Replies

First, you can post all the anecdotal stories you want and that proves nothing. You can't prove that women are more or less "immoral" or behave better or worse in their personal lives while in the military. If we want to talk about morality, I've posted above about the tens of thousand of abandoned kids fathered by US military personell in overseas deployements. These are real hard facts, not anectodotes about people engaging in oral and anal sex.

In terms of disciplinary action and criminal involvement, I'd like to see some stats on what percentage of women and men are cited for deriliction of duty instead of hearsay anecdotes about personal behaviour.

Secondly, females haven't proven themselves in combat because they haven't been there. So that is a red herring argument. Anyway, the majority of men in the military do not do combat duty. The military puts people in combat for specific reasons. The military would be wise (and is) in hiring people for specific expertise, such as logistics, tactical and technical capabilities. They're not going to put their top technical and logistics people on the front lines, nor should they. Nor would they put everyone in combat and leave no one for supply and backup operations. It's simply ludicrous to equate combat with military service. Most military people, even in wartime, never see combat. My grandfather was an ace mechanic in WWII. He was kept well behind enemy lines fixing machinery and transport vehicles. It would have made no tactical sense to put him in combat. He saved more lives doing what he was good at doing.

Thirdly, I am not a liberal but I am a feminist. However, your collectivist thinking is more indicative of liberals who use collective "group think" to form agendas.

Fourthy, if the military has problems with personell assignement, that has nothing to do with women but how they manage personell. They should look at changing their policies. What do they do if a male has to be on medical leave or is withdrawn for disciplinary action? Again, I'd like to see some numbers on demographic percentages of people pulled from active duty for medical reasons.

Meanwhile, while you're demonizing females off the top of your head, I found some interesting information on attrition rates. The overall attrition rate in the military for people not fulfilling their contract for their first tour for various reasons including medical reasons, drug use, inability to perform duties ect. is 30%. The attrition breakdown rate is:

White male: 33%

White female: 43%

Black male: 33%

Black female: 33%

Hispanic male: 26%

Hispanic female: 31%

It appears to me that while white women do seem to have a higher than average attrition rate, other females are in line with the average and with men in general. Overall it seems a 30% attritio rate points to very poor screening practices. I would hope the military would work on that one.

One could imagine that the attrition rate would be much higher under a draft. Even so, Lew Brodsky, director of congressional and government affairs for the SSS (selective service) has said that if a draft is ever reinacted women will most certainly be needed to fill all the positions such a dire situation and reinstating a draft would imply, particularly in the medical service. This is because we have a much smaller pool of younger people to draw from than in previous wars.

"The 2000 Census estimates that 6.6 million of the 8.5 million health care practitioners, technical and support occupations, are women. Though the database was never collected, Brodsky said the "preponderance of women" in the health care field makes it inevitable to include them in any future database development." (draft registration)

First, you can post all the anecdotal stories you want and that proves nothing.

I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone. I gave an opinion based on my experiences. You disagree with my opinion and that's fine.

It's simply ludicrous to equate combat with military service.

After rereading my post, I can see where I made it look like this is what I meant. I should have been more clear. You asked someone whether "men who never serve in the military or who never see combat "not equal" with men who have?"

I said yes, but did not clarify. I have nothing but gratitude and respect for non-combat arms folks. When I said "In the eyes of the law yes they are. In the eyes of this vet, no they are not," I was speaking of men who served in the military vs. men who did not. I have never met a combat arms soldier who did not appreciate a non-combat arms soldier, although we gave them a rash of good natured sh*t. They kept us supplied, fed and in good health, as well as allowed us to communicate with each other and fly/ride at times. My apologies to your father and any vet who reads my first post. It was not my intention to disparage.

The military puts people in combat for specific reasons. The military would be wise (and is) in hiring people for specific expertise, such as logistics, tactical and technical capabilities. They're not going to put their top technical and logistics people on the front lines, nor should they. Nor would they put everyone in combat and leave no one for supply and backup operations.

Thank you for explaining the military to me, but there is no need. Instead of talking about it, why don't you go join and live it. You know, serve your country, give something back?

However, your collectivist thinking

Please provide an example of collectivist thinking in my posts.

Fourthy, if the military has problems with personell assignement, that has nothing to do with women but how they manage personell.

Can't argue with that. If I was king for a day, if a single woman got herself knocked up, she would get administrative punishment (article 15), the same as she could get if she wound up with an STD. I would then kick her out of the military to free the slot for a qualified soldier. Darn. There I go being a male chauvanist pig again.

I am not a liberal but I am a feminist.

I've never heard of a non-liberal feminist. What does a non-liberal feminist believe or not believe that a liberal feminist believes (or doesn't believe)?