o sung wu

u touch on some really good points. The quota system has led us to probably the most incompetent Government of all time. It must be soul destroying for men putting their lives at risk to be compromised by an idiotic ideology that fail to recognise that their are differences in strength and abilities between men and women. In general woman are much better at some things while men are much better (usually leadership) than women. Most men don't want or respect women trying to act like men no matter what the rhetoric. Having 5 foot 2 policewomen on the beat is a joke to all concerned.

O sung you have hit a nail right on the head.

My youngest daughter has just come home from Darwin, after she has split up with her bloke of 6 years, ever since high school.

He went into the infantry, & had a tour of Afghanistan, before being posted to Darwin. She did not handle the worry of his being in Afghanistan very well.

He recently announced he could no longer hack the ladies army, & it was get out, or join the SAS. As no ladies have ever managed to pass the SAS entrance physical he reckoned he could still enjoy life.

My daughter argued she could not handle the worry of him in the SAS. After some strained months he has joined, & she has left.

This is not an isolated case, many are getting out, as is happening in the navy.

I recently looked at the figures in just the navy. The relationship of officers to ratings is becoming a problem.

There are 4 times as many lady officers to lady ratings, as there are male officers to male ratings. As you know many young officers are far from competent. They need training by their men. The female officers do not react well to their men training them, their dignity gets in the way & they become despised by those met they are supposed to lead.

We are getting far too many men commanded by ladies they can not respect, & are loosing the experience & knowledge required far too rapidly.

My son spent some time training officer cadets before they went to the college, & found an increasing expectation of special easier treatment among the ladies. That would be a big mistake with him. He has a special ability as showing up inadequacies be they in cadets or ships captains. I would have hated having him in a navy division, or army platoon. Unfortunately for commanders, he is too good to let go.

Hello there POIROT...

Lovely to speak with you again. One can't possibly defend their rank stupidity for doing such a thing. Immaturity I suppose ? When I joined the Army (regulars) in the early sixties I was 'silly as a two bob watch' too. I'm sure I'd be stupid enough to promote ALL my 'conquests' in/on whatever medium I could've found ? No computers in those days, certainly none in South Vietnam neither ? I dunno POIROT, I'm sure Army life has changed a lot from half a century ago when I was in, so I can't possibly account for their behaviour today.

I'm just wondering though if what they did is a hanging offence ? I've no doubt I'd be silly enough to engage in similar conduct myself, most of my platoon would've also. Though, some would never have the opportunity to behave in like manner again. Being killed at their FSB near the Long Hai's, kind of a stops all that sort of thing, regrettably ?

Great to speak with you POIROT.

'Even if the diehards cannot see that this is blatantly sexist behaviour, if nothing else it is an invasion of privacy. The act of sex is between individuals and the filming without knowledge or intention to post is a gross betrayal of trust. '

Exactly pelican.

Though I like the question ponderred by hasBeen at the first...

'Why is it OK for the women to do it, but degrading if people see it?
Why is it degrading for women, but not for blokes? '

I don't see it as degrading. I haven't read much on the story, but were there denigrating comments about the women? Or were they being appreciated by voyeurs? It's part and parcel of the sorry mess that women enjoying sex is seen as degrading in and of itself. Suze banging on about degrading the men as some retribution for the appreciation of the female form? Weird.

To me the privacy issue is the only paramount issue. Anyone who sees it as degrading has a problem with women and sex, and is buying into labeling people as 'sluts';

Man posts video of HIMSELF and woman engaged in consenting sex. Somehow people think this is degrading for the woman but not the man. They're both there!

It's about as degrading as women talking to each other about their husband's dick that happens every day. Actually less so, unless of course these women also share the ins and outs of their vaginas at the same time to their mates. Don't say it doesn't happen girls, chicks tell each other everything, the guys are just filming it for good measure.

o sung wu,

I don't necessarily blame them for finding an outlet to reassert their machismo.

In fact, I'm surmising that it might be a natural recourse in males whose territory has been infiltrated by women.

Just reading a little of Camille Paglia, who is a feminist who believes (and admires) that men created art, religion, architecture and civilisation on the run from nature and women...their response to the power invested therein - who writes:

"Androgyny, which some feminists promote as a pacifist blue-print for sexual utopia, belongs to the contemplative rather than active life. It is the ancient prerogative of priests, shamans and artists. Feminists have politicised it as a weapon against the masculine principle. Redefined, it now means men must be like women and women can be whatever they like. Androgyny is a cancellation of male concentration and projection."

Hi there RUNNER...

You're quite correct in your assumption. Once again these damn politicians are meddling in areas they have little knowledge.

Take the current Minister of Defence. Does he have any conception of the deleterious effect that some of the awful policies, he and his bungling mates in Cabinet have thrust upon the entire Defence Department ?

Further, does he realize how those awful policies have a 'ripple down' effect, right to the lowest ranks of, AB's, Pte's, or AC's. Any three of these magnificent personnel could teach the Minister more of the culture, the honour, and mentality of each of the vital 'arms' of our Armed Forces, then he and his useless cabinet mates, would ever know ?

Please Mr Minister, I would respectfully remind you, perhaps you should contemplate carefully, the true gravity of what the words of your portfolio convey;

Your DEFENCE portfolio entails keeping this Nation safe.

In order to DEFEND Mr Minister, one must be fittingly 'ARMED' with suitable weapons. By the overwhelming and strategic use of FORCE. FORCE is defined as Trained Personnel.

Defence is certainly, not a game, neither is it a weekend 'jolly' unlike what many politicians embark upon regularly ? It's serious stuff, with high stakes. The last thing any member of the Defence Force wishes, is some meddling, 'Derek do good' of a Defence Minister, lecturing how they must behave and think, both on and off duty. That task falls squarely on the shoulders of their respective senior officers, not some pathetic dullard of a politician who's never likely to wear 'with honour' a 'starched' set of 'greens' or 'whites' or 'blues' as proud symbol of being a vital and necessary part of this Country's defence force ! God knows you useless bunch, you can't even protect our borders, you incompetent fools !

Yet you have the extraordinary temerity to lecture a group of young, high spirited serviceman on morality ! That Sir is within the exclusive remit of their senior officers, NOT YOURS, EVER !