[BartSimpson]

The general is right insofar as military men who prosper in the military are wired a certain way. The fact of the matter is that the metrosexual ideal that this society promotes for men is not at all suited to military service.

The best guys in the military have a degree of disregard for many societal sensitivities and this is a good thing as this permits them to transcend the kinds of issues that cause PTSD.

Would some of these guys who are profoundly adept at killing our nation's enemies also be rather insensitive to modern perceptions of how women should be treated?

Yep. I've seen no end of misogyny in the ranks. I've also noticed that the units that punish the misogynists also have higher casualty rates along with a higher rate of failure in achieving stated objectives.

When it was my purview to make such decisions my solution was not to punish the Neanderthals but instead to put them all together and I'd put a Neanderthal in charge of them. I'd quietly give them leeway on behaviors that would get people punished in other units such as fighting, drinking to excess, and being generally disruptive. Typically, these issues would arise when they were in the rear on R&R so the solution, again, was to have them stay active but in a remote area where they could relax a bit.

Why do I say all of this?

Because when I need a bunch of ratfuck jihadis slaughtered down to a man I need a group of men who won't get all 'sensitive' about it. The job needs to get done and I don't need some pansy crying about it in therapy afterwards.

There's an old saying, "No country was ever saved by good men."

It's true.

And anyone who really wants their military to be transformed into a goddamned encounter group deserves to have their country invaded and they deserve to have their children slaughtered, their wives and sisters abused, and they deserve to feel the enemy's boot on their throats.

Bottom line is that the military isn't a fucking social engineering program. It's what protects your country so you can play with social engineering programs in safety.

Take it away and you invite a stronger people with less sensitivity to invade and conquer you.

[andyt]

Well, there you go, zip. That's where your men are wired differently leads you. Maybe the solution is to only allow neanderthals in the military, build a big wall around their bases, and only allow them out on overseas missions. There's some women that like that kind of man, so allow them in for base visits, as long as they sign a release form. Also of course they would be let to rape any enemy women, since they surely couldn't be expected to control themselves in the heat of battle with the "animals."

Bart, presumably you are a neanderthal, so how do you manage to function in civil society.

[2Cdo]

andyt andyt:

Well, there you go, zip. That's where your men are wired differently leads you. Maybe the solution is to only allow neanderthals in the military, build a big wall around their bases, and only allow them out on overseas missions. There's some women that like that kind of man, so allow them in for base visits, as long as they sign a release form. Also of course they would be let to rape any enemy women, since they surely couldn't be expected to control themselves in the heat of battle with the "animals."

Bart, presumably you are a neanderthal, so how do you manage to function in civil society.

And again Andy reveals his true feelings about the military.

[stratos]

It appears some people are wired to not understand what others are saying. Thus inadvertently proving the General right.

[andyt]

Just basing it on Bart's info. It's the logical conclusion if what he says is accurate. If the best military men have a disregard for many societal sensitivities, then they may be effective soldiers, but they are going to wreak havoc on civil society, so would need to be segregated.

So take your pick. Can soldiers control their behavior and not disregard societal sensitivities, in which case there's no room in the military for hose who can't, or soldiers can't control their behavior, in which case there's no room for them in civil society.

Is the army full of Col. Jessups, and is that who we want standing on that wall?

[Zipperfish]

andyt andyt:

Well, there you go, zip. That's where your men are wired differently leads you.

While it is my opinion that men are "wired differently" as you put it, it is based on a substantial amount of research. You should look up the roles of testosterone, estradiol, estrogen, adrenalin, and manyy other hormones that have profound impacts on our behaviour, and the demonstrated research in the difference of those various regulators adn ho4rmaones between males and females.

Funny, in your last post you said nobody was disagreeing that men and women were wired differently, but you seem to have reverted. Again, something I've noted in my debates with the global warming deniers over the years.

Now, I'm a scinetist, so I am sometimes overly focussed on reserach and what is a supported theory and what isn't. Based on that, I think you're right I did miss the point completely. I focussed on the fact that the general said that men and women are wired differently (which I hold to be true). But I think the outrage wasn't on that point, but rather the idea that that should be an excuse for it.

[andyt]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

andyt andyt:

Well, there you go, zip. That's where your men are wired differently leads you.

While it is my opinion that men are "wired differently" as you put it, it is based on a substantial amount of research. You should look up the roles of testosterone, estradiol, estrogen, adrenalin, and manyy other hormones that have profound impacts on our behaviour, and the demonstrated research in the difference of those various regulators adn ho4rmaones between males and females.

Funny, in your last post you said nobody was disagreeing that men and women were wired differently, but you seem to have reverted. Again, something I've noted in my debates with the global warming deniers over the years.

Now, I'm a scinetist, so I am sometimes overly focussed on reserach and what is a supported theory and what isn't. Based on that, I think you're right I did miss the point completely. I focussed on the fact that the general said that men and women are wired differently (which I hold to be true). But I think the outrage wasn't on that point, but rather the idea that that should be an excuse for it.

I have not reverted. I'm not arguing biology here (of which I probably know more than you) I'm arguing that biology is not destiny or we would never have advanced to the degree we have. And your last sentence seems to acknowledge that's what I'm saying, so thanks.

The point of what you quoted was to say that if you focus on men's biology, you make an excuse for their behavior. Bart says this is a good thing, it will keep our society safe. I think it will destroy society and take us back to Muslim times. Or as the movie asked, is there an excuse for Col Jessup or not?

$1:

Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

Well, there you go, zip. That's where your men are wired differently leads you. Maybe the solution is to only allow neanderthals in the military, build a big wall around their bases, and only allow them out on overseas missions. There's some women that like that kind of man, so allow them in for base visits, as long as they sign a release form. Also of course they would be let to rape any enemy women, since they surely couldn't be expected to control themselves in the heat of battle with the "animals."

The French have done exactly this for quite some time now. They call it the Foreign Legion.

andyt andyt:

Bart, presumably you are a neanderthal, so how do you manage to function in civil society.

I don't know. If I ever find a civil society I'll be sure to let you know how I get on.

[andyt]

So are yo advocating for a Foreign Legion for your country or ours?

Despite all your bluster, you probably act quite civilized these days. If you can do it, so can the others. No need to make excuses for them.

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

Just basing it on Bart's info. It's the logical conclusion if what he says is accurate. If the best military men have a disregard for many societal sensitivities, then they may be effective soldiers, but they are going to wreak havoc on civil society, so would need to be segregated.

So take your pick. Can soldiers control their behavior and not disregard societal sensitivities, in which case there's no room in the military for hose who can't, or soldiers can't control their behavior, in which case there's no room for them in civil society.

Is the army full of Col. Jessups, and is that who we want standing on that wall?

Andy, the question to ask is what do you really want a military to do?

Answer that question and then hire accordingly.

[andyt]

I doubt if we really need to hire people who can't control themselves. But again, if what you say is true, we need to control the soldiers who can't control themselves. WE lock up civilians who can't control themselves. Maybe instead of locking them in prison, we go back to letting them serve in the military, but in that case they need to be locked away from general society somehow.

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

So are yo advocating for a Foreign Legion for your country or ours?

We have the United States Marine Corps. For now. By default, so do you. Arguably, the USMC would effectively be Canada's Foreign Legion.

andyt andyt:

Despite all your bluster, you probably act quite civilized these days. If you can do it, so can the others. No need to make excuses for them.

I don't write about everything I do.

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

I doubt if we really need to hire people who can't control themselves. But again, if what you say is true, we need to control the soldiers who can't control themselves. WE lock up civilians who can't control themselves. Maybe instead of locking them in prison, we go back to letting them serve in the military, but in that case they need to be locked away from general society somehow.

Interesting because judges these days will still give young, first-time offenders the opportunity to join the military as opposed to going to prison. It's a constructive use of people who don't necessarily conform to the model of the New Soviet Man like you do.

[Zipperfish]

It all reminds of an old Star Trek episode. Actually, just about everything reminds me of an old Star Trek episode. In this one, a planet at war had bred super-soldiers--heightened strength, intelligence, agression. But after the war, they had proved an impediment to general society and so were exiled to the moon.

Ther are issues with veterans having higher-than-background crime rates. There is some preliminary research indicating that the exceedance of the crime rate over the background level is somewhat correlated to the proportion of soldiers with PTSD. That is to say, it would not be too much of stretch to say that the more traumatic the experience, the more likely a soldier would be to commit a crime, statistically speaking.

[ShepherdsDog]

funny that the feminists can get away with saying all men are potential rapists