Wednesday, June 19, 2013

SURVEY TIME AGAIN - This shit just got real. Real ugly, that is.

I am shamelessly reposting this from my facebook to here even though the only people that will probably read it, already have....on facebook. 

Here's the link that inspired this particular rant.  It's not so much the article but some of the schmos that commented.  Even though a lot of them are right, it doesn't diminish my desire to smack them about the face with a soggy banana.

Women in Combat - Huff post article

"I don't usually do this but today, I can't help it. To be honest, I don't know how to feel. My instinct is to lash out in defense of equal rights (much as I lashed out at my husband when he said this was nonsense last night). First, I'm sorry to him for getting so immediately angry. There's something about this argument that is so distasteful - I can't quite put my finger on it. I *think* what I believe is this: there are situations where a woman's presence in a special forces situation could be hugely beneficial and I think said woman should be afforded the same type of training so that she is prepared to face the same dangers. That said, I also think that if a female is to hold the same exact position as Navy Seal or Army Ranger, she MUST be able to adhere to the same physical standards - standards that are currently (for most women) impossible to uphold due to our physical makeup. 

So, I'm conflicted. I get the counterargument to this decision and I agree with a lot of it. BUT and it's a big BUT, I completely disagree with the vitriol behind a lot of the comments people are leaving in response to this decision. War is a disgusting, dangerous and divisive endeavor - and one that women have been a part of in some form or fashion throughout history. For some to claim that we are living in some la-la land where only men are disfigured or killed in battle is ludicrous. Look at how many women have fought and died for our country in the last 10 years. There should be thoughtful consideration when making these decisions and any acceptance of ANYONE into a special forces unit should be something that is dealt with on a case by case basis and if that person does not qualify, they're out.

The debate will rage on and I, no doubt, will be one of the many who waffle. When it comes to allowing women on the front lines however, my vote is 100% yes. Just because we have periods or frequent UTIs doesn't mean we can't protect our country - in fact, I'd argue that all the shit we go through as women makes us stronger in a lot of ways. I'm not so off the reservation that I don't realize that our emotional makeup can also be significantly different than a man's but not every woman is built of the same stuff. There are men who are clearly not cut out for combat either but that doesn't mean we should sideline them as a rule. The special forces issue will continue to be just issue.

All this little girl can do is speak from experience and the only experience I have that is similar is when I applied for several police departments. The only one that even came close to being challenging physically was the Austin Police Dept. I understand that they've changed the testing to "accommodate" female recruits but I can happily inform you that when I tested, I completed the only physical test they offered - and I did so faster than 80% of the other recruits. That was just one test though and I'm sure that I couldn't have faced and overcome every challenge that my male colleagues would have handled with relative ease. But there are things I/We do better...physically and emotionally so I think there's a need for inclusion....I just can't figure out how it would work.

So here I am - taking no real stance. I'd be a horrible president. I'd kinda like people to just stop saying such mean shit about women though - is that too much to ask??"

NOW - What do you ladies and germs think?  Gimme all ya got...I can take it.  Well, I might cry but I will get really angry and throw a barbell at you first.