RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. | Report this post to moderator
By: Jadzia-Dax (Odo's file, contact) @ 20:33:27 on Jul 24, 2004

Quote:

However, later on in this thread, you comment about the fact that women are not allowed in combat positions in the military. I might beg to differ just a bit.
At least in the USAF, there are women fighter pilots...some who fly F-16 Fighting Falcons, and at least one who is in training to fly the new F/A-22 Raptor. A fighter pilot's position is considered a "combat" position, in that they are dropping ordinance on targets, getting shot at from the ground, and dogfighting with other pilots. I do a lot of work with the USAF, and this is a point that comes up occasionally...especially when a Marine accuses an Air Force pilot of not being a "real man" when it comes to combat, because the flyboy is 30,000 feet above the battlespace and the Marine is in the thick of it.

I am sorry that I did not post the below link in my above post, the link of which I think I included several times in some of my other posts in this thread. But I would hope that after that Vulcan thread, you should know me better than that...

But I am NOT making this up. ;-)

Quote:

But my point is that, in my opinion, there are many valid reasons why women should not be allowed to participate in ground combat, and only a couple of them have anything to do with chivalry.

Well, the fact that other countries have women doing so, most notably Israel, means it's not like it's impossible. ;-)

Quote:

It is true that technology has advanced to the point where just about anyone can target and fire a Howitzer, or use an RPG. But I don't believe (and to an extent, neither does the Pentagon) that most women have the temperment to survive in a combat situation. (In fact, a lot of men lack this temperment, too.) And since the command ranks in today's military are composed of the same "old, white men's club" members, you will probably never see a woman advance to a command or flag rank, especially if they have never participated in combat. Catch-22.

Exactly. ;-)

Quote:

I'm not advocating that women should be prohibited from achieving command rank if they demonstrate the aptitude and abililty to handle that rank and the responsibilities it entails. But that would also entail that they are able to gain the respect from their troops that is necessary to be an effective commander.

Which becomes alot of the issue behind TOS "Turnabout Intruder". ;-) Where in that spacebeluga thread that I link to down at the bottom of this thread, that ep seemed to have an execution problem that actually covered for some major symbollisms that Roddenberry was slapping in there as his final "up you" to NBC in that final TOS episode.

Quote:

There are many men in command ranks in the military who do not have the respect of their troops, and it shows in areas like morale and retention.

True.

Quote:

I am advocating that women be prohibited from taking part in combat duties because the human race must be maintained.

Yet, the "Human Race" seems to have some physiological issue where the infant mortality rate for males is consistently higher than for females per this (PDF file). ;-) Leading to an excess of women by the time of child-bearing age.

So considering that all women need is 1 sperm to fertilize the egg, the male really isn't needed that much, as is the case for the animal, insect, and even plant world.

Quote:

If a major war were to erupt, along the lines of the fictional WW III (or any other fictional future war we've ever read about), the overriding goal of the survivors should be the rebuilding of the human race.

Yet as noted, all one needs is that sperm bank, even if just from a single male. ;-)

Quote:

That takes both men and women,

No, it takes one man and his millions of sperm to do as many women as one needs. LOL

Quote:

but frankly, it takes more women than it does men. Without women, the viability of the human race is in question.

On the contrary, multiple sperm + multiple eggs generally = multple births. Unlike most higher animals/primates, Human women can have those triplets and quadruplets and quintuplets, even up to octuplets who can be viable enough to survive. And then multiply that out having one (or more every other year as many women have had in the past), and voila! ;-)

Quote:

Take this forward to the 22nd Century, and it's quite likely that we will see the status quo maintain, and probably for the same reasons. If we see a female starship captain in ENT, it's purely for ratings.

Well now THERE I would agree. When one uses the same old sh*t about "fun and sexy" for female stars or guests on this show, let alone for a supposed female Captain, right then and there, we have just now labeled her to be irrelevent. She is to be the latest Braga plaything because the last one was used up.

And they can get up there and try to back track and try to make this woman some stereotypical man-like Ripley, but THIS is what I'm talking about regarding how things HAVEN'T CHANGED. It's insidious and flagrant in THIS SHOW.

I think we should start calling Archer "fun and sexy". Here - I'll slap this most "sexy" picture of Bakula up here just to underscore the point!

Fun and Sexy Captain Jonathan Archer


Oooooooo... ahhhhh....

Quote:

Damn, your penchant for writing novel-length posts is rubbing off on me! :-)

Heh heh

--------

"I think the show talked to people through the characters. They're stories that speak to the heart. They talk about love, they talk about friendship, they talk about loyalty, they talk about patriotism, exploration, curiosity, reaching out... And I think all those things still touch people. Even when you look at a 30-year old show, it still has something to say." - D.C. Fontana, Sci Fi Channel Special Edition TOS 1998
----
"If the season finale involves the re-built USS Reliant coming back in time to the 21st Century crewed by Moogie, Dr. Selar, Morn, Transporter Chief Kyle, and the Salt Vampire, then we'll know that Coto has gone too far." - tomba1701

Reply

Quote

Parent

Top