Santorum: Women’s “Emotions” May Not Be “In The Interests Of The Mission” In Combat by Niki2

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

How is this person a candidate? Who can hear such rhetoric and not be overcome with bewilderment or anger?

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 11, 2012 8:43 AM

HKCAVALIER

Senator Rick Santorum today was asked to expand on his statement yesterday that women's "emotions" in combat may not be "in the interest of the mission."

He said, "Now, I know how that sounds, but hear me out. While I do not believe women's emotions are appropriate to a combat situation, by the same token, I do not believe that men's lack of emotion in such situations is appropriate upon return to civilian life. Now, do you see what I'm talking about? I don't want women in combat because they're needed to run all our civilian opperations, while I believe men, all men, upon reaching the age of majority should be sent off to one battle field or other to live out the rest of their natural lives in a situation more conducive to their emotional needs. Ya get it? That's not sexism, that's just human nature."

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 11, 2012 8:54 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

A humorous spoof, Mr. Cavalier.

However, his attitudes do not seem so very different from the spoof!

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 11, 2012 9:00 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Hee, hee, hee...that's the LEAST ridiculous thing he's said, you know. I watch almost all of the current candidates and giggle my head off, because NONE of them talk sense this time around. I know they're vying to be "the most right", but they're making SUCH assholes out of themselves doing so, it can't help but be amusing.

Just a sampling of just Santorum:

Quote:
In an interview with CNN’s Piers Morgan, Santorum proclaimed that when a woman becomes pregnant after being raped, she has a duty to keep the child.

The former Pennsylvania Senator said the victim should not get an abortion, but instead welcome their "horrible gift from God."

Santorum phrases being raped as “women in such a position." He goes on to justify that having a baby after rape as “making the best out of bad situation."

Arguing that gay relationships “destabilize” society, Santorum wouldn’t offer any legal protections to gay relationships and has pledged to annul all same-sex marriages if elected president.

During an appearance on Christian television in January, Santorum said he was surprised that President Obama didn’t know when life began — given his skin color. “I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say ‘now we are going to decide who are people and who are not people,” he explained.

Speaking in Le Mars, Iowa in December, Santorum promised to significantly reduce federal funding for food stamps, arguing that the nation’s increasing obesity rates render the program unnecessary.

While discussing his track record as a champion of the partial birth abortion ban in June, Santorum dismissed exceptions other senators wanted to carve out to protect the life and health of mothers, calling such exceptions “phony.” “They wanted a health exception, which of course is a phony exception which would make the ban ineffective,” he said.

Santorum, who claims that Obamacare motivated him to run for president, told reporters in April that his daughter Bella — who was born with a genetic abnormality — wouldn’t survive in a country with “socialized medicine.” “Children like Bella are not given the treatment that other children are given.”

Answering a question about the uninsured, Santorum explained that health care, like a car, is a luxury resource that is rationed by society and recalled the story of a woman who said she was spending $200 a month on life-saving prescriptions. Santorum told her to stop complaining and instead lower her cable and cell phone bills.

"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does."

"Look at the political base of the Democratic Party: It is single mothers who run a household. Why? Because it's so tough economically that they look to the government for help and therefore they're going to vote. So if you want to reduce the Democratic advantage, what you want to do is build two parent families, you eliminate that desire for government."

"One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country. It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. [Sex] is supposed to be within marriage. It’s supposed to be for purposes that are yes, conjugal…but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen…This is special and it needs to be seen as special.”
~Rick Santorum, opposing contraception and frighteningly suggesting that he would love to make pre-marital sex illegal.

“Yeah, remember, under the Bush administration, welfare — I mean, excuse me, poverty among African Americans and among single unmarried women, poverty was at the lowest rate ever in the history of this country. So Obama’s policies are not working, Bush polices worked! For long a time as a matter of fact.”
~Rick Santorum, falsely claiming that poverty was the lowest in history because of the Bush policies. In fact, poverty only increased.

“9/11 families and everybody else in America should be furious at this president that he’s walking abound taking credit for, you know, getting Osama bin Laden. He didn’t get Osama bin Laden! … The president of the United States simply said — courageous act, give him credit for saying yes — but that’s all he did, is say yes. He didn’t do the hard work. The people he’s going after did the hard work. And that is an outrage.”
~Rick Santorum, claiming that President Obama deserves no credit for the killing of Osama bin Laden and that 9/11 families should be angry because he order him killed.

“I don’t want to go to a trade war, I want to beat China. I want to go to war with China and make America the most attractive place in the world to do business.”
~Rick Santorum, stating that he wants a war with China

Of course, we all remember

Quote:
While campaigning in Iowa he told a group of supporters:

“I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money; I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money.”

Later Santorum said he doesn’t remember saying that, retracting his statement:

“I’ve looked at that quote, in fact I looked at the video. In fact, I’m pretty confident I didn’t say black. I started to say is a word and then sort of changed and it sort of — blah — mumbled it and sort of changed my thought.”

I mean...???

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 11, 2012 9:54 AM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

A humorous spoof, Mr. Cavalier.

However, his attitudes do not seem so very different from the spoof!

--Anthony

Indeed. And ol' Frothy is showing a lack of historical knowledge. Women have made fierce warriors in many eras, including WWII, where there were many, many female snipers in the Red Army. They were terrifying to the enemy, because they were cold, detached, deadly effective, and the idea of women doing such "dirty" combat work completely unnerved the male-centric Nazi army.

There were also female bomber pilots on the Russian side, and they proved quite effective as well.

Seems that when lives are on the line, women are at least as able to turn off their emotions and do the job at hand as men are.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 11, 2012 12:16 PM

He's talking about rape, in case anyone missed it.

On the other hand... They REALLY need to stop drugging the mess tent food to make them more aggressive and battle-ready.

And honestly, like he said, it's not like this doesn't happen among deployed MEN. Of course in any tense wartime environment, this kind of thing will happen, whether or not women are there.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 11, 2012 1:33 PM

Byte, I guess I missed that angle. I thought he was referring to women being "too emotional" for combat, as if they'd get freaked out and start crying in the middle of a firefight or something. Hadn't heard that he was suggesting they put their emotions on hold when it comes to being raped while serving their country. That would be a whole new level of horrific from a man whose name already has a really shitty connotation!

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 11, 2012 2:19 PM

HKCAVALIER

Byte,

You sure you're not giving the man way too much credit? Here's the clarification I found on this topic, in his own words (And I promise this one's the real quote):

“I was talking about men’s emotional issues; not women. I mean, there’s a lot of issues. That’s just one of them. So my concern is being in combat in that situation instead of being focused on the mission, they may be more concerned with protecting someone who may be in a vulnerable position, a woman in a vulnerable position.”

“You throw on top of that just simply physical strength and capability and you may be out there on a mission where it’s you and a woman and if you’re injured, the ability to transport that person back. And you know, there’s just, there are physical limitations,” Santorum said.

Good gravy is this guy sexually repressed. Just look at the Freudian innuendo flyin': "someone in a vulnerable position, a woman in a vulnerable position..." "You throw on top of that..." Man, where are Beavis and Butthead when ya need 'em?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 11, 2012 2:42 PM

It's pretty much the same argument that was used against women serving on naval ships. As though men are unable to keep their hands to themselves. Really, it's offensive to BOTH men and women.

I see he's also using the physical capability differences argument too. Apparently he doesn't realize some women in the military can easily benchpress 200 pounds.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 11, 2012 5:37 PM

He did not say women's emotions.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I agree with Hero." Niki2, 2011.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 11, 2012 6:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
He did not say women's emotions.

It goes further.

Reaction to this is typical of liberal sexism against women. It's more subtle, but just as insidious as overt sexism.

Santorum talks about "emotions" in this context and liberals think "women are emotional" and immediately condemn his statement for their own mental leap to stereotypical thinking.

Women in combat places discipline and unit coehesion at risk because of the emotional response it would generate. In many ways this is similar to the argument used against blacks and other minorities. While it is easy to get caught up in tht example please consider that the actual circumstances are entirely different.

The military can be a powerful instrument for social change. But change is not always for the best. Women could and should serve in nearly every capacity in our armed forces, they should not be frontline combat soldiers. Please keep in mind the Constitution is far from silent on this issue.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I agree with Hero." Niki2, 2011.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 3:51 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Just think of the destructive power we could unleash !

Until the enemy deployed their own secret weapon... cute baby picture.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 6:36 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
a lack of historical knowledge

You ARE kidding, of course. It's not lack of historical knowledge, although that's probably true, too; it's pure mentality. I don't think for a minute he was talking about rape--respectfully I think that might be transference--but I have no doubt that in HIS mind, he meant emotions the way every misogynist has always used it. Given he's a prime example of the worst of men's thinking about women currently in the forefront of the MSM, it would be hard for it to be anything else. He's not that subtle. Back-tracking later doesn't change it. Any more than it's helped ANY of the current candidates with their various faux-pas.

Bear in mind this is a guy who thinks a raped woman should bear her rapist's child...it's pretty much all of a piece. Santorum isn't worth spending more than five minutes on; and that only to shake one's head in amazement and laugh at his ignorance and stupidity. Because yes, in this case it IS deliberate stupidity; he knows full well the facts about rape, etc., but chooses to show his stupidity.

Given Hero feels exactly the same as he does, I'm not going to respond to that!

Rap; I just HAD to click on that, tho' I knew what it was the minute I saw it. When I first saw it, I almost fell off my chair laughing. Oh, how I miss them...sigh...good TV is so damned hard to come by! Wouldn't work for me, tho', I'm pretty impervious to babies...now if it was a dog (tho' just photos wouldn't do it, either)...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 6:40 AM

If he's not talking about rape, explain to me why Santorum talks about men struggling with the same emotions with other men, and women exacerbating the problem.

He's pussyfooting around it, but what he means is pretty clear to me, because it's the same old argument against women in the military I've seen before.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 7:44 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
If he's not talking about rape, explain to me why Santorum talks about men struggling with the same emotions with other men, and women exacerbating the problem.

He's pussyfooting around it, but what he means is pretty clear to me, because it's the same old argument against women in the military I've seen before.

What, that you think the military is the place for co-ed shower scenes, like Starship Troopers ?

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 9:08 AM

Quote:
What, that you think the military is the place for co-ed shower scenes, like Starship Troopers ?

While Israel is not necessarily a military I'd emulate for various reasons, they are gender integrated, and most of these problems people worry about are non-existent with them.

I expect people to act professional. If our soldiers don't act professional around women soldiers, then the problem is discipline, not the presence of women.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 9:30 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

" professional " means little to a young adult trying to cope with a million years of human sexual evolution, while trying to also train to be a soldier. The last thing anyone needs is more distractions, just to appease the social engineering crowd.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 9:55 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Then how do the Israelis manage? It seems it CAN be done - it's just a matter of how.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 11:41 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

I say send all the dykes and lesbians to the front lines in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Mexico, et al, starting with Rachael Mancow.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 11:50 AM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
" professional " means little to a young adult trying to cope with a million years of human sexual evolution, while trying to also train to be a soldier. The last thing anyone needs is more distractions, just to appease the social engineering crowd.

You mean the same young men also coping with millions of years of flight response also? It should be noted that many armed forces around the world allow women to serve any role and they have little in the way of problems. Including the Israeli Defense Force.

If US soldiers can't deal with mixed combat units they can't claim to be the best in the world.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 12:23 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

As long as you can pass the training and fitness requirements, it shouldn't be an issue. Combat training should take care of the other issues. It'll soon weed out people, male or female who cannot think and operate under stress.

That being said, I don't love the idea of women in combat, but can't think of a rational reason why they should be excluded.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 12:53 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
He did not say women's emotions.

In a discussion on "Morning Edition" today, the understanding the participants had was that the "emotions" mentioned by Santorum were those of men in a combat situation who would, in his opinion, be likely to take greater risks to protect the women with them.

Not saying that this is a valid conclusion on his part, but it does appear he wasn't talking about the womens' emotions.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 1:13 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

The participants had that understanding because it's what Santorum SAID, as Cav quoted:

Quote:
“I was talking about men’s emotional issues; not women. I mean, there’s a lot of issues. That’s just one of them. So my concern is being in combat in that situation instead of being focused on the mission, they may be more concerned with protecting someone who may be in a vulnerable position, a woman in a vulnerable position.”

He said all that AFTER his original statement became an issue. Kind of like his "I wasn't saying Black people, I started to say 'Blah' then changed my mind" (not verbatum, but close enough). In other words, that's the spin Santorum gave, whether it's true or not.

I don't see rape coming into it; I interpret it as women's emotions getting in the way of them doing their job...killing maybe, or the "emotions" of their periods, I dunno...I'm not inside his weird mind to even guess. But when people talk "emotions" about women being anywhere (business, combat, etc.) it is generally pretty easily understood what they mean. And what kind of person they are, in my opinion.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 1:47 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Combatants tend to care about one another's wellbeing, don't they? They look out for their own.

All of the concerns can be overcome by training. I mean, you are training people to function when they are in the middle of enemy fire, to go against a basic survival instinct so it should be a cake walk to get them to overcome concerns, instinctual or otherwise, re their emotions about women serving with them.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 1:50 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I agree it should be easier to train Men to cope with Women than to train Men to charge a machine gun nest.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 2:08 PM

Niki: Still doesn't explain the men thing.

When a person is trying to save their own ass because they said something dumb, they'll say all kinds of things, sometimes which have nothing to do what the original point they were making was.

What is noteworthy about this is that he swallowed his own foot a little more with his follow up "explanation."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 2:38 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Exactly - mind you supply units, reserve ones primarily, have long since made this a non-issue.

In fact my original Drill Instructor down at Ft Jackson was female and such a hardass professional I actually respected her MORE than the FMJ wannabes who didn't actually seem to comprehend the difference between training young punks and abusing them...

Not to mention my unit of record, the few times I was with em, didn't have too many problems regarding race or sex, can't see why it would with my platoon being all female but me and one other grunt, and me being the only cracker there stirred up some resentment initially - which didn't last past the first real exercise when they realized I was a hell-bent shocktrooper somehow dumped on a third-rate supply unit.
(Although it did raise some really obvious suspicions given the amount of time I was "on detail" across the street with the spooks)

Whatever misogynistic notions folks have, one way to put a crimp in them is hand them a rifle, and tell them to imagine that same rifle a hundred yards away, aimed at them by a trained soldier.
AT THAT POINT, dude - do you CARE if it's a chick?

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 4:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
" professional " means little to a young adult trying to cope with a million years of human sexual evolution, while trying to also train to be a soldier. The last thing anyone needs is more distractions, just to appease the social engineering crowd.

So do you think that girls and boys going to school together is also "social engineering"? How are students able to keep from raping each other in the classroom?

How are young adults in the workplace able to restrain themselves from groping their customers and coworkers? The Abercrombie store at the mall must look like Plato's Retreat or Studio 54 at the height of the sexual revolution!

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 4:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
He did not say women's emotions.

In a discussion on "Morning Edition" today, the understanding the participants had was that the "emotions" mentioned by Santorum were those of men in a combat situation who would, in his opinion, be likely to take greater risks to protect the women with them.

Not saying that this is a valid conclusion on his part, but it does appear he wasn't talking about the womens' emotions.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

That makes it sound like Frothy's basically accusing the males in the military of cowardice, if he's thinking that they might stick around and fight harder for the women in their unit, whereas they'd simply up and run away if their male friends were under attack.

It really doesn't make his position sound better, if you ask me.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 5:26 PM

Hmm. Okay, THAT might explain the thing about the men's emotions, though it's a strange argument.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 5:29 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
That makes it sound like Frothy's basically accusing the males in the military of cowardice, if he's thinking that they might stick around and fight harder for the women in their unit, whereas they'd simply up and run away if their male friends were under attack.

The folks on "Weekend Edition" seemed to think he meant men would take more reckless and possibly foolish risks to protect women than they would other men in the normal course of combat operations. Seems like Mr. Santorum's still stuck in "Damsels in distress need rescuing" mode to me.

One of the interviewees was a female ex-Army officer who'd done tours in Iraq and noted that generally the military awards medals for folks who take extraordinary risks for their fellow soldiers, and that men had been taking those risks for other men for ages, and - in her experience - probably wouldn't do much different with women involved.

I suspect you're suggestion that he's hinting at cowardice is bias on your part.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 5:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

I agree it should be easier to train Men to cope with Women than to train Men to charge a machine gun nest.

--Anthony

It is far easier to train Men to charge a machine gun nest than to teach them to cope with Women.

Based on my lifelong observation of Men & Women in the USA. If Israel has solved the problem, they must be doin' it different than us (who brainwash kids with heavy gender roles & limits); and maybe we could learn from them.

As for Santorum, much of what he says was prevalent opinion 50 years ago. i.e., Conservative = Retro = WASP.

"All I suggest is a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest" ~Paul Simon

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 5:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
That makes it sound like Frothy's basically accusing the males in the military of cowardice, if he's thinking that they might stick around and fight harder for the women in their unit, whereas they'd simply up and run away if their male friends were under attack.

The folks on "Weekend Edition" seemed to think he meant men would take more reckless and possibly foolish risks to protect women than they would other men in the normal course of combat operations. Seems like Mr. Santorum's still stuck in "Damsels in distress need rescuing" mode to me.

One of the interviewees was a female ex-Army officer who'd done tours in Iraq and noted that generally the military awards medals for folks who take extraordinary risks for their fellow soldiers, and that men had been taking those risks for other men for ages, and - in her experience - probably wouldn't do much different with women involved.

I suspect you're suggestion that he's hinting at cowardice is bias on your part.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

I suspect it's bias on HIS part. After all, if, as you suggest, females in the foxholes would make men MORE brave and valorous, isn't that something you'd want in a soldier? We praise them as "heroes", but then don't want them to do anything, y'know, heroic when it comes right down to it.

Sounds like Frothy wants LESS heroism and gallantry in the field.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 8:49 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Originally posted by Oonjerah:
It is far easier to train Men to charge a machine gun nest than to teach them to cope with Women.

Bwahahaha.

While I suspect maybe not intentionally so, that's bloody hi-larious.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 9:04 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

I agree with Magon's. If anyone, male or female, wants to be a warrior and can pass the necessary tests and requirements then they should be able to do it. I personally would never want to (I couldn't anyways but that's irrelevent), I'm a nurturer and don't think I could kill anyone unless they were hurting my kids or going to hurt someone else I love. I like watching documentaries about historical wars but that's as far as I could go. I do know women though who could potentially be very good and able soldiers.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2012 11:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Quote:
Originally posted by Oonjerah:
It is far easier to train Men to charge a machine gun nest than to teach them to cope with Women.

Bwahahaha.

While I suspect maybe not intentionally so, that's bloody hi-larious.

-F

'Tis a bloody hi-larious fact of life, I say.

"All I suggest is a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest" ~Paul Simon

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2012 4:05 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

I suspect it's bias on HIS part.

I agree, hence the "damsels in distress" comment.

But the idea that soldiers will take even greater risks - and greater losses - in combat because they must "protect the ladies" will go over well with his base, so why shouldn't he suggest it, from a campaign point of view?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2012 5:24 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
When a person is trying to save their own ass because they said something dumb, they'll say all kinds of things, sometimes which have nothing to do what the original point they were making was.

Oh, Byte, sweetie, you don't need to tell ME--that's what politicians do every time they make a "faux pas"! They either, if they're dumb or stubborn, double down, or they backtrack as fast as they can with some kind of "spin" on the statement.

Rap: "more distractions" is one of the same excuses made against inter-racial military and gays in the military. I see no difference between those two and women in the military; they are excuses which military training proved wrong. I think that's an argument grabbed when reaching for SOMETHING to back up the mentality. You don't think African Americans in the military was a helluva distraction back when there were MANY in the military who were aggressively racist? Or when there was the big mess about gays--despite gays having been serving in the military since time began. People don't like change; they reach out for a reason not to have it, especially when it's something THEY don't like. Of course, I have a suspicion where Santorum's concerned that he's not happy with ANY of those being in the military (especially gays!), but it's just a suspicion.

Geezer, yes, I think he IS still stuck in the "damsel in distress" mentality...among other things. It seems obvious to me from many of his stances that Santorum has some opinions regarding women which are, at the very least, out of date. And I agree wholeheartedly with your last post.

Yes, Frem, it IS unintentionally funny, while at the same time very sad.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2012 11:12 AM

Bill, Army MSgt retired, been married to the same woman for +35 years. I dunno, but I've been told the 1st 10 years of marriage is a crash course in how to get along with someone of the opposite sex (not your mother-in-law). Bill learned to get along with his Mrs. Did Bill ever charge a machine gun nest? I dunno; he doesn't say.

Bill sends me jokes, the majority of them gender based. The differences between the genders is constantly on his mind. Example:

A woman walked into the kitchen to find her husband stalking about with a fly swatter.

"What are you doing?" she asked.
"Hunting flies," he responded.
"Oh. Killing any?" she asked.
"Yep, 3 males, 2 females," he replied.
Intrigued, she asked. "How can you tell them apart?"
He responded, "3 were on a beer can; 2 were on the phone."

The military should be the best possible place for men & women to get along well. The service is extremely structured as to communication and conduct. The exact same rules of conduct apply to men and women, so misunderstandings are minimized. At least in principle. I have read a few articles about when there's a conflict between a man & woman in the service, given that they are of the same rank, the rights of the man will be more important than the rights of the woman. I believe it.

Men find it easier to charge the guns than to get along with women.
The remark is funny. I knew it was funny. I didn't say it because it was funny. I said it because it is true.
People tend to be funny, weird, in-survival and rigid.

"All I suggest is a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest" ~Paul Simon

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2012 12:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
. You don't think African Americans in the military was a helluva distraction back when there were MANY in the military who were aggressively racist?

I considered the comparison, but it does not hold water. The African-American military legacy of good and faithful service in the front lines predates the founding of our country. Truman merely recognized what was common fact. African-Americans proved themselves time and again on the battlefield. By 1945 the Army, though segregated, had acknowledged as an institution that segregation was not necessary.

While homosexuals have a claim to a similar (if less obvious) legacy, woman have instead a long history of being shielded from combat (notable exceptions exist...Russia and Isreal are among them). Its practical and cultural, but those things don't carry the weight they once did. Modern medicine and birth rates eliminated the practical distinction and this has eroded the cultural one.

Ours is a dsciplined and professional military. I trust that our men in uniform are capable of serving honorably alongside females in frontline combat units...one wonders about the reactions of our enemies. The Taliban HR Dept is notoriously slow in handling sexual harrassment complaints.

Abuse of women will be common, it creates a risk, it puts our men at risk because they know this to be true.

How likely are you to resist interrogation when your female squadmate is being gang raped by a hundred North Koreans? This is my own concern...one of many.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I agree with Hero." Niki2, 2011.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2012 12:23 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Some excellent points, Oonj, thank you for that perspective.

The "logic" that, because something has been the case for X amount of time, it should stay that way, is something I won't even bother addressing.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2012 12:30 PM

We're at war with North Korea now?

You would have been closer if you said the Taliban or something, because they're aggressively repressed beyond any belief and just waiting for a socially acceptable outlet, and they have this homophobic thing against male rape.

But seriously, if you think rape is the worst torture someone can come up with and that only women are a concern (and men worrying about that concern), you're not being creative enough.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2012 12:35 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"How likely are you to resist interrogation when your female squadmate is being gang raped by a hundred North Koreans? This is my own concern...one of many."

Hello,

About as likely as when it happens to your male squadmate, I suspect.

Resisting interrogation isn't actually a big deal. You only have to last until your side can get the message that you've been captured.

Hours. Maybe a day. Possibly two. By then, the sensitivity of your information has been assessed by your side and they've made any adjustments they feel are necessary.

The idea of soldiers indefinitely resisting interrogation is more for the movies than for real life. For most people, it's not IF. It's WHEN.

-Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2012 12:37 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"they have this homophobic thing against male rape."

Hello,

I'm not sure that they do. They may just use a surrogate, like a stick or a pipe. I seem to remember something similar on the news recently.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2012 12:43 PM

Ah. Duly rescinded.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2012 1:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Some excellent points, Oonj, thank you for that perspective.

The "logic" that, because something has been the case for X amount of time, it should stay that way, is something I won't even bother addressing.

Did someone say "should"? I mostly avoid that word.

"All I suggest is a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest" ~Paul Simon

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 14, 2012 8:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
We're at war with North Korea now?

I note for the record that the Korean War never ended...its just an unusually long halftime.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I agree with Hero." Niki2, 2011.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:02 AM

STORYMARK

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
" professional " means little to a young adult trying to cope with a million years of human sexual evolution, while trying to also train to be a soldier. The last thing anyone needs is more distractions, just to appease the social engineering crowd.

Yeah, Israel - the land of social engineering.....

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 14, 2012 9:10 AM