Posted on 02/16/2013 5:31:35 AM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, says that he is hopeful that making the combat roles of women official will create a greater environment of respect for women, which in turn may have an impact on instances of sexual harassment and assault.
“I believe it's because we've had separate classes of military personnel, at some level,” he said at a press conference Thursday.
General Dempsey was quick to add that sexual assault is “far more complicated than that – but when you have one part of the population that is designated as warriors and another part that's designated as something else, I think that disparity begins to establish a psychology that in some cases led to that environment."
“I have to believe, the more we can treat people equally, the more likely they are to treat each other equally.”
It is a sentiment that is echoed among advocates for victims of sexual assault.
“When you have legalized discrimination against women, there’s no doubt in my mind that there’s a link there,” says Anu Baghwati, a former company commander in the Marine Corps.
“I experienced it firsthand as a woman officer in the Marines. There’s a constant reminder by your peers that you’re not as strong, you’re not as competent, which is not based on your actual, but your perceived performance,” she says. “And I think women would doubt themselves a lot less.”
Critics of women in combat express concerns, however, that the move could actually make women more vulnerable to sexual assault by putting them in closer contact with men in situations where they will have little privacy.
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
I thought this was a John Semmens satire, alas it is not.
At what cost? PC idiocy.
Is the Army going to add a new military occupational specialty (MOS), i.e., company or platoon pump?
Actually, if anything it will increase sexual assaults. When you have two people of opposite sex sleeping in a foxhole together, you will inevitably have increases in both consensual and non-consensual sex. I’m not even saying it will be rape in the classic sense. It will create many more opportunities for close quarters “misunderstandings” which can lead to non-consensual sex. For example, if a female soldier is pressing against a male soldier while she’s sleeping. Remember, in many cases these people are still teenagers little/no experienced with interpreting the opposite sex.
And, lets face it, if you have 20 guys and 4 women in a close-knit group, there will be tension and competition among the guys for those women. Especially true if you are dealing with single people under 25.
Seems to me that there were a couple of females at the center of that whole Abu Grave mess in Iraq and they weren’t victims. Hell the commanding officer was a female.
A Navy Commander told me all about respect for women aboard ship as so many of them come back from a deployment pregnant. Women in combat will just complicate things. And does anyone believe for a minute women will have even a portalet for their use? The kind of woman who will drop her drawers at nature’s call, in front of male troops, will probably be able to drop them for other reasons without much thought.
They are simply looking for ways to rationalize an unpopular decision that has no merit. If medics are already going to be exposed to perverts’ blood under fire, then why even pretend anymore that these questions matter? Those same freaks wouldn’t be allowed to donate blodd, with good reason.
Anyone who wants to die for what this government represents at this point has my blessing; I do feel for the people who too late ralize that when Caesar pays the piper he picks the tunes.
One again, we shake our fists at God and tell Him that we will re-define all reality in our image.
Undoubtedly. There is no greater aphrodesiac than extremely high levels of both testosterone and fear incurred by soldiers under fire. Sexual conduct will be at 100% instantly.
A polite society is a fully armed society. Just keep the firearms out of the paws of the squirrels, rabbits, and deer. I’ll trust my dog though.
I’ve never had less respect for a female soldier than when a) she is clearly in over her head and insists that she’s up to the task,
b) I’m carrying her ruck and rifle because it’s just “too heavy”,
c) a man is performing her job without the benefit of her rank or pay because she is once again undeployable because of pregnancy or “female problems”.
One week of this shit in combat units and these women will earn the wrath of ever soldier in their unit.
Thus lays to rest the notion that, "There's no such thing as a stupid question."
A sharp stick in the eye. Could it reduce blindness?
Exactly. America has looked EVIL in the face and embraced it.
Exactly. America has looked EVIL in the face and embraced it.
Spot on, friend, spot on.
Of course it will make things worse.
Liberals know nothing about human nature. They only know their morally superior (translate: self-righteous) views and goals make them better than us.
The Pharisees of our day.
Women in combat units: Could it reduce reports of sexual assault in the military?
There, fixed it.
In a tightly nit platoon/unit women who are sexually assaulted might also be less inclined to report such an assault due to the close proximity to the rest of the unit for fear of "in the field" reprisals.
Accidents happen, as it were.
And if there are problems with hazing now (it still happens despite efforts to end it) what will it be like when women are involved.
It's a situation rife for such allegations as well as actual abuse.
Idiots are in charge...IMHO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.