{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by car15:
12/8/2015 8:55:57 AM
6
As long as they meet the standard, I don't see the problem with it, but they [i]must[/i] meet the exact same standard as male soldiers, and that standard [i]cannot[/i] be lowered for their benefit.
English
-
Edited by OurWildebeest: 12/8/2015 12:02:51 PMFine in theory. But, they will not meet the same standards. What then? Accept that they don't qualify, or try to "creatively" "solve" the "problem" of them not qualifying because the qualification process is "inherently sexist"? The irony is going to be when women go from 14.5% of the U.S. military to (guessing) 9%-11% because of this and politicians will have no idea why. 92% of female soldiers do not want combat roles.
-
Edited by iInfinityLimit: 12/10/2015 4:05:54 PMHow would it drop? You will have those who meet the requirements and get into combat roles and those who don't that will go into the same positions they already get into. Now they have more options so the % will go up [spoiler]and it won't be sexist unless we lowered the standards specifically for them. If we leave the standards the same it is acknowledging that they can meet them just like men = equality[/spoiler]
-
Edited by OurWildebeest: 12/10/2015 5:32:30 PMIf female combat roles become common or mandatory, or enough female soldiers realistically think it MIGHT become mandatory, women will leave to avoid the possibility of combat. I say this because A - Last year, a poll reported in USA Today and many other media outlets showed 92% of female soldiers do not want combat roles. B - I personally know one female sergeant who said this will cause her not to re-up, and one of her female soldier friends I do not know agreed. Exaggerating - maybe, but the discussion is out there. C - I know human nature beyond TV show depictions and am very aware of the conversations parents currently have with daughters interested in joining the military, and how those conversations will change if their daughters face the possibility of combat. If female combat roles are rare and optional, as they are in Israel, then I doubt there will be much of an impact - but in that case, why bother?
-
[quote]If female combat roles are rare and optional, as they are in Israel, then I doubt there will be much of an impact - but in that case, why bother?[/quote] Why [i]not[/i]?
-
No. Any change needs a reason to happen, not a reason not to happen. I presume the reason is "fairness." Fairness is of trivial importance in the context of casualties and degraded combat performance.
-
If the standards are not lowered, then what casualties and degraded combat performance are you talking about? Female combat roles would be rare and optional, so as you mentioned, there would be very little impact on the military. Therefore, [i]why not[/i] when the change is so unobtrusive?
