Bi courious

[alistair.blankley]

and that is why I hesitated.  I have served in the military, i've been there/done that.
And yes there are some women who could do the job just as well as any man, but on average is what we have to look at.  

Would MOST women be able to do the combat tasks?  Men and women, though jsut as good as the other, have serious diff. in phsycology and anyone who doesn't recognize this is simply blind.  There are things women are better at, and things men are better at (again, on average).

But this is way off topic, so I"ll stop now.

I recognize that PEOPLE have serious differences in psychology (when did psychology enter into it? I thought it was men being too overprotective) and ability.  Many men are not capable of nor suited to military service, just as surely as many women are. To say women shouldn't serve in combat because of averages and generalizations is an excuse for discrimination, nothing more. Anyone who meets the requirements should be able to serve.

The fact that it might distract some men from doing their own job properly is no argument. That's their problem to deal with, not women's.  A lot of whites made that argument about why blacks shouldn't serve in their units (for the opposite reason as is used for women). You aren't defending that argument, are you?

[gomez38555]

of course not.  But what I'm saying is true equal treatment.  Man are not given a choice, and that is not what the women want, they want to pick and choose.  so they are NOT asking for equal treatment, but options the men don't have.

And you do have to take psychology into it.  Every general does (moral is a big issue, and that is psychology).  Mental standing is a big part of military ability to fight, ask any squad leader.

On a side note, we discussed this today at the college.  It surprised me that the majority of veterans (male and female) who agreed.

[Partner]

At first I was wonder how this got so far off topic.  Then I read back and realized it was my fault.

...whoops.   

;-)

[Katiebee]

Oh, so is it discipline time then, Partner?

Turn around, drop trouser, and bend over.

 

[Partner]

LOL.

I read this immediately after posting the details on my dare.   

[alistair.blankley]

of course not.  But what I'm saying is true equal treatment.  Man are not given a choice, and that is not what the women want, they want to pick and choose.  so they are NOT asking for equal treatment, but options the men don't have.

I do not understand what you are saying. What do you mean about men are not given a choice? What do you mean about women wanting to pick and choose? How are women (all women everywhere, apparently) asking for options men don't have? You've completely lost me.

And you do have to take psychology into it.  Every general does (moral is a big issue, and that is psychology).  Mental standing is a big part of military ability to fight, ask any squad leader.

I assume you meant morale. Morale & "group cohesion" has been used with African Americans and gays. Bogus argument. Morale flows from the top down, soldiers do what they're told, and if their superiors are sincerely committed to it, they will be, too.  As for mental standing: Exact same argument has been used to explain why women could and should never handle other jobs, like doctor, surgeon, lawyer, judge, police officer, firefighter, race car driver, senator, governor, prime minister, president of the World Bank...  Guess what? It was BS for all of those. Despite all the protests, women have gone on to serve and serve well in every one of these occupations. The military is no different. There is very real reason why this discrimination is a great disadvantage to the military careers of women: most top command positions are drawn from the ranks of those who have served in combat units. How can any woman ever realistically hope to achieve the rank of general if she is categorically excluded from the only path the holds a possibility to advance that far.

I'll say it again, tell me how you disagree. Many men are not qualified for and couldn't handle military service that involved combat duty. Many women undoubtedly are qualified and could handle military service that involved combat duty (if they can handle every other job on the planet, including police officer and firefighter, is it sensible to suggest there are NO women who could hack it?). To deny those women who qualify the right to serve in those roles has no logical basis except discrimination based purely on sex, not on job-related qualifications. That is not only indefensible, nowadays it is illegal.

On a side note, we discussed this today at the college.  It surprised me that the majority of veterans (male and female) who agreed.

Not at all surprising that many of those indoctrinated in the current military culture would repeat the prevailing conventional groupthink of that culture. Cops and firefighters are the same. You will also likely hear a majority of them say that openly gay soldiers should not be allowed to serve, because it is distracting and disruptive to group cohesion, and you can't "trust" them. Just because a lot of them say it doesn't make it true, and doesn't make it right. It's discrimination based on prejudice, not on job-related qualifications. Sound familiar?

[gomez38555]

It's simple, so pay attention.  Military women are asking for, and been granted, the ability to VOLUNTEER for combat units once they have enlisted.  Men are not given the option as to whether or not they are in combat unit.  They are ordered to go or not, depending on what the commander wants/needs.

That is not equal treatment.  That is giving the woman an option not available to the guy.  I never said women (in general) were incapable of doing the job, just they are asking for an option not given to the men.

[gomez38555]

Oh, so is it discipline time then, Partner?

Turn around, drop trouser, and bend over.

 

How come he gets rewarded?  I was in this too.

[alistair.blankley]

It's simple, so pay attention.  Military women are asking for, and been granted, the ability to VOLUNTEER for combat units once they have enlisted.  Men are not given the option as to whether or not they are in combat unit.  They are ordered to go or not, depending on what the commander wants/needs.

That is not equal treatment.  That is giving the woman an option not available to the guy.  I never said women (in general) were incapable of doing the job, just they are asking for an option not given to the men.

If you had explained what policy/request you were talking about in the first place, I wouldn't have had to ask, so don't tell me I wasn't paying attention and I'd appreciate it if you lost the patronizing tone.

1) Who, exactly, is asking for this unique right?  Does that request from whomever represent the desires and beliefs of every woman who enters the military? If you are referring to the lawsuit filed by four female service members, I will go out on a limb and say that it may be risky to describe the legal action of four women as representative of what all women are asking for. Sounds like another gross generalization to me.

2) More importantly, since serving in combat is a right and duty previously not open to women (and it was not at the time the lawsuit was filed), asking for the right to volunteer for combat duty represents a step in the direction of equal treatment, not away from it. Aside from being logically flawed for that reason, since most of your other statements indicate you don't think they belong in combat at all, taking the "that's unequal treatment" tack sounds to me like you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.

[gomez38555]

Alistar it seems obvious that we are talking from two vary diff. view points and will never agree. I intended to sound sarcastic, not condescending.

I was not talking of the lawsuit you mention (yes I'm aware of it), I was speaking of the recent decision by the army (in the name of equality) of allowing women to volunteer for combat units, something they could not previously do.  To me, and many others, this "option" is actually a step away from equality, simply by saying "some of you feel you are qualified" instead of "all of you are qualified".

That sort of thinking (to use an example similar to yours) is like sayingthat some blacks are as goods as whites.  And since a group the size of the military must work with "average person" in setting policy, they should either say, "all women will be treated the same as men" or "no women will be treated the same as a man".  BTW it was womens groups that helped push for the change in policy.

[Katiebee]

It's simple, so pay attention.  Military women are asking for, and been granted, the ability to VOLUNTEER for combat units once they have enlisted.  Men are not given the option as to whether or not they are in combat unit.  They are ordered to go or not, depending on what the commander wants/needs.

That is not equal treatment.  That is giving the woman an option not available to the guy.  I never said women (in general) were incapable of doing the job, just they are asking for an option not given to the men.

No, not accurate. Enlisting you may get an option to select an MOS, which doesn't necessarily mean you will receive that MOS. Since combat arms makes up a goodly portion of Army, it's a good bet that the less technically qualified will end up with combat arms MOS. Those with medical training, or other technical qualifications will usually be placed in an MOS that applies to their skills.

And if you hadn't noticed, with combat operations against a guerrilla force, more people are required to act as Infantry, which is the secondary mission of nearly all MOSes in the Army. And combat arms isn't always Infantry, there is Armor and Artillery.

[alistair.blankley]

Alistar it seems obvious that we are talking from two vary diff. view points and will never agree. I intended to sound sarcastic, not condescending.

I was not talking of the lawsuit you mention (yes I'm aware of it), I was speaking of the recent decision by the army (in the name of equality) of allowing women to volunteer for combat units, something they could not previously do.  To me, and many others, this "option" is actually a step away from equality, simply by saying "some of you feel you are qualified" instead of "all of you are qualified".

That sort of thinking (to use an example similar to yours) is like sayingthat some blacks are as goods as whites.  And since a group the size of the military must work with "average person" in setting policy, they should either say, "all women will be treated the same as men" or "no women will be treated the same as a man".  BTW it was womens groups that helped push for the change in policy.

So, you're talking about what the military is deciding is its policy, not what women are asking for.  In the future, please say so, and don't talk about what women are asking for. If you do, provide sources and references backing it up, otherwise please confine yourself to facts that can be substantiated and verified.

Are you, then, in fact saying that asking for the ability to volunteer for combat units when they were not allowed to serve in combat units at all is not a step in the direction of equal treatment, rather than a step away from it.

Military standards are not based on averages. Standards are theoretically based on capacity and qualifications necessary to do the job. In virtually every other role in the military, if you can meet the requirements and do the job, you're in. If you can't, you're out. Why should combat be different? Currently, the branches of the military are examining whether all of the current requirements are truly necessary and job-related.  Averages don't have sweet Fanny Adams to do with it.  The Marine infantry officers training course is one of the most rigorous, brutral there is. 25% of men wash out. That's 25% of Marines who choose to take it, and no one is going to take it if they have any doubts they won't make it, as washing out is worse than not trying at all. That standard has nothing to do with averages. The average man on the street would wash out in ten minutes. Before you mention that all four women who have attempted it have washed out, I'll point out once again that 25% of men do, and they are already Marine officers who volunteer to take the course.  Four women in one of the toughest courses in all the military is not enough of a sample to be meaningful; and one of them made it four weeks but was forced to drop out by a stress fracture.

[tennysonp]

Before the topic was derailed, I wonder if Karl2 has had found anyone / anything that helps him.

I have been bi curious for a very long time. It may have started when I realized that most men I met have MFF fantasies and I had MFM fantasies.

I have always fantasized about being with a couple (MF) - and both of us pleasing the woman. With the right couple, I could be convinced (and in some fantasies, ordered) to try things with the other man.

My wife has chrons/colitis and having sex is NOT an option for her.  I am not looking to chuck the marriage - and I could not go out to an adult book / toy store and troll for someone.

I don't have the inclination or money to pay someone to fulfill any fantasies. I could not perform or enjoy it if I was paying someone.

I am a bit stumped on what to do about my feelings as well.

[Janus]

Before the topic was derailed, I wonder if Karl2 has had found anyone / anything that helps him.

I have been bi curious for a very long time. It may have started when I realized that most men I met have MFF fantasies and I had MFM fantasies.

I have always fantasized about being with a couple (MF) - and both of us pleasing the woman. With the right couple, I could be convinced (and in some fantasies, ordered) to try things with the other man.

My wife has chrons/colitis and having sex is NOT an option for her.  I am not looking to chuck the marriage - and I could not go out to an adult book / toy store and troll for someone.

I don't have the inclination or money to pay someone to fulfill any fantasies. I could not perform or enjoy it if I was paying someone.

I am a bit stumped on what to do about my feelings as well.

How open minded is your spouse? Does she feel that you aren't being taken care of? I don't want to encourage anyone toward infidelity. However, how open minded is your wife? There are  many options out there to fulfill fantasies. If you want suggestions or just want to have a sounding board, feel free to PM me.....

Janus

[alistair.blankley]

Before the topic was derailed, I wonder if Karl2 has had found anyone / anything that helps him.

The thread, derailed? Who'd do a nasty thing like that?

Mea culpa.

[kurious]

So a lot has changed since I was last on here.

Just wanted to throw out a quick apology for resurrecting an old thread first.

I'm now a Grandpa, different job, different house, different lifestyle. Oh yea, and different bedroom rules.

Same wife, same kids, but living a much better life.

Long story short, while lying in bed I told Mrs Kurious what I wanted and how I wanted. She, of course called an all-stop for discussion time. I was at a crossroads. She was looking for 'why' I wanted. I chose my response carefully and used honesty, sincerity, and intimacy.

She was hurt that I didn't tell her sooner. She felt guilty that I didn't feel as if I could tell her anything. I explained all the responses she had given me over the years (in my head) and how it made me freeze when it came time to be honest about my desires.

Turns out she's kind of a sicko and I LOVE IT! The games she plays with her hand inside me... Mental and physical. Mmmmm.

Anyhow, we're celebrating our 25th anniversary this year and it seems like we're newlyweds.

I appreciate all the advice and different perspectives you all gave me. It helped me to breach what I envisioned was an impossible subject with my wife.

Who knew?

Oh yea, one more thing.. How'd the moderators allow this topic to jump so far off? Shame shame. 😁

[staci]

Janus was an eight dollar bill. RIP

[Pornhubby]

Welcome back. Yeah, no one has posted in this thread for nine years. I don’t think any of the original commenters are even still here.

Congrats on your relationship and your grandchild.

Hard to believe he’s been gone seven years now, Staci.

[kurious]

I didn't know Janus other than reviewing some of the posts, but still appreciate the helpful discussion he gave.

Thank you Pornhubby for your response. It appears a lot of things have changed here since I last visited. Just getting my feet wet looking around again.

[staci]

I didn't know Janus other than reviewing some of the posts, but still appreciate the helpful discussion he gave.

Thank you Pornhubby for your response. It appears a lot of things have changed here since I last visited. Just getting my feet wet looking around again.

Some things have been altered but I don't remember when you were last here. Glad you are back and you will find that most things are the same also. 1408 is still no mans land and certain topics cause more discussion than the sex posts. We have lost a lot of good people and they have been replaced by new thoughts and ideas.
Enjoy getting caught up and yell if it gets confusing.

A woo for reminding me of Janus. He was one of a sort