Comments on: Women Warriors http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm From the World's Largest History Magazine Publisher Sun, 19 May 2013 11:23:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Due March 15, 2013 | hussibhoa http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm#comment-932379 Due March 15, 2013 | hussibhoa Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:02:04 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13687653#comment-932379 [...] http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm [...] [...] http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm [...]

]]> By: Women in Combat: Been There, Done That « The Foxhole http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm#comment-885071 Women in Combat: Been There, Done That « The Foxhole Fri, 15 Feb 2013 23:22:12 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13687653#comment-885071 [...] Women Warriors (historynet.com) Share this:StumbleUponDiggRedditFacebookTwitterLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. [...] [...] Women Warriors (historynet.com) Share this:StumbleUponDiggRedditFacebookTwitterLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. [...]

]]> By: Wong Hoong Hooi http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm#comment-881861 Wong Hoong Hooi Fri, 15 Feb 2013 04:27:45 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13687653#comment-881861 1. Some posts here have it that those who argue for putting women into combat roles are engaging in some bourgeoise feel-good mind game. My reply is: a) war has been a reality and remains a possibility and what's so \natural\ about excluding half of humanity from participation in combat ? b) women have been clamouring about how they can do or outdo men in whatever and it's time they put their money where their mouth is - combat. 2. Others talk about the problems from having women train and live with men in the same barracks. But less so if you have all-women units training together in all-women barracks. 3. Still others talk about how women are physically weaker than men. Look, the geek with glasses and a 135-pound frame can get drafted into combat training just like the swim-team jock, no ? Individuals of either gender vary greatly in size and strength. Besides, as one of your officers had put it in Korea, \all the other side needs is the right number of fingers to pull triggers in the right place at the right time and you're screwed. \ Doesn't seem to matter a lot if some of those fingers have traces of nail varnish (preferably female ones.) 1. Some posts here have it that those who argue for putting women into combat roles are engaging in some bourgeoise feel-good mind game. My reply is:
a) war has been a reality and remains a possibility and what's so \natural\ about excluding half of humanity from participation in combat ?
b) women have been clamouring about how they can do or outdo men in whatever and it's time they put their money where their mouth is – combat.
2. Others talk about the problems from having women train and live with men in the same barracks. But less so if you have all-women units training together in all-women barracks.
3. Still others talk about how women are physically weaker than men. Look, the geek with glasses and a 135-pound frame can get drafted into combat training just like the swim-team jock, no ? Individuals of either gender vary greatly in size and strength. Besides, as one of your officers had put it in Korea, \all the other side needs is the right number of fingers to pull triggers in the right place at the right time and you're screwed. \ Doesn't seem to matter a lot if some of those fingers have traces of nail varnish (preferably female ones.)

]]> By: Wong Hoong Hooi http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm#comment-881767 Wong Hoong Hooi Fri, 15 Feb 2013 03:47:08 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13687653#comment-881767 Sorry, my reply above is to comment #6 but somehow ended up being published under #9 Sorry, my reply above is to comment #6 but somehow ended up being published under #9

]]> By: Wong Hoong Hooi http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm#comment-881759 Wong Hoong Hooi Fri, 15 Feb 2013 03:44:28 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13687653#comment-881759 Typical of the Western generalisations of societies they don't approve of - i..e deny validity to any positives that are reported.. Coerced solidiers might stay in the zone of combat but would either cower or not fight effectively. Fact is that the average Soviet solider did. Typical of the Western generalisations of societies they don't approve of – i..e deny validity to any positives that are reported.. Coerced solidiers might stay in the zone of combat but would either cower or not fight effectively. Fact is that the average Soviet solider did.

]]> By: Eric http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm#comment-876850 Eric Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:37:49 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13687653#comment-876850 Women bodybuilders are not as strong as male bodybuilders. A small minority of women, perhaps including the bodybuilders, are capable of meeting men's physical standards. But most of the women in the US military are not part of that small minority. Women bodybuilders are not as strong as male bodybuilders. A small minority of women, perhaps including the bodybuilders, are capable of meeting men's physical standards. But most of the women in the US military are not part of that small minority.

]]> By: Muggins http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm#comment-875819 Muggins Mon, 11 Feb 2013 20:02:58 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13687653#comment-875819 When America runs short of fighting men as in Stalingrad, then I agree, we should send in the women. But, the case now is no shortage of men. In fact, the military is shrinking. In the ideal world, the military should strive to enlist the high quality enlistees available regardless of sex, except, sex presents problems, such as jealousy, favoritism, privacy, division of labor due to upper body strength, and the list goes on including the bomb shell topic of pregnancy in the military. I'd like to know how many women come off our aircraft carriers pregnant. I don't think it's politically correct to even bring up the subject. At any rate, it costs thousands of dollars to train a soldier and pregnant soldiers are a waste of that training money. Do we want women in combat roles even if it costs more money and/or lowers morale? What is more important? Improving the combat rediness of our troops or pushing a social agenda? When America runs short of fighting men as in Stalingrad, then I agree, we should send in the women. But, the case now is no shortage of men. In fact, the military is shrinking. In the ideal world, the military should strive to enlist the high quality enlistees available regardless of sex, except, sex presents problems, such as jealousy, favoritism, privacy, division of labor due to upper body strength, and the list goes on including the bomb shell topic of pregnancy in the military. I'd like to know how many women come off our aircraft carriers pregnant. I don't think it's politically correct to even bring up the subject. At any rate, it costs thousands of dollars to train a soldier and pregnant soldiers are a waste of that training money. Do we want women in combat roles even if it costs more money and/or lowers morale? What is more important? Improving the combat rediness of our troops or pushing a social agenda?

]]> By: Dennis http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm#comment-874161 Dennis Mon, 11 Feb 2013 02:46:18 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13687653#comment-874161 You, like most, are missing the key components of what physical problems are involved. There is a WORLD of difference between lifting 200+ lbs in a body building competition / gym and spending 6 months in patrol base in 120 degree heat, carrying 100lbs packs miles with little rest, and going on little sleep, no showers / cleaning for months at a time, etc. The MOMENTARY physical demands of bodybuilding are childs play compared to the long term wear and tear on the human body that is sustained by the common infantryman. You might as well be comparing your bodybuilder to a triathlete. You, like most, are missing the key components of what physical problems are involved.

There is a WORLD of difference between lifting 200+ lbs in a body building competition / gym and spending 6 months in patrol base in 120 degree heat, carrying 100lbs packs miles with little rest, and going on little sleep, no showers / cleaning for months at a time, etc. The MOMENTARY physical demands of bodybuilding are childs play compared to the long term wear and tear on the human body that is sustained by the common infantryman. You might as well be comparing your bodybuilder to a triathlete.

]]> By: Norman Kelley http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm#comment-874154 Norman Kelley Mon, 11 Feb 2013 02:39:01 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13687653#comment-874154 How do you explain, then, women body-builders? How do you explain, then, women body-builders?

]]> By: Women in combat: | Arts & Letters Daily http://www.historynet.com/women-warriors.htm#comment-870847 Women in combat: | Arts & Letters Daily Fri, 08 Feb 2013 17:51:45 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13687653#comment-870847 [...] Women in combat: The first defenders of Stalingrad in 1942 were teenage girls, firing antiaircraft guns to halt German tanks… more» [...] [...] Women in combat: The first defenders of Stalingrad in 1942 were teenage girls, firing antiaircraft guns to halt German tanks… more» [...]

]]>