any field dealing with human services, male-dominated, female-dominated, there would obviously need to be a level of empathy for clients and patients regardless of the caretaker's gender.

I know plenty of people who find aggressiveness in a woman to be a positive trait, so no it is not always going to be viewed as negative trait, as you implied.
People not being able to distinguish between two similar behaviors is not sexism.
Assertiveness is a behavioral trait of the field, you have to be assertive to get anywhere in business, otherwise you get stuck in the mail room. I would expect everyone in business to have a certain level of ambition and to be assertive. There, using the same logic you just did, we can simply wash over stuff without acknowledging that it is basic behavioral patterns on display here. Like I said before, the minorities in that field set an example.

 

[Kiro]

Women I love you. I love you so much I am willing to enlist in the United States Marine Corps and fight for you. So let me and my brothers fight the good fight and you stay in the homeland, safe. I don't think a warzone is a place for anyone, and a lady even less.

Frankly? I feel that attitude is even more sexist and disgusting than your previous attitude... and let's not forget that your precious USMC has plenty of women in it. Women in combat roles. So get off your high horse.

 

[Mr.BossMan]

@Outlander

Treating women right and not harassing them is not Sexist.

Sorry you feel that way.

@Kiro

What is wrong with protecting women? War is not about gender equality. Adding women in combat roles is problematic on several different fronts. It does more harm than good. It is a belief I hold, and it is not going to change.

I also find it insulting how you and Outlander have the balls to label me a sexist simply because I disagree with you.

 

[Nor'baal]

If a woman wants to take my place on the front line when the war comes, I sure as hell ain't going to top her.

I'll become a spy, like a shit version of Jack Reacher.

#RunAway #Cowardice

 

[Outlander]

Its fine to disagree. However, your need to 'protect' women from war is denying an entire gender the right to help defend their country is one I find archaic.

I never called you sexist, and it seems like your feeling insulted is a knee-jerk reaction. Especially when in context to @Kiro , who has the potential to be much more insulted by your comments than you are of hers.

@Outlander

Treating women right and not harassing them is not Sexist.

Sorry you feel that way.

@Kiro

What is wrong with protecting women? War is not about gender equality. Adding women in combat roles is problematic on several different fronts. It does more harm than good. It is a belief I hold, and it is not going to change.

I also find it insulting how you and Outlander have the balls to label me a sexist simply because I disagree with you.

 

[Kiro]

What is wrong with protecting women? War is not about gender equality. Adding women in combat roles is problematic on several different fronts. It does more harm than good. It is a belief I hold, and it is not going to change.

I also find it insulting how you and Outlander have the balls to label me a sexist simply because I disagree with you.

What's wrong with it is that you think that we NEED to be defended. We are perfectly capable of defending ourselves, as several in this thread have pointed out repeatedly. Myself included. But yeah, thanks, I'll go tell my sister, whom is currently a lieutenant in the Royal Norwegian Airforce and has served overseas in combat situations, that she's physically incapable of serving.

And I don't find you sexist because you disagree with me. I find you sexist because you inherently see women as someone weaker than you. Someone BENEATH you, something that requires to be kept far from harm and tucked away warm and safe.

EDIT: I don't have balls. Which is one of the main reasons I am calling you sexist.

 

[Nor'baal]

My Grandmother was the third female police officer in the UK. Her sister served in the IDF.

My other grandmother was a member of the German Armed Forces in WW2.

The leader of the British RAF is female, and does a bloody good job. More women in the UK that ever before are joining the police.

Saying women shouldn't serve in the armed force is the most flag waving gun toting American lunacy I've ever heard, bar perhaps dropping a nuke on Japan after they surrendered.

Seriously, Europe took less time that the USA to realise women could do more than clean and have children, and that's really saying something.

 

[Cheshire]

@Outlander

Treating women right and not harassing them is not Sexist.

Sorry you feel that way.

@Kiro

What is wrong with protecting women? War is not about gender equality. Adding women in combat roles is problematic on several different fronts. It does more harm than good. It is a belief I hold, and it is not going to change.

I also find it insulting how you and Outlander have the balls to label me a sexist simply because I disagree with you.

Its fine to disagree. However, your need to 'protect' women from war is denying an entire gender the right to help defend their country is one I find archaic.

I never called you sexist, and it seems like your feeling insulted is a knee-jerk reaction. Especially when in context to @Kiro , who has the potential to be much more insulted by your comments than you are of hers.

I don't understand where you are coming Bossman because quite frankly, I think what you are doing is saying that women should not have a certain job. However while you are not meaning to sound sexist, it certainly comes across like you are.

 

[Sinbi]

Seriously, Europe took less time that the USA to realise women could do more than clean and have children, and that's really saying something.

Europe has been civilized for far longer than the US, and since the US is still very young and has gotten to the point where men and women are equal in less of the allotted time, that really shows something. Your nationalism is showing. Other than that, uh, yeah I get your need for EXCESSIVE EMPHASIS. Ladypeople should be allowed to put their lives on the line to protect whatever. The guy has a bit of an outdated view, and it offends you. If you're getting angry over this, and this is just a hunch so if you're not just disregard the next two sentences..
Practice a bit of stoicism. Offense is never given, only taken.

 

[Black Noise]

Europe has been civilized for far longer than the US, and since the US is still very young and has gotten to the point where men and women are equal in less of the allotted time, that really shows something. Your nationalism is showing. Other than that, uh, yeah I get your need for EXCESSIVE EMPHASIS. Ladypeople should be allowed to put their lives on the line to protect whatever. The guy has a bit of an outdated view, and it offends you. If you're getting angry over this, and this is just a hunch so if you're not just disregard the next two sentences..
Practice a bit of stoicism. Offense is never given, only taken.

Frankly, the only person I see getting hostile is you.

Kiro, Gaba, ect. Are not sitting behind their computers spitting with rage at "OMG SOMEONE ON THE INTERNET DISAGREES WITH ME."

What they are is mad, and they have a RIGHT to be. If injustice, suffering, inequality and violence against a certain people group or gender does NOT anger you, then perhaps you should step back and examine your morality. The wage gap exists, but so does a lot of wage inequality in the states and other countries that goes FAR beyond just gender and race, it's greed, selfishness, and corporate evil. It's why I get paid 13.75 by my generous employer and the guy down the street working twice as hard as me gets paid 6.75. I work for a private employer, he works for a company.

You can sit on your high horse and tell everyone else how to not be angry, but that makes you nothing more than a hypocrite to be ignored and discarded. You may read me as angry, as hostile, or as stoic, how I am perceived is really of no concern to me. What is of concern is the facts of what I am saying, and I am stating facts.

Explaining to people like boss man why he is wrong is how people change for the better. If not for how I was 'mocked and shamed' by Prospero/BLADE when I was young and stupid on this site four years ago, I'd still be fairly homophobic, never questioning what I had been taught and raised to believe.

Righteous anger, mockery, it has a place, and it is necessary. But your incessant, needless, unnecessary whining and high horsing accomplishes nothing.

 

[Mr.BossMan]

BUT, I know some of you may hate me for it. But i still believe, and quite honestly will always believe, women should not be allowed combat roles in the military. Ya I said that, and yes I truly believe this, and yes I am right and if you fight me on this you are wrong. Also NO women should not be forced to be in the draft, that idea is ridiculous.

This is what I said.

What's wrong with it is that you think that we NEED to be defended. We are perfectly capable of defending ourselves, as several in this thread have pointed out repeatedly. Myself included. But yeah, thanks, I'll go tell my sister, whom is currently a lieutenant in the Royal Norwegian Airforce and has served overseas in combat situations, that she's physically incapable of serving.

And I don't find you sexist because you disagree with me. I find you sexist because you inherently see women as someone weaker than you. Someone BENEATH you, something that requires to be kept far from harm and tucked away warm and safe.

Somehow you got that out of what I said.

How in any way can you jump to the conclusion that I find women weaker than myself? How can you say I find women BENEATH me? And how can you say that I see women as Something rather than a human being?

Reread what I said and reread what you said and please enlighten me on your thought process.

Or actually don't. Cause I know exactly what this is, you are so passionate about this topic you are letting your emotions rule you. So let's stop doing that and instead have a civil argument. I am going to post why I think women should not be allowed in COMBAT roles. Note I put emphasis on COMBAT simply because I am perfectly fine with women in non-combat roles. There are other ways to serve your country than killing and dying for it.

And I want to hear an argument from you that is not "well women can be just as physically fit as a man!" Ugh...duh. But if you have a woman who is exactly in the same shape as a man. Why not just pick the man for the combat mission? That way it stops all potential problems before they even start. Such as rape claims, favoritism, (yes I dare say women will be treated unfairly whether that be better than men or worse.) Unprofessional behavior, pregnancies and periods.

Also I could see you saying "if men can fight for their country than women can to! Its only fair!" War is not fair. War is not about gender equality.

Here it goes.

Without arguing the physical part which I hope we can all agree upon. Men on average are naturally more physically able. You want proof? When you run a mile for highschool men have a set time they must meet, it is a shorter time than females. Same for the military, males must meet higher standards than women. This is because males are naturally more physically able. This is fact, arguing against that is just ignorant.

Now can a woman meet the same standards as a man? Absolutely. I have some fellow female Marine poolies that are in far better shape than myself. And could easily beat me in the 1.5 mile run and crunches test.

And one more physical reason women shouldn't be allowed in combat roles. Pregnancy.

Now aside from the physical aspect of combat military let's focus on the real reason why shouldn't be allowed.

Women and men together in units can lead to completely unprofessional behavior. A fellow member on the Site said so (I forget who it was) but the member said a man and a woman slept with each other. Then another man slept with the same woman creating an awkward enviorment for all involved.

Romances can form and they could interfere with a soldiers duty to his country and his commanding officer.

A feeling of protection over the woman can arise.

If a commanding officer is faced with a decision of sending a man or a woman into a position which will likely cause harm to that soldier, he must choose. Most men would most likely keep the woman safe, thus sending the man into danger. Not fair.

If a woman gets pregnant while overseas, and she is supposed to be with her unit. Then what? She gets s free ticket home when she is supposed to be fighting? In that case a woman can just get pregnant and thus decides when she wants to leave a warzone.

If a woman is on her period does she just get to up and say "hey I'm on my period, I'm jot gonna fight today."

If a woman gets captured by the enemy, do you have any idea what would happen to her? Terrible, terrible things.

Those are some arguments I made in five minutes. Little scenario's that are very plausible in real life.


Thoughts? Pick it apart and tell me what y'all think.

 

[Livgardist]

It is my belief without a shred of doubt that women should always be included in all parts of the military, including in a possible draft. The fact is. we're living in a world where we are all equally responsible for shaping and nurturing it. And protecting it.

Similar things can be said for nations. In my world, if there is a draft, it's your damn duty to protect your country. That duty, as with every other duty, such as voting, paying taxes, etc...all thingd for bettering your homeland....should apply to every citizen of legal age, with absolutely zero exceptions.

It's not for the woman's sake or for 'equality', nor is it to punish them for wanting equality in the first place. But imho, equality does not matter in this instance. Only the needs of the country does.

Now follow my logic...

It is because if there is a draft, the country will need good soldiers, and the draft means it is in a situation where it needs lots of them. Not allowing it access to half the country could mean the difference between victory and defeat. Between living freely and under another country's yoke.

Add on top of that the moral issues with not allowing women to participate fully in the defense of their own home country. But that comes a close second to the needs of the nation. In the end they both demand women be included in a draft, though.

My 2 cents. Written on my cell, so excuse me if I'm not entirely clear on my position. I have a harder time expressing myself without a proper keyboard.

 

[Sinbi]

Frankly, the only person I see getting hostile is you.

Kiro, Gaba, ect. Are not sitting behind their computers spitting with rage at "OMG SOMEONE ON THE INTERNET DISAGREES WITH ME."

What they are is mad, and they have a RIGHT to be. If injustice, suffering, inequality and violence against a certain people group or gender does NOT anger you, then perhaps you should step back and examine your morality. The wage gap exists, but so does a lot of wage inequality in the states and other countries that goes FAR beyond just gender and race, it's greed, selfishness, and corporate evil. It's why I get paid 13.75 by my generous employer and the guy down the street working twice as hard as me gets paid 6.75. I work for a private employer, he works for a company.

You can sit on your high horse and tell everyone else how to not be angry, but that makes you nothing more than a hypocrite to be ignored and discarded. You may read me as angry, as hostile, or as stoic, how I am perceived is really of no concern to me. What is of concern is the facts of what I am saying, and I am stating facts.

Explaining to people like boss man why he is wrong is how people change for the better. If not for how I was 'mocked and shamed' by Prospero/BLADE when I was young and stupid on this site four years ago, I'd still be fairly homophobic, never questioning what I had been taught and raised to believe.

Righteous anger, mockery, it has a place, and it is necessary. But your incessant, needless, unnecessary whining and high horsing accomplishes nothing.

Uh, okay? Take it down a notch dude. Engaging in discourse isn't against the rules (I think? I'll double check), and disagreeing with something you believe is incorrect and arguing against it isn't high horsing. It's participating in discussion. Nor'baal said something I disagreed with, then something I agreed with in a comically angry tone (from what I read anyhow :D). I invited them to disregard the last bit if they weren't actually getting mad over it. If you see me as hostile, that's fine. Like I said before, I'm not intending to offend, and if people take it that way then that sucks and I'd like for everyone to hug a stuffed animal or something and try not to take it that way.

I also never said those peeps were sitting at their desks spitting with rage. I implied some people might be, because it happens. There's no reason to attack me for disagreeing, attack my arguments if you feel they are incorrect. That's how you change minds. Shit, that does sound high-horsey doesn't it? Well, I'm just trying to steer the conversation to a slightly more leveled area, because right now it's skewed to insults and de-constructive "Nuh uh!"s.

 

[Livgardist]

This is what I said.



Somehow you got that out of what I said.

How in any way can you jump to the conclusion that I find women weaker than myself? How can you say I find women BENEATH me? And how can you say that I see women as Something rather than a human being?

Reread what I said and reread what you said and please enlighten me on your thought process.

Or actually don't. Cause I know exactly what this is, you are so passionate about this topic you are letting your emotions rule you. So let's stop doing that and instead have a civil argument. I am going to post why I think women should not be allowed in COMBAT roles. Note I put emphasis on COMBAT simply because I am perfectly fine with women in non-combat roles. There are other ways to serve your country than killing and dying for it.

And I want to hear an argument from you that is not "well women can be just as physically fit as a man!" Ugh...duh. But if you have a woman who is exactly in the same shape as a man. Why not just pick the man for the combat mission? That way it stops all potential problems before they even start. Such as rape claims, favoritism, (yes I dare say women will be treated unfairly whether that be better than men or worse.) Unprofessional behavior, pregnancies and periods.

Also I could see you saying "if men can fight for their country than women can to! Its only fair!" War is not fair. War is not about gender equality.

Here it goes.

Without arguing the physical part which I hope we can all agree upon. Men on average are naturally more physically able. You want proof? When you run a mile for highschool men have a set time they must meet, it is a shorter time than females. Same for the military, males must meet higher standards than women. This is because males are naturally more physically able. This is fact, arguing against that is just ignorant.

Now can a woman meet the same standards as a man? Absolutely. I have some fellow female Marine poolies that are in far better shape than myself. And could easily beat me in the 1.5 mile run and crunches test.

And one more physical reason women shouldn't be allowed in combat roles. Pregnancy.

Now aside from the physical aspect of combat military let's focus on the real reason why shouldn't be allowed.

Women and men together in units can lead to completely unprofessional behavior. A fellow member on the Site said so (I forget who it was) but the member said a man and a woman slept with each other. Then another man slept with the same woman creating an awkward enviorment for all involved.

Romances can form and they could interfere with a soldiers duty to his country and his commanding officer.

A feeling of protection over the woman can arise.

If a commanding officer is faced with a decision of sending a man or a woman into a position which will likely cause harm to that soldier, he must choose. Most men would most likely keep the woman safe, thus sending the man into danger. Not fair.

If a woman gets pregnant while overseas, and she is supposed to be with her unit. Then what? She gets s free ticket home when she is supposed to be fighting? In that case a woman can just get pregnant and thus decides when she wants to leave a warzone.

If a woman is on her period does she just get to up and say "hey I'm on my period, I'm jot gonna fight today."

If a woman gets captured by the enemy, do you have any idea what would happen to her? Terrible, terrible things.

Those are some arguments I made in five minutes. Little scenario's that are very plausible in real life.


Thoughts? Pick it apart and tell me what y'all think.

If you're going to take what I say to prove your point, take all of it. I also said that I have had countless fellow soldiers of the female variety, as well as squad leaders, drill instructors, hand to hand combat instructors, and all the way up to company commanders, who have been far more professional than many men I've served with.

What you're talking about in regard to "problems" is not the problem of men snd women serving together. It's the problem of unprofessional people being let into a professional role they are not ready for. That is what happened in my unit in the Navy. The gender of the people may have been a catalyst, but was not the issue. Again. Their lack of professionalism, or if you will, their immaturity was.

Furthermore, I think you should give your own country's officers more credit. They are professionals and they will treat their soldiers like soldiers, nothing else. An officer that does not will not last long in any Western country's military.

I don't have the time to meet more of your arguments, as, again, I'm on my cell, but if I were not, I would.

 

[Nor'baal]

I hate to say it Bossman, but if the military decide to employ females, then as a male in the armed forces you'll get used to it.

You follow orders, and do as your told - regardless of if you agree with it or not.

That's kind of how it works, any member of the services knows that. You may not like women in the armed forces, but if an officer tells you to like it, you do as you're damn told.

 

[Livgardist]

Hear hear! You should enlist, Norbs. You'd make sn excellent private. #Cowardiceissues aside. XD

 

[Mr.BossMan]

Uh, okay? Take it down a notch dude. Engaging in discourse isn't against the rules (I think? I'll double check), and disagreeing with something you believe is incorrect and arguing against it isn't high horsing. It's participating in discussion. Nor'baal said something I disagreed with, then something I agreed with in a comically angry tone (from what I read anyhow :D). I invited them to disregard the last bit if they weren't actually getting mad over it. If you see me as hostile, that's fine. Like I said before, I'm not intending to offend, and if people take it that way then that sucks and I'd like for everyone to hug a stuffed animal or something and try not to take it that way.

I also never said those peeps were sitting at their desks spitting with rage. I implied some people might be, because it happens. There's no reason to attack me for disagreeing, attack my arguments if you feel they are incorrect. That's how you change minds. Shit, that does sound high-horsey doesn't it? Well, I'm just trying to steer the conversation to a slightly more leveled area, because right now it's skewed to insults and de-constructive "Nuh uh!"s.

Bro your fine.

Explaining to people like boss man why he is wrong is how people change for the better. If not for how I was 'mocked and shamed' by Prospero/BLADE when I was young and stupid on this site four years ago, I'd still be fairly homophobic, never questioning what I had been taught and raised to believe.

Two things.

1. That's Mr.BossMan to you. :)

2. You do not decide who is "Right" or "Wrong" just because you believe different than I do, does not make you right nor I wrong.

Plus, Sinbi is not being that bad, others, including myself, have been much worse. I think the hostilities towards him are simply because he's bringing up valid points.

If you're going to take what I say to prove your point, take all of it. I also said that I have had countless fellow soldiers of the female variety, as well as squad leaders, drill instructors, hand to hand combat instructors, and all the way up to company commanders, who have been far more professional than many men I've served with.

What you're talking about in regard to "problems" is not the problem of men snd women serving together. It's the problem of unprofessional people being let into a professional role they are not ready for. That is what happened in my unit in the Navy. The gender of the people may have been a catalyst, but was not the issue. Again. Their lack of professionalism, or if you will, their immaturity was.

Furthermore, I think you should give your own country's officers more credit. They are professionals and they will treat their soldiers like soldiers, nothing else. An officer that does not will not last long in any Western country's military.

I don't have the time to meet more of your arguments, as, again, I'm on my cell, but if I were not, I would.

Ya like I said in my post, I don't know who said that. I only knew what you said, so ya. My bad on that.

 

[Sinbi]

Bro your fine.



Two things.

1. That's Mr.BossMan to you. :)

2. You do not decide who is "Right" or "Wrong" just because you believe different than I do, does not make you right nor I wrong.

Plus, Sinbi is not being that bad, others, including myself, have been much worse. I think the hostilities towards him are simply because he's bringing up valid points.



Ya like I said in my post, I don't know who said that. I only knew what you said, so ya. My bad on that.

You're making me look bad! Stop agreeing with me, swine!
/s (since this is needed, apparently)

 

[Mr.BossMan]

I hate to say it Bossman, but if the military decide to employ females, then as a male in the armed forces you'll get used to it.

You follow orders, and do as your told - regardless of if you agree with it or not.

That's kind of how it works, any member of the services knows that. You may not like women in the armed forces, but if an officer tells you to like it, you do as you're damn told.

Stop saying armed forces.

I said and I have made it very clear I do not like women in COMBAT ROLES.

Women in my opinion are more than welcome to serve their respective countries in Non-Combat roles.

I just don't want a woman killing for me, and I damn sure don't want a woman dying for me.

 

[Kiro]

How in any way can you jump to the conclusion that I find women weaker than myself? How can you say I find women BENEATH me? And how can you say that I see women as Something rather than a human being?

Reread what I said and reread what you said and please enlighten me on your thought process.

I'll happily tell you how? And this isn't my emotions ruling me, though I'd be lying if I said I'd be able to be 100% objective about this, because I'm a woman, and every single member of my family, save my mother, have served in the Royal Norwegian Airforce. It's your attitude. It's the way you portray women in the way you write. Simply by stating that you think women shouldn't be in combat roles, you are inferring that women are inferior to men.

Or actually don't. Cause I know exactly what this is, you are so passionate about this topic you are letting your emotions rule you. So let's stop doing that and instead have a civil argument. I am going to post why I think women should not be allowed in COMBAT roles. Note I put emphasis on COMBAT simply because I am perfectly fine with women in non-combat roles. There are other ways to serve your country than killing and dying for it.

I am being passionate about it. Because, as said, I am a woman, and you're insulting every damn woman in the world that is currently serving in the various armed forces around the world. Especially the tens of thousands that serve in combat positions every day. But I am not letting my emotions rule me. If I did, I'd frankly be cursing at you and writing everything in this post in bold italic underlined all caps.

And I want to hear an argument from you that is not "well women can be just as physically fit as a man!" Ugh...duh. But if you have a woman who is exactly in the same shape as a man. Why not just pick the man for the combat mission? That way it stops all potential problems before they even start. Such as rape claims, favoritism, (yes I dare say women will be treated unfairly whether that be better than men or worse.) Unprofessional behavior, pregnancies and periods.

Again, there is the attitude that makes me label you sexist, and why I say that you see women as inferior. You assume that because a woman will be in a combat situations, problems will arise, especially "rape claims". But I'm not going to go into rape "claims" because that's another can of worms and not what we're discussing at this moment. Favouritism will exist regardless of women serving in combat positions, and follow that logic and you can exclude any minority, like Asians, Blacks, Jews, Muslims, because "oh no, it'll cause favouritism issues". And honestly, female soldiers tend to be the most professionals, because they have to deal with people like you. People that think they're weak. That they're inherently a problem. So they have to perform twice as hard to be even considered equal to a male soldier. As for pregnancies, I have two words for you. Birth Control. Periods aren't even a consideration. I happen to know that my sister has been on active duty while on her period. Seriously, what exactly do you think a period involves?

Also I could see you saying "if men can fight for their country than women can to! Its only fair!" War is not fair. War is not about gender equality.

Not even worth arguing, as this is just nonsense. It's got nothing to do with the issue at hand.

Without arguing the physical part which I hope we can all agree upon. Men on average are naturally more physically able. You want proof? When you run a mile for highschool men have a set time they must meet, it is a shorter time than females. Same for the military, males must meet higher standards than women. This is because males are naturally more physically able. This is fact, arguing against that is just ignorant.

It's not fact. And no, military does not set higher standards for men. In the Royal Norwegian Armed Forces, it's the same standard for both genders. And no, they haven't lowered it since they allowed women to serve. It's the same with the UK's armed forces, and I'm certain (though @Livgardist will have to back me up or refute me on this) that it's the same with Sweden.

Now can a woman meet the same standards as a man? Absolutely. I have some fellow female Marine poolies that are in far better shape than myself. And could easily beat me in the 1.5 mile run and crunches test.

Yeah, I'd rather have that female marine that can outperform you in a combat situation than you. So thanks for making my point for me.

And one more physical reason women shouldn't be allowed in combat roles. Pregnancy.

Birth Control. Or just not have sex. Seriously, do you think women sleep with people at the drop of a hat? I'm not emotional, I am honestly, genuinely, confounded as to why you think this is an issue as to why it should prevent women from serving on the front lines. Yes, there will be some female soldiers whom isn't careful, or just stupid, and gets knocked up. She could get an abortion and return within a week, if not less. There are male soldiers that have had to leave the service because of equally dumb reasons like "accidentially" (or genuinely accidentially) shooting themselves in the foot.

Now aside from the physical aspect of combat military let's focus on the real reason why shouldn't be allowed.

Women and men together in units can lead to completely unprofessional behavior. A fellow member on the Site said so (I forget who it was) but the member said a man and a woman slept with each other. Then another man slept with the same woman creating an awkward enviorment for all involved.

Romances can form and they could interfere with a soldiers duty to his country and his commanding officer.

As can friendships between men. As can homosexual relationships between men, including your fellow marine poolies. I can guarantee you that there's at least one gay man within your battalion.

A feeling of protection over the woman can arise.

See above.

If a commanding officer is faced with a decision of sending a man or a woman into a position which will likely cause harm to that soldier, he must choose. Most men would most likely keep the woman safe, thus sending the man into danger. Not fair.

Wow. You seriously have no faith in your officers, do you? Officers are trained to think of their soldiers not as men, as people, but as soldiers. Each time he sends any soldier on any mission, he (or she) must accept the fact that there is a genuine risk that they won't return alive. So the officer, regardless of gender, should send out the soldiers best suited for the mission. Regardless of gender. And you're right, it's not fair. The woman should be sent if she's the superior soldier for the mission.

If a woman gets pregnant while overseas, and she is supposed to be with her unit. Then what? She gets s free ticket home when she is supposed to be fighting? In that case a woman can just get pregnant and thus decides when she wants to leave a warzone.

As I've said above: Birth Control. Or just not have sex. Seriously, do you think women sleep with people at the drop of a hat? I'm not emotional, I am honestly, genuinely, confounded as to why you think this is an issue as to why it should prevent women from serving on the front lines. Yes, there will be some female soldiers whom isn't careful, or just stupid, and gets knocked up. She could get an abortion from her regimental/battalion medical officer and be fit for fight within a week, if not less. There are male soldiers that have had to leave the service because of equally dumb reasons like "accidentially" (or genuinely accidentially) shooting themselves in the foot, or getting drunk and driving their jeep into a boulder.

If a woman is on her period does she just get to up and say "hey I'm on my period, I'm jot gonna fight today."

As I asked above: What the hell do you think a period is? Again, as I've said before, I know my sister has been in combat situations while on her period. As are thousands of women. It's not this crippling horrific thing that makes us incapable of actually functioning. Any combat situations would flood your system with adrenaline and not even notice that you're on your period in any case.

If a woman gets captured by the enemy, do you have any idea what would happen to her? Terrible, terrible things.

Do you have any idea what happens to a man that's captured by the enemy? And what enemy would that be in this theoretical scenario? The Russians? ISIS? If it's the latter, terrible, terrible things would happen to them both, regardless. It's a risk every soldier has to be willing to face. Female soldiers are willing to face it to serve their country. You shouldn't belittle their courage and desire to serve their country by thinking that their worth is any less than your own.

Those are some arguments I made in five minutes. Little scenario's that are very plausible in real life.

For most of them? Not really. Twenty years ago, maybe.