Originally Posted by Shaella
Its also a logical fallacy
The favorite by far in this discussion has been the strawman.
Straw man: A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresenting an opponent's position so as to more easily refute it.
Person A: Sunny days are good.
Person B: If all days were sunny, we'd never have rain, and without rain, we'd have famine and death. Therefore, you are wrong.
Problem: B has misrepresented A's claim by falsely suggesting that A claimed that only sunny days are good, and then B refuted the misrepresented version of the claim, rather than refuting A's original assertion.
Mom: You have been playing video games for too long these past few days. You should focus on your school work.
Son: You think I play video games for 20 hours?
Problem: The son has made an exaggeration of what the mom said when it is not what she said.
Originally Posted by Whiteglint3
women aren't in combat situations for very, very good reasons.
the main, and mostly only reason is this.
women put into combat situations cause incredible problems when injured in the line of duty, nearly ALWAYS the men combatants instinctively do everything they can to help them, this is bad because if say.
1, female combatant is shot by a sniper, everyone is behind cover, normally the correct procedure is to use coverfire to protect said injured, find the sniper and route him, then apply care to the injured soldier.
when females are put in place, the men will break cover to protect/help her, they will then all be killed, combat effectiveness is instantly lowered to nothing (because they are dead).
this same event happens in other situations, the men WILL do whatever it takes to help the women, its instinct, and it kicks in hard in combat, and it has gotten men killed many times (and the women involved).
women are entirely capable of being in combat, they can kill people just as good as men (infact they are very good fighter pilots and helicopter pilots, and is the main combat role the get to take)
but women should not be put into ground forces combat, they disrupt combat effectiveness and get people killed due to situations I discribed.
so.. knowing this, women are treated diffrently in the army, do you think what I said was sexist? (if you do that means you think progression is more imporant than soldiers lives).
I await your answer, i'm sure your mature enough to give a good one (ha).
It's cool that you have a lot of evidence to back up this sweeping claim based on anecdotal evidence. You do, right? I'll wait.
Note though, that your horrible real world example (oh the humanity!) doesn't even necessarily mean that women should never be soldiers, or that women CAN'T be soldiers, or that women make poor soldiers. At best, you've argued for same *** units - guys together and gals together. To protect the men from their uncontrollable emotional responses, apparently.