NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/soc/women/20230

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-24 | 3.4 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!usenet.coe.montana.edu!ogicse!das-news.harvard.edu!husc-news.harvard.edu!husc11.harvard.edu!sormani1
From: [e-mail] (Nannette Sormani)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Women in Combat
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 24 Nov 92 02:13:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Nov23.211354.17741
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: Harvard University Science Center
Lines: 58
Nntp-Posting-Host: husc11.harvard.edu

-------stuff deleted
>
>1) the combat side of the militiary cannot be compared to the service sector
>of the forces or to industries .
>true . women may generally handle family pressures and pregnancies well but
>not ALL of them do . and in a combat unit where there is generally very
>little allowance for substitutions of roles - this could be very disruptive.
>men may have the same problems too - ( minus the obvious one ...) but at
>least the system knows how to handle the situation as pertaining to men .
>and furthermore , men tend to be more predictable in their .... lifestyles.
>i don't know if i put this properly .. but i guess what i mean to say is that
>the male dominated militiary KNOWS how to predict when a problem might pop up
>and what should be done .... with women ... you'd have to re-train personnel
>to further evaluate the unfamiliar situation . (am i saying this right? )
>hmm....
>besides.... let's not forget that that ONE problem i was talking about IS
>a BIG factor..

This isn't a very fair argument.  You're punishing the women for the
flaws of the system.  Fact of the matter is, the only way the military
will become used to dealing with women is to put women in combat
positions and particularly in positions of leadership.  After all, if
women are as different as you claim, women will know how to deal with
it.

In many ways I think this argument is analagous to one which could
have been made in the forties when the army was desegragated.  Looking
back, we would all agree that this was a good thing, but many of the
common arguments could have been made.  For example, you could argue
that putting blacks in with whites would create tension and lack of
trust, given the racial attitudes of the time.  Furthermore, how would
the commander be able to handle things if a "black problem" cropped up
(though I'm not sure what a "black problem" or even a "woman problem"
would actually be).


>2) inter office romance and even relationships in the service sector ofthe
>forces cannot be compared to relationships in the combat sector .
>they're mUCH more disruptive because life/death situations and decisions
>generally are made more often in the combat units.
>yeesh...bus is here..got to go..back tommorow.
>>                            --  Michal

I disagree here, too.  I would tend to see relationships as more
intense forms of the bonding that goes on in any combat unit.  Would
the actions of a romantically involved couple be that different from
two very close friends in a combat situation?  Please, give men and
women some credit for professionalism!

Looking forward to hearing your response,
Nannette


--
*******************************************************************************
* Nannette Sormani          * "The rooster may crow, but it's the hen that    *
* [e-mail] *  delivers the eggs." -Ann Richards, Gov. of TX  *
*******************************************************************************