Keith is a very no nonsense kinda guy when it comes to thinking. He's very logical and analytic in his approach to a debate. He's a left brainer. I am the opposite. I am very spirited and emotionally based when making decisions on what I believe. My heart wins out over my brain, every time. So our debates can get pretty intense.
how it started: should women be allowed in the military?
This is a very big, and on going debate we have in my house. It can be started randomly (like everytime we drink), brought up by movies, or be brought on by other debates that have nothing to do with it, but I find a way to relate them (because I'm a woman, and that's what we do).
Was pretty upset by "the way he was raised comment". Because that is the way he thinks and was raised in a way: to respect women and to "take care of them". Which is not necessarily wrong. He thinks that it is a man's job as a man to take care of women, be chivalrous, open doors for them, be compassionate.. those kinds of things. He wants our daughter to be treated with respect. What parent doesn't? And this may include: specific respect from men, being treated "correctly" with chivalry. He also says that he understands where the military is coming from not wanting to integrate large amounts of women, because it would cost them more money to train people from a group that has the largest fall away rate.
The saying is "chivalry is dead", cause that's shits dead. Women do not need men to open doors for them, to tell them they're pretty, to take care of them, or be compassionate to them just because they are women. Would you hold a door open for a woman? - yes. Would you stand there and hold the door for another man? -no, probably not. Women don't need men to be nice to them because they're women, people need other people to be nice to them because we're all people. Women don't need men to take care of them because they're married. A man and and woman need the other to take care of them because they're family, and they love each other. If a man or woman falls in battle, whoever is the witness should and will be affected.. but if they're a good soldier they will remember their duty and carry on. It should have nothing to do with their sex. I don't want to teach our son to be nice to and respect girls, I want to teach our son to be nice and to respect people. I don't want our daughter to learn that good qualities in a man is whether or not he opens the car door for her, or if he can financially support her. I want to teach my daughter that she is capable of doing anything and everything for herself, but if she receives support and help from anyone else she should be grateful. I want her to be able to support herself, stand on her own two feet.. and then one day be able to stand next to the person she loves, not leaning on their shoulder.
ALSO.. I agree that if women want to be treated equally than they should understand the gravity of that request. I don't believe equality can be conditioned, where a woman can say I am the same as you and want to be treated the same as a man, as long as it's in ___ conditions, doing ___. However, that being said.. it has to be the same on the other end. If a group of men are holding an inappropriate conversation and makes another man uncomfortable, what happens? Probably nothing, because that man is afraid of speaking up for fear of being made fun of by the other men. And if they do speak up, then they are in fact made fun of by the other men.. or maybe he removes himself from the situation or the men respect his feelings and don't make him uncomfortable. Same should go for the women. Except the underlying issue comes back that women are viewed as being more fragile and entitled to more respect from men. So if a woman was to complain of inappropriate talk, the reprimand would be more severe for the men, than if another man was to complain. But again, the fault doesn't lie with the woman, it is in the system.
And on the sexual harassment front.. this should not be an issue if everyone is being treated respect and equality. A man is not going to say something about another soldier of a sexual nature, even if he is sexually attracted to men. So that should remain true whether the soldier is a man or woman. The present of a woman should not increase the likely hood of sexual harassment incidents. This is like saying a woman should not dress provocatively because then she is more likely to be raped. (only more likely to give a negative impression of herself).
I think the problem is our society doesn't recognize the strength of a woman, and down plays the intelligence of a man. Women are strong and capable. If they feel any different it's because they have been taught something different. And instead of standing up and claiming their own right to be anything they want to be, they sit down and listen to hundreds of years of stereotypes that say women are weak and gentle creatures in need of a male (father, brother, boyfriend, husband) to place them on a pedestal, take care of them, and make them complete. When that is not true at all. And Men are intelligent beings. They are completely capable of judging the appropriateness of a situation, regardless of the people presence. And if they aren't, then making it easier for them isn't fixing anything, it's enabling. And they are also completely capable of controlling their urges, be it sexual or anything else. A man has the ability to be in the presence of a sexually dressed woman (or naked!) and be able to still act like a civilized human. And if he doesn't have that ability, than it doesn't matter what the woman is wearing, he will still have the same absence of control.
People are what they are. Changing the scenario or environment a person is placed in does not change the person. And I think it is morally wrong to employ this way of thinking because we're too lazy to change it. Yes, it would take a big change, resources, and involvement from the military to integrate women into it's ranks and have everyone treat and be treated with equality. And whether we do it or not isn't even my concern. My concern is if we're not doing it because it'll be alot of work, then that's some bullshit, and some things (such as the moral objectives of our leaders) need to be called into question.
peace & love