Girls and guns

Everybody knows that the mainland’s army is more than twice as huge as Taiwan’s. So if Taiwan enforced the draft for women as well as men… then there would be a hell of a lot more manpower available to defend Taiwan.

Unfortunately, not only do women not serve an obligatory two years in the army, but they don’t even learn how to use a gun properly. Allow me to explain:

As my Chinese teacher pointed out, in Middle School everyone has to go to a special class called something like “Army class” (similar to the USA’s “R.O.T.C.”) - it’s a special side class where a real soldier teaches the little children how to use a gun.

Boys have to hit the target six times out of six - then they pass. However, girls only have to pick up the gun and blindly shoot anywhere - yes - blindly - that means maybe without even looking.

Now everybody who’s studied the history of warfare knows that up to one-half of all casualties are caused by friendly fire. So here we have an island teaching half of its population (girls) to pick up the gun and turn your head and close your eyes and shoot. Never mind if they accidentally kill the soldier who taught them to do this - because he’s an idiot - just like the politicians who allow this situation to continue are absolutely… I really can’t find a more appropriate word…STUPID… and perhaps suicidal.

Taiwan should really follow Israel’s example in regard to its defense. Taiwan is lacking in man power and it’s sacrificing half of its manpower because of some stupid conservative sexist attitude.

My Chinese teacher did tell me: during the class a lot of the girls started getting hysterical and crying. They were very afraid of fire arms. So the sodiers got soft and decided to just let them shoot once and forget it.

Well, I’m not surprised.

First of all, the girls were crying because they’ve been raised and conditioned to act like that since they were born. All the soldier would need to do is say:

“NO. You have to hit the target six times out of six. So quit crying and shoot the gun.”

If the children are expected to be tough - then they will be tough. If the children are expected to be soft wimps (which is expected of girls in Taiwan) then they will indeed play that role…

And the more they play that role - the more soft they will be - and Taiwan’s defenses will be softer, too.

In our Chinese book, the new word was “sexual discrimination”. The question in the book was something like - “do you think that not requiring military service for women is a form of sexual discrimination?”
I thought to myself, ‘is this a question?’ and I answered,“of course it’s sexual discrimination. It’s very obvious.”

But the problem goes deeper than sexual discrimination. It just weakens Taiwan’s defenses.

I feel that Hellizabeth has posted some very informative and well thought-out comments.

It is worthy of note that in the past decade there have been a number of conscientious objectors (males) who have sued the ROC government over the requirement that “men have to serve in the military but women are excluded.” As would be expected, their legal arguments focused on the fact that this military service requirement treats men and women in a differently, in apparent violation of Article 7 of the ROC Constitution, which guarantees men and women equal treatment under the law.

Unfortunately, none of those suits were decided in their favor. The Supreme Court justices offered a number of reasons. (I am not sure if English translations of those decisions are available on the Internet or not.)

At any rate, if we consider Hellizabeth’s comments to be of value, (and I think they are), then there is clearly a course of action which is open to us which has never been used before in the history of the ROC.

This is as follows: Hellizabeth (or someone with similar interests) must find an ROC girl of military service age who wants to be a test case. Then we would help her to apply for military service. It would be expected that application would be denied. This denial could then be appealed, and a court suit filed, then later an application could be made to the Supreme Court.

Well, this is my two cents worth. I imagine that some other people will have some good ideas as well.

I’m not clear on what would happen. There are already women in the military, aren’t there? A couple of articles: Click here and here. Did the law about them being allowed in combat not go through after all?

To skip to a non-legal aspect of the subject, women on the average are better shots than men.

Yes, I’m sure there are women in the military. But the main thing that I find silly is…

  1. the differential treatment in the “army class” where girls practice friendly fire so that they can be prepared to accidentally kill Taiwanese people in the event of an actual war.

  2. women aren’t drafted like men.

I’d simply like to reiterate that if “Army teachers” expect the young girls to hit the target six times out of six - then THE GIRLS WILL. And… Taiwan will have doubled its number of sharp shooters and enhanced its defense system. But if the teachers expect the girls to cry - then most of the girls will comply and cry as they have been expected to do from birth.

War is more high-tech than ever before - and adding Taiwan’s women to the military would increase the competition in more technical areas of the military. HALF OF TAIWAN’S BRAIN POWER IS NOT BEING USED in the military. And I know the argument that many people have: who will take care of the children? Well, I certainly hope that the person who is taking care of the children is a sharp shooter who knows how to use a machine gun well. The way Taiwan prepares its women for war, they might accidentally shoot their own children. Talk about a nation shooting itself in the foot!

“Women should not be soldiers…it comprises the other soldiers…plus their stamina compared to a mans is lower” …this is what a friend(who is a marine) told me…and he said that this is a generally accepted thing in the army… How many GI Jane’s (Demi Moores), rough and tough women are there…apart from some of those big beauties that are always fighting on Jerry Springer LOL

Well, I’d like to say again that I really hope Taiwanese schools start teaching the girls how to be sharp shooters. Maybe it’s just me, but I always remember at summer camp, the best archers were always the girls. It was probably just my summer camp. Anyway, six out of six for all the kids.

Guns are nasty dirty noisy scary things and if you play with them too much you’ll end up looking like Charlton Heston. Actually, the gun thing is just a very innocuous example of the really disgusting discrimination against women in Taiwan.

Anyone familiar with the policies on “girls and guns” in Mainland China? That would make for a good comparison. Someone made a very broad statement to me the other day that “women in China are HEARTLESS because of Communist mentality/training” and that in business they are tough as ****! (oh darn that censorship! j/k, I typed the asterisks myself, lol). I agree with Hellizabeth, the problems are much more deeply rooted that sexual discrimination. Interesting discussion going on here.

By the way, whether or not women can or could fire, aim or hit with a gun would/will be irrelevant if/when the Great Red Beast to the West rises against the tobacco leaf-shaped island. You may as well be arguing the need to train fish to ride bicycles…

I think Hellizabeth’s point was aimed more at the gender stereotyping at a young age that’s so prevalent in Taiwan (and many other places, of course).
It’s really just another way of saying: “Why do little boys get to play with toy trucks and pistols but little girls get Barbie dolls and My Little Pony.”
No sentient being who actually follows events here would consider for even a minute that there could be anything other than massive-scale destruction of Taiwan’s cities in the event of a major cross-strait confrontation, whatever the eventual resolution or intervention by other powers. Whatever the final result after the smoke clears, Taiwan would be well and truly f***ed. Whether or not civilians – male or female – could shoot would be, as Wolf points out, totally irrelevant.

“Totally irrelevant”? Those are strong words, cowboy. If it’s totally irrelevant, then why do they teach the boys to hit six out of six? Are you saying that they should just scrap the “army class”? OK… I agree. Scrap it. And scrap the army. If Costa Rica can do it, there must be a way, right?

Oh, by the way, Switzerland is probably one of the best defended nations in the world - and every household has a gun and a person who knows how to use it… Why?.. just in case, that’s why - it’s defense. And Israeli men and women all keep a machine gun in the back of their car… just in case. And the red army is full of women and men who are super-sharp shooters… just in case… it’s defense…I think…

Are you saying that Taiwan should just not have an army or a defense system? OK, if President Chen can pull off the Costa Rica thing and get the nobel peace prize, that would be brilliant. So now the thread of this discussion has turned to…
Don’t teach girls OR boys how to be sharp shooters because in the event of a real attack (which won’t happen) it won’t matter if people can use guns BECAUSE…Taiwan will just be wiped out anyway because Taiwan’s defense is a silly paper-mache facade with no substance so the army shouldn’t even exist…

Maybe the government should teach all children (boys AND girls) how to properly commit suicide in the event of an attack. Right, folks? Let’s hear it!

And… anyway - brain power in the military is another thing I brought up, folks. The more high-tech areas of the military require brain power. Are women brainless? Uh…like…I don’t know, like…right?

I think it’s stupid to teach boys how to be sharp shooters and let girls randomly shoot with closed eyes. And by the way, like anything you learn, you can easily pick it up again 10 or 20 years later - it’s like riding a bicycle, folks.

Hi, Mr. Musasa.

  1. a soldier is a soldier, whether or not your “top brass” army [dIk] friend think he’s “worthwhile”.

  2. learning to use a gun is a skill that can be recalled 10-20 years down the line. The skill may be dormant, but it can be recalled: like riding a bicycle.

  3. women soldiers can assist a military conflict that takes place on the outlying islands of the Taiwan Straight, and they will be better prepared to do so if they learn how to use a gun right at an early age.

I don’t see how your three issues make the issue at hand a non-issue.

With the utmost respect to you and the late Rev. Jackinoff,

Hi, I am married to a Tiawanese women who has showed me her school reports and her "A"s for Military training. Maybe she went to a different school than the other person is talking about because my wife says she was definately required to hit the target with all six shots. They also had plenty of what she calls “dry runs”,(loading and unloading) but definately fired live amo and was required to hit the targets just as the boys in her class did.
She said there was also a hell of a lot of marching and carrying the guns which they did along side of the boys.

I have also been on a youth camp here in Taiwan called “Tiger Camp” which is loosely based on military training. We had to wear army clothes for a week, get up at 5:30am for role call and marching and the fun army stuff. We also did practice parachute jumping from a tower with some kind of bungy/parachute harnese connected to a long flying fox, Abseiling, crossing some gorges suspended on cables a mock battlefeild situation crawling through mud with explosives going off, they showed you how to lie on the ground and take cover to reduce the effects of the percussion from the explosives vibrating through the ground and to cover the ears to avoid any air pressure damage and while we didn’t have guns to play with we did do archery (whoopee), but the girls had to do everything just like the boys. These were mostly 14 - 16 year olds. It was fun, but it seemed a little nationalistic and brainwashing.
My wife also plays TaeKwondo for fun, She has a third dan blackbelt and I have seen her hit a guy in the face before who was giving her a hard time.
She’s great.

Hi… my friend Donnie is with a leading U.S. defense company and was sent to Taiwan to train the military with some of the equipment that was purchased. I bugged him to share his views on this topic since he works right smack in the middle of it all, he emailed me with the following (unedited) and said I could post it up. Here goes:

[quote=“Donnie”]1. The military here is broke. Gender, or lack thereof in some cases does not matter. Backwards thinking, corruption, and refusal to change to modern technology severly hamper Taiwan’s military on a daily peace time mission, must less in the event of war.

  1. I, having served alongside with many women in the US ARMY, am a firm believer in EQUAL OPPORTUNITY. But in order to do that, the standards should be the same across the board for both sexes and lots of times the standards are not the same.

  2. Guns. Well, generally, women are more scared of firarms than men are; however, as stated in the forum, women are generally a better shot than men are. I say generally, because, men unlike women can go to specialized schools to learn how to fire better and more accurately. These schools are for combat arms speciality’s, the front line guys, so they are not open to women in the US ARMY, neither are they here.

  3. Taiwan does have alot of female soldiers. I work with some of them everyday. They are very smart and articulate, and very professional in their choice of career. However, they, just as in the US ARMY, are not permitted to join combat arms specialities. The one’s that I work with are either office staff, or missile maintenance techs.

  4. While in school, the children may learn how to use a firearm, but once out in the real world (ARMY), unless assigned to combat arms units, all men, no one continues to practice BRM (Basic Rifle Marksmanship). While, yes, shooting is something one can recall later in life, to be proficient at it, one must practice. After all, practice makes perfect.

  5. Discrimination. Well, yes and no. First on this subject, the draftee ARMY, should be done away with. It doesn’t work. America figured that one out the hard way.

Second, these people should ask themselves, if they would want their women serving in the military before discussing the topic in an open forum. I bet that 75% or better of the ones discussing it, would not want their daughter doing it. Heck, I don’t want my son going in when he turns 18. He deserves better!!!

Choice is the key word here. Give the kids a choice to serve or not to serve. Give the ones that do proper pay and special benefits. That would keep folks that wanted to be in the service, IN, and the ones that don’t, OUT. This should be done WORLDWIDE, not just here, as most military service members are grossly underpaid, including the US.

  1. Now, we come to the subject that will infuriate alot of folks, yourself incuded, so I apologize already. Women are generally weaker in some areas than men are. Strength is one of those areas. In war, everyone has to carry their own weight. REGARDLESS. In some ways, women are not cut out for this. Weeks or months, at a time without proper hygeine. Needless to say, it is alot easier for men to function in this type of arena, without having to worry about infections. I won’t elaborate on this, as we are both adult and can read between the lines.

Next comes, having actually to pull the trigger. Believe me, that is the easy part. Living with the consequences isn’t. I think that men are somewhat better equipped in this area also, because men tend to bury things and keep them inside. This IS NOT the right way to handle this, but it helps greatly helps. Kinda like the addage “Pain only hurts if you let it”.

Next, in the event of being taken prisoner, women face the possibility of the most traumatic, degrading experience possible. Rape. While men too also face this possiblity, let’s ask ourselves, how many men are going to rape another man. There are countless documented stories of women being beaten and brutally raped, numerous times by numerous people, to “break their spirit”. Most women, would not be able to handle this, and I can’t blame them the least little bit. That is an aspect of women on the front lines that no one wants to think about.

  1. Last but not least. All anyone has to do is ask theirself if they are ready to see a women come home in a flag draped casket, or be blown to bits in a mortar attack on national TV. I can tell you honestly, the US isn’t ready to see that, so how can anyone think that a 50 year old democracy is ready to see that. Women are looked at as a caring motherly figure. This is why society in general is not ready to see “GI JANE” marching off to war and storming the trenches in a hail of gunfire.

OK, now let me climb off the soapbox. Hope you get something out of all that rambling. I am not against women serving in any military. I do agree that there are certain areas and jobs, that will never be suited for a woman, due to the differences in body makeup and psyche alone.[/quote]

To the last guy,

OK, you expected it, but I totally disagree with your asessment of women being used as frontline troops. I’m absolutely for equal opportunity (to go and get yourself killed) and think your arguments are totally without foundation.

Your first point is about health and the problems of women getting infections. Pathetic. I think women can deal with their health issues and there periods. Are you implying that wmen are too delicate to put up with the inconvenience of no hygeine facilities. When it comes to problems of health and infection one of thebigger issues has got to be male soldiers going around infecting the local populace of areas that they are stationed in with all kinds of sexual diseases. I suspect an all female army would not have so much of this problem.

Are women as capable of kiling and dealing with the consequences as men? This one I’m not so sure of. Turning supposedly law-abiding moral citizens into trained killers has always seemed ratehr dubious to me. I think women are probably as good at this as men.

Then you don’t want women fighting because they migth get raped. Well war is brutal mean and nasty, or so I hear, men and women get tortured, killed, maimed and raped all the time. It doesn’t matter if you’re a man or a woman. You seem to forget that most of the rape that goes on in a war is done by the soldiers to the civilians. My guess (and this may be wild specultaion) is that n all female army would reduce this somewhat.

Women coming home in body bags. I don’t like men coming home in body bags either. I don’t like little girls in villages getting napalmed even more. I don’t think it’s an issue.

I’ve got another idea. If men were banned from becoming frontline troops, what do you think would happen to the state of warfare in the world?


See the “Too Many Foreigners” topic for some parallel political conversations on this issue for ARC status.

Women in Taiwan should be expected to perform some form of national service. However, most are not likely to make good recruits for the ROC armed forces…especially in “offensive” combat zones like the outter islanders of Kinmen and Matsu.

Under Laws of War (eg. Geneva Convention), there is the POW status of militia/volunteer corps and is different from Armed Forces. Militia cannot be used outside their jurisdictional borders in offensive capacity. Thus the pertinent issue of alien women with ARC status being compelled to be potentially “conscripted” into the ROC national service under militia status.

The defacto Mutual Defense Treaty is the Taiwan Relations Act which is limited to Taiwan/Penghu.
The SFPT is geographically so delimited as well.

No MDT or SOFA (Status of Forces Agreements) makes for some very perculiar bilateral defense circumstances as well the Shanghai Communiques. And SFPT makes for some unique wrinkles as well.

Anyone with ARC status is likely to be subject to ROC militia conscription laws. Punishments can be done under the same ROC “Uniform Code of Military Justice” shared with the Armed Forces.