160 réponses à ce sujet

[Pups_of_war_76]

Kronner wrote...

Pups_of_war_76 wrote...

He is "correct biologically speaking" in that males are stronger and more rugged on average

However, the fact that many males are bigger and stronger than many females doesn't mean that there aren't some females who are stronger and fitter than most males, and there's no reason why those who can meet the physical requirements shouldn't be able to participate in full, 

which is why current policy is silly

That's leaving aside the fact that the games take place in the future, and thus there are things like semi-powered armor and genetic enhancements to alleviate the disparity. 

It's not silly. While a female marine is stronger/faster/fitter than most males, the male marines are just on another level altogether. Why do you think that men and women do not compete against each other in the Olympics?

You misunderstand.

Prohibitions against female combat troopers in the U.S. are often justified by stating that females are incapable of fulfilling the physical requirements of the job, which is false.

Absolute peak strength and speed are not necessary.

I've met more special forces types who are kind of lean, wiry dudes with a ton of stamina than who are musclebound lunks. You've already got male soldiers who are less strong than other male soldiers, so applying relativism in this context doesn't make a lot of sense. 

The standards should be set at an even level, and any person who can exceed that level should be able to serve in any capacity for which they are qualified. 

[jlb524]

Ah, the problem with these topics is that people need to remember we are talking about a fantasy game that is a means for the player to play out some imagined character (possibly idealized version of themselves) as a form of escapism. There are loads of things that don't really make sense even within the lore, or are unrealistic.

However, things get troubling when people start to be staunch defenders of 'realism' but only when discussing specific/politically charged topics...like women as soldiers or homosexuals.

It's as if these people don't deserve to play out their fantasy game in a similar fashion to the 'majority' which is assumed to be heterosexual males.

[Centauri2002]

It seems that quite a few people here think that more physical strength equates to a better soldier. Commander Shepard is not only an Alliance soldier but a leader and, in some cases, can be an engineer or biotic. All of these roles use very different skills. I don't think buckets of physical strength are at the top of the list for any of them.

Shepard's shining trait is her (or his, if you prefer) will. She overcomes some of the hardest trials in the galaxy, not because she can lift twice her body weight or pry open a bulkhead with her bare hands, but because she has the grit and determination to continue down a difficult path. Her skill with weapons, biotics and technology don't rely on strength either. Leadership is another important factor in what makes Shepard such a successful protagonist. Along with this comes intelligence, strategic thinking, and tactical knowledge. Now, these don't really seem to me to be the domain of one gender.

Skill and achievement are not the sole domain of a single gender but of a single individual. We all have our strengths and weaknesses but they are down to us as people, not because we are men or women.

Edited to add: The whole point of Mass Effect is that Commander Shepard achieves all of this because he/she is awesome, not because he/she is a man or woman. 

Modifié par centauri2002, 06 juin 2011 - 02:49 .

[Kronner]

Pups_of_war_76 wrote...

You misunderstand.

Prohibitions against female combat troopers in the U.S. are often justified by stating that females are incapable of fulfilling the physical requirements of the job, which is false.

Absolute peak strength and speed are not necessary.

I've met more special forces types who are kind of lean, wiry dudes with a ton of stamina than who are musclebound lunks. You've already got male soldiers who are less strong than other male soldiers, so applying relativism in this context doesn't make a lot of sense. 

The standards should be set at an even level, and any person who can exceed that level should be able to serve in any capacity for which they are qualified. 

OK, even if there was a female who could pass all physical and psychical tests (I wouldn't bet on that just yet), would she be accepted/respected by all the men in a combat situation? It's not a good idea to have mixed Special Forces units. As far as I know, women are given the opportunity to join all but the elite units, and there is a good reason for that.

[MDT1]

Montezuma IV wrote...

Then penalize the men. Not the women.

Stay realistic, as long as the majority of the units would still consist of men its just unpractical to penalize them and not the few women.

Modifié par MDT1, 06 juin 2011 - 03:03 .

[Pups_of_war_76]

Kronner wrote...

Pups_of_war_76 wrote...

You misunderstand.

Prohibitions against female combat troopers in the U.S. are often justified by stating that females are incapable of fulfilling the physical requirements of the job, which is false.

Absolute peak strength and speed are not necessary.

I've met more special forces types who are kind of lean, wiry dudes with a ton of stamina than who are musclebound lunks. You've already got male soldiers who are less strong than other male soldiers, so applying relativism in this context doesn't make a lot of sense. 

The standards should be set at an even level, and any person who can exceed that level should be able to serve in any capacity for which they are qualified. 

OK, even if there was a female who could pass all physical and psychical tests (I wouldn't bet on that just yet), would she be accepted/respected by all the men in a combat situation? 

That question probably has more to do with the crux of the matter than the physical thing does (there ARE female athletes and such who are more physically capable than some Green Berets, so whether it's possible shouldn't be an issue). It's also more or less the same thing that is used to justify Don't Ask, Don't tell. While I'm confident that soldiers would eventually learn to Deal With It despite the fact that the army and marines draw a disproportionately high number of recruits from conservative demographics, it's understandable that higher-ups would want to avoid potential headaches, even if I would prefer it if they ordered people with problems serving alongside women or gays to get over it, and come what may. 

I don't really want to get into it in terms of the modern military since there are too many variables, including the existing cohesion of the unit outside of the gender context, the way initiation of new members is handled, and its composition. I think most of us can agree that it probably wouldn't be as much of a problem in an ostensibly liberal and egalitarian futuristic setting, just as it isn't a prohibitively big issue for the European countries who use female troopers.

Modifié par Pups_of_war_76, 06 juin 2011 - 03:06 .

[Sphynx118]

Montezuma IV wrote...

Kronner wrote...

Pups_of_war_76 wrote...

You misunderstand.

Prohibitions against female combat troopers in the U.S. are often justified by stating that females are incapable of fulfilling the physical requirements of the job, which is false.

Absolute peak strength and speed are not necessary.

I've met more special forces types who are kind of lean, wiry dudes with a ton of stamina than who are musclebound lunks. You've already got male soldiers who are less strong than other male soldiers, so applying relativism in this context doesn't make a lot of sense. 

The standards should be set at an even level, and any person who can exceed that level should be able to serve in any capacity for which they are qualified. 

OK, even if there was a female who could pass all physical and psychical tests (I wouldn't bet on that just yet), would she be accepted/respected by all the men in a combat situation? It's not a good idea to have mixed Special Forces units. As far as I know, women are given the opportunity to join all but the elite units, and there is a good reason for that.

Then penalize the men. Not the women.

Penalizing wouldnt help. Its human nature to be afraid/suspicious of things out of the ordinary.

If i told you that a seagull had passed a drivers test would you trust it to drive your kids to school every morning?

[Kronner]

Pups_of_war_76 wrote...

That question probably has more to do with the crux of the matter than the physical thing does (there ARE
female athletes and such who are more physically capable than some Green Berets, so whether it's possible shouldn't be an issue). It's also more or less the same thing that is used to justify Don't Ask, Don't tell.
While I'm confident that soldiers would eventually learn to Deal With It despite the fact that the army and marines draw a disproportionately  high number of recruits from conservative demographics, it's understandable that higher-ups would want to avoid potential headaches, even if I would prefer it if they ordered people with problems serving alongside women or gays to get over it, and come what may. 

I don't really want to get into it in terms of the modern military since there are too many variables, including the existing cohesion of the unit outside of the gender context, the way initiation of new members is handled, and its composition. I think most of us can agree that it probably wouldn't be as much of a problem in an ostensibly liberal and egalitarian futuristic setting, just as it isn't a prohibitively big issue for the European countries who use female troopers.

If everything was equal (physical tests, mainly) for both men and women, the actual number of women in the Army would drop (since females would have to directly compete against men, and most women would not meet the universal standards, and obviously there would be less promotions for women). Also, like it or not, men are physically tougher. It is one thing to run 3 miles as fast as a man on a Sunday afternoon, but running the same distance in a full gear with an injured buddy on your back after four days in some hellhole is a whole different animal. This is not sexist or anything, but females in Special Forces would pose a danger to the whole unit. Of course, there may be an exception here and there, but unless you advocate special (not equal) rights for women, it is not possible for them to serve in Special Forces, otherwise ALL women would be subject to combat roles. And do you honestly belive they'd like that? So now, there are double standards (women benefit from that), but in return women are not gonna get into Special Forces anytime soon. I am glad, to be honest with you.

Modifié par Kronner, 06 juin 2011 - 03:13 .

[MDT1]

Montezuma IV wrote...

MDT1 wrote...

Montezuma IV wrote...

Then penalize the men. Not the women.

Stay realistic, as long as the majority of the units would still consist of men its just unpractical to penalize them and not the few women.

So the Gay Rights Movement. Stay realistic, right?

Yes.

I don't see the government disband all their special forces because the male members can't handle a women in their unit.

[Shadow_Soul]

I almost joined the millitary, I'm one of the women who is fast, strong, smart, etc. I scare men sh*tless at points (now and in the past) and women alike, note that the men are bigger then me, or something. I am just saying, and I've been told, I'd be an amazing marine, or an amzing bodyguard, or something like that, I fight, I kickass, that's what I do.

Also, because I just remembered this: I once had a sex-ed teacher say that boys are broken. She said "Boys are Y, while girls are X...so think of Y as X with a leg broken off. Therefore, boys are broken." so, there. You men are really just broken women, acording to that teacher.

[Sphynx118]

Kronner wrote...

Montezuma IV wrote...

Then penalize the men. Not the women.

If everything was equal (physical tests, mainly) for both men and women, the actual number of women in the Army would drop (since females would have to directly compete against men, and obviously there would be less promotions for women). Also, like it or not, men are physically tougher. It is one thing to run 3 miles as fast as a men on a Sunday afternoon, but running the same distance with an injured buddy on your back after four days in some hellhole is a whole different animal. This is not sexist or anything, but females in Special Forces would pose a danger to the whole unit. Of course, there may be an exception here and there, but unless you advocate special (not equal) rights for women, it is not possible for them to serve in Special Forces, otherwise ALL women would be subject to combat roles. And do you honestly belive they'd like that?

Idd. Men and women are different biologically and mentally. Thats why all this " we are really exactly the same" crap that some people like to shout is bull.

[Sphynx118]

Shadow_Soul wrote...

I almost joined the millitary, I'm one of the women who is fast, strong, smart, etc. I scare men sh*tless at points (now and in the past) and women alike, note that the men are bigger then me, or something. I am just saying, and I've been told, I'd be an amazing marine, or an amzing bodyguard, or something like that, I fight, I kickass, that's what I do.

Also, because I just remembered this: I once had a sex-ed teacher say that boys are broken. She said "Boys are Y, while girls are X...so think of Y as X with a leg broken off. Therefore, boys are broken." so, there. You men are really just broken women, acording to that teacher.

Well you dont lack selfconfidence at least. You must excuse me if i dont take you seriously. Im sure you are all those things in your head.

[MDT1]

Shadow_Soul wrote...

Also, because I just remembered this: I once had a sex-ed teacher say that boys are broken. She said "Boys are Y, while girls are X...so think of Y as X with a leg broken off. Therefore, boys are broken." so, there. You men are really just broken women, acording to that teacher.

I know where this comes from in an evolutionary point of view but saying it like that is as much simplification as saying, men have still one X but also an additional upgrade, the Y.

Modifié par MDT1, 06 juin 2011 - 03:15 .

[Sphynx118]

Montezuma IV wrote...

Sphynx118 wrote...

Kronner wrote...

Montezuma IV wrote...

Then penalize the men. Not the women.

If everything was equal (physical tests, mainly) for both men and women, the actual number of women in the Army would drop (since females would have to directly compete against men, and obviously there would be less promotions for women). Also, like it or not, men are physically tougher. It is one thing to run 3 miles as fast as a men on a Sunday afternoon, but running the same distance with an injured buddy on your back after four days in some hellhole is a whole different animal. This is not sexist or anything, but females in Special Forces would pose a danger to the whole unit. Of course, there may be an exception here and there, but unless you advocate special (not equal) rights for women, it is not possible for them to serve in Special Forces, otherwise ALL women would be subject to combat roles. And do you honestly belive they'd like that?

Idd. Men and women are different biologically and mentally. Thats why all this " we are really exactly the same" crap that some people like to shout is bull.

We exaggerate differences. That's how racism exists still today.

This is also true. We like to exagerate these differences and thats wrong. But nevertheless there are differences. Thats a fact.

[Shadow_Soul]

Sphynx118 wrote...

Shadow_Soul wrote...

I almost joined the millitary, I'm one of the women who is fast, strong, smart, etc. I scare men sh*tless at points (now and in the past) and women alike, note that the men are bigger then me, or something. I am just saying, and I've been told, I'd be an amazing marine, or an amzing bodyguard, or something like that, I fight, I kickass, that's what I do.

Also, because I just remembered this: I once had a sex-ed teacher say that boys are broken. She said "Boys are Y, while girls are X...so think of Y as X with a leg broken off. Therefore, boys are broken." so, there. You men are really just broken women, acording to that teacher.

Well you dont lack selfconfidence at least. You must excuse me if i dont take you seriously. Im sure you are all those things in your head.

Try me, ok. I've been in countless fights, alright? Ask anybody that knows me, they won't lie, even if they dislike me. I am not a weak little girl, I am millitary from my roots, I do not back down. They aren't all in my head, I'm not over confident, got it? I mean, it's not like you really know me, now do you?

[Shadow_Soul]

MDT1 wrote...

Shadow_Soul wrote...

Also, because I just remembered this: I once had a sex-ed teacher say that boys are broken. She said "Boys are Y, while girls are X...so think of Y as X with a leg broken off. Therefore, boys are broken." so, there. You men are really just broken women, acording to that teacher.

I know where this comes from in an evolutionary point of view but saying it like that is as much simplification as saying, men have still one X but also an additional upgrade, the Y.

Fair point. This was like when I was in 6th grade, and almost all the girls looked like they would throw up (the looks on their faces XD) so I think the teacher was trying to be simple, and make them not vomit or something. Idk, really (none of it bothered me, I already knew most of it, my parents told me)

[Sphynx118]

Shadow_Soul wrote...

Sphynx118 wrote...

Shadow_Soul wrote...

I almost joined the millitary, I'm one of the women who is fast, strong, smart, etc. I scare men sh*tless at points (now and in the past) and women alike, note that the men are bigger then me, or something. I am just saying, and I've been told, I'd be an amazing marine, or an amzing bodyguard, or something like that, I fight, I kickass, that's what I do.

Also, because I just remembered this: I once had a sex-ed teacher say that boys are broken. She said "Boys are Y, while girls are X...so think of Y as X with a leg broken off. Therefore, boys are broken." so, there. You men are really just broken women, acording to that teacher.

Well you dont lack selfconfidence at least. You must excuse me if i dont take you seriously. Im sure you are all those things in your head.

Try me, ok. I've been in countless fights, alright? Ask anybody that knows me, they won't lie, even if they dislike me. I am not a weak little girl, I am millitary from my roots, I do not back down. They aren't all in my head, I'm not over confident, got it? I mean, it's not like you really know me, now do you?

No i dont know you personally.
But you show clear signs of being a compulsive liar. The way you write gives it away. If you are undiagnosed then you wouldnt know it. Just saying;)

[Shadow_Soul]

Sphynx118 wrote...

Shadow_Soul wrote...

Sphynx118 wrote...

Shadow_Soul wrote...

I almost joined the millitary, I'm one of the women who is fast, strong, smart, etc. I scare men sh*tless at points (now and in the past) and women alike, note that the men are bigger then me, or something. I am just saying, and I've been told, I'd be an amazing marine, or an amzing bodyguard, or something like that, I fight, I kickass, that's what I do.

Also, because I just remembered this: I once had a sex-ed teacher say that boys are broken. She said "Boys are Y, while girls are X...so think of Y as X with a leg broken off. Therefore, boys are broken." so, there. You men are really just broken women, acording to that teacher.

Well you dont lack selfconfidence at least. You must excuse me if i dont take you seriously. Im sure you are all those things in your head.

Try me, ok. I've been in countless fights, alright? Ask anybody that knows me, they won't lie, even if they dislike me. I am not a weak little girl, I am millitary from my roots, I do not back down. They aren't all in my head, I'm not over confident, got it? I mean, it's not like you really know me, now do you?

No i dont know you personally.
But you show clear signs of being a compulsive liar. The way you write gives it away. If you are undiagnosed then you wouldnt know it. Just saying;)

I don't lie about this stuff, alright? I give the cold, hard truth. I don't lie much what so ever, really. I'm quite honest, more so then others. I just mean, that if a person doesn't actually know me, they should say this stuff. That's all I mean.

[Pups_of_war_76]

Well this is deteriorating rapidly.

What was this thread about again?

[MDT1]

Montezuma IV wrote...

MDT1 wrote...

Montezuma IV wrote...

MDT1 wrote...

Montezuma IV wrote...

Then penalize the men. Not the women.

Stay realistic, as long as the majority of the units would still consist of men its just unpractical to penalize them and not the few women.

So the Gay Rights Movement. Stay realistic, right?

Yes.

I don't see the government disband all their special forces because the male members can't handle a women in their unit.

Okay......so all minorities should just stand down now :

No,

but to successfully change something you need to win the majority at some time and not penalize them.

[Clonedzero]

this is just further proof that femshep isnt real