Posts: 57,781
Threads: 5,856
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
Another military genius in the offing.
Next to General Custer. :biggrin:
There's a few ladies in the IDF who would like to talk to him about 'combat stress'. Somehow I think that 'that time of the month' would be the WRONG time to attack us.
Posts: 8,407
Threads: 230
Joined: Apr 2025
Sigh
But he'd take Boehner and Santorum.
Posts: 8,440
Threads: 599
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation:
0
"This latest "gaffe" could only be the beginning of what could be a big problem for Santorum down the road: difficulty winning over women voters, ."
Ya think?
Posts: 23,023
Threads: 576
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
And please, no girly men, either.
Posts: 46,542
Threads: 2,629
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Ah, the men will be too busy showering with each other to care what happens to the women.
Posts: 37,913
Threads: 4,147
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
All that he is saying is that if women were working along side men in the armed forces, there'd be more lovin' going on... duh... I think we all know that to be true. I don't see a need for panty bunching here. The question is: why is more lovin' a problem?
What DOES bother me about this snip is this sentence: It already happens, of course, with the camaraderie of men in combat, but I think it would be even more unique if women were in combat.
just what does this guy think 'unique' means?
Posts: 8,440
Threads: 599
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation:
0
I think he means that men may behave differently in combat situations if women are present - IOW - they might worry about the physical safety of women soldiers instead of just focusing on the mission and viewing them as teammates, as they do men. And that this dynamic could jeopardize missions.
Based on what I know about people in combat, that's bunk. Men sacrifice for their fellow soldiers and they always have each other's backs, I don't see why that dynamic would need to change if women are present
There are currently some very serious problems in the military with sexual assault of females (and men sometimes too) and the rate of unplanned pregnancy for women serving is also very high. So from a leadership and discipline standpoint, these things need to be addressed and corrected and I think are bigger problems than excess chivalry.
Posts: 57,781
Threads: 5,856
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
Grace-
Those statements are exact statements made as excuses why women should not be allowed in the military. And have been debunked rather thoroughly. I'm rather amazed you bring them up.
I'll also point out that the incidence of sexual assault in the military (approximately 2,500 incidents in 2010) is statistically FAR less than the incidence of sexual assault in a similarly aged population, to wit, American college students.
Statistically approximately 1 in every 12 US women soldiers may experience actual or attempted sexual assault. (based on 2010 DOD statistics) Based on a separate 2000 study, approximately 1 in every 4 US women college students will experience actual or attempted sexual assault.
And yet Women's groups do not rush around insisting that women should not go to college, the way they insisted that women should not join military service. Why is that the case ?
You're generally a very accurate and reliable person with a strong advocate for the rights of your gender. Good for you. But you've gotten bad information.
(note that I drew these points based on about 5 minutes of fast googling actual reports and statistics, and NOT news media reports which repeat the same incorrect conclusions.)
