191 réponses à ce sujet

[Computer_God91]

TS2Aggie wrote...

That's the thing, though: you *don't* know for certain that a man would automatically be better than a woman in a combative role simply because he has a penis. Not all men are brawny and physical and not all women are 'shrinking violets.'

This isn't about having a penis, its about our physical build. No, not all men are brawny hulks, and they shouldn't be on the battlefield if they don't meet the requirements.

Modifié par Computer_God91, 18 septembre 2011 - 08:34 .

[Carfax]

TS2Aggie wrote...

They may have been considered valid at the time but even today's modern women have proven that they are more than capable to pick up a gun and fight in combat scenarios. One would think that 170 years into the future that would be even more true.

You have to be careful with what you're saying.  No country with an active Military uses women for direct combat operations.  The U.S, U.K, Israel etc have all done testing to ascertain whether women could be used for direct combat, and the results were unanimously no..

To understand why this is, you have to be familiar with biological gender differences when it comes to physical performance.  Not only is the amount of muscle mass in our bodies affected by our gender, but our lung capacity, amount of red blood cells, skin thickness, bone density.....and even our reaction times.  Men have an edge over women in all of these areas, simply by virtue of being male.

As for your immediately dismissing genetic enhancement, you don't get to choose what parts the opposing side of view is 'allowed' to use to defend their point. Genetic enhancement works for both genders and is a legitimate reason that women could be considered even more physically capable in the future than they are now. Don't apply the mentality of a certain faction of people in today's society to that of the one illustrated in the Mass Effect future, because they are not the same.

Again, like I said, for genetic enhancement (as understood by the ME setting) would not be capable of increasing the performance of women to a degree significant enough for them to rival even non genetically enhanced men.

That falls under genetic engineering, which is completely different, and I'm certan, illegal as well.

[Zkyire]

TS2Aggie wrote...

That's the thing, though: you *don't* know for certain that a man would automatically be better than a woman in a combative role simply because he has a penis. Not all men are brawny and physical and not all women are 'shrinking violets.'

See the entirity of human miitary history for the answer.

Of course there are some short men, and some tall women.

But for this to apply to Shepard, she'd have to be like 6'5"-7' tall.

Even a 6' tall woman would still be weaker than a 6' tall man. Weaker meaning not able to carry as much of a load, and having lower running speed (even if they had the same leg length, less muscle in the legs means less speed).

There's a reason why men and women athletics are separated.

Modifié par IEatWhatIPoo, 18 septembre 2011 - 08:36 .

[Computer_God91]

Carfax wrote...

You have to be careful with what you're saying.  No country with an active Military uses women for direct combat operations.  The U.S, U.K, Israel etc have all done testing to ascertain whether women could be used for direct combat, and the results were unanimously no..

To understand why this is, you have to be familiar with biological gender differences when it comes to physical performance.  Not only is the amount of muscle mass in our bodies affected by our gender, but our lung capacity, amount of red blood cells, skin thickness, bone density.....and even our reaction times.  Men have an edge over women in all of these areas, simply by virtue of being male.

This and the fact that men would not want to see a woman get gunned down before their eyes or blown up in an explosion.

Modifié par Computer_God91, 18 septembre 2011 - 08:37 .

[Aggie Punbot]

Computer_God91 wrote...

TS2Aggie wrote...

Just because men "have the edge" in a physical contest doesn't mean that women aren't capable.Besides, physicality isn't the only thing that matters in combat; intelligence, tactical strategy, mechanical eptitude, weapon accuracy, storm speed; those are all things that don't 'require' one to be a brawny leviathan to perform and are all vital to effective combative effectiveness.

You also need to have a strong will to handle all the violence that comes with the position. I'd say men would have an easier time dealing with it then women. I'm not saying women can't, I'm just saying that men would have an easier time because that's how men are raised.

First of all, again, you're putting your own modern day bias into your argument and it's just not valid. Mass Effect 2 takes place 175 years into the future. How men have been "raised" is likely much different than how moden day men have been.

It's rather silly of you to claim that men are inherently much better than women at something that is not tied to a specific chromozone. Men and women are equally as capable of reasoning and dealing with stress as the other gender (and that is something that is true today, much less talking about the future).

[didymos1120]

Carfax wrote...

The U.S, U.K, Israel etc have all done testing to ascertain whether women could be used for direct combat, and the results were unanimously no..

Wrong.  The IDF most certainly does put women in combat roles. 


ETA: You may also want to brush up on your research into this topic a bit:

http://en.wikipedia....tary_by_country

Modifié par didymos1120, 18 septembre 2011 - 08:45 .

[Computer_God91]

TS2Aggie wrote...

Computer_God91 wrote...

TS2Aggie wrote...

Just because men "have the edge" in a physical contest doesn't mean that women aren't capable.Besides, physicality isn't the only thing that matters in combat; intelligence, tactical strategy, mechanical eptitude, weapon accuracy, storm speed; those are all things that don't 'require' one to be a brawny leviathan to perform and are all vital to effective combative effectiveness.

You also need to have a strong will to handle all the violence that comes with the position. I'd say men would have an easier time dealing with it then women. I'm not saying women can't, I'm just saying that men would have an easier time because that's how men are raised.

First of all, again, you're putting your own modern day bias into your argument and it's just not valid. Mass Effect 2 takes place 175 years into the future. How men have been "raised" is likely much different than how moden day men have been.

From birth men and women are raised completely different. It's been this way through the entire human history, that will not change in 175 years.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Computer_God91 wrote...

TS2Aggie wrote...

Just because men "have the edge" in a physical contest doesn't mean that women aren't capable.Besides, physicality isn't the only thing that matters in combat; intelligence, tactical strategy, mechanical eptitude, weapon accuracy, storm speed; those are all things that don't 'require' one to be a brawny leviathan to perform and are all vital to effective combative effectiveness.

You also need to have a strong will to handle all the violence that comes with the position. I'd say men would have an easier time dealing with it then women. I'm not saying women can't, I'm just saying that men would have an easier time because that's how men are raised.

And they don't want women in the warrior role because of one thing. When we're in the role of protecting our young we're absolutely brutal about it. Humans are the only species that trains its females to feel inferior in this role.

Without Shepard as the "alpha male" we are left with these other alpha males -- Hackett, Udina, TIM, among the humans. Anderson is a beta. Every other male we meet is either a beta or omega. Hock was an alpha but he's dead.

Alpha females other than femShep: Miranda, Kasumi, and Ashley are betas. Jack is an omega. The other alpha females are non-human.

[Carfax]

didymos1120 wrote...

Wrong.  The IDF most certainly does put women in combat roles. 


ETA: You may also want to brush up on your research into this topic a bit:

http://en.wikipedia....tary_by_country

LOL, perhaps you should do your own research instead of resorting to Wiki.  First off, I knew that Israel puts women in combat battalions. 

I also know that these combat battalions are typically reserved for border duty, as it says in the very link you posted.  Border duty (especially with peaceful neighbors) is hardly direct combat operations, and was simply a way for the Israeli Military to appease the feminists by saying that women could now be integrated into combat units....yet they still don't do any direct combat operations.

As for the other Wiki link, most of those countries don't have active Militaries that engage in wartime activities on a regular basis to the extent that U.S, Israel etc do.

Modifié par Carfax, 18 septembre 2011 - 08:56 .

[Aggie Punbot]

Computer_God91 wrote...

This and the fact that men would not want to see a woman get gunned down before their eyes or blown up in an explosion.

1). That assumes that modern day sexism still exists in 2185.
2). That's really the fault of the men and not the women.

[Dave of Canada]

TS2Aggie wrote...

2). That's really the fault of the men and not the women.

How dare you get gunned down infront of me!

[didymos1120]

TS2Aggie wrote...

Computer_God91 wrote...

This and the fact that men would not want to see a woman get gunned down before their eyes or blown up in an explosion.

1). That assumes that modern day sexism still exists in 2185.
2). That's really the fault of the men and not the women.

The history of warfare also demonstrates that that isn't quite true anyway.

[Sepewrath]

Shepard and their actions within this trilogy is each players own, however what they choose to do with Shepard outside of it is there business. It doesn't invalidate what you have done in your game, so there is no right path for the player to take. If they wanted to take Shepard in a new series and make them a very specific character, there is nothing wrong with that as that is no longer the players character. New series, means new rules, what you did in a completely different series is relevant only to that series of games.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Carfax wrote...

 Border duty (especially with peaceful neighbors) is hardly direct combat operations.

Peaceful neighbors? Are you serious? Someone is out of touch with reality.


-Polite

[Jafroboy]

canonizing revan was a dick move. I hope they dont do it to Shepard, and if they do i will ignore it anyway. Everyone deserves thier own shepard.

[Computer_God91]

TS2Aggie wrote...
That assumes that modern day sexism still exists in 2185.

It's not sexism if its a fact that man are built to fit combat roles better then women. People these days love to throw words around that they don't understand.

Just so we are clear I am not saying women unable to be in combat roles, because they have the ability to. I'm just saying that males are better suited for it.

[Carfax]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Carfax wrote...

 Border duty (especially with peaceful neighbors) is hardly direct combat operations.

Peaceful neighbors? Are you serious? Someone is out of touch with reality.


-Polite

I'm not out of touch with reality, just more knowledgeable about recent events.  The "Caracal battalion" in the wiki link has border patrol duties on the Egyptian border.  Before the fall of Mubarak, the Egyptian border was quite peaceful as tensions between Egypt and Israel had mostly dissipated after the signing of the Israeli Egyptian peace treaty.

[Aggie Punbot]

Computer_God91 wrote...

It's not sexism if its a fact that man are built to fit combat roles better then women. People these days love to throw words around that they don't understand.

Oh, I understand it quite well, thanks. I've seen a lot of "feminists" use it as a way to "empower" women and it ticks me off. That doesn't mean that I'll overlook men being sexist towards women, though.

Just so we are clear I am not saying women unable to be in combat roles, because they have the ability to. I'm just saying that males are better suited for it.

And I'm saying that you can't make broad generalizations like that. Comabt roles need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

[RAF1940]

The series should just end after ME3.

[Computer_God91]

TS2Aggie wrote...

Computer_God91 wrote...

It's not sexism if its a fact that man are built to fit combat roles better then women. People these days love to throw words around that they don't understand.

Oh, I understand it quite well, thanks. I've seen a lot of "feminists" use it as a way to "empower" women and it ticks me off. That doesn't mean that I'll overlook men being sexist towards women, though.

I'm not trying to be or sound sexist, all I'm trying to do is state facts. I think Sexism/Racism/whateverism is plan stupid. Sterotypes mean nothing and I do my best not to use sterotypes for the basis of my opinions. I think some behavior is just men trying to protect women because that was and is our duty as males.

TS2Aggie wrote...

Just so we are clear I am not saying women unable to be in combat roles, because they have the ability to. I'm just saying that males are better suited for it.

And I'm saying that you can't make broad generalizations like that. Comabt roles need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. 

All I mean is that the vast majority of females wouldn't be as suitable as the vast majority of males for combat roles. I'm not trying to generalize it because some woman can kick the sh!t out of some of the tougher males and would work just fine in combat roles



 like Vasquez from Aliens, I know she could probably beat everyones ass on that ship but I still would rather see a male in combat then a female, it's just awkward, I don't know.

[Dunmer of Redoran]

If Shepard is canonized, does that mean St. Nicholas of Myra and St. Augustine of Hippo will accompany him into the final battle with the Reapers as squadmates?

[Aggie Punbot]

jreezy wrote...

Another Male vs Female in regards to combat effectiveness debate? There was a thread involving FemShep that was very similar to this.

No wonder I missed it; I generally tend to avoid femShep threads like the plague.

[Collider]

TS2Aggie wrote...

Computer_God91 wrote...

This and the fact that men would not want to see a woman get gunned down before their eyes or blown up in an explosion.

1). That assumes that modern day sexism still exists in 2185.
2). That's really the fault of the men and not the women.

Exactly.

And although I wish they'd make female shepard look more the part of a soldier, I find all of the criticism of being able to play as a female Shepard nonsense.

[Ophiskc]

Computer_God91 wrote...

You also need to have a strong will to handle all the violence that comes with the position. I'd say men would have an easier time dealing with it then women. I'm not saying women can't, I'm just saying that men would have an easier time because that's how men are raised.

I have to disagree on that, (this days) while men are normally more capable of a better physical performance regarding violence, women are more capable to handle it in a psychological level.
At least in police operations when there's a casualty on the team, on those situations women tend to step into a leading role and push the ones being affected to stay focus, and i find that interesting.

Anyway, this thread is becoming a fail and once again a sexist discussion. Remember the theme is "Canonizing Shepard", not what men or women are capable to or not to do.