MRAs often complain bitterly that men have to register for the draft and women don’t. Ironically, many MRAs – sometimes the very same people – also think that women shouldn’t be allowed in the armed forces at all, or at the very least should be barred from direct combat.
One MRA who’s staunchly against women in combat is a Redditor calling himself Demonspawn. In a recent comment he sets forth “four huge reasons” why. The first is a doozy:
The vagina. You can’t keep it clean in battlefield conditions. Military regulations state that women on extended training exercises must have access to garrison or equivalent facilities for hygiene at least once every X number of days (usually 7). Why? Because otherwise you run a very high risk of a vaginal infection and can die from it. Those facilities cannot be guaranteed on the battlefield and therefore it is an even greater risk to women’s lives to use them as battlefield troops.
I’m surprised he forgot to mention the chronic problem of centipedes in the vagina.
The rest of his reasons are equally stupid, if not quite as amusing. Number two:
Public Relations. … Have you not read the articles when women soldiers die and it’s a big deal, while more dead male soldiers is just business as usual? Public support for war cannot be sustained in the face of massive female soldier casualties.
And three:
Men get themselves killed overprotecting women. This is the #1 reason Israel deintegrated their troops.
Yeah, it’s a terrible thing when soldiers try to protect one another.
His final reason returns us once again to the whole vagina thing:
Women tend to “get pregnant” when leaving for overseas trips… That destroys unit cohesion. Research the “pregnant navy” syndrome. One ship had over 40% of it’s female sailors suddenly become pregnant before an overseas trip.
I did a Google search for “pregnant navy.” In 2007, according to one article I found, roughly 11 percent of female soldiers had to be shifted to shore because they were pregnant; it’s usually less than that.
Women: trouble when their vaginas are infected, trouble when they’re clean. Why do we even let them leave the house?
Thanks to MuForceShoelace for posting the link to Demonspawn’s comment on the AgainstMensRights subreddit.
EDIT: I misread an article I originally cited about female crew members on a supply ship getting pregnant during the Gulf war. The percentage who got pregnant was 10%, not more than half. (In my defense, the article was badly worded.) I’ve removed the erroneous material.
Brandon: <i.@Moe: You can’t really look at one front in a vacuum. Soviets placed most if not all of their troops on the eastern front while the Americans were split between the Western front and the pacific theater. Thus I see it as comparing apples and oranges.
You are right, but the wrong reasons. The US had options. They tried, actually, to put off the invasion of Europe, because they wanted to focus on the Pacific. For some reason, the USSR was arguing for opening a second front against Germany.
That might be because they were doing the heavy lifting. Yes, the Japanese were fighting the US, but (for all the sense of anger at having been sucker punched) the War in the Pacific wasn’t, for the US, an existential struggle.
The Eastern Front was, for both Germany, and the USSR.
Brandon: In my personal opinion, the job is the job and we should only have one standard and not two.
@KathleenB: The idea that you would get to make hospital visits for basic aliments is laughable. Soldiers get to go to the hospital from the battlefield when they get incapacitated from trench foot (gangrene or amputation). The commanding officers and NCO’s do their best to prevent that by having them clean and dry their feet, socks and boots. You aren’t going to go to the hospital for a few blisters or swelling.
@KathleenB: Yes there are medics who are usually there to save lives when soldiers get shot. I don’t think they carry feminine hygiene products.
Got a lot of combat time do you?
Right.
The things which make a good combat soldier (IME) is the paired mor&eactute;s of group identity/mission loyalty. Since, in the modern age, there is damned little in the way of Light Infantry (from a practical role in a combat environment; i.e. humping all one own on one’s back, plus a combat load) the real question is, “can a person carry what needs to be carried to the fight”, and once in the fight can that person put fire on the target, while keeping track of her/his fellows, the present situation, and the overall mission.
I’ve not had problems with that. The best 203 grendadier I knew, was a 5’0″ female, about 95 lbs. She could wear the vest, and drop four rounds on a 10m square, 200m away, in 30 seconds.
Give her call-out for a change in round, mid-stream, and she’d do it.
I made no implication that women expect special treatment…they do get special treatment though. Women are held to a lower standard when it comes to physical training.
They are held to a different standard.
Pop-quiz, what are the present PT standards?
Essay question: explain the justification for Push-ups, sit-ups and a 2-mile run as an evaluation of combat capability: be sure to inlcude explanations of the rationale for adjusting the performance of those taskes being changed by age.
Medics carry tampons. They make great bandages for through and through wounds of muscle tissue (as well as those in which the bullet doesn’t emerge).
I carried a box of OB with me, as well as field dressings, and (as soons as I could get a hole of them; before they became the standard) some Israeli dressings.
Amazingly, I didn’t need to “lend” any of the tampons to the womeni was with. They had packed enough, and (the same way I was able to get DEET and foot-powder, the Army had tampons in the supply stream.
Go figure.
Any feminist (of either sex) worth her salt knows full well that the military is a treehouse with the words “NO GIRLS ALLOWED!” scrawled on the door. Those mean boys won’t let her join in and play too!
EWME: This feminist did an entire career in the Army. I don’t know about your army, but mine (when all was said and done) is pretty tolerant of women. Heck, in my part of the Army we had women in command, and shit.
There were female drill sergeants when I was in Basic (I had a female West Point Cadet: I have only seen a few male soldiers who could match her at PT, much less best her).
Hengist: Field camps? Soldiers in major wars spend weeks not visiting bases and camps. Most would only be temporary or makeshift camps to resupply soldiers. Are you suggesting that women get special treatment and have portable showers flown into those bases for women’s use?
I dunno, they probably have separate facilities though, don’t they? Otherwise you’d be opening the door to all kinds of sexual harassment scandals.
The answer is… sort of. Depends on how the showers are built. If they are discrete (i.e. one shower, with one dressing area) first come, first served. If they are group, then they are either taken in shifts, or dedicated male/female.
In a combat zone, some things tend to be less important. My unit; pretty egalitarian. I had a female soldier who figured out how to piss into a bottle on a moving humvee. Most would wait for a piss-break and we’d hold ponchos so they could take a leak without being stared at.
The guys would go to the other side of the vehicle.
As always, Pecunium, it is a great pleasure to watch you shred these twits. XD
I read an article the other day on Australia allowing women into combat roles (sorry, too lazy to look it up), and they’re talking about ensuring that the PT requirements for specific roles are actually freaking *requirements* for the roles, and not something which emphasises all the things male bodies tend to be good at, and de-emphasises all of the things female bodies tend to be good at.
I think the answer to Pecunium’s essay question is that the standards have been set with men and men’s bodies in mind, without direct reference to what is actually required for the job. It’s not a matter of lowering the standards, its about making sure the standards are actually relevant (and not just a handy way to keep women out of roles that they are capable of). News flash: the number of push ups one can do is not the only way to test strength and fitness,* let alone one’s ability to shoot guns.
*the armed forces clearly have a big range of fitness tests they do, my reference to push ups is really in response to anyone who thinks that upper body strength (which can only be measured by the number of push ups one can do) is, like, the most important thing ever.
@ Samuel: I enlisted, so my service has nothing to do with the draft. I was also not in a “combat” position. I was in a “non combat” position, in a “non combat” protective force, which is totally legal. The fact that I was up to my ass in combat… well, shit happens sometimes. There were also a lot of women in the medical facility, and nurses and doctors are considered non combat positions as well. They had NO problem picking up weapons and fighting along side the other “non combat” personnel. It’s not like the non-combat personnel have never shot a gun in their life and are somehow exempt from fighting, if combat shows up on the front porch.
When the enemy showed up, we kicked their ass, because… when someone’s shooting at you, do you think there’s really time to piss and moan over who’s supposed to be in combat and who isn’t? Do you think it’s a huge issue of “OMG, there’s a woman with a gun and she may have vagina cooties?” No. You STFU and do what needs to be done.
Also, I think that, if you’d actually read the comments here, you’d notice that the feminists are agreeing with you about women’s military service and the draft.
@ Mythago: They were. And they gave me a really big gun too! They were really gentlemanly about it, though. One of them drove the gun around, another one reloaded my gun for me… it was totes awesome! Sarcasm aside, these guys were some of the most amazing that I’ve ever met, or ever hope to. For some internet troll to even think about questioning their manhood… I’d be pissed if I weren’t laughing so hard.
@ Amused: It’s still this way, in some parts of the former USSR. I was in a little Ukrainian farming village in August and… no indoor plumbing. There was an outhouse and we bathed with well water in the outdoor sauna. After a really long day out in the field or on REALLY hot days, we’d take a bath, but most days we didn’t think that it was worth the hassle. We’d wash our hands, feet and faces to get the dirt and dust off (the driveway wasn’t paved, the yard was pretty much dirt, aside from the actual crop fields, and the road into town was only partially paved) and be done with it. My vagina is just fine, as are the vaginas of my female inlaws.
I also agree with you about the whole “separate facilities are SO obnoxious” sentiments. It’s not like we need hazmat gear in there. And men already know this. We all had mothers, at the very least, and used the same bathroom facilities that they did.
@Pencunim: The “mechanism” I was talking about was the actual regulation barring women from enlisting into combat roles.
Also the key point about a scandal is that it goes against SOP. The typical recruitment process was a full day at MEPS taking the ASVAB and doing a ton of physical tests (eye, ear, urine, blood, etc…). After your test scores came back, A Sergent would present you with a list of jobs that 1) you qualified for and 2) the Army had available at that exact moment. Then you signed a contract guaranteeing your job after basic training. I also had the “benefit” of selecting my first post at Ft Hood.
Since I didn’t have a degree, I wasn’t eligible for a lot of other perks. The point is that yes scandals happen but they aren’t the rule…they are the exception.
Again, I also mentioned that you don’t have complete control over what jobs you can do. Hence me saying something along the lines of “and what jobs X branch of service has available at the time of enlistment”.
Nothing is absolute when it comes to the military.
The present PT standards for the Army is that men and women have to do the same amount of situps but only have to do a third of the push ups and they get something around 3 minutes extra for their 2 mile run. (for the 17-21 age range)
You say different standards, I say lower standards. Either way, women get more slack on PT.
Essay question? Who do you think you are my teacher? You condescending dolt.
The point being is if women are to serve in combat roles then I say they should be forced to do everything the men are already doing. Anything less is giving women more slack and holding men to a higher standard then women. If women want to be infantry, I am more than happy for them to do it. However, they should follow the exact same rules and procedures as the men already do. Fair is fair.
You say different standards, I say lower standards. Either way, women get more slack on PT.
So do people older than 21, as you note parenthetically. Why should 40-year-olds get more slack on PT than 18-year-olds? If middle-aged people are to serve in combat roles then why aren’t they forced to do everything the young’uns are doing? Fair is fair.
Or, you know, it could be that the PT requirements have shit-all to do with whether you can actually do the particular job, and more about insuring that the soldier is at top physical condition for their age and gender.
“EWME: This feminist did an entire career in the Army. I don’t know about your army, but mine (when all was said and done) is pretty tolerant of women.”
Yes, I’m quite sure that after all the things feminists said and did the military has become VERY accomodating. Lucky the Soviet Union collapsed first.
“Heck, in my part of the Army we had women in command, and shit.”
Yes, I have no trouble believing you shoveled shit in the service.
“There were female drill sergeants when I was in Basic (I had a female West Point Cadet: I have only seen a few male soldiers who could match her at PT, much less best her).”
Yes, I’ve seen ‘Starship Troopers’ too.
Essay question? Who do you think you are my teacher? You condescending dolt.
I’ve seen this before when Brandon responds to jokes or figures of speech; I really don’t think he “gets” figurative language.
Boy, evilwhitemaleempire sure is tearing up the house. He sure did show Precunium, a guy who actually knows what he’s talking about, who’s boss.
I hope he notices how I’m salivating at how brilliant and wonderful his response is, in the face of all evidence and truth.
Le sigh. Round #284772874 of Brandon-is-obtuse-yet-simultaneously-splainy.
When I joined my current lab I was “assigned” to a project in that my PI was like “okay, you can do that,” when my friend’s kid got into her nice preschool she was “assigned” to the class she had being trying to get into, etc. etc. It doesn’t mean that the person being “assigned” has no input in the process or that they never initially volunteered or applied for whatever they were “assigned” to.
But hey, if that single word is what has your panties in a twist, feel free to substitute “granted” or “hired for” instead of “assigned to” or whatever would detwist you. I would hate to chafe you further.
Sergent
Now that boosts my confidence in Brandon’s military knowledge.
@Katz: Oh noez…a misspelling. Do you want to see my DD-214? I also have pictures of myself in uniform surrounded by other soldiers in uniform. Will that make you happy?
@mythago: Those are age based assessments. Younger people are typically stronger and less prone to health related problems (e.g weaker bones).
Maybe you should explain your opinion as to why a 20 year old male should have to perform more than a 20 year old female?
@Brandon: Yes, I know those are age based assessments. What’s your point? Could you explain your opinion as to why a 20 year old male should have to perform more than a 40 year old male, instead of just saying that the 40 year old male can either meet the standard or GTFO?
The obvious reason is that the standards are meant to insure that the soldier is at a high level of physical fitness. A 40-year old male in peak physical condition should be able to do X number of situps. That is fewer than a 20-year-old male, but that’s okay, because a fit 40-year-old is not going to be as strong or energetic as a 20-year-old. We don’t care about that; we just want to make sure the 40-year-old is at the top of his form.
Same thing for gender. A 20-year-old female in peak physical condition probably can’t do as many push-ups as a 20-year-old male in peak physical condition, because men typically have higher upper-body strength than women (just like older people typically can’t run two miles as fast as younger people).
You really can’t have this both ways. Either the standard is an absolute one – a soldier who cannot run two miles in X minutes is a danger to his unit, period, and we’re not going to allow him to endanger other servicemen just because he’s 40 – or it’s a relative one, and so we scale it.
Are all of the people in uniform hot? Because then yes that would make me happy.
Bagelsan, one of them is Brandon. The other ones are people who were willing to be around him. Regardless of how physically attractive they are, you’ll always know that.
@katz, that’s unfair. The other people in the picture have probably been given orders to be around him.
Maybe it could work like the one blank in a firing squad, and the fact that I don’t know which one is Brandon will let me sleep at night? 😀 Probably not though.
I’m confused, so do army women currently have to meet a lower standard than men or don’t they?
Why is it okay to kick day hypothetical 20-year-old woman out because she can’t do everything a 20 yo man can, but the 40 yo man is fine even though he ALSO can’t do everything a 20 yo man can do? Brandon, there is really no logic in that position.
Because PENISES.
Mythago, I had no idea there were also age based differences in fitness requirements. I’m filing that one away for the next time some butthead yanks out the push-up bullshit.
Samuel: The US does not have a draft.
The fact that men are still required to register is a problem, but there is. no. draft. We have a volunteer army.
As someone else said earlier in the thread, if they tried to reinstitute the draft, the lawsuits would be a-flying (and it probably wouldn’t happen anyway — after all, how many “wars” have we had in the last decade or two without a draft.).
So stop fucking saying we have a fucking draft because we fucking don’t.
To combat (HAH) the “I Saw a movie once” ignorance that seems to be surfacing, here are you know some links to actual research some of it done by THE MILITARY.
And, Samuel, Notice: AMERICAN VOLUNTEER MILITARY.
http://www.js.pentagon.mil/dacowits/research/Women_Minorities_in_Amer_Vol_Military.pdf
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1998/ns98213.pdf
http://archive.gao.gov/d23t8/141925.pdf
http://www.rand.org/pubs/rgs_dissertations/2006/RGSD114.pdf
And don’t forget, that not all women are white women!
http://www.alternet.org/economy/93254/the_trials_minority_women_face_serving_in_the_military/