[SprCForr]

Nope not an idiot for suggesting anything different. That's how women came to be in the teeth trades.

As for it working, it should so long as the physical standards aren't compromised.

[Richard]

wildrosegirl wildrosegirl:

Why is it the women's fault that the men in their unit can't keep their minds on their job instead of the women's pants? Why is it that women shouldn't be allowed to serve just because some of the men they might be working with are pigs?

Sorry. Unfair justification.

How about natural human nature.
Sorry but that was one of the reasons I left. I felt until you can make a man ignore his primal instincts to be attracted to or need to protect a woman you are going to get people killed. That has nothing to do with their abilities what so ever.

[Guy_Fawkes]

Im sorry, you are going to have to clairify that; You left because you couldnt date a chick you were serving with overseas?

[ASLplease]

Richard Richard:

wildrosegirl wildrosegirl:

Why is it the women's fault that the men in their unit can't keep their minds on their job instead of the women's pants? Why is it that women shouldn't be allowed to serve just because some of the men they might be working with are pigs?

Sorry. Unfair justification.

How about natural human nature.
Sorry but that was one of the reasons I left. I felt until you can make a man ignore his primal instincts to be attracted to or need to protect a woman you are going to get people killed. That has nothing to do with their abilities what so ever.

I think he basically said that men are getting themselves killed because they are men.

[Guy_Fawkes]

Well then he must not have been much of a soldier.

[Richard]

LOL clueless on two counts. Chivalry must truly be dead.

[Gunnair]

Richard Richard:

LOL clueless on two counts. Chivalry must truly be dead.

If it's chivalry, then I'm puzzled why you'd take issue? Chivalry is a bit more than putting your jacket over a puddle...

Surely, if you're willing to take risks for the chic in your platoon because of affection, then you're willing to do it for the guy friend in your platoon because of affection?

If you're taking risks because you got a hard on for the sweaty filthy chick humping a ruck, then you're a dumbass.

(Royal 'you're' by the way, not you)

[Guy_Fawkes]

Richard Richard:

LOL clueless on two counts. Chivalry must truly be dead.

Since you didnt clarify your response like I asked you too, I think the real answer must be more embarrassing then our assumptions.

[Richard]

Times change in 25 yrs boys. With all the ladies trying so hard to be one of the boys now days it shouldn't be a shock to see things gender neutral. I was raised a little differently men were expected to look out for the ladies and it would only be natural to instinctively do something that may get you killed. Everyone seems to jump to the conclusion that it is always about knocking booties.

[GreenTiger]

I don't think that policy would work in any military organization. They are human beings ander fire they are going to seek support(and sometimes a little) from each other.

[Guy_Fawkes]

Richard Richard:

Times change in 25 yrs boys. With all the ladies trying so hard to be one of the boys now days it shouldn't be a shock to see things gender neutral. I was raised a little differently men were expected to look out for the ladies and it would only be natural to instinctively do something that may get you killed. Everyone seems to jump to the conclusion that it is always about knocking booties.

Ahuh, so your excuse is you're so old skool that you cant stop yourself from throwing your jacket over a puddle. Chivalry and politeness are all good and fine when you're in Canada or behind the wire. However as soon as that LAV ramp drops that shit is out the window.

Richard Richard:

I felt until you can make a man ignore his primal instincts to be attracted to or need to protect a woman you are going to get people killed.

This has been achieved through proper training and social evolution. Times are a changing grandpa, and I still think your excuse is bullshit, it was 25 years ago and it is now.

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

I don't think that policy would work in any military organization. They are human beings ander fire they are going to seek support(and sometimes a little) from each other.

Of course, but you can take and receive support without romance.

[Richard]

Well I can see there is no discussion here so I am done. Your probably not even 25 and must have a serious chip on your shoulder for some reason. Take care and play safe.

[Guy_Fawkes]

Richard Richard:

I was raised a little differently men were expected to look out for the ladies and it would only be natural to instinctively do something that may get you killed. Everyone seems to jump to the conclusion that it is always about knocking booties.

Its just statments like that which are annoying. When you put on a uniform you are, for the most part, gender neutral. I did overstep myself talking about 25 years ago, Spr is much more qualified in that area. He was pounding pin when I was still in diapers, so I am sorry for that comment. I still think its a poor excuse to leave the service though.

[SprCForr]

Different time, different view. We recognize that change hits the green machine slower. There was a real big fear that the standards would be eased to allow them in. It almost happened and that just hardened the view that women should be excluded from the Arms. When women started passing and the hysteria wore off, most realized it was pretty much a non-issue. Supreme Court decree's and other special interest group rants on numbers and porportion didn't and still don't make much of an impact. They don't grasp the fact that huge numbers of women aren't clamouring to join Arms trades. They're filthy jobs and they just don't want them, they prefer something else and if forced into them, they'll just leave.

I wasn't any different in my view, and I ended up being involved from the start. I realized pretty quick that it wasn't going to be like I feared it would. All the huddled discussions and pontificating missed one crucial view: the women themselves who wanted a shot at joining an Arm. Once their voice was being heard above the din, it soon became apparent there was much ado about nothing.

The views held by older generations are not those held by the latest and that is where the argument tend to fail. Older can't see why, newer can't see why not.

It isn't wrong, it's just different.

[2Cdo]

SprCForr SprCForr:

Different time, different view. We recognize that change hits the green machine slower. There was a real big fear that the standards would be eased to allow them in. It almost happened and that just hardened the view that women should be excluded from the Arms. When women started passing and the hysteria wore off, most realized it was pretty much a non-issue. Supreme Court decree's and other special interest group rants on numbers and porportion didn't and still don't make much of an impact. They don't grasp the fact that huge numbers of women aren't clamouring to join Arms trades. They're filthy jobs and they just don't want them, they prefer something else and if forced into them, they'll just leave.

I wasn't any different in my view, and I ended up being involved from the start. I realized pretty quick that it wasn't going to be like I feared it would. All the huddled discussions and pontificating missed one crucial view: the women themselves who wanted a shot at joining an Arm. Once their voice was being heard above the din, it soon became apparent there was much ado about nothing.

The views held by older generations are not those held by the latest and that is where the argument tend to fail. Older can't see why, newer can't see why not.

It isn't wrong, it's just different.

Best post in the entire thread!