Could white men do all the work?

Page 4 of 4 [ 63 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

BTDT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 61
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 7,883

31 Oct 2016, 11:08 am

http://controversialtimes.com/military/ ... ely-crazy/
Two Russian women made this top 10 list of snipers.

http://userpages.aug.com/captbarb/sniper.html
"Frankly, women are better suited mentally for this job than most men," said Dolan who has learned the sniper craft from the Marines and from the Army and who saw duty as a Marine sniper 10 years ago during the Persian Gulf War. "A woman is best suited to counter a woman sniper," he added. "That's important because more than 50 percent of the countries that have been considered hostile to the United States, including North Vietnam and North Korea, have used women snipers.

Campin_Cat
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2014
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 25,953
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.

31 Oct 2016, 11:32 am

adifferentname wrote:

One consideration is that men and women typically cope with stress differently, with men typically defaulting to problem solving solutions and women using emotion-focused coping.

I can agree with this. From my experience, I'd MUCH rather have a male boss than a female boss, because females are more emotional; and also, terribly competitive with others (males AND females----maybe even MORE competitive, with other females). Not ALL females are like this, obviously, but.....

_________________
White female; age 59; diagnosed Aspie.
I use caps for emphasis----I'm NOT angry or shouting. I use caps like others use italics, underline, or bold.
"What we know is a drop; what we don't know, is an ocean." (Sir Isaac Newton)

Campin_Cat
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2014
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 25,953
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.

31 Oct 2016, 11:36 am

adifferentname wrote:

FWIW my personal stance is that anyone dumb enough to sign up for the military shouldn't be protected from engaging with live fire.

Just curious as to why you think that anyone who signs-up for the military is dumb?

adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

31 Oct 2016, 1:50 pm

Campin_Cat wrote:

adifferentname wrote:

FWIW my personal stance is that anyone dumb enough to sign up for the military shouldn't be protected from engaging with live fire.

Just curious as to why you think that anyone who signs-up for the military is dumb?

Well it's more accurate to say that I think the decision is a dumb one. I don't agree with the way that our military is utilised - I'd much prefer it be primarily defence oriented rather than playing boy wonder to America's world police.

There are numerous other reasons, such as exploitative recruitment policies that target the impoverished (who tend to account for most casualties), but I'll leave it there for risk of derailing the entire thread.

Don't get me wrong. I still respect the courage and discipline of our troops, my beef is with their paymasters and the special interests they represent.

Quote:

There most certainly are exceptions, and I can't rely completely on anecdotal evidence due to being on the spectrum (I still struggle when confronted by strong emotional displays), but the absolute worst working environment I've experienced was dominated by women (there was one other male there - a teenager). It was beyond toxic.

CockneyRebel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 118,192
Location: In my little Olympic World of peace and love

04 Nov 2016, 10:03 pm

androbot01 wrote:

adifferentname wrote:

.... still think what it comes down to, primarily, is that most people don't want to see women getting shot or blown up.

I don't like seeing anyone getting shot or blown up.

It is interesting how society has a protective attitude toward women.

It's also very sickening too.

_________________
The Family Enigma

CockneyRebel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 118,192
Location: In my little Olympic World of peace and love

04 Nov 2016, 10:07 pm

Campin_Cat wrote:

adifferentname wrote:

FWIW my personal stance is that anyone dumb enough to sign up for the military shouldn't be protected from engaging with live fire.

Just curious as to why you think that anyone who signs-up for the military is dumb?

I think it's great that people are still joining the military.

_________________
The Family Enigma

CockneyRebel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 118,192
Location: In my little Olympic World of peace and love

04 Nov 2016, 10:13 pm

adifferentname wrote:

androbot01 wrote:

adifferentname wrote:

.... still think what it comes down to, primarily, is that most people don't want to see women getting shot or blown up.

I don't like seeing anyone getting shot or blown up.

Indeed.

Quote:

It is interesting how society has a protective attitude toward women.

We've traditionally protected women because human beings are a resource and women make human beings. There's obviously more to it, but it essentially boils down to "think of the children".

If a woman would rather be in a war than have a family, she should be able to. Also, how about the trans man who weighs 280 lbs and goes by the name, Schultz. I think he should have the right to fight with the men if there was a civil war or any war, for that matter.

_________________
The Family Enigma

CockneyRebel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 118,192
Location: In my little Olympic World of peace and love

04 Nov 2016, 10:17 pm

androbot01 wrote:

adifferentname wrote:

.... still think what it comes down to, primarily, is that most people don't want to see women getting shot or blown up.

I don't like seeing anyone getting shot or blown up.

It is interesting how society has a protective attitude toward women.

I think most people need to get with the times.

_________________
The Family Enigma

CockneyRebel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 118,192
Location: In my little Olympic World of peace and love

04 Nov 2016, 10:24 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:

adifferentname wrote:

BTDT wrote:

I think white men are worried about the loss of jobs traditionally reserved for them--combat jobs, for instance.

Which white men and based on what? What jobs in the military (let alone anywhere else) are "reserved" for white men? The problem with your narrative (the incoherence and bizarre hypothetical scenarios aside) is that it follows a typical "progressive" pattern of [manufacture conflict, assign victims and aggressors, side with victims] yet has an illogical inclusion in the 'victim' group.

In short: you're doing social justice wrong.

Quote:

You had to be a white man. Then they opened it up to non-whites. Then they opened it up to women. Who knows, will the USA have something like the French Foreign Legion, in which undesirables from other countries become citizens just because they were injured on the battlefield?

I'm not sure how you've arrived at your hypothesis. More information is needed here.

Quote:

They are scared that women now expect to be able to participate in combat if they want to.

Putting aside our traditional value of keeping women out of harms way, there are many logical reasons given by those who dislike the idea of women performing in combat roles. Some arguments are rendered null due to technology in very specific circumstances (e.g. fighter pilots) but the primary objection seems to revolve around physical and mental competence.

The fear, if anything, seems to be for the welfare of men and women in the armed services. I think that's a rational and legitimate concern.

I don't think you understand what the word progressive means...if you think that describes a progressive pattern. Also pretty sure it is false that females have lesser physical and mental competence across the board than males, that said I myself have no desire to be in the U.S military but still that's a rather sexist reason.

I feel that everybody should have the opportunity to fight in combat, whether they're male or female. Of course you have 280 lb me who has it in for men to the point that I could break every bone in a rapist's body and as a result I'm very competent in that department.

_________________
The Family Enigma

adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

05 Nov 2016, 6:31 am

The problem with not reading the entire conversation before responding to individual posts is that if we addressed your responses we'd be regressing the conversation.

SilverProteus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,915
Location: Somewhere Over The Rainbow

05 Nov 2016, 7:51 am

BTDT wrote:

Suppose we did have a civil war and all the women and non-white men decided to stay home and not go into work--could the white men keep everything going and run a country all by themselves?

I assume you're talking about the US in your hypothetical situation.

All the women would make up roughly 50% of the population. Many are employed in strategically important jobs. Add the non-white males and that would definitely mean more than half the population wouldn't go to work -- I doubt that would mean a small portion of the population (white males) would be able to fill all the strategically important jobs left vacant and keep the country running.

_________________
"Lightning is but a flicker of light, punctuated on all sides by darkness." - Loki

SilverProteus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,915
Location: Somewhere Over The Rainbow

05 Nov 2016, 8:01 am

adifferentname wrote:

As for mental "competence", that's a mischaracterisation of the argument proffered by female front line objectors. One consideration is that men and women typically cope with stress differently, with men typically defaulting to problem solving solutions and women using emotion-focused coping. The argument is that the former is more useful/less detrimental under fire. Whether it's better in general is entirely up for debate, and may well be a factor in the higher suicide rate of men.

Women do cope with stress differently, and there are numerous studies showing that we are more prone to developing PTSD than males, possibly due to a higher density of estrogen alfa and beta receptors in key regions of the brain, along with other factors such as how women process emotion.

_________________
"Lightning is but a flicker of light, punctuated on all sides by darkness." - Loki

SilverProteus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,915
Location: Somewhere Over The Rainbow

05 Nov 2016, 8:04 am

CockneyRebel wrote:

androbot01 wrote:

adifferentname wrote:

.... still think what it comes down to, primarily, is that most people don't want to see women getting shot or blown up.

I don't like seeing anyone getting shot or blown up.

It is interesting how society has a protective attitude toward women.

It's also very sickening too.

I think it's sickening too, basically women are "the frail sex" and while on average this might be true in terms of physical strength and aptitude, people also consider women to be mentally weaker as well and thus need to be shielded from certain events or situations.

_________________
"Lightning is but a flicker of light, punctuated on all sides by darkness." - Loki

Amaltheia
Snowy Owl

Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 154
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

05 Nov 2016, 8:29 am

naturalplastic wrote:

If all people who were born on odd number days of the month were to "stay home from work" society would prolly collapse because the even number day folks wouldnt be able to do it all. Likewise vice versa. Same answer to pretty much any other "all folks who are X stopped working could the remaining non X people carry on?" questions.

Actually, I think this is a much more interesting question, given that people born on odd number days of the month do 51% of all jobs, while people born on even number days of the month do only 49% — so, if the even number days people go on strike, then the odd number days people could each cover one other person's job, with a bit of spare capacity, and maybe get by. However, if the odd number days people went on strike, then even if the even number days people each covered one other person's job, they couldn't do it all.

So, clearly, people born on odd number days of the month are more important to the economy than those born on even number days of the month.

And, we really need to address the question of why people born on even number days of the month aren't putting in their fair share, instead leaving it to those born on odd number days of the month to carry the bulk of the load.

This is an issue of ongoing systemic numberism that no-one is willing to address.

CockneyRebel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 118,192
Location: In my little Olympic World of peace and love

05 Nov 2016, 4:48 pm

If only the white men went to work and women and darker skinned people stayed home, than the economy would suffer and we would find ourselves in another Great Depression. I also feel that nobody should stay at home if we don't want to. Society has come too far over the past 80 years for anybody to have to be forced to stay at home and not be part of the job market.

_________________
The Family Enigma

Page 4 of 4 [ 63 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

Jump to:

Similar Topics
Trump accuses South Africa of genocide against white people in News and Current Events	22 May 2025, 6:34 pm Kraichgauer
why do some games use 10 and 20 when 1 and 2 would work? in Games and Video Games	15 Jun 2025, 10:10 pm MatchboxVagabond
Work and School With Dyscalculia in Work and finding a Job	08 Apr 2025, 10:39 pm renaeden
Staying in hotel for work in Work and finding a Job	23 Apr 2025, 10:16 pm Brian0787

Could white men do all the work? Post Reply New Topic

Could white men do all the work?