Message from @Nathan James 123

Discord ID: 632591020420366376


2019-10-12 14:47:06 UTC  

@Mavalance Can you explain what you mean here "Yet my thinking does lead me to believe that there is a path of strength women can take that does not have to be the same as men."

2019-10-12 14:47:26 UTC  

Seduction of male enemy combatants @4SidedTriangle

2019-10-12 14:48:30 UTC  

@Nathan James 123 Actually might be a legitimate reason for MI6 but not the Army. In fact didn't the Russians train there female spies in seduction.

2019-10-12 14:48:34 UTC  

You're all missing the obvious reasons

2019-10-12 14:48:42 UTC  

Logistics

2019-10-12 14:48:47 UTC  

@4SidedTriangle Considering women are generally physically weaker than men, especially in upper body strength. It then does not make sense for them to be carrying the same as that of a man. The ability to shoot a gun effectively to kill the enemy is important, so why should women carry the same as men when they aren't as physicallly able?

2019-10-12 14:48:53 UTC  

>Weaker @Joshu

2019-10-12 14:49:02 UTC  

So more of them are required for the same task

2019-10-12 14:49:12 UTC  

Nathan, wait a second I wasnt done

2019-10-12 14:49:15 UTC  

Means more supplies are required to support them

2019-10-12 14:49:19 UTC  

Aight

2019-10-12 14:49:40 UTC  

Lets say you have a above average woman who was as physically capable as her section.

2019-10-12 14:49:48 UTC  

She is a lesbian

2019-10-12 14:49:53 UTC  

and is butch

2019-10-12 14:50:03 UTC  

not attractive in thr slightest

2019-10-12 14:50:10 UTC  

lets say she is literally unfuckable

2019-10-12 14:50:18 UTC  

So we eliminate that variable

2019-10-12 14:50:24 UTC  

@Mavalance If women are not as physical capable in the whole then why should they be in the military. Soldiers don't carry that which is not needed and if a woman cannot carry this weight then they are not suitable. It's purely a case of combat effectiveness.

2019-10-12 14:50:25 UTC  

What do women do

2019-10-12 14:50:29 UTC  

once per month men do not

2019-10-12 14:50:52 UTC  

Biological warfare is illegal @Joshu

2019-10-12 14:50:59 UTC  

@4SidedTriangle which is why there are other avenues that they can take. Not every role is solely combat orientated

2019-10-12 14:50:59 UTC  

Logistics

2019-10-12 14:51:10 UTC  

Do you want that container full of morphine/ammo

2019-10-12 14:51:12 UTC  

or tampons

2019-10-12 14:51:25 UTC  

It's a serious consideration

2019-10-12 14:51:36 UTC  

What happens of they run out in a combat situation?

2019-10-12 14:51:49 UTC  

Lack of hygiene during menstruation can cause serious infections

2019-10-12 14:52:07 UTC  

There is a good reason you can;t be front line if you REQUIRE meds

2019-10-12 14:52:39 UTC  

It;s the same reason why trans should not be in the military

2019-10-12 14:52:43 UTC  

They REQUIRE pills

2019-10-12 14:52:44 UTC  

Didn't think of that.

2019-10-12 14:52:51 UTC  

Ban em as well.

2019-10-12 14:52:52 UTC  

@Mavalance We aren't arguing that women should be in non-front line rolls we are arguing that they shouldn't be in front line rolls. That is what the article that sparked this conversation off was about.

2019-10-12 14:52:58 UTC  

and also are more suceptible to mental health issues

2019-10-12 14:53:07 UTC  

Now non front line?

2019-10-12 14:53:09 UTC  

Absolutely fine

2019-10-12 14:53:45 UTC  

But as soon as you put women in front line roles en-mass

2019-10-12 14:53:55 UTC  

you take away container space for critical supplies

2019-10-12 14:54:00 UTC  

It will indirectly kill people

2019-10-12 14:54:35 UTC  

Even if that women is a fucking olympic decathlon weightlifter