In the argument of how women are percieved in the military I must call attention to the one that was just rescued. Had this been a man would there have been such a "to do" about the fact. I somehow doubt it.

Not to say it isn't great, but it just goes to show you people still look at women as the more "fragile" species (as I like to call them, because I don't think we are the same species sometimes).

Perhaps I'm wrong, and women should do everything a man should do, but I think it honestly affects a man's ego living in today's world. He no longer has any domain to call his own, but women still have plenty. Shopping, cooking, make-up, fashion, etc. etc. So unless your a gay male, or of another ethnicity, you have no domain to call your own anymore, as we cannot have WET tv (White Entertainment Television), nor can we have WMOC (White Men Only Club), yet women and other ethic groups are allowed these segregated type institutions, and they are all still crying for equal rights. Then for starters they need to advocate a stop to this discrimination first.

I'm sorry, but I get tired of the hippocrits, the women cops on power trips, and the rubbing in my face of events that took place over 150 years ago. This country will always be held back by our pure inhability to act like humans, if this rediculous PC crap doesn't go away we will never rid this nation of prejudice. You have to start by looking it in the face.....and getting to the root of it, because it's rampent in one form or another in 99% of Americans.

But I rant all day long about the breaking of the moral fabric in this country, and I wasn't raised by a stay at home perfect mom, my parents had serious problems (some even drug related), but they somehow managed to teach me moral values. It is time we all stop blaming everyone else for our problems, quit being a nation that does only what "feels good", and get off well-fare and start experiencing the joys of a free life.

Sorry for the rant, hope it made sense. Oh, and lastly where's my free "white man's pass to college"?

 

Kevin K. breifly touched on the one drawback I have to women being in a combat situation.

Being captured.

Jessica notwithstanding, the implications are much more sinister for a female POW. Dismissal of Geneva Convention rules by other countries is the RULE, not the exception. It's one thing to be beaten, starved, paraded,and conventionally tortured -physically and mentally. It's quite another to be brutalized in a most despicable fashion as everyone knows would be the case. Primal human nature can take a particularly vicious path when left unchecked by a sense of dignity, compassion, or love of human life.

No POW I have ever read about or known came home without DEEP scars. I cannot imagine a woman carrying that immense weight with her for life.

As far as equality, I've seen both sides. We had a female crew cheif that simply WOULD NOT carry her weight on the flight line. Conversely, there were two female airmen in the "paint barn" and they ran the place in high fashion. Excellence was their trademark.

In those respects I feel it's not a matter of gender. It's a matter of personality.

Female combatants? No, but ONLY for POW reasons.

On the other hand, there's something awfully attractive about a woman with a weapon!!!

Chuck

 

Well, I figure as I might put my 2 cents in. so here goes
I was raised in a typical suburban southern family, my father made the money, my mother stayed at home and raised 5 kids. On occasion my mother would get a job, but for something to do with her time, like now, the two oldest, myself included have moved out, two are in high school, one will grad. in a month, the youngest in middle school, so my mom works 4 hours a day, she works as a seamstress...hmmm... that is what my mom did when she did not have a job, stay at home, take care of the kids, sew, cook dinner, and clean. And I am glad, I am glad she was home when I got home from school, that she had dinner on the table when my dad walked home, I feel I got alot better raing NOT going to day-care, or some other stay at home mom's house. She would pick me up from school, and with a stern hand she made me do my homework, then let me go play with the neighborhood kids, my dad would get home and we would play ball, or what-not. And this is how I plan on raising my family. My Fiancee wants to go to collage and get a job, not wanting kids right now, I can't blame her, we are still to young..in my humble opinion, however, I will work two full time jobs before we have to rely on her income along with mine to get by. She willl only have a job to have something to do or because she likes what she does...she has talked about being a teacher.
I was raised to open doors, pay the bill, and everything else..I do believe women are fully capable, I have no doubt. BUT, I believe that it is also my job to make sure that my gal does have the opertunity to show that she is capable.
As for women in the military, I am active, I do not believe that any gal could be in any job, but it is like that for guys too....we have one maint female, who is the "OH MY GOD! I broke a nail" type, and then one who is more manly than most of the men...as for the front line, or in a fighter, or chopper, they do not belong, it is not that they cannot do the job, I think they can, but it is natural for any man to protect them, it disrupts the delicate balance of a fighting group when you pay extra attention to a certain individual, you must view everyone elses lifejust the same as the person next to him. Having a female in the group disturbs that. The very thought of what happened to PFC Jessica Lynch disturbs me, very much, and if I had been over there, I can tell you that it would have affected my actions and performance very very much.
But, this is just my 2 cents. Jimmy Dean

 

Well, since truckfreak69 stole my White Entertainment Television idea (blast you) I must ramble on from there. There is one job I can think of right now that a woman cannot do as good as a man: Santa Clause! Now if she's being Mrs. Clause and I've been naughty its a different story... but all humor aside heres my two cents. I remember playing football in 8th grade and we had two girls on our team. To be quite honest, they were better than most the rest of the team and they earned first string spots. Every time they got clobbered on a play, me and a buddy of mine made it a point to claim retribution on the offender. Sure, this brought slews of yellow flags when it was blatantly obvious, but our coach was brought up the same as us and let it go except for the couple of games we got ejected from, and then he only pretended to yell at us so it looked good to the refs. Point is, even though they could hold their own, and it cost us a little bit in the end, me and my buddy stuck to our upbringing and I'm proud of that. Since then I've been suspended twice from high school, brought up on charges three times, and lost one friend for upholding these same morals (never lost though ) and I gotta say that I wouldn't change a thing. I even beat another one of my buddies for slapping his girlfriend, thankfully he knew he deserved it and it brought us closer together. Also, I was lucky he was drunk or he woulda kicked my butt! Enough of my rambling, though, I'll just finish by saying that if I join the millitary it will be the same way, protect the fairer gender no matter what the cost. You can take the hillbilly out of the hills, but you cant take the hills out of the hillbilly.

 

The segregated classroom idea isn't a new concept. It has always been well documented that students who attend all-boys or all-girls high schools scored WAY better on the ACT and SAT tests. The logic is this:
Boys tend to be competitive, and girls tend to be cooperative (at least in school ).
If you have a group of boys that are challenged to learn by offering a friendly competition, most will respond to that by stepping up their learning to a higher level. And without the need to impress the girls in the class, the urge to alienate the "weaker" or "geekier" boys is greatly diminished, as is the tendancy to "act out" and be disruptive. So the boys not only get the competition element, but they learn to work together and accept one another, and they aren't as rowdy.
Then in the girls classroom, you make an environment where the girls cooperate and learn in groups, and challenge them to learn as a team. Without the distraction of the boys competing for thier attention and being disruptive, the girls are able to learn aesthetically much better. And when the girls are in groups, a competition element can be added, whereas if the groups were co-ed, the boys would basically drown out the girls in the situation.
See how this works? You isolate the genders so that the tendancies of each doesn't interfere with the other's ability to learn.
I hope I explained that better than I did before...
BDV

 

BDV,

You explained it well both times, and I see your point. My point is that there are several ways to "improve test scores". Segregating by gender just wouldn't be my first choice. At some point in life, men and women must learn to overcome their differences and work together. It's my opinion that the sooner they learn this, the better they'll be able to function in society. I also believe that the socialization skills would decline as much as the grades would improve, but that's just my theory.

Studies are almost always biased, too. If the results didn't come out like the designer planned, they redo the study until it does.

I've also seen studies that show children in a structured daycare environment are way more prepared acedemically and socially for pre-school or kindergarten than those that stay home with mom. And another that shows home-schooled kids scoring higher than public or private school kids.

Ultimately, weather your child goes to daycare or not, weather they go to an all boys/girls school, are home-schooled, come from a broken home, have no syblings, etc..., their ability to learn and function in society is impacted more by what they learn from their parents than what they learn in a book.

Sorry this got a little off topic.

Kevin K.