You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 05, 2016, 02:35:32 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Female conscription  (Read 2195 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BeorningTopic starter

Female conscription
« on: October 15, 2014, 12:41:31 PM »
I just read on one news site that Norwegian army (which still gets its recruits from conscription / draft) has decided that it will start drafting women. Previously, while the women were allowed to serve in the Norwegian army, they weren't subject to compulsory military service like the men. Now it's going to change and both men and women will be subject to the draft.

I believe that Norway's army would be the only European army to do a thing like that - and I think that there aren't many militaries in the world that draft women, overall. Actually, the only other army doing this that I can name is Israel's.

What do you think about it? Is it a natural thing to happen or is it gender equality going too far?

Personally, I'm all for it. It only makes sense, if we assume that both sexes have the same societal obligations...

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Female conscription
« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2014, 12:52:49 PM »
I'm against conscription in general, but if it's an accepted thing then it should apply equally regardless of gender.

(Amusing anecdote: I remember a few years back, the news was simultaneously reporting that the US military was considering whether women should serve in combat, and the Canadian military was asking what its troops want in a military-issue bra.)

Offline BeorningTopic starter

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #2 on: October 15, 2014, 01:48:34 PM »
I'm against conscription in general, but if it's an accepted thing then it should apply equally regardless of gender.

I'm of exactly the same opinion.

I kind of wish we had this kind of discussion back here... unfortunately, there was no time for it. Our military actually started admitting voluntary female recruits only the late 1990s - and it was considered a big change then (heck, the man who is currently our president? He was the Defense Minister back then and he actually claimed that women shouldn't be allowed into officer schools etc. He claimed it was a threat to "female dignity" etc.). And then, only ten years later, our military dropped conscription altogether. So, there was no time for discussing the possibility of conscripting women...

But I'd really, really like to see this kind of discussion. I'd love to hear what our feminists would say about that...  ;D

Quote
(Amusing anecdote: I remember a few years back, the news was simultaneously reporting that the US military was considering whether women should serve in combat, and the Canadian military was asking what its troops want in a military-issue bra.)

Personally, I hope that the Canadian female soldiers asked that a military bra would have none of these awful ribbons and bows that plague ordinary bras...

Offline consortium11

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #3 on: October 15, 2014, 01:51:57 PM »
Personally, I hope that the Canadian female soldiers asked that a military bra would have none of these awful ribbons and bows that plague ordinary bras...

<Not entirely serious>

Surely they'd be like this:


Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Female conscription
« Reply #4 on: October 15, 2014, 02:11:48 PM »
Consortium, how did you get that document? That's a military secret!

(In all seriousness, IIRC the general consensus was "Supportive as all hell - no, more than that - and can we get some weather-variant options for warm and cold climates, please?")

Beorning: That's an argument that's always confused me. How exactly is it a threat to "female dignity" to put them in the upper levels of hierarchy? Particularly when they're already in the lower levels? It seems to me that this is exactly backward.

Offline Steampunkette

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #5 on: October 15, 2014, 02:17:39 PM »
Feminists have been pushing in the US to get women on the front lines for decades. We don't want to feel like we're not allowed to give as much to the nation as the men can. Though, always, there's pushback because women are "Too Frail" or "Too Weak" to cope. Personally I think that indicates our Military's standards of soldiery are too freaking high.

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Female conscription
« Reply #6 on: October 15, 2014, 02:20:01 PM »
<Not entirely serious>

Surely they'd be like this:




From a review of a Lara Croft game:

"The key point of the game is to make us stare at Lara's bazookas, and I'm not thinking of her assault firearms."  ;)

OT: yes, if the army in a country that aspires to become gender equal is to run on compulsory draft, then gender shouldn't make any big difference. I'm not sure it's viable to have women trained for all kinds of combat positions, and that's a rather different issue, but gender equal draft really makes sense.

Offline BeorningTopic starter

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #7 on: October 15, 2014, 02:33:20 PM »
Surely they'd be like this:



Heh. There was an android in one of the Space Quest games with that kind of equipment...

Beorning: That's an argument that's always confused me. How exactly is it a threat to "female dignity" to put them in the upper levels of hierarchy? Particularly when they're already in the lower levels? It seems to me that this is exactly backward.

Hey, don't ask me. I agree this kind of thing is a total bull... Still, that was exactly the position of Bronisław Komorowski: he claimed that women could be military doctors or nurses... or, maybe, work in the logistics. But women as commanders? Nah, threat to female dignity and all that...

What can I say? Komorowski was sexist toward female soldiers back then... and I'd say he's that way nowadays, too. Not too long before he became our President, he was visiting another country (I forgot... was it Denmark?) and he was invited to see a military ship. Upon arriving, he spotted some female staff members and he went *on record* with jokes on how ugly they were... *facepalms*

Feminists have been pushing in the US to get women on the front lines for decades. We don't want to feel like we're not allowed to give as much to the nation as the men can.

Well, the sexist part in me does wonder whether women are as good in combat as men...  :-( But we've had this discussion already...

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Female conscription
« Reply #8 on: October 15, 2014, 02:46:29 PM »
Well, there's two parts to that question:

1. Do women have a harder time developing violence and aggression?

I honestly don't have a solid, data-supported answer to this, but even if the answer is yes, then the fact that we socialize girls and women to be meek and docile and nurtureing is certain to be a factor. In short, the solution to this problem is still less sexism, not more.

2. Are "women" and "men" even useful categories when talking about this?

They're extremely goddamn broad. I can name men who would be an active detriment on a battlefield, and women I'd trust more than the overwhelming majority of men to get me out of a lethal situation. In this, as in most things, even if there is a difference of ability, it's two mostly-overlapping bell curves - any difference is only to be found at the extreme edges.

Offline Silk

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #9 on: October 15, 2014, 02:47:05 PM »
From what I recall one of the main reasons for women not being in frontline roles actually has nothing to do with Women, but male instinct in regards to women in dangerous situations. It's hard enough for a soldier to see a close friend get injured or die in battle. But when almost all male instinct is to protect women in such a situation. That leads to a hornets nest worth of logistical, strategic and conflict issues.

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Female conscription
« Reply #10 on: October 15, 2014, 02:55:11 PM »
Instinct != socialization. Again, the solution is less sexism, not more.

Offline Lustful Bride

  • "Logic is for Squares."
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Gender: Female
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Female conscription
« Reply #11 on: October 15, 2014, 02:55:44 PM »
I'm against conscription in general, but if it's an accepted thing then it should apply equally regardless of gender.


I am sort of the same, it should be a choice to serve in ones army, not forced. Unless its something like the damn aliens are invading and we are all screwed if we don't get a lot of people fighting them. Or some major catastrophy.

I personally am undecided on women in the army, if they can do it and prove they can meet the standards then go for it.  ;D

But it shouldn't become like a handout or something where every unit is mandated to have female soldiers.

Offline As Day Fades

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #12 on: October 15, 2014, 08:23:50 PM »
Many people will sign up for military service on their own. Many more will stand and volunteer for their country in a time of need. My feeling is that, if a country runs out of both of those groups of people, that should be it. When you've reached a point where you have to force people to fight, perhaps that says something about what the general populace really wants.

So I'm very much of the mindset that there shouldn't be drafts/conscriptions. But if there are, they need to be gender neutral. It's one of the sucky things that comes with equality, gals - if guys can be forced to sign up and serve in combat, so should you.

I'm what's called a 'conscientious objector,' meaning it's against my personal belief to be forced to fight, so in America if I'm called up for some reason that will exclude me from duty. There's two levels to the law, depending on what your belief is - if you're against the 'killing' aspect you don't have to participate in combat but may still be forced to serve in other roles, or if you're against 'this whole war in general' you're protected from the draft entirely.

From what I recall one of the main reasons for women not being in frontline roles actually has nothing to do with Women, but male instinct in regards to women in dangerous situations. It's hard enough for a soldier to see a close friend get injured or die in battle. But when almost all male instinct is to protect women in such a situation. That leads to a hornets nest worth of logistical, strategic and conflict issues.
You're not wrong, I've thought the same myself and have read in-depth discussions of such before, but it bottom lines to something we just need to get over as a people. If we catered to 'male instinct,' a woman's place would still be in the home.

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Female conscription
« Reply #13 on: October 15, 2014, 09:22:42 PM »
Well, I think Silk has a really good point and I'm not sure bringing women into let's say unit combat positions as a regular thing is viable - allowing it on a volunteer basis is a whole different thing. No matter social conditioning I don't think it would have worked mentally for the soldiers involved to have, like, 30% women among the ground troops at let's say the D-Day landings. A future war might not look exactly like that of course, but the group dynamics of survival involved are essentially the same.

Offline Silk

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #14 on: October 16, 2014, 02:52:20 PM »
Many people will sign up for military service on their own. Many more will stand and volunteer for their country in a time of need. My feeling is that, if a country runs out of both of those groups of people, that should be it. When you've reached a point where you have to force people to fight, perhaps that says something about what the general populace really wants.

So I'm very much of the mindset that there shouldn't be drafts/conscriptions. But if there are, they need to be gender neutral. It's one of the sucky things that comes with equality, gals - if guys can be forced to sign up and serve in combat, so should you.

I'm what's called a 'conscientious objector,' meaning it's against my personal belief to be forced to fight, so in America if I'm called up for some reason that will exclude me from duty. There's two levels to the law, depending on what your belief is - if you're against the 'killing' aspect you don't have to participate in combat but may still be forced to serve in other roles, or if you're against 'this whole war in general' you're protected from the draft entirely.
You're not wrong, I've thought the same myself and have read in-depth discussions of such before, but it bottom lines to something we just need to get over as a people. If we catered to 'male instinct,' a woman's place would still be in the home.

Perhaps, but were talking about a situation that people are very likely to die and as such all measures to make sure that doesn't happen are considered. I don't see why we should put countless soldiers life in even more unnecessary danger or stress.

Offline BeorningTopic starter

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #15 on: October 16, 2014, 03:40:08 PM »
You know, you raise interesting points. I haven't thought about that issue... But are you sure that it couldn't be solved by training?

We might need to invite some soldier (Callie?) to chime in...

BTW. What about police officers, then? If this "men will unnecessarily risk their lives to protect the women" thing is true, then women shouldn't be allowed to be cops, either... Or firefighters. Or work in any role that puts them into risk...

Offline Steampunkette

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #16 on: October 16, 2014, 03:42:15 PM »
No. We're really not.

War is not the Invasion of Normandy. It's not a massive clusterfuck of bullets shooting towards small boats as they race to shore to see who gets to die first.

War is personal. It's 5 and 10 men and women moving from room to room, street to street, corner to corner. We don't have tanks trundling down the streets of Cannes or Berlin, anymore. Warfare is a hell of a lot different today than it was then. "Every Measure" has gone from taking out gun-nests to sweeping a room to ensure it's clear, holding civilians at gunpoint while they're searched for weapons and explosives, and performing duties most people associate with Police Officers, minus the investigation and arrest. Unless it's arrest of life by hail of gunfire.

There isn't a "Front Line" anymore. We're not a military power pushing an enemy army along before us as we sweep through the area, dealing with false retreats and tank emplacements. We're not in setpiece warfare, anymore.

We're dealing with shock-strikes and guerilla tactics as the primary combat method of our enemies. We don't get to keep "Noncombatant Soldiers" safe from harm because our enemies don't accept that there are noncombatants. The distinction doesn't exist because we're all invaders and destroyers, whether we're holding the gun or telling the person with the gun who they should shoot. Part of why the military has considered a general nondeployment to combative regions order, here and there, over the past 20 years.

As for men's instinct: Men's instinct is to run away from explosions and fires. It's to hide and try not to get killed when the bullets are flying. It's to do anything it takes to avoid death, dismemberment, or at the lowest level: Pain. And we train our soldiers to fight through all of that.

Self Preservation is an instinct. Protecting Women isn't.

If it was then groups of criminals would fight each other when a woman was threatened. Men who see a gun pulled on a woman would almost always leap to action instead of trying to get away with their own lives intact. Men wouldn't savage women and kill them, endlessly. Fight or Flight would kick in. Either kill the attacker or get the woman away. We see, endlessly, how that doesn't happen. And when it does happen the man involved is someone's husband, father, brother, or has another deep personal connection that accounts for their actions. On the rare occasion where it's complete strangers the dude's always someone who would do it for anyone if they had the chance. Solid Hero Complex territory.

Protecting Women is a learned behavior. And even if it wasn't we teach men, every day, how to ignore their instincts and do their job.

Offline Silk

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #17 on: October 16, 2014, 06:28:29 PM »
You know, you raise interesting points. I haven't thought about that issue... But are you sure that it couldn't be solved by training?

We might need to invite some soldier (Callie?) to chime in...

BTW. What about police officers, then? If this "men will unnecessarily risk their lives to protect the women" thing is true, then women shouldn't be allowed to be cops, either... Or firefighters. Or work in any role that puts them into risk...

Except both of those situations are only potential dangers and for police tend to only work in pairs at most, its very different dangers with their own regulations. After all the on the street bobby isn't going to be taking part in SWAT raids for example. Also the mortality rate between the three is still very heavily in front line armies favor.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2014, 06:30:58 PM by Silk »

Offline Marchoisas

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #18 on: October 16, 2014, 08:28:24 PM »
Now how did I miss this topic so far...? Need to be paying closer atention, I guess. Aniway, heres my take on the subject, as a professional soldier in Croatian military. To clarify, I vasnt drafted, its my career choise, has been for almost 5 years now. Just in recent months, my country has reintroduced conscription, in order to create a viable reservist force to supplant the standing army, in light of the increasingly unstable vorldwide political climate. On-topic, conscription here is limited only to men, and that is something I strongly disagree with. I think Norway has the right idea, and I see it as a sensible, progressive vay of thinking. Not only for equality's sake, but also makes sense on a purely logistical level, doubling the potential pool of able recruits.

As far as vhether or not I'm in favor of forced conscription in general... I'd have to say that, under normal circumstanses, I wuld not be, I belive people shuld have the right to decide for themselvs if they want to serve their country by serving in the military or not. But it has its place in a time of emergency (or potential emergency). And it certainly has its place in the current world-wide geopolitical climate. So under the circumstances that exist today in the world - I am in favor of it, and I'm glad my country is taking the issue seriusly enogh to reintroduce it. Of corse, I have plenty of gripe regarding the severe laxity of training standards for conscripts compared to professional troops, but thats another issue that I vont go into, since it wuld be straying from the topic.

But on a semi-related note, I feel I shuld adress Steampunkette's point:

Feminists have been pushing in the US to get women on the front lines for decades. We don't want to feel like we're not allowed to give as much to the nation as the men can. Though, always, there's pushback because women are "Too Frail" or "Too Weak" to cope. Personally I think that indicates our Military's standards of soldiery are too freaking high.

As much as I dont want to, I have to agree vith said pushback. Military service (professional one aniway) is anything but easy, the training regimens are insanely taxing on both body and mental state (in case of live-fire exercises and survival courses, for instance), And high physical/psychological standards have to be met. The "standards of soldiery" are in place for a VERY sound reason. Warfare today is a game of psychological attrition as much as it is a combat engagement, be it conventional or unconventional. Soldiers have to contend vith not only the enemy and their innate fear of getting hurt/killed, but also to be ready to make hard and often nerve-wracking choices at a moments' notice, and be ready to live vith the consequences. Like Steampunkette said, there is no such thing as a setpiece warfare any longer, clean, tidy and structured. Real war happens on a very personal level, and unlike the idealized version of it seen and romanticized in movies/books/games, there really are no rules in war. And a soldier has to expect that, and be able to handle it vithout breaking (be it physicaly or mentally).

If a woman can not compete with her male counterparts in any specific area (physical or psychological), she has no place being a professional soldier, and potentialy compromising her vhole assigned unit as a result, in a combat situation, being the "weak link". At least not until/unless she trains up/toughens up enogh to compete on equal footing. Of corse, that goes for men as wel, those who fail to meet the requirements. If you cant cut it, you cant cut it, no matter vhat you have betwen your legs. Come back and reapply vhen you can.

Regarding the issue of women in the army and male instinct regarding them... I say its a non-issue. That "protective instinct" is learned, not innate, in my opinion, and a result of long-established societal norms, seeing us as innately "weaker" and in need of protection. I'v seen it in action, I'v experienced it during my training, I had to prove myself more than my male colleagues in the eyes of drill-instructors, to show them I "have vhat it takes". And like all misguided ideas, that tendency can be unlearned. And it shuld be. The only *real* obstacle for women to serve in the military, IMO, is the same one that exists for men; their level of ability/comitment. But, that said, I absolutely believe in equal standards of admission for both men and women. Women shuld NOT be privileged there in any way, or subjected to any less rigorous training and conditioning, compared to men. Standards are there for a reason, and shuld not be changed to accomodate anyone.


Offline Retribution

  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: First star to the right straight on till morning
  • Gender: Male
  • When I'm good I'm good when I'm bad I'm better
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Female conscription
« Reply #19 on: October 17, 2014, 08:50:34 AM »
A couple things I note each time I see such discussions but at this point in time are probably kind of moot:

Every time I see someone mention conscientious objectors I cannot help but feel like that would be great if we were dealing with reasonable people. But if all people were reasonable we would have no need for war and killing one another ISIS anyone?

As for women and conscription, in the US men have to register for the draft but I honestly do not feel we will see a draft again because strictly volunteers seem to be filling the need. Having said that one of my issues with women in combat is along the lines of it is hard to protect the fairer sex from things like rape if captured. Now some pretty nasty things can happen to male combatants, but stuff like rape for whatever reason hits me on a more personal level. Thus I have an issue with women in combat not because of capability but all things being equal men do not get raped.

Now I am sure I shall be promptly crucified here for this point of view, but I have never seen anyone address this issue to my liking.

Offline Marchoisas

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #20 on: October 17, 2014, 09:14:51 AM »
Having said that one of my issues with women in combat is along the lines of it is hard to protect the fairer sex from things like rape if captured. Now some pretty nasty things can happen to male combatants, but stuff like rape for whatever reason hits me on a more personal level. Thus I have an issue with women in combat not because of capability but all things being equal men do not get raped.

Now I am sure I shall be promptly crucified here for this point of view, but I have never seen anyone address this issue to my liking.

Let me try to adress it. Just today in the newspaper, I read a article about female Kurd units battling ISIS, and their cited extreme efectiveness in combat, in part because of their intense fear of capture by the jihadists. Those women, acording to one that was aparently interviewed, wuld sooner fight to the death then be captured, and wuld actualy kill themselves if that becomes unavoidable. That fear is a powerful motivator in combat. They'r not afraid of dying or getting hurt, they wont surender even if its hopeless, their only fear is of being captured and mistreated/raped. So esentialy, the possibility of rape only motivates them more (and of corse, I completly emphatize vith them there).

So no... no crucifiction will be necessary, dear!  ;D

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Female conscription
« Reply #21 on: October 17, 2014, 09:21:04 AM »
A couple things I note each time I see such discussions but at this point in time are probably kind of moot:

Every time I see someone mention conscientious objectors I cannot help but feel like that would be great if we were dealing with reasonable people. But if all people were reasonable we would have no need for war and killing one another ISIS anyone?

As for women and conscription, in the US men have to register for the draft but I honestly do not feel we will see a draft again because strictly volunteers seem to be filling the need. Having said that one of my issues with women in combat is along the lines of it is hard to protect the fairer sex from things like rape if captured. Now some pretty nasty things can happen to male combatants, but stuff like rape for whatever reason hits me on a more personal level. Thus I have an issue with women in combat not because of capability but all things being equal men do not get raped.

Now I am sure I shall be promptly crucified here for this point of view, but I have never seen anyone address this issue to my liking.

Well, I think Ret has a point: even if technically guys can get raped it is hugely more rare in a warlike (or thuggy) situation than with women. Or any situation really, except in jail.

It's hard to get around that war entails killing the enemy's soldiers, and running the risk of getting killed or maimed yourself, particularly if you're in the combat zone, or "the front". Or sometimes killing civilians (by design or as "collateral damage") who are deemed to "be in cooperation" with the soldiers. Okay, there hasn't been anything quite like Normandy or the battle for Britain in the last forty years, not in the developed world anyway, but that's more or les because the powers that be have wanted to avoid that kind of head-on, long conflict - and when the US has been at war in the middle east it hasn't been with enemies who had the same level of stock equipment and technical advantage: Saddam's air force was no match at all for the USAF. An army or a navy have to be prepared for all-out confrontations in something like a WW2 style too, that level of carnage and gruelling fighting.

I remember seeing the film director Samuel Fuller in an old interview on French tv, talking about his reminiscences of D-Day; he was present on Omaha Beach as a young GI, and here he sat talking about what it had felt like to see people getting gunned down around him and sinking into the water, men drowning under their own backpacks, the fear, the smell of death and the resolve (I have since read other people talking about their experiences of that day but Fuller was the first one I heard or read who gave a clearly personal account). I really can't imagine it would have worked and kept up momentum with a large proportion of female drafted soldiers, no matter what kind of mindset people would have been coming in with. Every other man in that crowd would have thought as a woman struggled by his side or as she was coldly gunned down: "Why are you here, lady?" and felt compelled to help her, save her.

Let me try to adress it. Just today in the newspaper, I read a article about female Kurd units battling ISIS, and their cited extreme efectiveness in combat, in part because of their intense fear of capture by the jihadists. Those women, acording to one that was aparently interviewed, wuld sooner fight to the death then be captured, and wuld actualy kill themselves if that becomes unavoidable. That fear is a powerful motivator in combat. They'r not afraid of dying or getting hurt, they wont surender even if its hopeless, their only fear is of being captured and mistreated/raped. So esentialy, the possibility of rape only motivates them more (and of corse, I completly emphatize vith them there).

So no... no crucifiction will be necessary, dear!  ;D

I really don't think that's applicable to most kinds of wars a country like the US or just about any European country would find themselves in, however grave. Sorry.

Offline Marchoisas

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #22 on: October 17, 2014, 09:26:29 AM »
Quote
I really don't think that's applicable to most kinds of wars a country like the US or just about any European country would find themselves in, however grave. Sorry.

More applicable then you think. Wars arent those tidy, by-the-book things you see in movies. Never have been, never wil be. The reality of any war is a lot difrent. I was born during a war, I lived a good portion of my childhood thru it, and I remember how it vas like.

Quote
Every other man in that crowd would have thought as a woman struggled by his side or as she was coldly gunned down: "Why are you here, lady?" and felt compelled to help her, save her.

And if he thought that, then he wuld need to reasess his thinking, and alter his mindset, because like I pointed out, that kind of thinking has no place on the front line. Why is she there shuld be obvius, the same reason he is there.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2014, 09:37:48 AM by Marchoisas »

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Female conscription
« Reply #23 on: October 17, 2014, 09:42:52 AM »
More applicable then you think. Wars arent those tidy, by-the-book things you see in movies. Never have been, never wil be. The reality of any war is a lot difrent. I was born during a war, I lived a good portion of my childhood thru it, and I remember how it vas like.

Those Kurdish women are speaking from a position where they don't have a recognized state of their own, a home country with respected borders (not even in peacetime!) and where even their language and history are outlawed in public (Kurdish books, newspapers and schools have been forbidden in Turkey for many decades, and it was the same in pre-2003 Iraq I think). And they are expecting to die, rather than to win. When that's the deal it creates a completely different set of methods and combat aims (and a different kind of mindset) than when a country which has been on the map for centuries and has a well-trained regular army, modern fortifications and a regular air force is going to war.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2014, 09:44:03 AM by gaggedLouise »

Offline Marchoisas

Re: Female conscription
« Reply #24 on: October 17, 2014, 09:52:59 AM »
Quote
Those Kurdish women are speaking from a position where they don't have a recognized state of their own, a home country with respected borders (not even in peacetime!) and where even their language and history are outlawed in public (Kurdish books, newspapers and schools have been forbidden in Turkey for many decades, and it was the same in pre-2003 Iraq I think). And they are expecting to die, rather than to win. When that's the deal it creates a completely different set of methods and combat aims (and a different kind of mindset) than when a country which has been on the map for centuries and has a well-trained regular army, modern fortifications and a regular air force is going to war.

Wow, talk about arrogance and condescention.  ::)  Honey, get real, because this is pathetic. You know vhat the only real "combat aim" in any war is? To crush the enemy, and make them give up on fighting you. In that, there are no rules, and if you think there are, you'r delusional. You think those heroines give a damn vhat you (or anyone else) thinks about their culture and language? Fat chance. All that matters to them is that it is their home, and they'l do everything in their power to protect it. Thats the real mindset in any war. And abstract borders on a map make zero diference. If that kind of war came to ANY country, its people wuld become exactly like those Kurd women.