4 ms·

> women denied combat roles I see this argument a lot, yet the same people making the argument don't typically think that women should be included in the draft

> women denied combat roles I see this argument a lot, yet the same people making the argument don't typically think that women should be included in the draft. And that makes sense, because women are biologically different than men. However, I agree than women should be allowed to take combat roles if they're qualified, and men should be denied if they're not. I just don't think the ratio needs to be the same between the sexes. The question is, when will we go far enough to prove that we've "solved" bigotry well enough that we can have the discussion about what the rules should be? There are very clear differences between men and women, but it feels like making that point is automatically considered bigoted.

MyHypatia 8y ago
I don't think the statement "men and women are different" is bigoted. It's what comes after that statement that matters. But I understand that the statement itself can put some people on guard, because it is very frequently followed with, "therefore [insert stereotype/generalization/justification for ____]". What is the specific purpose that the difference, rather than the similarity, between men and women is being highlighted? If it's to discuss real verifiable biological differences, sure. If it's to use "biology" to speculate and extrapolate on issues that effect someone's life directly (i.e. being able to participate on an equal footing economically, politically, and socially) then I can see why people find it upsetting. It's the intention, not the phrase itself. On the topic of the draft. Actually, the same people complaining about women being denied combat roles are the same people who think women should be included in the draft. There was a HackerNews thread on this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19242191 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19242191 To summarize, in 2016 an amendment to include women in the draft had broad support among Democrat and Republican leaders and women in both parties. However, it was fiercely opposed by conservative law makers, and ended up being stripped from the final bill in a procedural move.

MyHypatia 8y ago

I don't think the statement "men and women are different" is bigoted. It's what comes after that statement that matters. But I understand that the statement itself can put some people on guard, because it is very frequently followed with, "therefore [insert stereotype/generalization/justification for ____]". What is the specific purpose that the difference, rather than the similarity, between men and women is being highlighted? If it's to discuss real verifiable biological differences, sure. If it's to use "biology" to speculate and extrapolate on issues that effect someone's life directly (i.e. being able to participate on an equal footing economically, politically, and socially) then I can see why people find it upsetting. It's the intention, not the phrase itself. On the topic of the draft. Actually, the same people complaining about women being denied combat roles are the same people who think women should be included in the draft. There was a HackerNews thread on this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19242191 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19242191 To summarize, in 2016 an amendment to include women in the draft had broad support among Democrat and Republican leaders and women in both parties. However, it was fiercely opposed by conservative law makers, and ended up being stripped from the final bill in a procedural move.