Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by philpot123

  1. The same reason I didn't delve into certain issues on gender is the same reason I won't go into this. Because I will get ripped apart by the public at large and nobody will agree and it will all be pointless. Why is "we'll see what happens in the future because we DON'T KNOW YET" illogical? Just leave it there.
  2. It's complicated. And certainly wont make me a popular person on here. I'll just leave it at lets see what happens. What's so hard about that? It might go bad, it might not. We'll see.
  3. Perhaps it won't happen. Perhaps I'm wrong. That's why I'm saying we'll see.
  4. Don't put words in my mouth. I said what I meant, we'll see what happens. Each situation is unique.
  5. I meant US. Not talking world. I'm just saying, we'll see.
  6. I guess we'll just wait until women get placed in combat MOS's, which they inevitably will be, and see what the results are.
  7. First, church is different than MONTHS of deployment. Second, because sexual relationships have no place in combat situations! It would be a distraction. It's the same reason DADT stood as long as it did, and why it needed to go at the same time. Your sexual orientation shouldn't matter in the military, because SEX has no place in the military within the unit. Especially when you are a deployed in a combat situation.
  8. This isn't a situation of "taking the victim out." It's not putting a potential victim into a situation like that. I'm a martial artist and I carry a weapon, but I don't walk down a back alley in the dark because that's asking for trouble regardless.
  9. Outfits are considerably different than placing women and men close together for extended periods of time.
  10. And suggesting that something that happens on a regular basis is purely the fault of a man with limited self control? When the situation could be altogether avoided in the first place by keeping things how they are and not having to worry about it? Obviously we are just going to disagree on this issue.
  11. Regardless of the authenticity of the suit, they will happen. Also, you seem to have a very good view of men, because I suppose you don't think that in close quarters for long amount of times that the tensions will reach a point that inappropriate conduct WILL happen that would NOT happen had women not been present. It WILL happen, it doesn't matter if you say "Well they should just behave themselves!" because some people can't. Why make the situation even more likely than it already is?? They altered the standards for women in the marines, so my feeling is if they let women be in combat situations there's going to be so much whining from feminists that the requirements aren't "fair" towards women that there will be separate brackets. By all over the world I meant at US spec ops bases all over the world, temporary or permanent. Like I said, the very VERY few number of women who would be able to complete the requirements (barely any men can.) simply makes the huge cost of showers and housing and reworking the ENTIRE system to include a few women not worth it. Obviously the military agrees with me.
  12. I have a couple I could use, but I think I'll go with this one... I took it at the Charles L. Sommers canoe base in Ely, Minnesota
  13. Separate showers, separate barracks, separate housing when on field missions to prevent sexual harassment suits, changing the training program (example is the marines, fit test for men and a fit test for women. they would have to adjust.) There's SO much that goes into it that would have to happen all over the US and around the world that it's just not worth it. Obviously, or they would've caved to the growing feminist movement.
  14. If it was as easy as "If they can do it, let em!" Don't you think they would have changed it by now? It involves the re-working of an entire system, it's not something that's cost effective or time effective for the few amount of women who would be able to do it. Logistically it would be a nightmare, and for what? The odd one out of thousands spartan woman becoming a SEAL?
  15. Well lets see, Twilight is horribly written with very little plot, a story that reads like a hormonal teenage girl's diary with paranormal beasts thrown in. Eragon has a plot completely borrowed from Star Wars Episode 4, isn't very well written (the first one at least) but I loved it anyways. Eragon gets my vote.
  16. I'm not really prepared to launch into that area because I KNOW you all would disagree with me, and there's really no point in stating what I believe when I'm going to be torn apart moments later. My views are controversial and "offensive" to some and I don't want to instigate that.
  17. Like I said, looks like I backed myself into a corner here with what I'm coming across that I think and what I actually think. I'm trying to think of a better way to word this that's less confusing, so give me a chance In response to the above post, T shirts jeans and boots are horribly attractive. Not gonna lie. I agree on makeup. My definition of feminine isn't stereotypical, feminine, pink, fluffy, weak, etc. That is most definitely NOT what I'm talking about. But there's a reason girls are girls and guys are guys. I like my girls to be comfortably distinguishable from the opposite gender. Like I said, give me a bit, I'll clarify... eventually
  18. I'm afraid I came off the wrong way here. I'm really not talking about girls who can handle themselves, (I've gotten a royal ass kicking from a couple girls and I respect them all the more for it.) It was a hasty generalization, forgive me this is my personal opinion, it's hard to explain. There's a difference between what I'm talking about and what you're talking about. I don't mean "tomboy-ish" girls, that kind of thing... I'll think about this and try and come back with a better response. Just an opinion, Y'all disagree obviously.
  19. I wasn't speaking for all guys. when I said from a "guy's" perspective I meant mine. Personal opinion. Feel free to disagree. reasons? Because we ARE different. Biologically, emotionally, girls and guys are different. Yes there are effeminate guys and manly girls, but that doesn't mean it's natural.
  20. See my last post in response to the first part of your message. be offended if you wish, it's just one guy's opinion. And not necessarily. There's a lot of reasons women ARE allowed in the military but AREN'T allowed in combat situations. 1st, the physical. Simple fact is the vast majority of girls cannot physically handle the training, much less the missions of a Spec Ops solider. Sure there are some women that could, but they are few and far between. Try a SEAL workout on for size hmm? Or try and get a perfect 300 on the MEN'S version of the Marines physical. 2nd, practicality. This is not as simple as DADT. An entire training system, entire barracks, entire stations would have to be reworked for housing for women. SEAL, ranger, green beret, Marine Spec Ops, all of these are in place and set up exclusively for men. All of those would have to change. That's not a little thing. 3rd, in the US and in the world there is still some semblance of that "outdated" "sexist" thing called chivalry. Women and children should be safe, the men protect them. Women on the front lines would have very... interesting effects on the psyche of both the male soldiers they are fighting WITH and AGAINST.
  21. From a guy's perspective, a manly girl isn't exactly attractive. There are things that guys do, things that girls do, ways they act that are just gender specific. I'm not talking about interests, that kinda thing. There's nothing hotter than a girl who's good with cars but there are reasons certain things are masculine and feminine. This is kinda off topic anyways, that's just my opinion.
  22. I fully agree with you on both counts. I didn't delve into my full argument for women not being in combat situations, and you basically expounded on another area of it. I completely agree with that you said. And I also completely agree that women are different. I don't like feminism, in fact I hate it. My point was that if a woman can fulfill the requirements of a job TO THE SAME EXTENT that a man can, there should be no gender DISCRIMINATION. There's a large difference between discrimination based on gender and special treatment based on gender. I don't agree with either. I agree with equality to the point that a woman can, in fact, fulfill the requirements as good or better as a man. And that she should not NECESSARILY be judged by gender but by ability. Obviously (as with combat soldiers) there are exceptions. Femininity is a very good thing that should be retained, I agree. Girls who act/talk exactly like guys are pretty disgusting. But as I said, discrimination purely based on gender isn't good either. Discrimination based on skills and ability to fulfill the prescribed task IS.
  23. I collect instruments. And knives. And the tears of my fallen enemies, which I keep in convenient glass vials.
  24. Oh, on the female side of it, I don't agree with gender stereotyping in the workplace. If a woman can do the same job as a man, pay her the same or hire her if she's better qualified. Of course, that only goes so far. The simple fact is the vast majority of women can't handle being front line combat soldiers, which is why special forces and most combat MOS's are still closed to women. I'm all for that. Sure there are some women who COULD handle it, but reworking an entire system for those few is totally impractical. At least, that's how I see it. *prepares flame shield*
  25. Sexism... lol... That said... I think sexism can go both ways. A common mentality today among girls (especially teen girls) is that all guys are *s who use girls for sex and then leave them. Well, hate to break it to you, but that's simply not the case. I've been the subject of ridiculous amounts of gender stereotyping by girls throughout highschool, even though I am NOTHING like a typical guy. Also, I don't understand why a girl would be upset that a guy would do things for her like holding doors open, etc. MY GOSH we have a hard enough time trying to please you without being berated for doing things that we think are just simple, sweet gestures. Seriously!? Take it at face value, a guy doing something very VERY small out of politeness, not a condescending sexist stereotype of your gender.