|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:47 pm
If chivalry ish sexism then I'd have been smacked by every man and woman I've ever made eye-contact with. xD
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 11:09 pm
@Etherealsage: Butting in on your debate with Cherry, I'd have to say that I agree with her in having the "expendable" women enlist. As you've also noticed, not all women are anatomically/health-wise/physically/mentally the same. In that essence, there are a good number of women who would be well fit for the military in many circumstances. It would do well to increase the ranks of the military.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:58 am
The problem with that, of course, is that you get into a tricky situation if you make the ability or willingness to have children part of the criteria for military recruitment. Are you going to make women sign a waiver vowing that they're either barren or promise to never ever have kids? Would you kick a woman out of the military if she gets pregnant? Enforce birth control or even sterilization? What would you do if a female soldier gets pregnant as a result of a rape by a fellow serviceman?
I may have made it sound more simplistic than it really is, but my point was more to show how unreasonable it is to keep all women out of the military when only some of them are going to be reproducing. A government saying that only the perpetually childless women are fit for military duty, though, is only going to open an even bigger can of worms.
Also, don't worry at all about butting in. It's much less boring if it's not just the same two people going back and forth. biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
