Social Question

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Is the military going to dumb down the requirements for the SEALs, Rangers, the Green Berets, and other special ops now that there are no restrictions for women to be a part of them?

Asked by Hypocrisy_Central (26879points) December 18th, 2015

In this PC gone whacky over the past couple of decades, in order for the military to claim being PC and equal to all are they going to dumb down the requirements to enter special ops to do it? For instance, if the requirement for navy SEALs was a candidate had to be able to shoulder a 70lb pack and be able to hike 15 miles in X amount of time, or carry a 220lb man 3 miles in X amount of time (these are examples for the sake of the question, and may not be actual requirements) will they dumb it down so women who are not man enough to pass, where even many able-bodied men are bested by it? Will the soften the requirements as firefighters have just to be able to promote some women into it, or will they say, you want to play, you have to play equal to the best of the men or we will see you on ”wash out lane” with all the men who could not cut it?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

100 Answers

dxs's avatar

Nothing will be “dumbed down” because women are not dumber than men.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

^ It has nothing to do with intelligence, ”dumb down”, I guess, in the circles I am in is buzz for powder puffing or softening something up, making it less hard or stringent. I personally know many very intelligent women.

cookieman's avatar

No. The idea is that the women who aspire to those positions in the military will have to meet all the standard requirements (same as the men).

And many will.

SavoirFaire's avatar

No. The whole reason there has been so much controversy in the first place is that there are a number women who meet all of the current requirements but nevertheless were not allowed to join.

Darth_Algar's avatar

I love how PC has become shorthand for “anything I disapprove of”.

rojo's avatar

Yeah, yeah, the whole world is going to hell in a handbasket.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Darth_Algar Especially when combined with “that I haven’t bothered to research.”

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

^ that is what I have Fluther for, at least everyone doesn’t spend their time in fluff, I guess they actually do read real stuff. ~~~

jerv's avatar

The Green Berets might, but the SEALs won’t. Then again, in the Navy, the pronoun “bitch” is gender-neutral anyways.

ragingloli's avatar

Who cares.

ucme's avatar

They’re already dumbed down with those pussy names…

“Yoo-Hoo, hi guys, look at my lovely hat, brings out the blue in my eyes don’t ya think?”

cazzie's avatar

Adm. Jon Greenert said he and the head of Naval Special Warfare Command, Rear Adm. Brian Losey, believe that if women can pass the legendary six-month Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL training, they should be allowed to serve.

“Why shouldn’t anybody who can meet these [standards] be accepted? And the answer is, there is no reason,” Greenert said Tuesday in an exclusive interview with Navy Times and its sister publication Defense News. “So we’re on a track to say, ‘Hey look, anybody who can meet the gender non-specific standards, then you can become a SEAL.’”

I think you know where I think @Hypocrisy_Central can stick his powder puff.

Perhaps what we should be asking is how are some men going to react when women continue to pass the gruelling non-gender specific testing? Will some of them need counselling for their feelings of emasculation? Perhaps train chaplains with special bible verses to comfort them in their need for feeling superior to women in every way.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@cazzie “some men going to react when women continue to pass the gruelling non-gender specific testing? Will some of them need counselling for their feelings of emasculation?” There it is again! That unnamed, odd fear men have of women.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

They may have to if it becomes a numbers game. Just depends on how PC things get. As long as we accept that there will be fewer women than men passing the through the physical fitness filter I don’t think it’s an issue. If there ends up being quotas officially or not then lowering standards is likely. Remember we are talking about people in their prime. That’s when the differences are most dramatic. Average folks male or female are all going to wash out.

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@cazzie I think you know where I think @Hypocrisy_Central can stick his powder puff.
Not if it is where you misplaced your lipstick, getting any powder puff I may have back might spark criminal proceedings.

Adm. Jon Greenert said he and the head of Naval Special Warfare Command, Rear Adm. Brian Losey, believe that if women can pass the legendary six-month Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL training, they should be allowed to serve.
So, which women have the military actually taken the time to train and upon passing the test was denied admittance into any special forces?

@ARE_you_kidding_me As long as we accept that there will be fewer women than men passing the through the physical fitness filter I don’t think it’s an issue. If there ends up being quotas officially or not then lowering standards is likely.
There is the rub, a lot of women (and I am going to say that with a straight face) will not acquiesce that men can do somethings much better. If 90% of the women wash out they will make it some conspiracy and not just women could not do it, and that opens the slippery slope to easing the test so more women can make it and equality appears to be in order when it is just a feel-good manufacturing of equality for people who really don’t have the mettle.

JLeslie's avatar

Did that happen in other places? They lowered requirements when women entered the force? Fireman, Police officers, etc.? What about dumbing down written tests for minorities? I think that has happened in the past.

I don’t think standards should be changed for women unless the standard was unnecessarily extreme. You have to be able to do the job. Lowering standards helps some men too if it does happen.

Apparently_Im_The_Grumpy_One's avatar

No.

Although they already did that in every other part of the military. I still think women should be everywhere that men are (in the military).. but with the exact same standards.

Sadly (all things being honest), women (in general) can’t uphold the same standard physically. Don’t get uber feminist on me .. I’m just stating an absolute fact… I see it every day.

The result? Lots of overweight women are rolling around in the military (pun intended) and they cant be kicked out because they are women…

The American public (can’t speak for other countries) would be in an absolute uproar if things were actually equal.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Apparently_Im_The_Grumpy_One It wouldn’t be “uber-feminist” to deny the existence of sexual dimorphism. Everyone knows it exists. What feminists have traditionally wanted is for women who meet the standards to be allowed to do the job. In NYC, for instance, the first firefighters who complained about standards being changed to fend off lawsuits were the women who had qualified under the old standards.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central The reverse is also true, when there are certain things that women can do better then there will be a large number of men who will have a hard time accepting it. Personally, I have sort of a beef with feminists who claim that the movement wants that kind of equality for everyone. It’s not feminism anymore and should not be approached through a gynocentric lens. I know they mostly say men can be feminists too but it’s simply not workable from that approach and many will say that men can only be allies because we “can’t be trusted.” go ahead and roll your eyes There is no coherent feminist movement, it’s what ever the fuck anyone claiming to be a feminist wants it to be now. I really, really want everything to simply be opened up to everyone without quotas, or special accommodations so we can all stop whining, leave this PC bullshit behind us and start living in reality. I think we are and have been ready for it for a long time. I’m tired of everyone tiptoeing around everyone else’s feelings.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I don’t think there are any feminists with an IQ over 100 who would disagree that, on average, men are stronger than women.
What the feminists are angry about is the still-lingering assumption that men are not only stronger, but they’re smarter than women. It makes me angry too, because, of course, it isn’t true.

Now, if being a SEAL or a Green Beret requires X amount of physical strength then no, the standards should not be changed.

SavoirFaire's avatar

“There are very few jobs that actually require a penis or vagina. All other jobs should be open to everybody.”
— Florynce Kennedy

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@Dutchess_III but why? I have never really seen this assumption in other men as an adult. Certainly not a normal or accepted view these days by us guys. In school it seemed like the reverse was assumed but we come from different generations. I really think the guard has changed when you were not paying attention. I come from an age of “squash the white male kid” and you come from an age of “oh shit women can do this too” (assessed your age when you said your daughter was my age) On average men may be better at certain things and on average women may be better at others. On a personal level that does not hold so what difference does it make? Let me tell you what men really, really hate. And yes hate is a strong word and I am using it as such. We hate it when women assume we look down on them, that we are somehow shorting them or taking something away. That is why I get so cross with you at times. You appear to hold the same bias I remember from childhood.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@ARE_you_kidding_me I still see that attitude all the time. And there’s no such thing as the age of “squash the white male kid.” That’s how white male kids interpreted “even the playing field for everyone (which involves removing the various undeserved privileges white male kids have been receiving for so long).”

I get it. Taking away stuff that was taken for granted, even when it was undeserved, never goes well. Ask anyone in government: it’s much harder to roll back privileges and entitlements than to enact them. I think everyone can agree to that while still leaving the debate over which ones are really deserved intact. But saying that white male kids have been getting squashed goes against all the empirical evidence.

Endless studies continue to reveal that bias against women persists (even among women) despite attempts to even the playing field. They also reveal that white males react very badly—typically by claiming everyone is biased against them—when their privileges are revealed. It’s a defense mechanism—the same one we see whenever life gets harder for anyone (even if they never deserved for it to be easy).

cazzie's avatar

1. No women have washed out because they weren’t allowed to begin.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@SavoirFaire I certainly experienced it in public school, nor did I feel like I had any special privilege. Very, very real, but also very brief ~late 1980s-early 1990s and usually at the hands of insecure, defensive white women… I never saw this with any of my black female teachers for some reason. My folks moved around quite a bit so I went to like six or seven different public schools so there were more than just a couple of data points to go on. Did I see other bias…100% yes especially against minorities, gender…not as much. I saw female students get treated the same or better (usually better). I also definitely experienced bias as a young adult in the age of affirmative action. I know that these practices continue today in certain parts of Gov’t and private sectors. As I have said, the guard changed without many realizing it. Whatever gender/race privileges I had were gone before my generation could take advantage of them…but we still take the shit for it and we get tired of hearing it. Seriously shut up already, we know. I’m sorry my ancestors fucked you over. Can we move on and open things up to everyone now including us…please? Please don’t reduce it to “it’s a defense mechanism” and if you are going to say “you don’t know what privileges you have” then explain to me what they are. If I really don’t know then I need to…odds are I do but to say there is no bias against white males is simply not facing up to reality. We know it’s less but until we can caste all of it away we have not done enough. Is this you’re course of study? You genuinely seem to know your way around it.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@ARE_you_kidding_me are you asking me why there is the lingering assumption that men are smarter than women? Because some things take a long time to die. Attitudes started changing in the 70’s, but the folks who were young adults at that point, and had been raised for 20-some years just “knowing” that men are smarter than women, couldn’t just shuck it off. Our current presidential candidates are from that generation, in case you couldn’t tell. They may give lip service, but deep down in their heart, where they may even refuse to look, lingers that “knowledge.”

Your generation was, for the most part, raised from the cradle with the knowledge that men and women are of equal intelligence. They have nothing to shuck off.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

Which is precisely why we are sick of hearing it. The tendency to extend that angst to my generation persists and it teaches the females of this generation that this is ok to do so. Big roadblock in the way of progress when you look at it objectively.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I’m not extending it to your generation. I said, “Your generation was, for the most part, raised from the cradle with the knowledge that men and women are of equal intelligence. They have nothing to shuck off.” However, unfortunately, your generation isn’t very much in charge yet. They’ve only just begun so, in many ways, women are still fighting all those outdated ridiculous assumptions that tend to hold them down.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@JLeslie What about dumbing down written tests for minorities?
I believe that is hog wash same as affirmative action. I believe there is a difference in having test questions relevant to the life the students know than what the testers believe is relevant to the student or test taker. For instance, if you are testing city or urban kids, asking them what is the difference in weight from a barrel of corn than a barrel of potatoes that is assuming the tester knows the general weight of a barrel of each vegetable? Asking a kid from a poorer neighborhood, if you had 8 plate settings and 2 guest could not make it to dinner how many plate settings would you remove? If the kid never had a plate setting much less dinner guest, how would they even know what the right answers was less going just on straight math of it?

@Apparently_Im_The_Grumpy_One Sadly (all things being honest), women (in general) can’t uphold the same standard physically. Don’t get uber feminist on me .. I’m just stating an absolute fact… I see it every day.
Of course it is a fact, one as big a blimp hanger but either ignored or billed as some male conspiracy. When there is no alleged takeaway women are fine with it. If they (women in general) actually thought there was no real difference in the physical ability between the sexes they would seek to abolish the distinction on the Olympics and other competitions; the 100 meter dash, the skulls, tennis, cycling, etc. would be just that, if you think you can medal you enter, and the best person will win. Women would not want that because the podium would hardly see any females if they went head to head with males.

@ARE_you_kidding_me The reverse is also true, when there are certain things that women can do better then there will be a large number of men who will have a hard time accepting it.
That would not surprise me, because if women do it, I can seem men doing it as well. There are things I know women do better and I am fine with that. I know a man can be a single parent but he would be a poor replacement for what a mother could do. I think women are better at interior decorating (if you eliminate gay men), I found more of them have better skills naturally to assemble an appealing looking room than most men I know.

@Dutchess_III I don’t think there are any feminists with an IQ over 100 who would disagree that, on average, men are stronger than women.
Which is why some women try to change the conditions of the sport, competition, etc. as an equalizer.

@cazzie 1. No women have washed out because they weren’t allowed to begin.
Which mean there may be very few women because so far it is untested, but if one goes off the preponderance of the evidence that these test wash out many strapping triple AAA athlete type males, that the ranks will swell with women special op personnel is about as likely as a lamb lasting tree days in the lion’s enclosure when they have not been fed 2 days prior.

JLeslie's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central it isn’t hogwash if it is relevant to the job. I agree the things you cited are unfair for IQ and knowledge tests, but testing for a specific responsibility is different.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@Dutchess_III We are in charge now and have been for a while, just not visibly. Give it about five to ten years and it will be obvious that the baton was passed somewhere in the mid 2000’s.

FireMadeFlesh's avatar

Haven’t they already lowered the requirements, because too few men can meet the fitness requirements?

Apparently_Im_The_Grumpy_One's avatar

@Savoirfaire
What feminists want would lead to the immediate separation of 90% of women from the military for not meeting the standard. Uproar.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@ARE_you_kidding_me everyone thinks their generation is in charge. Your generation is having an influence, of course, at the lower echelons. However, this shows that the average age of a House representative is 57, and the average age of a congressman is 63.

The average age of a CEO is 50 – 59.

The average age of a president is 55.

Yes, I agree, in 10 years your generation will start having a much stronger influence. But you’re not there yet. Sorry.

@Hypocrisy_Central is which sports have women suggested the standards be lowered? I just can’t imagine. Only the best of the best of the best play. Even if a woman qualified for pro football team because the standards were lowered, it doesn’t mean she’d actually play.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@Apparently_Im_The_Grumpy_One This discussion wasn’t about the military in general. It was specifically about the upper echelons of the military, like the SEALs.

Apparently_Im_The_Grumpy_One's avatar

@Dutchess III
Ok?

Thought I was addressing @SavoirFaire. Did I mistype?

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@Dutchess it depends on where you think the seat of control lies. While thirty somethings are not CEO, presidential or other top level ranks we are at the helm physically steering the ship, putting out fires and solving the problems left for us as best we can. Just because we don’t hold those top positions yet does not mean you get to rationalize spewing man hate in this century, regardless of who you say it is directed at.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Boy, you’re taking this to all kinds of level of paranoid, @ARE_you_kidding_me! I don’t believe I’ve spewed even a little bit of ‘man hate” here. Insisting on being treated equally where ever possible, is certainly not spewing hate. We aren’t quite there, but we’re close. I do believe your generation will finalize it, when they get the chance.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

You tend to come across that way, at least to me at times. Probably just the lack of options to express emotion in text here. It’ll be my generation’s kids if we can manage not to be helicopter parents. Gen-x is tainted because we are not buffered against the boomers and their predecessors.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Of course your generation is tainted by previous generations! All generations are. Some for better, some for worse.

I think the thing is, is that I have had experiences as a female that you can’t really relate to. And that’s OK. As long as my experiences aren’t dismissed as ridiculous. I can’t really relate to being anything but a straight, white female myself. I can try to understand, but I don’t always succeed.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@ARE_you_kidding_me “I certainly experienced it in public school, nor did I feel like I had any special privilege.”

No one ever feels like they have privilege. That’s the thing about privilege: it is largely an ability not to think or worry about something. That’s why having it taken away often feels like oppression (since it has been taken for granted).

“My folks moved around quite a bit so I went to like six or seven different public schools so there were more than just a couple of data points to go on.”

The plural of anecdote is not data. Studies on this topic were done during that same time period using hundreds of schools. So even if your experiences were genuine and are not being filtered through the haze of memory coupled with accumulated political beliefs—and I am willing to believe you when you say these were your experiences—then it remains the case that those experiences were quite outside the norm (which make them unfortunate, but not representative).

“Whatever gender/race privileges I had were gone before my generation could take advantage of them…but we still take the shit for it and we get tired of hearing it.”

Or perhaps you’ve just failed to notice it (not least because privilege tends to become subtle before it goes away). I’m younger than you and went through the school system a little bit later than you did, yet I’ve still seen the effects of privilege (though vastly diminished from how it used to be). Again, I’m willing to accept that you may have had a statistically anomalous experience. I’ll also concede that that my own experience is no more definitive than yours (again, it’s just one anecdote among many). But the data bears out the fact that my experience was more representative than yours (though again, it’s the data that matters more than my personal experience).

“Seriously shut up already, we know. I’m sorry my ancestors fucked you over. Can we move on and open things up to everyone now including us…please?”

Moving on is what we do when the problem is over. The legacy of bias, however, is still very much with us (as is bias itself, though admittedly less so). No one objects to the children of Jews asking the children of Nazis for their parents’ possessions back. Yet somehow it is unreasonable for those whose ancestors were dispossessed in the United States to make similar requests that their losses be rectified. It is perfectly reasonable, I think, to argue over what sort of rectification is appropriate. The idea that we should just say “well, I didn’t do it” and move on, however, does not seem reasonable at all. (And interestingly, two of the most important modern political philosophers—the libertarian Robert Nozick and the liberal John Rawls—ultimately agreed on this issue.)

“if you are going to say ‘you don’t know what privileges you have’ then explain to me what they are.”

Sure. The classic introductory piece on this can be found here. But listing things out like that doesn’t work for everybody, so you might want to start with this article. Again, these are just introductory pieces. They are meant to educate, not convert. But we can go from there afterwards. Now, I would certainly agree that there is an element of the (typically younger) population that tends to overplay these issues. But we should never judge a theory or a movement by its worst representatives.

“to say there is no bias against white males is simply not facing up to reality.”

Sure. It doesn’t tend to by institutional bias (at least, not in mainstream institutions), but I would never deny that there is plenty of individual bias against white males to be found (especially on the internet, and especially among that younger element that I mentioned above). This kind of bias is typically less detrimental in the long run, however, and thus tends to be seen as less pressing (we plug the big holes in the boat before the small holes). It’s certainly something that needs to be addressed. But it may be that one important way of addressing it is removing the underlying impetus for it (which is the legacy of past injustices and the ongoing, even if lesser, harms that it brings).

“Is this you’re course of study? You genuinely seem to know your way around it.”

I specialize in moral and political philosophy, with most of my recent work being done in political philosophy. So this is in my general area, though it is not the specific topic of any of my formal work. I’m glad that there are people who have done formal work on this topic, but I also recognize that it’s not a problem that will be solved in academic journals. It’s the kind of thing that has to get hashed out among individuals (with plenty of awkward conversations, miscommunications, and disagreements along the way).

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Apparently_Im_The_Grumpy_One “What feminists want would lead to the immediate separation of 90% of women from the military for not meeting the standard. Uproar.”

You keep saying this, but history does not bear you out. Also, most women—like most men—don’t even want to join the military. So even if it were true that 90% of women would be ruled out, most of those women would never even notice (which would make it harder to get upset over since a lot of the women who were interested would probably qualify). But I don’t think your 90% figure is accurate. My sister-in-law is in the military (now working somewhere high up in intelligence, which is all she’s allowed to tell us). I suspect she’s the kind of person you would have looked at before she signed up and said “she’ll never make it.” But she went through the same training as everyone else and did just as well as everyone else (like everyone, there were things she was better at and things she was worse at, but she met every qualification that any male recruit was expected to meet—including the physical ones).

Apparently_Im_The_Grumpy_One's avatar

@SavoirFaire
She didn’t go through the same training. You’re astoundingly misinformed. And what do you mean people don’t want to join? What in God’s name are you talking about? I can’t even…. This is definitely an unfollow question.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Dutchess_III @Hypocrisy_Central is which sports have women suggested the standards be lowered?
I don’t know, on a professional level, even below that if there is a sport where women feel they can’t hang with the men, they request their own league. I know of one many years ago, was an over 30s soccer league, because of women, they did away with slide tackling, females were allowed to cross their arms chest trapping the ball, and each team had to have at least three women on the field during the game. If they want to play soccer with the boys, why not play with the same rules? It was an over 30s league, are women 30–36 years old really worries about some 50 something man besting them on the pitch, that they had to augment the rules for them?

JLeslie's avatar

@SavoirFaire Did your SIL have a college degree when she went in, and was an officer from the get go? Or, she started as an enlisted person and went through basic training? Still, it wouldn’t be like the training for Green Berets.

My dad was an officer. When he retired he was an 06. In Navy talk that’s a Captain, or Army talk that’s a Colonel. When he entered the service he just took his college degree and was given a desk.

A navy recruiter friend of ours tried to recruit my husband for a while. He would have walked in as an officer doing HR work. It’s not like he would have been combat ready.

Not all positions go through physical training. All positions are required to meet some physically fit measures. Things like maintaining weight and they get a physical and some other stuff.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central I don’t know soccer well enough to know why they made those special rules. Sounds like it probably has something to do with protecting those annoying breasts.
Anyway, that was at the amateur level, and it was your choice to play on that league. If you didn’t like it, you could have quit and gone and played men’s league.

I played co-ed volley ball, and many of the men were semi-pro. They were feckin’ monsters, too. There were no special considerations given to women. Well, except a few times the men needed to be reminded not to hog the ball by shoving their much smaller female teammate out of the way when she had already called it and was set to take the serve. At any rate, it was every one’s choice to play co-ed. No one forced anyone to.

As far as I know, there is no special consideration given to women in co-ed softball, either.

”....on a professional level, even below that if there is a sport where women feel they can’t hang with the men, they request their own league.”
First, there is no “feeling like” we can’t hang with them men. It’s a fact that we can’t.
Second, just exactly what is wrong with requesting our own league?

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@SavoirFaireNo one ever feels like they have privilege. That’s the thing about privilege: it is largely an ability not to think or worry about something. That’s why having it taken away often feels like oppression (since it has been taken for granted). ” What would you suggest has been taken away? I’m not feeling oppression from any privilege that has been taken away.

If you are going to explain things away by using the canned response “studies have shown…such and such” cite them. If they are good, properly designed and publish the boundary conditions then it’s usually the answer. That said what people don’t generally get about racism/discrimination is that it’s not quantifiable like this. Sure studies can show certain trends but it’s a deeply personal thing. It actually does not matter if trends show it or not. If it happens to one person A.K.A. you or me…it’s enough.

Moving on is what we do when the problem is over. The legacy of bias, however, is still very much with us (as is bias itself, though admittedly less so). No one objects to the children of Jews asking the children of Nazis for their parents’ possessions back. Yet somehow it is unreasonable for those whose ancestors were dispossessed in the United States to make similar requests that their losses be rectified. It is perfectly reasonable, I think, to argue over what sort of rectification is appropriate. The idea that we should just say “well, I didn’t do it” and move on, however, does not seem reasonable at all. (And interestingly, two of the most important modern political philosophers—the libertarian Robert Nozick and the liberal John Rawls—ultimately agreed on this issue.

Moving on is not only perfectly reasonable it is the only thing we can do. Sure there is a legacy of bias but an individuals vector into this life should never under any circumstance be held against them. If we don’t move on together then what do you suggest? Reparations?!

Sure. The classic introductory piece on this can be found here. But listing things out like that doesn’t work for everybody, so you might want to start with this article

I’d like to respond to each of these but this would be a wall of text and walls of text seldom get read. I’ll say that many of these examples are weak at best. Seriously “I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down to my color” double face palm and obligatory sigh worthy…
The ones that are/may be valid at least in 1988 would include #20, 7,21,24,25,26,45
I think that things were starting to mute but are being brought right out again for one huge problem not even mentioned and it’s as if people are afraid to speak it: We (white people) created a type of breakaway culture with our urban renewal projects. It’s a problem that is being incited, exploited and is creating a false divide. The members of this culture are discriminated against, bitter and trapped in a poverty cycle. Not growing up in that environment could be called white privilege because on average it’s minorities who are trapped in it. Where is the discussion on this? How can we rectify the situation and integrate inner city culture into the rest of society?

Lets talk about #35 because this is my largest issue with social justice these days. I’m completely guilty of seeing minorities/females of being tokens in certain jobs because it’s sometimes true and that’s a problem. As a < 40 year old, white, non-handicapped male I can be completely discriminated against even today under affirmative action. I actually have been denied employment in favor of a diversity candidate at least once (I had insider knowledge). I’m not bitter because ultimately it was my actual qualifications that landed me alternative employment. I also found myself on the other side of this as a graduate student. I earned a research position that should have been given to a more qualified asian and it was a horrible feeling. Like I was stealing something. How can we possibly say that this is leveling the playing field in 2015. It’s just shitting all over the playing field for everyone. Personally I have no use for the diversity hires if they are not able/willing to pull their weight. The ones who do completely absolve themselves of any doubt once they demonstrate their ability.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Dutchess_III Sounds like it probably has something to do with protecting those annoying breasts
They seem to annoy women more than men, and women seemed as preoccupied with them as men for different reasons. Rather than change the rules for them, they should get creative and invent Teflon bras (since they like to wear them for nothing anyhow), just as men have jocks with cups, they are not allowed to trap with their hands if their package gets in the way.

Anyway, that was at the amateur level, and it was your choice to play on that league.
Actually, at the time I was too young to play.

There were no special considerations given to women.
Which is all I am saying, in anything that started with men, if women want to enter, they have to rise to the standard that was set not have the standard lowered to accommodate them.

AdventureElephants's avatar

There have been many studies conducted that have shown women have traits that could potentially be desirable in an elite combat role. Women are generally more flexible (and have potential to be, based on bone structure). Women have more nimble fingers and could potentially perform more delicate or intricate tasks at a faster pace. Having smaller frames means they may be able to fit into spaces that would be difficult for larger bodied special forces men. I’m sure there are more…

So there just may be some real positives to adding women. Hopefully the standards for admission do not change. The world those forces deal with isn’t getting any easier. Quite the opposite. To lower the standard is only opening up the possibility of killing more good men and women.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central Ha ha! I knew a reference to those bags of fat on our chest, that had nothing to so with a sexual reference, would trip your trigger! Yeah, women are preoccupied with them because they’re such a pain the the ass in so many different ways, not theleast of which is when it comes to sports. I’d just as soon mine be gone.

There is a difference between requiring stringent measures for SEAL training for purposes of National Defense, and the more relaxed requirements needed for knock about, play-for-fun co-ed leagues. Obviously even some men want co-ed leagues or there wouldn’t be any. They’d all be male leagues, or female leagues because men would refuse to play.

Also, the question I really want answered is my last one: “What is wrong with wanting a league of our own?”

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Dutchess_III Obviously even some men want co-ed leagues or there wouldn’t be any.
Even if they did not, it would be shoved down their throats or they or the league would be threaten with a law suit.

“What is wrong with wanting a league of our own?”
If you want my take on it (which gives you plenty of fodder to lurve up off) it is fraud and hypocritical. It would be like me asking for the end of Jim Crow in the job market when I plan to work at Black-owned businesses and don’t really care to work with white people because the benefits and lateral promotions would be better in a Black-owned company. If women truly thought they could hang, they would see no reason to have their own league unless they could not handle the ribbing, teasing or other players hitting on them. If women feel they should have the option of a female only league, men should have the same, for whatever reasons that suits them.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@HC, re: your first paragraph. That’s just stupid. The only way a lawsuit could be brought is if the league advertised itself as a coed league, but then refused to take men, or women, who wanted to join.

Jesus. You are really reaching with your response to why we shouldn’t have a league of our own. You’re response would only make sense if men and women didn’t have the option of men or women only leagues, which they do. That’s why we have such terms as “Men’s softball,” and “Women’s softball.”

You know, that’s something I’ve noticed about men. They can be so illogical in their arguments, but their ego blinds them to that fact.

ragingloli's avatar

Men are just in denial about their own inferiority.

cazzie's avatar

@Dutchess_III HC has some really nasty thoughts about the role women should have on Earth. He thinks he explains it in the nicest way possible, but to get there he has to use a hella load of poor rationalisation and nonsensical arguments. Basically, if he just would be upfront and say, ‘Because I believe it is what God wants.’ I would have more respect.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I know, @cazzie. We’re good for fucking and throwing away, and that’s about it. .... WAIT! He should run for president!

Ela's avatar

IMO They won’t “dumb them down” but unfortunately they will probably become less physically demanding.
Either there will be a quota created, women will get a burr up their asses about how few are actually accepted in, or the special ops organization will discover a way to benefit financially from more women entering.

@ARE_you_kidding_me I have three teenage boys. I don’t believe a lot of young females are being raised to think of themselves as equals to males – they are being raised with the mindset that they are better . Not only of males but of one another. I’ve seen mothers actually proud of their daughters for bullying. They think in order to be “strong” everyone else needs to be weak and are made to feel inferior.
It’s virtually impossible for most people to lift the cloak of sex and just see others as beings capable of things unique to them – not their gender.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@Ela, I have seen it also especially in primary school. A formula destined to cause calamity in adulthood for both genders. god, the truth is so taboo I bring that up and it’s almost if you can hear a collective gasp.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I don’t think they will lower the physical standards required even if some women ridiculously get a burr up their asses about how few are actually accepted. There are good, valid reasons for those minimum requirements.
It’s not the same as getting a burr up your ass at being paid .80 per male dollar for doing the exact same job, or getting a burr up your butt about society acting like women are just asking to be raped, for what ever reason.

Ela's avatar

There are very valid reasons for the requirements but all it takes is a few women to piss and bitch about it being unequal.

Sorry. I don’t consider the wage difference a burr and I sure as hell would never call anyone saying a woman asked to get raped a burr either.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@Dutchess_III Where did you get the .80 per male dollar figure?

Dutchess_III's avatar

@Ela Sure, some women bitch about stupid things, but so do some men. I don’t see the requirements changing. Not everything changes just because people whine.

@ARE_you_kidding_me it’s just something I saw that stuck with me. Let me google, see what else I can find…... A quick search brought up this. “In 2014, female full-time workers made only 79 cents for every dollar earned by men, a gender wage gap of 21 percent.

No time to look further, gotta go.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

I have, seen it before and it’s been discredited many times over but it is still widely cited. Even Obama dropped it in a speech.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@cazzie HC has some really nasty thoughts about the role women should have on Earth.
Well, share them with me since you are so clairvoyant, and I will show you how far off you are on that.

He thinks he explains it in the nicest way possible, but to get there he has to use a hella load of poor rationalisation and nonsensical arguments.
If it is nonsensical DO THE WORK, point it out with your superior logic < snicker snicker > blow for blow ans line for line, but all you seem to have is to simply say it doesn’t make sense.

Basically, if he just would be upfront and say, ‘Because I believe it is what God wants.’ I would have more respect.
For one I don’t believe you have a clue how God views women, it certainly is not the way to project it. Since you seem not to believe in God, explaining His position would not make any sense to you so I try to do my best coming from a Darwinian approach; something you should understand better. If you could fathom how God sees women we would not be having this course of conversation.

@Dutchess_III We’re good for fucking and throwing away, and that’s about it.
I think you are mixing it up with those guys who do not believe in God who are afraid to get married and figure a g/f is only good enough until she goes flat like an open beer then you go get a fresh one. ~~

ragingloli's avatar

he wants a slave, basically.

cazzie's avatar

But he’ll do the decent thing and marry her first.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@ARE_you_kidding_me could you show me where that .80 / 1.00 was discredited?

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

sure
WSJ

The “wage gap” does not include the fact that men work more overtime hours, choose higher paying professions, don’t leave the workforce to have children before their earning prime..etc. etc.. Their is still a small gap but it’s somewhere south of 7%

Dutchess_III's avatar

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

cazzie's avatar

I don’t get it, if women are having children, aren’t men, too? In many instances anyway. Oh, that’s right, you guys haven’t managed to have paid maternity leave yet. That should be incorporated in the bias against women, not thrown out as an excuse to rationalise the difference.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@cazzie wth are you talking about? Stay at home moms don’t generally earn a “wage” so averaging them in with the ones who do makes it appear like working women make much less when in reality the rift just is not that large. While there are stay at home dads most moms stay at home and the fathers end up pulling double duty to support both. That makes the gap look even larger when in reality raising a family is hard on both parents. Pretty uncontroversial

Dutchess_III's avatar

@cazzie If it’s a temporary leave, I don’t think that can be factored in as one of the reasons for the discrepancy. If they quit altogether and stay home for a few years, that would factor in. And in almost all cases it is the women who do that, not the men.

AdventureElephants's avatar

@cazzie Men do get paid paternity leave through FMLA.

cazzie's avatar

Yes, they do. I just ran into a new father today who proudly stated he was on ‘Pappa-perm’... meaning Pappa permission. The mother and father generally coordinate so that they can manage their careers by using her maternity leave and his pappa permission. The household functions, the careers aren’t destroyed and the family is strengthened. Now, if that isn’t family bloody values, I don’t know what is. (recent studies haven’t shown a level of generous use of pappa permission that strictly aids the mother and spends time with the child and it does lean to the pappa spending more time at the gym and with his friends than with his offspring, leaving retired family members to pick up his end of the deal.) But at least the idea is there. They can’t mandate how he spends his time.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@cazzie Your work on this thread was interesting. http://www.fluther.com/184723/describe-your-perfect-significant-other/
Because I was real and honest as the OP asked, I cannot help it if people don’t like it, I was not going to give some fake response as some did just to spare feelings.

But he’ll do the decent thing and marry her first.
Oh, no, I will just use her for decades until I milked her dry or she becomes too old then I will get another heifer as the heathen men do. ~~~ LOL

@ragingloli he wants a slave, basically.
If that ius what you think, knock yourself out, it is not what I said. I suspect thought, you would settle for far less..

Dutchess_III's avatar

Yeah, Trump is all honest and shit too. He’s also a piece of scum. But he’s honest.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

TRUMP IS NOT HONEST. He just says what people want to hear. That said the psychological profiles that have been on both Trump and Hillary show that they are in good company with each other

ragingloli's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central
“far less”, yes.
Well, I would not settle for you.

Dutchess_III's avatar

LOL! Wouldn’t even touch him with a 10 foot pole!

ragingloli's avatar

@Dutchess_III
Unless it is a glaive.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@ragingloli Well, I would not settle for you.
No worries, you were never in consideration…..bygones….

@Dutchess_III LOL! Wouldn’t even touch him with a 10 foot pole!
Double that, no triple that, and that’s how far I would keep from you….

ragingloli's avatar

just like hitler was never interested in anne frank.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, you wouldn’t have had a chance to get that close, HC. I would have seen you coming from a mile away. Although you would have tried, I’m sure. I was “eye candy.” I was a 10. For some men, that’s all that matters, nothing else.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

< two above > whatever…..let’s just hope they don’t lower standards of those who have to protect us because some females get their panties in a bunch.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I don’t think they will.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@Dutchess_III For a few insecure men that’s all that matters, in a LTR anyway. I’ll take a 3 or 4 that I get along with over a bitchy “10” any day. Hell, I’d take celibacy over that. There is nothing and I mean nothing less attractive than a bitchy ball busting high maintenance woman.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, I agree with that. However, given the slightest encouragement, most men tend to get focused on the physical and discount the personality and everything else until they are satiated. Then they might start withdrawing when they realize what a ball busting bitch she is. But they pull away sporadically, slowly, trying to keep her available.

Men are put off by a lot of other characteristics too. Too many men want a subservient, dependent woman. For some, they view an intelligent, independent, self confident woman as a “ball buster.”

Ela's avatar

IMHO you people really should say some men and some women.

and btw – both genders have members that don’t have the personality of sock and therefore only have their looks going for them. I doubt many worthwhile people find even a sock attractive after awhile. I dunno. Maybe that’s just me ; )

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

“you people” hey now…

Ela's avatar

LoL well….. you are people ; )

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@Dutchess_III define “independent”

Dutchess_III's avatar

PEOPLE LIVES MATTER!

Dutchess_III's avatar

@ARE_you_kidding_me Woman who don’t need a man to support them, for example. Women who can do just about everything on their own. Women who don’t get all helpless in certain situations.
When I had the shop there was one particular customery, from my dad’s generation, who would blow a gasket if I was in the back actually working on a unit, instead of in the office working the books, or greeting customers. One time he literally pulled me away from the mower I was working on, and pulled me back to the front of the shop! He said, “That is no place for a woman!”

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@Dutchess_III Good, at least there is something we can agree on. Too many times I hear “strong independent woman” and see completely dependent children with a chip on their shoulder and are painfully clueless as to what it takes to be self-reliant.

Dutchess_III's avatar

LOL! Yeah, then there is that! They claim to be “independent,” then spend all their time of FB whining about how their man doesn’t appreciate them!

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Too many men want a subservient, dependent woman.
As too many women want a mamby pamby, spineless, effeminate, panty-waist, male feminist.

(Yeah, I said it and I did not bite my tongue either.)

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther