Stare Death In The Face, But No Peeking At Naked Boobies!
Man enough to fight a war, but if a piece of legislation goes through, Uncle Sam's going to be your nanny. Seth Robson writes for Stars & Stripes:
Legislation that would restrict the sale of certain men's magazines on U.S. military bases around the world would be bad for morale, according to soldiers at Grafenwöhr.U.S. Rep. Paul Broun, R-Ga., has introduced legislation that would close a loophole in the current law that allows the sale of some sexually explicit material on military bases by lowering the threshold required to deem material "sexually explicit."
A Department of Defense committee that reviews materials sold on bases ruled last year that magazines such as Playboy and Penthouse are not pornographic. But Broun's Military Honor and Decency Act includes language that could make those magazines eligible for the ban.
What's "decent" is that Broun gets to decide what magazines he and his children read, but leaves the decision of what the adult men and women serving in the military read to those adult men and women.
Broun, a Marine veteran, told Newsweek recently that the magazines sold in military exchanges are partly responsible for a rise in sexual assaults in the military and other problems.
Yeah? On what evidence?
"Allowing the sale of pornography on military bases has harmed military men and women by: escalating the number of violent, sexual crimes; feeding a base addiction; eroding the family as the primary building block of society; and denigrating the moral standing of our troops both here and abroad," Broun says on his Web site.
Rape can be violent, but it is not a crime motivated by violence but a crime motivated by a desire for sex. There's plenty of evidence for that -- but none offered by Broun (at least, not in this article) for his claims of all the ills supposedly being caused on military bases by glimpses at Miss November.
More from Robson's piece:
The legislation would require the DOD to annually review material that is not currently deemed sexually explicit to determine if it should be prohibited, according to the Web site.Some soldiers say magazines that could be banned are particularly important downrange.
Brown deployed to Afghanistan in 2002 and 2005 and is preparing to go to Iraq with the 12th Combat Aviation Brigade this summer. When he was in Afghanistan he was one of the first to pick up a new copy of Maxim or FHM when it came out, he said.
"It would suck if they ban it," he said. "It's bad enough we are down there to begin with. Taking that away would be like a knife in the chest. I'm not saying I'm depending on Maxim to keep me alive over there, but it helps."
Publications such as Maxim and FHM are not named by Broun, but lowering the threshold of the sexually explicit definition might mean such magazines would be targeted for a ban.
Sorry, but if you're laying your life on the line on behalf of the rest of us, the only boobs in your life shouldn't be puritanical jerks like Broun.
UPDATE: Vlad, in the comments below, had a great idea:
Amy if this jack ass gets his way we need to start a playboy and penthouse air lift. How's "Boobs for our troops" sound.
Jennifer had another:
I think we should start a porn drive right now for Paul Broun. Let's call it "Ass for Brass" and start mailing skin magazines by the hundreds to his congressional office, in protest.
Looking for my current copy of Hustler now!
That address:
Senator Paul Broun
2104 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
via ifeminists
Damned foolishness.
The term "Hookers" comes from General "Fighting Joe" Hooker, who kept prostitutes near his tent.
Venus has followed Mars to war since the spear got a bronze head. The idea that soldiers wouldn't like sex, or wouldn't like looking at naked women...numbers of each, is nothing less than stupid. And the idea that it is a violation of our morals...or that our morals have ANYTHING to do with that to the degree that it needs to involve restrictive legislation, is paternalism at its worst.
Hmpf, if it were up to me, there would be a redlight building on every post for morale enhancement purposes, sure would beef up recruitment. I understand banning it in sensitive countries, but come now, all it means is we'll buy it elsewhere.
Robert at May 13, 2008 2:18 AM
"Broun, a Marine veteran, told Newsweek recently that the magazines sold in military exchanges are partly responsible for a rise in sexual assaults in the military and other problems."
I have to call this guy an idiot. Not only has this stuff been available since the '80s, ten steps outside any military base in the US and Europe is a newsstand with anything whatsoever you wish in the inventory. He's going to have to find another job, especially when somebody points out that Ed Meese, as US Attorney General, could not find a link between sexual crimes and pornography despite being ordered to do so.
If you want a better idea, try considering that the expectation of entitlement and privilege has appeared in the military population - the "me first" entity, fit, lonely and mad that someone can actually tell them what to do at any moment. Criminals, after all, are a small part of any demographic, despite their conspicuity.
Radwaste at May 13, 2008 2:32 AM
Radical feminism, meet radical Christianism.
How the fuck did we end up with Republicans that believe this shit about rape being about violence and triggered by pornography?
How many years have both of these groups been trying to prove this link and failing miserably?
Is this thing on?
Hello?
brian at May 13, 2008 4:28 AM
Not only has this stuff been available since the '80s, ten steps outside any military base in the US and Europe is a newsstand with anything whatsoever you wish in the inventory.
It's the guys in Iraq and Afghanistan who have to get it on their bases.
Amy Alkon at May 13, 2008 5:05 AM
I went to this guys site, interesting.
All Quotes from: http://broun.house.gov/about.shtml
"He has enjoyed the freedom of practicing medicine without bureaucratic encumbrances"
This type of attitude will always raise an eyebrow and perk my ears. While I hate bureaucratic crap it's kind of part of the territory for being a doctor. When I hear this normally the doctor is into some far out mickey mouse stuff.
"He is active in the Gideon ministry and in 2004 participated in a mission trip to Iraq." So here is where he saw countless instances of male troops drop the playboy after becoming sexually enraged and gang rape a fellow soldier.
"conservative Republican candidate for the U.S. House in 1990 and 1992 and for the U.S. Senate in 1996." There are few word that scare the crap out of me "conservative Republican" is up there with Tali ban, Shari Law and Fundamentalist.
vlad at May 13, 2008 6:37 AM
How the hell is some grunt reading playboy in a sand and blood mired shit hole eroding family values? What his wife and son are at the front line with him? I think he has some undiagnosed porn addiction, this is his way of dealing with it.
Amy if this jack ass gets his way we need to start a playboy and penthouse air lift. How's "Boobs for our troops" sound.
vlad at May 13, 2008 6:42 AM
Amy if this jack ass gets his way we need to start a playboy and penthouse air lift. How's "Boobs for our troops" sound.
I was thinking the same thing myself!
Amy Alkon at May 13, 2008 6:48 AM
Count me in!
Flynne at May 13, 2008 7:03 AM
During the 70s when I wasi n my young teens, I used to look at all the "skin" mags that were sold in the Navy Exchange. Where was all the rape? The ban must be recent because there used to be all sorts of adult magazines sold there. Like usual phony science is being used to promote a moral agenda
David H at May 13, 2008 7:15 AM
The stuff in the mags is nothing compared to what wives and GFs send their guys every week.
austin at May 13, 2008 7:45 AM
I think there's a bigger underlying rationale:
as soon as those servicemen see boobies, they're going to start questioning why the hell they're doing what they're doing. Why could I not be back home in Indianapolis drinking beers and partying with drunk midwest girls? Why am I sitting in a giant, unchanged sandbox that And it's not just the tits. It's everything else within the pages as well. Imagine for a moment you find yourself stuck in ecru, mississippi for a year, and the only paper you can get is new york's nightlife weekly.
I think the whole 'rape' rationale posited is not the reason at all. The military officers are not dumb people. What fundamentalist soldier (and they're are thousands of them) is going to ever question this? "perhaps boss is right. we shouldn't be lookin' at dem der titties. it would be 'gainst the word of God. Now, let's go kill some towlies!"
There's two reasons here: the reason they tell you, and the reason they did it for.
j.d. at May 13, 2008 7:49 AM
After reading back my long post here, I decided to title it:
The Evolution of Women and Sex in the Navy
..according to Bikerken
In November of 76 when I checked into bootcamp, I saw a sign on a door that said “HEAD”. Not being familiar with the term, I kinda chuckled and thought, “Nah, It couldn’t be.” I still didn’t go in there till I had to take a leak and asked somebody.
When I checked aboard the USS Midway in 1977, there were two little main stores on board where you could by a carton of cigs for $2.50 and all kinds of skin mags such as Gent, Hustler, Juggs, Club (my fav), Chic, Playboy, Penthouse, etc. They were about two bucks a piece and whenever the store got new issues in, they sold out pretty quickly. We spent a LOT of time at sea on the Midway. Back then, we had pinups and centerfolds plastered all over the walls in our berthing and work spaces, and I mean explicit ones. Nobody cared.
Weird things happen to men’s heads when they are separated from women for a long time. During the Iranian hostage crisis, I was on a frigate, USS Knox, on station for five straight months on station in the Arabian Gulf. No women. Then we had a breakdown and had to go to Diego Garcia for four months and wait for a tender for repairs. At the time, there were no women on Diego Garcia. (DG is a small sliver of land barely large enough for a runway right in the center of the Indian Ocean). I walked into the EM club and they were playing pornos on a super 8 projector with a big white screen right above the bar. Then the tender came in to repair our ship. The USS Ajax had on it some of the very first women to be assigned to ships. Six female ensigns. They had to have a two marine escort anytime they left their ship and we were told to stay at least twenty feet away from them. The possibility of a mass rape was no joke. If you haven’t been in the presence a real women in nine months, you have no idea how much just being close to her can affect you. Just the smell of her hair or perfume go send you reeling. You could easily hurt yourself. We actually had a couple of cases of guys with twisted testicles! I don’t know how or why or what and don’t wanna!
Well, we finally left Diego Garcia and went to Subic Bay in the Phillipines. For those of the un-indoctrinated, in the late 70’s, the tiny town of Olonopo right outside the gate had about sixteen thousand hookers in a five square block area. Within an hour of the ship pulling in, you could almost hear a collective Grunt coming from the town.
In 1986, the Navy started to pay attention to fraternization and sexual harassment since more women were coming on to ships. This was the complete first sexual harassment lecture that I received in the Navy. Five simple words: “Don’t fuck with the cunts.” Okie dokie then! We were well on our way to accepting women at sea! Then they started cracking down on the pictures in the spaces and told us all the dirty pictures had to come down. We were told no more naked pictures, we could only have up to five pictures on the bottom of the rack above you and they could only be family. So I asked, “Sir, what if you’re from North Carolina and you have naked pictures of your sister?” He didn’t laugh, turns out he was from Charlotte. We actually did have a guy in the division at the time who was from NC and made no bones about doin his older sister. We just looked at each other like, Okaaayyy.
So all the dirty pictures came down and we started seeing a lot more women in the Navy. By the time the nineties came around, I was off the shore of Oman jumping from ship to ship trying to catch up with my battle group and I landed on the USS Prarie. At the time, it was the oldest ship in the Navy and had a snake across it’s ensign that said, “Don’t tread on me”. This was my first exposure to women at sea. There were a few hundred women on board and that thing was a floating whorehouse. Some women would take out the hemming in the crotch of their coveralls so they could just bend over in a fan room or somewhere dark and a guy could just slip up behind them. If anyone came around, she could just stand up and him turn around. Sounds tacky, but it worked. In one cruise, some forty women got pregnant, at sea. So now there began to be much wailing and gnashing of teeth, “Oh my god, they are having sex on ships!” DUH! You put a few thousand men and women on a ship of an average age of about 22 for months at a time and what do you think is going to happen? They are going to hook up, orders or not!
So the solution to this problem has been for the Navy to come down hard on people getting caught having affairs with shipmates. They still do it, it’s just that now, it can ruin your career if you’re caught. However, political correctness plays a major factor in who gets punished how much. Lesbians seem to get let off the hook much more than hetro’s do. Rank, status and the kind of unit your assigned to can be a major factor too. So it’s not really equal punishment for all.
Bottom line here, it is not the presence of women or pictures of women that cause problems such as sexual violence against women. It is the absence of a normal sexual relationship that causes men to be violent against women. Ted Bundy, who famously declared that porn made him do what he did, did not have a normal sexual relationship with a woman. He had a girlfriend, but he freaked her out with his wanting her to act dead and things like that. The military needs to get a grip. SEX IS NORMAL. YOU WANT PEOPLE TO BE NORMAL. Quit trying to overthink the problem!
Bikerken at May 13, 2008 8:01 AM
I wonder if banning such mags would have a noticeable impact on reenlistment rates? This is exactly the kind of morale-breaker that might push a guy over the edge. In which case, maybe the fellow promoting it is anti-war.
I think we should start a porn drive right now for Paul Broun. Let's call it "Ass for Brass" and start mailing skin magazines by the hundreds to his congressional office, in protest.
Jennifer at May 13, 2008 8:02 AM
You know, I'm serioius. Dan Savage was able to get his readers to send tons of sex toys to Kandiss Crone, a t.v. news reporter who did some stupid sex-phobic reporting. While I certainly don't think that's a legitimate and sanitary form of protest, perhaps sending NEW, hygienic material to Mr. Broun would "open his eyes" to what's really out there, and he'll realize that Playboy ain't so bad.
(Here's the link to Dan's column, if you're interested.)
Jennifer at May 13, 2008 8:09 AM
Refresh your browser - just posted an update to this post (above). On deadline now, but I'll have to figure out a name for the thing.
Maybe "boobs for the boob"?
Suggestions? Best one wins.
Treacher? You got anything?
Amy Alkon at May 13, 2008 8:17 AM
I was married when I was on the Midway back then, my wife and my mother used to get me subscriptions to Penthouse and Playboy all the time for birthday presents. It was great to read them, and I actually did read them too, just to see what was going on in the real world. Back then, with no internet and very little live news, (all our news came off the teletype) we were kinda out of touch with the whole world.
There's a problem with you're airlift idea though, they would never get through the mail. You would have to be real clever at hiding them because they do get yanked out of the mail and the person they were mailed to could actually get in trouble. I ran into that at Diego Garcia which is a British Indian Ocean Territory. They prohibited skin mags on the island and would screen them out of the mail. They even searched your duffel bag for them if you flew in. But yet there was porn at the EM club.
These magazines actually do serve a purpose. They actually do help to relieve pent up 'pressure' for these guys. It gives them something nice to think about and to 'shower with affection'. If they weren't doing that, they could really go off the deep end.
Bikerken at May 13, 2008 8:25 AM
How about, "Droops for Troops"?
Bikerken at May 13, 2008 8:27 AM
Broun was a Marine, eh?
Why do I get the feeling that he was one of those "Rear Eschalon" non-coms that never saw combat. A real "Frank Burns" type.
Redpretzel in LA at May 13, 2008 9:26 AM
A real "Frank Burns" type.
I suggest we give him a high-colonic and send him on a 10 mile road march, with full-pack. That might get him to forget this crap.
I was USAF for several years and spent (peace) time in Korea for a few years. The magazines were there, not obvious, but available. And for the most part the spouses weren't. But right outside the gate was Songtang-Si (pronounced song-tong-see) with about 80 bars and clubs. Not to mention a few whore houses. For the right price you could get a Korean lady for the hour, the night or longer depending.
The last base commander when I was there was trying to kill all the whore houses, the bars, and the mags on base. Want to guess what all the enlisted thought about him? The officer's didn't say much, but the attitude was the same.
This is just trying the same thing on a larger scale. Guess how this will go over. And if it does, the stop loss will be ridiculous.
Jim P. at May 13, 2008 11:46 AM
"Why do I get the feeling that he was one of those "Rear Eschalon" non-coms that never saw combat. " Can't find his combat record but as per his site he was a Reserve Jet Engine Mechanic, then a doctor in the Navy. Since I did not serve (will resent this fact till the day I get put in a box) I have no right to poke at someone who did.
vlad at May 13, 2008 11:55 AM
"There's a problem with you're airlift idea though, they would never get through the mail." I suspected as much. Wonder if Black water contractors can be used as mulls.
vlad at May 13, 2008 11:57 AM
You can tell a lot about any culture by what they consider acceptable as far as girlie mags go. When I lived in Japan, the first thing I noticed in the drugstore magazine racks was that they had a lot of japanese skin mags, but almost every one had a B&D or S&M theme to them. Almost none were just pictures of hot women. They were really kinky, then they didn't allow the pubic area to be shown. It was blacked out. We used to bribe japanese yardbirds to get some work done faster or better on the ship by passing them American skin mags that were highly prized by the Japanese. I always wondered what Europes would be like becuase the same pictures seem to be plastered everywhere.
Bikerken at May 13, 2008 12:22 PM
Vlad -
Since I did not serve (will resent this fact till the day I get put in a box) I have no right to poke at someone who did.
Sure you do. I see absolutely no reason not to when said person is using the claim that they were in the military, to bolster their claim that this or that idiotic policy should be enacted.
I've never served either, though I have no regrets about it at all. In part because I am firmly against nearly every military excursion our country has gone on in the last century. I am not, however, anti-military and in fact have nothing but the utmost regard for those who choose to serve their country and (in principle, if not always in fact) protect me and mine.
So when an asshole like this comes along and wants to fuck over the people who chose to take up arms and serve my country, I am going to hammer at them to kingdom fucking come. And if that means slamming them for making claims of largess that imply something more than they actually did while serving, I'm all over it.
DuWayne at May 13, 2008 1:05 PM
Bikerken -
My old rhythm player is involved with Lansing, MI's sister city program with (sorry don't remember the city) a city in Japan. Being huge fans of raunchy porn, my partner and I were looking forward to him bringing home some good Japanese porn, on the assumption that if it's anything like many highly sexualized anime and manga, the porn would rock. He really chuckled about it before he left, but promised he would bring us porn.
It was just as raunchy and disgusting as we had hoped. Unfortunately it was also censored. He then explained that he had actually taken a bunch with him to give to a friend their. Ironically, it was Japanese porn that was sold in the U.S. and therefore uncensored.
DuWayne at May 13, 2008 1:14 PM
"Sure you do. " No and here's why. I don't know if he actually spent time in combat. If I was in or knew the members of his unit (which I can't find) and could say that his trigger time was all on the range then yes I will poke hole in him. If he only wore the uniform and stayed safe in the rear then he has no more combat experience than I do.
vlad at May 13, 2008 2:45 PM
I got yer naked booby, right here
TE at May 13, 2008 4:09 PM
Amy, I'm with you on this. A little comfort food for the troops' eyeballs never hurt anybody. I wouldn't allow absolutely unfettered sale of skin mags on post, and the sensibilities of the host country have to be considered, but Maxim Magazine doesn't hurt anybody. From you what you write in your post, it sounds like the review board has set the standards about right.
For that matter, I think we ought to consider allowing limited access to beer on the FOB, subject to appropriate chain of command supervision (when I was stranded for a week at the US Air Base in Qater, I discovered that troops are allowed two beers a night there - and yet the Republic endures).
It is disappointing to see this coming from Congress, given that the Army is the fully proficient at finding ways to over-protect us itself. I have no use for Maxim or Playboy myself - but when I was a much younger twenty-something deployed to Somalia eons ago, I had a different attitude! :)
One of the US Army's greatest strengths is the profound level of care and concern that leaders feel for junior Soldiers. However, sometimes it feal that Mama Army is trying to love us to death.
Dennis at May 13, 2008 5:58 PM
Of course, popular media maintains the "slippery slope" argument. Tonight's episode of "Criminal Minds" features a serial killer who developed his fetish looking at "Boudoir" magazine as a teen. Urk. At least they didn't do the Hollywood gunplay scene, which almost always suckkkkks.
Meanwhile, reasonable people think that the Playmate in the pages in between might be fun, but doesn't look like that because she spends six hours a day having sex with a guy who has to buy the magazine to see something like that.
Radwaste at May 13, 2008 7:47 PM
This is what happens when we pretend that women are qualified and competent to stick their noses into military matters, and when wimpy liberal men try to curry the favor of feminists.
Smarty at May 14, 2008 7:57 AM
Smarty, what about women on this blog defending pornography and general masculinity? Like myself, and Flynne, and Jennifer, and numerous others on other blog threads of Amy's? And especially Amy herself? Are we all incompetent too?
Or did you really mean feminists instead of women? Cause I certainly agree that as a whole they're underqualified and incompetent for anything other than victim's studies.
Jessica at May 14, 2008 9:11 AM
I mean women in general. While you defend this, in general, women are clueless about military matters, military morale etc. Those that are not are a small %, and to you, I apologize. However, just as we would never have elected Roosevelt, Kennedy, Carter or Clinton without female voters, we would not have such a strong trend towards the sissification of the military if women were not "empowered" to think that their opinions matter when they are clueless as to the facts.
Smarty at May 14, 2008 9:44 AM
Not all women. If you start talking about Clausewitz, I know you don't mean the Polish Santa Claus.
Amy Alkon at May 14, 2008 10:01 AM
"This is what happens when we pretend that women are qualified and competent to stick their noses into military matters, and when wimpy liberal men try to curry the favor of feminists." That's about the stupidest thing I have heard come out of the mouth of a human being in the past month. First most people have no understanding of military matters, military morale or in fact how to even fire a freaking gun. I don't see how being female has anything to do with military knowledge or experience.
So lord general please enlighten me about how U.S. Rep. Paul Broun, R-Ga. a conservative republican (look it up) is a wimpy liberal man trying to curry favors with the feminists. This guy is about as far from feminist or liberal as one can get.
vlad at May 14, 2008 10:10 AM
Vlad,
If women knew jack-squat about war fighting, then there would be a solid history of female armies and female generals who are victorious. How many women that you know LIKE watching war movies? Or can compare and contrast US football vs. soccer as they relate to military organization? Who is so sqeamish about collateral damage that they would have us lose? Women and the liberal men who are women with penises. Who tries to avoid "making the enemy more mad"? The same. That isn't how you win wars, that is how you negotiate your surrender and slavery.
He may be pushing it from a bible-thumping perspective, however his support will be from the same hairy legged women that shoved women into inappropriate places in the military. There aren't enough bible-thumpers alone to give this bill a chance, and I bet he is counting on the feminists support.
Smarty at May 14, 2008 10:39 AM
Two of the members of my M.A. committee were fiery conservative military historians. So I guess I ended up with a reasonably decent understanding of the military.
I understand where the generalization comes from, Smarty, and I definitely think it's a valid point - but my goodness, I know so many guys that are completely ignorant of military matters, it's hard for me to attribute so much of the fault based upon gender.
Rather than wimpy liberal men courting the feminist agenda, this appears (to me) yet another way for religious zealots to force their moral codes into our government.
Jessica at May 14, 2008 10:48 AM
I'd think that any enlisted women who actually admit/understand that sex is good wouldn't want to see this happen either. Nothing like a Penthouse Forum to kick off a little private fantasy for stress relief.
moreta at May 14, 2008 11:08 AM
"Who is so sqeamish about collateral damage that they would have us lose?" Reducing collateral damage in a fundamentally unpopular war is a matter of political survival. In matters of war the first question is why are we fighting? If we are CLAIMING that we are there to free the people of Iraq then we kill most of them it looks very bad. Since this is our reason for going there officially we need to be seen as avoiding collateral damage.
Let me guess your all for firebombing cities to break the enemies will to fight. That got taken out of favor because reporters kept making images of charred orphanages. Which is bad for moral at home and in the field.
"If women knew jack-squat about war fighting, then there would be a solid history of female armies and female generals who are victorious." There are quite a few examples. The barbarian queen of england during the roman times did a hell of a lot better than any of her male counter parts at halting roman advances.
Also just remember for every Patton there are a shit load of Custers. So an inherent ability to lead armies is just plain rare regardless of gender.
vlad at May 14, 2008 11:44 AM
The evidence says women should not be in combat positions:
Co-ed Combat: The New Evidence That Women Shouldn't Fight the Nation's Wars, by Kingsley Browne, a Wayne State law prof and evolutionary psychologist.
Amy Alkon at May 14, 2008 11:50 AM
Smarty -
He may be pushing it from a bible-thumping perspective, however his support will be from the same hairy legged women that shoved women into inappropriate places in the military. There aren't enough bible-thumpers alone to give this bill a chance, and I bet he is counting on the feminists support.
Bullshit. While there are feminists out there that tend to take a very puritanical approach to things like pornography, they are a minority of feminists. And traditionally, puritanical feminists and puritanical religionists do not mix. There is just way too much they disagree on to forge a functional alliance. Some of them may support the legislation but their support is not going to be very solid.
If women knew jack-squat about war fighting, then there would be a solid history of female armies and female generals who are victorious.
Actually, in warrior cultures that allowed women to fight alongside the men, there are. Many Celtic tribes allowed women into combat and some even had women devising strategies - though ironically such women usually stayed out of the fighting.
Many of the Germanic tribes also had women in leadership roles and also had female warriors. Remember, Rome felt it's first real defeats at the hands of Germanic tribes. They were vicious and unpredictable warriors, who seemingly had no fear. The worse thing was, that if the troops got close to the villages, the children would even join in. Children in Germanic tribes were also responsible for going through the battle field when the fighting was over and killing all the wounded enemy and mercy killing their own side's wounded that were too far gone.
Look to history and you will find the women warriors and war leaders. They may be a very tiny minority, but they were certainly out there. And there are plenty of women who are highly skilled strategists today. Women who have studied battles and game theory. Women who are certainly more qualified than most men to direct troops and battles.
DuWayne at May 14, 2008 12:25 PM
So how is the country of Celt doing? And as I recall, Germania ain't what she used to be. And while there have been female military leaders, the armies were made up of men. And a tiny minority does not justify the emasculation of an army or a nation. Nor does it qualify the massive majority of those fairly ignorant by both nature and nurture to stick their noses in.
Ever hear of an "oppressive work environment"? The forces of equality have been taking porn out of prisons (offends the lesbian prison guards), so why don't you think they are all over taking it out of the military????
Smarty at May 14, 2008 1:01 PM
Read the reviews don't have the book. Sounds not all that different from why color/race should be a factor for soldiers. Part of the problem is not the women in combat but male reaction to them in combat. I'd be curious if we could try an all female unit. How much of the issue is women and how much of the issue is certain men.
BTW there is nothing that pisses me off more than the double standard we now have. You want to fight by all means fight but don't demand special conditions for serving.
vlad at May 14, 2008 1:44 PM
"So how is the country of Celt doing? " Actually quite well the British pound is worth a hell of a lot more than the dollar.
"And as I recall, Germania ain't what she used to be." Right but I'd like to point out that during her fall it was a male army with male leaders.
vlad at May 14, 2008 1:50 PM
If all female units were worth a damn, there would be some out there now. Call it free market, or Darwinian, or whatever.
PS The Celts are not the British, they are the Irish that got stomped and subjugated by them. And your very poor logic re Germania tells me that you aren't much in the way of military genius either. how is a male army being defeated by a male army proof that women are equal to men in combat?
Smarty at May 14, 2008 3:32 PM
Not so smarty -
PS The Celts are not the British, they are the Irish that got stomped and subjugated by them.
Wrong. The picts were in the north, not the Celts.
And your very poor logic re Germania tells me that you aren't much in the way of military genius either. how is a male army being defeated by a male army proof that women are equal to men in combat?
First, I don't and I'm pretty sure that Vlad wouldn't claim to be a military genius. Neither of us has even served in the military. However, I do have soem familiarity with the history of the roman empire - though even that's not as good as it should be.
One of the reasons the Romans lost to the germanic tribes, is because they had never come up against warrior women that fought like that. No, they weren't the equal of the men in combat. A larger percentage of the women died than the men - in part because the women were just about batshit crazy in battle.
This is not an argument for women in combat, I honestly don't think it's appropriate. It's an argument against your idiotic assertion that women just don't have the temperament to lead troops and direct battles. History shows us that this is far from the truth. And by sheer volume, it stands to reason that there are women out there today, who actually have what it takes to do that.
DuWayne at May 15, 2008 12:17 AM
"how is a male army being defeated by a male army proof that women are equal to men in combat?" That would be cause it's not oh wise one. Your argument is that if women had the ability to be competent military leaders there would be historical reffernecs to them. Using this logic if men were inherently gifted at war there would be few bad military blunders. That was to illustrate that men are not inherently good at war as a group as it is men that led themselves into the disaster, that was operation Barbarossa and opening the eastern front. Which incidentally had a great number of female soldiers on the Russian side. Unmarried women were drafted during the later years of WW2 in Russia.
http://www.lothene.demon.co.uk/others/women20.html
vlad at May 15, 2008 5:47 AM
I believe it was Elaine Boosler who had this to say about women in combat:
Take all American women who are within five years of menopause - train us for a few weeks, outfit us with automatic weapons, grenades, gas masks, moisturizer with SPF15, Prozac, hormones, chocolate, and canned tuna - drop us (parachuted, preferably) across the landscape of Afghanistan, and let us do what comes naturally.
Think about it. Our anger quotient alone, even when doing standard stuff like grocery shopping and paying bills, is formidable enough to make even armed men in turbans tremble. We've had our children, we would gladly suffer or die to protect them and their future. We'd like to get away from our husbands, if they haven't left already. And for those of us who are single, the prospect of finding a good man with whom to share life is about as likely as being struck by lightning. We have nothing to lose.
We've survived the water diet, the protein diet, the carbohydrate diet, and the grapefruit diet in gyms and saunas across America and never lost a pound. We can easily survive months in the hostile terrain of Afghanistan with no food at all!
We've spent years tracking down our husbands or lovers in bars, hardware stores, or sporting events...finding bin Laden in some cave will be no problem.
Uniting all the warring tribes of Afghanistan in a new government? Oh, please ... we've planned the seating arrangements for in-laws and extended families at Thanksgiving dinners for years ... we understand tribal warfare.
Between us, we've divorced enough husbands to know every trick there is for how they hide, launder, or cover up bank accounts and money sources. We know how to find that money and we know how to seize it ... with or without the government's help!
Let us go and fight. The Taliban hates women. Imagine their terror as we crawl like ants with hot-flashes over their godforsaken terrain. I'm going to write my Congresswoman. You should, too!
o_O
Flynne at May 15, 2008 6:12 AM
Amy, I should have known you'd come up with a great name. "Boobs for the boob" is perfect, and also makes sense to us dumb little girls who wouldn't get the "brass" reference anyway since we're so gosh darn ignorant of military affairs!
Um, Smarty, you are an idiot. Women didn't historically fight wars because of their breeding issues. You have to be a moron not to realize this. It's only been since the advent and widespread use of birth control that fielding an army of women has become plausible. However, throughout history there have been notable exceptions (Joan of Arc, anyone?) who were generally celibate, thus mitigating the problem.
Which brings me back to the initial point - no one wants an army starved for sexual gratification.
Jennifer at May 15, 2008 6:47 AM
"We'd like to get away from our husbands, if they haven't left already. And for those of us who are single, the prospect of finding a good man with whom to share life is about as likely as being struck by lightning." Are you stating that all husbands are bad and good single men are also non-existant? That would imply that all men are bad as there are only two types of men single or married, or are not married men in relationships not single?
vlad at May 15, 2008 7:29 AM
Vlad, think "satire", please! I don't know what Elaine Boolser was thinking when she wrote this; I know that some women feel this way, but not all of them do!
Flynne at May 15, 2008 11:10 AM
jennifer, women dont fight wars because they get their asses kicked, raped, then killed or enslaved.
The British army actually dared study readiness in Boot camp. They found that the top 2% of women (fitness and stamina wise) met the 50% mark for the men.
Regarding all you experts, I served in Reagan's navy, my dad was career Air Force, and every male member of my family back to WWI served. Some in the Prussian army, some in the German Army, the rest in the US Navy/Air Force. I've been around the world, and wherever the rules of civilization were lower, the women had it worse. Not exactly the warrior spirit/ability.
Smarty at May 15, 2008 3:30 PM
Leave a comment