Alright, there you go! Now we have a debate. It took several posts before I could get you to offer up some evidence to back up your claims (which, as I said before, is on you because you're making the claims and it's a little ridiculous to expect someone to offer up evidence for a lack of a wanting of a thing).
I offered up a link a few posts ago, and I have voiced concerns, not made claims.
-I am concerned that this will happen
-This will happen
I'm sure you won't believe me, and I'm sure your first reaction is to point out that I didn't believe you blah blah blah, but I've known for awhile about the differences in the US Army physical fitness standards, and was waiting for you to bring it up.
You are right, I don't belive you. A lower fitness standard indicates a lowering of fitness standards. If you had known that there were lower standards, you would not have said that a lowering of standards had no basis in reality. So I call shenanigans on that. Either you were totally ignorant or you were ignoring a fact that did not fit in your view.
You see, this is how a debate works. You say "I think someone might try to lower the physical fitness standards." I say "I don't see any indication that that is something that will happen."
YOu did not say, 'I see no indication' you said, 'no basis in reality'. Please tell me that you can see the difference between those two
Then instead of immediately getting all defensive and saying I'm calling you a liar and questioning your integrity
You- Irrelevant link
-Me- Voicing concerns
you-no basis in reality
me- I have experienced it
you- 'Your words are as good as fiction'
At least be honest about your insults.
you present EVIDENCE.
Yep, I'm going to present evidence of shit that goes on behind closed doors. I'll get right the fuck on that.
Dude, I always call out people who don't present evidence to support their claims.
except for yourself
Because how will we get anywhere if we don't back up the things we say?
Hierarchy of proofs, I issue personal experience, you then negate that by issuing a proof higher than that. So far, I am hte only one who has provided any proof of any level.
I suppose I could be lying in saying that I haven't heard anything about anyone wanting to lower the standards (not talking about how they're already lowered, so don't go there),
Why the fuck not, a lowering of standards indicates a willingness to lower standards.
but if anyone was saying that, surely you would have heard about it and used that to counter me, right? But apparently you can't because you "see" the same things I do, don't you?
No you wilfully ignorant rapscallion, I see different things to you. You see things from outside of the military, I see things that go on inside the military, shit that does not go into press releases because it will be bad press. And I am annoyed that I have to explain this again, but it does not go
Interest groups-'lower standards'
ARMY (lowers standards)
reasonable people -'let women in'
Army (lets women in)
Interest groups-'why aren't more women passing, is it because of sexism?'
Reasonable people-'gasp?! Sexism, fix it government'
Government- Don't be sexist army, stop holding women back, be more engaging and less gender specific'
army-Issues back door directives that more women are to pass
Instructors -lower standards.
If I was going to be dismissive, I would not have addressed their points, I would not have put time and effort into responding. This, this is what I would consider to be a dismissive reply
'That video has no basis in reality'
And the entirety of your post was 'I'll just leave this here', what is there to dismiss?
well, maybe a little
No, You would
know if I was being hostile.
I hate to pull the you started it card,
Come on now, you have done little else
but how the hell do you expect people to react to you when you start off a conversation that way?
Well, to be entirely honest, when I see someone who seemingly got their opinion of the military from the west wing, I don't really expect the conversation to go anywhere
But I see that by responding in kind and goading you all the way here
so you admit to trolling [/quote]
you've revealed your true colors with the "sweetheart" comment.
YOu know, because I never call any of the male posters sweetheart. I called smaugk it a few days ago. I like the overly familiar tone of it. But hey, if you need to call sexism because you have less legs to stand on than... fuck I had something for this... something with no legs, go right on ahead.
I tell you, I can smell a misogynist from a mile away, and I can always out them with a little pushing.
Oh.. is that, it is, the 'you fell into my clever trap card' YOU WIN BAD ARGUMENT BINGO
Admit it, you don't want women in the military at all, because you just don't like them, do you?
before, I was annoyed, now I am actually angry.
You have the balls the sit there and accuse me of conjecture when you then fucking accuse me of misogyny over a single word that I use for both male and female posters alike. YOu accuse me of wanting no women in the defence force?
My first PTI -A woman
My marksmanship Corporal- A woman
My first RSM -a Woman
My first specialist instructor- A woman
My Second PTI - A woman
The toughest section commander in my platoon a few years ago- A woman
Best soldier in my recruit intake - A woman
Best Instructor that I have ever had- A woman
The sergeant that to this day scares me the most - a woman
All of them (except for the third last one, she was a bit of a brown noser) were far far better soldiers than me. If I, at any point in my career, are the half the fucking soldier as any of them, I can retire a happy fucking man. But you know what fucks them over, what allows ignorant people like you to maintain your fiction that the defence force is sexist? The females who slip through the cracks and damage the inherent reliability of those soldiers.
To quote the toughest soldier that I have ever known
'Piss weak pieces of shit like you are the reason that we can't get any respect around here'-Said to a female recruit who could not march two ks with basic kit. Said female recruit passed.
So take your accusations of misogyny and... do unpleasant things with them. I know what I am, I am a belligerent, arrogant arse of a human being, but I would happily die for any soldier that I work with, male or female, and I am secure in the knowledge that they would do the same for me.
AGAIN! because it did not get through your skull the first few times. I am in favour of women in arms corps. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT INTEREST GROUPS FUCKING IT UP FOR ALL CONCERNED, MALE AND FEMALE
Yes, there are differences in the army fitness standards,
which would indicate that the army is willing to lower standards. Meaning that concerns that they will do so is rooted squarely in reality.
and personally I don't think it's a good idea either. There, we agree, don't we?
Yep, we can agree that they shouldn't change standards, or rather they should toughen them up for everybody.
But I'm glad I could accomplish what I set out to do, which was to get you to engage in actual debate involving actual research,
I posted the first result of army fitness standards from google, after posting a similar set of standards (which you rejected out of hand because reasons) and you crumbled because you have no leg to stand on
and at the same time get you to reveal your misogyny. All in all, a good time. Cheers!
You revealed something that doesn't exist, to prove a point that you don't have, which you supported with a video that is not relevant to the issue at hand.
I have to tell you, I am very annoyed at that accusation. When I have issues, emotional, financial, familial etc, it is my fellow soldiers, male and female who help me through, and you fucking accuse me of hating them.