just phyllis

just phyllis
Small Town, Indiana, USA
November 13
Blogging with PTSD --------------- "Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around." - Leo Buscaglia _____________________________________ All works ┬ęPhyllis45, the author of this blog. _____________________________________ Also posting at Our Salon http://oursalon.ning.com/ http://oursalon.ning.com/profile/Phyllis


JANUARY 26, 2013 5:55PM

Another Step towards "Star Trek"

Rate: 5 Flag

Hello. I felt the need to add my two cents (link) to the discussion regarding women in combat roles in the United States' military. I can't help but see this as a good thing for human society, and as another step towards freeing up humans in general to be the best person they are capable of being. Small steps forward eventually bleed out into the society at large.


Your tags:


Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:


Type your comment below:
Phyllis, I have no opinion on this, I think if they want to fight, so be it. I would gladly hand them my rifle, any day.
Kenneth, that's all that's being asked, at least by me. Don't stand in my way as you don't want me to stand in yours. Giving respect as a human being should not be a hard thing to give but for some people, they see a threat when all that is asked is consideration. Think how great the world could be if we empowered each other instead of what we do now.

Sounds like a perfect plan; let's empower each other to kill others so we don't need to kill each other 'till we're done killing them others!


Sky, did you miss the part where I said I believe this could eventually end war? I can't stand the violence myself, but even so, all humans should be treated fairly and if women can fight and want to fight, they should be allowed to fight. Keeping women out of combat roles won't stop the killing.

I'm most interested in learning how allowing more people to join in the killing of others "could eventually end war."

Or did you mean that with more people killing other people we could decimate the human population more quickly and thus end war by killing ourselves off?

While I strongly agree that women should be given every opportunity that men have in a great many fields of endeavour, I just cannot get behind the "opportunity" of killing, except in self-defence, for any part of our population not presently involved in it.

I'd like to see that non-involved part be ALL of our population but if that can't be, then let's keep as few people involved as we can. If women are now to join the ranks of those who kill others who are defending their homeland, how long will it be before children will also be involved?
First, the premise is sound: Women who qualify will be allowed to do the job. The Secretary was clear about his intentions: Women in uniform who want to fight will be given a chance and will be recognized, promoted...

The sad part is this. We have come a long way in women's lib, and much has been accomplished. Yet, many especially, some religious nuts and some politically correct idiots are tackling the issue with a 13yr-old boy mentality: "are they going to see each other naked? Are they going to have sex?"

Women treated exactly the same as men in the military is the only way for men in the military to respect and treat women in uniform as soldiers.

As long as this culture is sexually immature/depraved, and as long as society continues to TELL a woman what do with her body or which part of her body is OK to show, we will remain a backward culture far from gender equality.
Sky, my premise is that small change invokes big change. You are assuming that the political structure will remain unchanged by this new decree. Currently, it is difficult for women to be promoted to leadership positions because priority is given to people with combat experience who are all men. We know that combat experience changes a man, and it is entirely possible that we are currently being led by a generation of men who believe 100% that war is the only answer to every question. Women having combat experience will increase their chances for promotion, thus changing the structure of the leadership. Studies have shown that businesses are more profitable with women on the board of directors because they think differently. I believe that have women on the Joint Chiefs and filtered into the leadership of the armed forces in greater numbers than currently exist can only help our country, and I believe that it will lead to fewer excuses to kill people.
Thoth, that's my hope, that everyone sees these women and men as soldiers first, and gender as irrelevant. I don't understand why our country that prides itself on being a world leader still insists that it's okay for men to think with the dangly bits. Growing up would be wonderful.
More than 150 women have been killed and more than 800 wounded in the Iraq and Afghan wars, according to the military. The NPR article quoted herewith also indicates that 280,000 women have been deployed to Iran and Afghanistan since 2001. Apparently the Joint Chiefs seek to clear up euphemistic language and definition. Most of us do not appreciate that war transpires. The mind's eye long ago wrongly held that such door to door, trench by trench--it takes a full deployment to raise a village mentality--had lapsed to obsolescence. More to your point, I simply do not understand why such 'official' privilege of sacrifice
would be construed as humanistic progress.
J. P., I see it as humanistic progress because more female leaders will rise out of it. When the military looks to promote, they look at your job titles. They don't necessarily look at how well you do your job. (yes, I have a specific situation in my memory.) The women deployed are in support roles. They are barred from the leadership roles by virtue of their gender. That will change now. That change will permeate the military. The veterans will bring it home with them, and thus it will permeate society at large. Little girls will soon have their role models expanded beyond Wonder Woman and Xena to include real people. People who don't take their clothes off once they get famous, and aren't depending on their looks to promote themselves. Real, strong, women.
A measure of how sick a society is must be that it can more easily advocate letting women get in on the killing and dying even more than they already are, so that they can "qualify for promotion."

What insanity is this?!!!

Would it not be far better to simply change the qualifications for promotion?

Why do you think that combat experienced by women won't lead them to the same attitude of using military force as an answer to all problems, just as it does with men?
Sky, it could lead them to the same mindset, but I'm betting that it won't. Women's brains are wired differently, we use them differently, and we approach problems differently.

Right now, we are still living in a world where men are in charge, and men approve the promotions, so we have to do what we have to do to get ahead. If someone suggested changing the promotion requirements, people would say they were being dumbed down so that women could get ahead. I am really tired of hearing that.

I've seen no evidence that women in business "do things differently". Nor in science, education, research, medicine, psychology, etc., etc. But they'd do things differently as warriors? When they will learn their killing skills from men? Kill alongside men? Be killed alongside men? You'll forgive me if I take that with a grain of salt.

If the requirements for promotion were ONLY changed for women, yep, it would be condescending; but if they are changed for all? I doubt it.

Any time your gender, my gender, or any of the 17(?) genders humans come in, has to kill people in order to be eligible for promotion, we are sick, sick, sick.

Sky, I'm not disagreeing with you, it is sick, but the system isn't going to change just because we think it should. The men have a good thing going and they aren't going to change it today. As to who's right, we'll have to wait and see.