Crimicar Lane murder

[sgtkate]

Society puts a higher value on the life of woman than it does on men, which is precisely why woman are not (at the moment) permitted to fill front line combat duties in the British Army. It is not because women could not do the job, but because society doesn't want to see woman returned in body bags.

 

 

What a complete crock of *****. I was even trying to take a rational argument with you but clearly you are in a different universe to the rest of us if you believe society values a woman's life more...woman aren't allowed to fight on the front line because the military believe the other soldiers will rape them.

[Member]

So violence towards vulnerable people is not worse than violence towards people who are stronger? So the panorama investigation that showed care home staff shouting at elderly residents was no worse than someone screaming at me in a pub?

 

You seem to be under the misapprehension that Lee Rigby wasnt vulnerable. He was extremely vulnerable to the car they used to mow him down. If its a contest id say Lee was more vulnerable that the poor old lady because unless you come from Krypton youre always going to come off second best to a car.

[charmer]

What a complete crock of *****. I was even trying to take a rational argument with you but clearly you are in a different universe to the rest of us if you believe society values a woman's life more...woman aren't allowed to fight on the front line because the military believe the other soldiers will rape them.

 

 

Wow link for that offensive comment? You genuinely think our law makers think so little of our soldiers?

 

Also, why then are their special provisions in the Geneva Convention that outlines preferential treatment for women? Why the outrage when the victims of domestic abuse are women, but silence when it is a man?

 

Why the "women and children first" rule (whether official or not) when in dangerous situations?

Edited December 17, 2014 by charmer

[Member]

Wow link for that offensive comment? You genuinely think our law makers think so little of our soldiers?

 

Im really hoping they mean soldiers from an opposing force, not our own.

[charmer]

You seem to be under the misapprehension that Lee Rigby wasnt vulnerable. He was extremely vulnerable to the car they used to mow him down. If its a contest id say Lee was more vulnerable that the poor old lady because unless you come from Krypton youre always going to come off second best to a car.

 

He was absolutely vulnerable, though less so in my opinion than an old lady who thought she was in a safe environment.

[Member]

He was absolutely vulnerable, though less so in my opinion than an old lady who thought she was in a safe environment.

 

Unfortunately thats where we differ. For me, Lee Rigby was more vulnerable but as i said earlier to me thats irrelevant anyway. Violence is violence and its almost always wrong.

[sgtkate]

Im really hoping they mean soldiers from an opposing force, not our own.

 

Actually, they mean both. I know because I used to be an Army Officer who debated heavily over this ruling about women being on the front line because that was what I wanted to do. They did say rape in the extreme of cases from both sides, but they also said this wasn't a physical capabilities issue (if a woman can pass the test then she's passed the test!) but also around how men would act in the case of a women being on the front line. There would be an instinct to protect her, which does slightly agree with you I suppose (see I can back down from time to time! ) and that also relationships would spring up under pressure causing terrible decision making. You are far more likely to want to protect your partner from harm than a colleague.

 

And for some interesting reading, some stats about sexual assault between soldiers on the same side during the recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq...I can't find the same stats from the UK, but we are not massively different from our allies over the water...http://mic.com/articles/72503/pentagon-releases-startling-new-statistics-on-military-sexual-assault

 

 

Anyway, we are getting off the point. Killing a woman is no worse than killing a man if all other circumstances were the same.

Edited December 17, 2014 by sgtkate
Typos

[Member]

Actually, they mean both. I know because I used to be an Army Officer who debated heavily over this ruling about women being on the front line because that was what I wanted to do. They did say rape in the extreme of cases from both sides, but they also said this wasn't a physical capabilities issue (if a woman can pass the test then she's passed the test!) but also around how men would act in the case of a women being on the front line. There would be an instinct to protect her, which does slightly agree with you I suppose (see I can back down from time to time! ) and that also relationships would spring up under pressure causing terrible decision making. You are far more likely to want to protect your partner from harm than a colleague.

 

And for some interesting reading, some stats about sexual between soldiers on the same side during the recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq...I can't find the same stats from the UK, but we are not massively different from our allies over the water...http://mic.com/articles/72503/pentagon-releases-startling-new-statistics-on-military-sexual-assault

 

 

Anyway, we are getting off the point. Killing a woman is no worse than killing a man if all other circumstances were the same.

Can i ask, do you still have your uniform?

Edited December 17, 2014 by Member
stuff,

[sgtkate]

Can i ask, do you still have your uniform?

 

Oh darling...I am flattered. Photos can be sent at good prices.

[Member]

Oh darling...I am flattered. Photos can be sent at good prices.

 

Ive got money, my inbox is thata way

<

<

<

<

<

lol