|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Jun 15, 2011 23:03:58 GMT -5
by that logic, men and woman shouldn't be allowed to work in the same office buildings because they might have relationships that might become disruptive. the majority of people ought to be able to keep these issues from being too disruptive, and if they can't the offending individuals can be transfered to different units. There is a significant difference between the environment in office buildings and in a deployed operational force. Civilians thinking that the office environment is similar to the military combat environment is probably the root of the problem here. Point 1. Office environment, 8 hours, then you get to go home at the end of the day, and take the weekends off. Deployed military personnel are together 24/7 for months. 2. Office environment, roughly 50/50 male to female? (one would hope) I don't know what the numbers would be on integrated Australian units, but it would be a looong time before we reached 50/50. 3. Office environment, range of ages, and personality types, with various forms of stress release easily available, and an outside of work support net. Deployed military, very fit, young, sexually charged people under extreme stress. Its chalk and cheese. |
|
|
|
Post by DeadpanDoubter on Jun 15, 2011 23:04:24 GMT -5
Lies! Damn lies! Mollassia has the greatest army in the world. Army? They have no army. They have Baugh. And that is all they need. @lhm: You're forgetting to factor in all the bi and pansexuals. |
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Jun 15, 2011 23:05:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Jun 15, 2011 23:05:47 GMT -5
Our military has managed to incorporate female soldiers without having the army turn into one big high school clique. We've had female soldiers for years too, and it has been mostly OK... although the high school cliquishness certainly does occur, and I speak from experience. But there is a difference between integrated support units and combat units. |
|
|
|
Post by TWoozl on Jun 15, 2011 23:05:49 GMT -5
Yep. If I recall correctly, it's only certain Navy submarine positions that are restricted -- women can serve in any other role, provided they pass the requisite tests. e: Ah, it appears the submarine positions are now open to women too. www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdnmilitary/women-cdnmilitary.htmlThe Canadian Armed Forces opened all occupations, including combat roles, to women in 1989. Only submarines were excluded and they followed in 2000. Fellow Canadian, former Navy, confirming that. |
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Jun 15, 2011 23:07:31 GMT -5
So, wait. In other words, cohesion's destroyed, so blame the women and not the morons without sufficient discipline to carry on with the new recruits business-as-usual and keep their shit tucked? Yeah... Who's blaming women? If you took 5 seconds to analyse my position, rather than leaping in to flame me, you might understand that I actually think it is mostly the men who are the problem here. Actually, mostly its young people in general. But the way men act when there is a large group of men with a small number of women, in an isolated high stress environment is the problem. |
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Jun 15, 2011 23:08:12 GMT -5
Lies! Damn lies! Mollassia has the greatest army in the world. Army? They have no army. They have Baugh. And that is all they need. @lhm: You're forgetting to factor in all the bi and pansexuals. Got a reliable statistic on how many of them there are in the Australian military? I'd be genuinely interested to know. |
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Jun 15, 2011 23:09:57 GMT -5
How very interesting. How many operating subs does Canada have? I believe Australian subs are the only non unisex ships in the RAN. Thats a bit of an aside though, because the navy is a bit different to Army ground forces. ETA: I just read that article, and it doesn't mention armour, infantry, artillery or engineers. Can anyone confirm if the Canadian Army deploys women in these corps? |
|
|
|
Post by DeadpanDoubter on Jun 15, 2011 23:10:58 GMT -5
Army? They have no army. They have Baugh. And that is all they need. @lhm: You're forgetting to factor in all the bi and pansexuals. Got a reliable statistic on how many of them there are in the Australian military? I'd be genuinely interested to know. I'm afraid not, but you're using the general population statistics on which to base your assumptions, so maybe I can find stats of bi/pansexuals in the general population. |
|
|
|
Post by Tiberius on Jun 15, 2011 23:11:05 GMT -5
How very interesting. How many operating subs does Canada have? I believe Australian subs are the only non unisex ships in the RAN. Thats a bit of an aside though, because the navy is a bit different to Army ground forces. We have, like, three in West Edmonton Mall!  |
|
|
|
Post by DeadpanDoubter on Jun 15, 2011 23:12:59 GMT -5
Those are some dangerous looking mofos.
|
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Jun 15, 2011 23:13:04 GMT -5
Got a reliable statistic on how many of them there are in the Australian military? I'd be genuinely interested to know. I'm afraid not, but you're using the general population statistics on which to base your assumptions, so maybe I can find stats of bi/pansexuals in the general population. I think that would be a fair extrapolation. |
|
|
|
Post by TWoozl on Jun 15, 2011 23:14:38 GMT -5
So, wait. In other words, cohesion's destroyed, so blame the women and not the morons without sufficient discipline to carry on with the new recruits business-as-usual and keep their shit tucked? Yeah... Who's blaming women? If you took 5 seconds to analyse my position, rather than leaping in to flame me, you might understand that I actually think it is mostly the men who are the problem here. Actually, mostly its young people in general. But the way men act when there is a large group of men with a small number of women, in an isolated high stress environment is the problem. Considering that you provided ass-all for explanation, statistics or otherwise in earlier postings (Save for dragging someone else's posting out of flame and burn, then lightly painting it with personal rhetoric), there wasn't exactly anything to analyze. Further? You're still making broad, sweeping assumptions about one gender or another. Either (by your logic) men are weak morons who can't be relied on to be disciplined personnel, or women are frail, emotional, sexual targets or whatever other classical conservative excuse you want to paste over it. It's absolutely silly either way. The "best fighting force" defeated by their own lack of discipline? I sense another piss-take coming. |
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Jun 15, 2011 23:14:53 GMT -5
How very interesting. How many operating subs does Canada have? I believe Australian subs are the only non unisex ships in the RAN. Thats a bit of an aside though, because the navy is a bit different to Army ground forces. We have, like, three in West Edmonton Mall! I want one! |
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Jun 15, 2011 23:16:57 GMT -5
So the problem we'd face is that the men are too immature to handle serving with women. Gotcha. I don't know about "immature", but yes, the dynamic between men and women in such an environment is not conducive to combat effectiveness. IMHO. Laugh all you like. Its still true. |
|
