Question for the Regs

[Anonymous]

I have been reading all of the posts here for months and have got a kick out of them. I have to say that "GlennP" makes very good points, as do the females that rebut his statements. But there is one area that has yet to be touched. In the areas of Women In Combat and in the military, some men and women feel that we should not be there. The reasons: too weak, can't handle the pressure, we get pregnant, ect. Well my question is this: Is a woman's life more important than a man's? I mean, is it okay for men to fight for the United States of America and possibly die while the women folk just sit around? Are we putting the life of a woman before the life of a man? I believe that all life is valuable. I am a mother and I wouldn't like my son to come home in a body bag, nor would I like to see my daughter come home that way. This is something that we would not like to see happen, but it happens. The thing is that it is happenening when we sent our children to school, not war. I understand that this is an opinionated arena, but I don't like the disrespecting of military members, military services, our flag and our President. And if anyone is curious, I am in the Air Force and have been for 8 years. I work in a male dominated shop doing what most folks call mens work. I can shoot an M-16 just a good as the next person, I have made marksman 3 years in a row. I also can drive heavy machinery and handle anything and everything. For the women, take it one day at a time. For the men, keep challenging us. Thank you for your time

[Anonymous]

: Well my question is this: Is a woman's life more important than a man's? FROM THE TRADITIONAL BIOLOGICAL VIEWPOINT OF ENSURING THE SURVIVAL OF THE HUMAN SPECIES, THE ANSWER IS A RESOUNDING YES. ONE MAN CAN IMPREGNATE HUNDREDS OF WOMEN, WHILE WOMEN'S CAPACITY TO PRODUCE CHILDREN IS LIMITED BY THE 9-MONTH GESTATION PERIOD AND THE INDIVIDUAL'S CONSTITUTION. CONSIDERING JUST HOW HARD CHILDBEARING IS ON THE MOTHER'S BODY, BETWEEN 10 & 20 OFFSPRING IS ABOUT MAX; MUCH LOWER FOR MANY WOMEN. OF COURSE, ON A PLANET WITH 5 BILLION PEOPLE ON IT, I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT ENSURING THE SURVIVAL OF THE SPECIES IS REALLY AN ISSUE, AND THIS TRADITIONAL VIEW AND ALL ITS BAGGAGE NEEDS TO BE PUT AWAY IN THE PAST WHERE IT BELONGS. THE ISSUE OF ASSIGNING VALUE IS A PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUE BEST DISCUSSED ELSEWHERE. BUT I DON'T THINK MANY PEOPLE ARE ARGUING TO KEEP WOMEN OUT OF COMMENT BECAUSE WOMEN'S LIVES ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN MEN'S, BUT BECAUSE THE ISSUE OF CULTURALLY ASSIGNED GENDER ROLES IS DEEPLY IMPRINTED INTO OUR SENSES OF PERSONAL IDENTITY AND SOCIAL VALUES.
: mean, is it okay for men to fight for the United States of America and possibly die while the women folk just sit around? PLEASE! WOMEN HAVE NEVER JUST SAT AROUND WHILE MEN RAN OFF TO WAR. DURING WAR (AS WELL AS IN PEACE!), WOMEN HAVE BEEN VERY BUSY MAINTAINING THAT THING CALLED HOME WHICH SO OFTEN SERVES AS THE RAISON D'ETRE FOR WAR. THEY HAVE PRODUCED THE FOOD, NURTURED THE NEXT GENERATION, AND IN THIS CENTURY AT LEAST, PRODUCED THE ARMAMENTS WITH WHICH THE WARS WERE FOUGHT. DO YOU THINK WWII COULD HAVE BEEN WON (OR FOUGHT AT ALL) WITHOUT ROSIE THE RIVETER MAKING THE TANKS, GUNS, AIRCRAFT, ETC.?
: For the men, keep challenging us. WHY? WHY SHOULD MEN KEEP MAKING LIFE FOR WOMEN HARDER THAN IT NEEDS TO BE? WHY CAN'T THEY SIMPLY ACCEPT THAT THE PAST IS PAST, EMBRACE THE CHANGING PRESENT, AND FACE THE FUTURE WITH COURAGE?

greatoz@aol.com