{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
1/24/2013 1:33:08 AM
16
Breaking News!!! Women are allowed combat roles in the US
I'm sort of against this. I know a lot of women can kick some ass (more ass then guys), but I feel it can compromise a mission. The Men will feel like they have to protect the Women and such and put them before the mission.
Discuss
-
There's nothing wrong with this. A person willing to protect a dying woman on the battlefield will just as likely be willing to do it for a male friend. It needs to be a volunteer effort and anyone should be able to help. What we need to do is stop bullying the world and starting phony wars and invasions.
-
2 RepliesYeah, you know. They should set up some types of rules and regulations... You know, like a Code of Conduct in the military. I see no reason why to think that this is bad. They have a set of rules and regulations. In the battlefield, it doesn't matter if your ally is a man or a woman. You're getting shot at. What do you value more? Impressing a woman or saving your team's life? People in the military work as a TEAM.
-
4 Replieslol I love how that ugly feminist jay is tagged.
-
2 RepliesEdited by Random: 1/30/2013 9:05:01 AMWe had a large thread about this like a week ago also why the -blam!- did you tag #gaming?
-
Why on earth am I hashtagged in this?
-
6 RepliesJust more women getting in the way. Watch the casualty rates go up because a woman is physically inferior to a man. Also, watch how they won't get any important missions.
-
Gender priority will probably be discouraged during training. Everyone is equal.
-
I didn't even know they weren't allowed combat roles :s
-
[quote]"The Men will feel like they have to protect the Women and such and put them before the mission. "[/quote] What are you even talking about? You act like soldiers don't do the same already. You know those who are in combat roles look out for each other, right? Sex means literally nothing in this situation. Plus why did you tag Jaythenerdkid in this thread?
-
5 RepliesI'm honestly shocked it took this long. Aside from cosmetic/reproductive differences, they're exactly the same as men so there's not really any reason for rejecting it.
-
[quote]I'm sort of against this. I know a lot of women can kick some ass (more ass then guys), but I feel it can compromise a mission. The Men will feel like they have to protect the Women and such and put them before the mission. [/quote] You have to stop putting the pussy on a pedestal. Once you do, a soldier is a soldier - no matter their sex - and you want them all home alive.
-
Foe Hammer, is that you?!
-
Error: Unable to comprehend human sub-species system.
-
[quote]The Men will feel like they have to protect the Women and such and put them before the mission. [/quote] Wait. Do males in the military just leave their male counterparts behind when they're in a tough situation? If you don't give a shit about the people you're serving with, you should see yourself out.
-
2 RepliesEdited by Pfhortnite: 1/24/2013 1:35:56 AMThere is a possibility of that being true, with the protection, but where is the evidence? We have to at least try it to know; Don't quit before you even try.
-
Why not make them serve in every kitchen?
