BaBamSam

Oh yay. Another white male who believes he can comment on the physical and emotional capabilities of women because he knows and happens to be related to a couple of women. Let's take a look.
"Last week I had the opportunity to sit down with a diverse group of people to discuss..."
Define diverse. Men and women? Different political analogies? Different ages? Different lifestyles? Just men and women is not diverse enough to get an actual debate on this topic, but points for trying.
"...if you admit women into the Infantry, you must ask them to be men"
No. You ask them to be exceptionally strong individuals.
"As Ms. Duff pointed out during our discussion, women have 50% less upper body strength, and 25% less lung capacity..."
Source this? Also, there are a million other variables that determine capacity more than biological sex. Health, lifestyle decisions, height and weight, training, etc. Obviously there's a difference but considering the top female lifter and top male lifter are not separated by this alleged 50%, I'm going to suggest that this gets fact checked.
"Do you really want your daughter hanging out with men who have that mentality?"
I wouldn't want my son OR daughter to be, actually. Thanks for reinforcing that gender construct.
"More to the point, if the calculus is altered, our people, my peers, die. So, if we have the most capable and lethal ground combat force on the planet, it isn't broken. If it isn't broken, what are we trying to fix?"
Substituting an equally trained and competent woman for a man of lesser or equal quality would not break your formula. But it might help erode some engrained gender constructs.
"It is the ultimate crucible of human physical and emotional endurance, which only the most capable people should apply."
And some women can be in that "most capable" group should you allow them to prove themselves.
"Plain and simple, that standards are dropped to allow 'social progress.'"
No one is advising that standards be dropped. They are advising that women should be allowed the opportunity to meet those standards.
"Furthermore, if you look at American culture, the 'beta' male has become the norm, or even the social ideal. While James Dean, or John Wayne used to be the 'ideal' American male, we now have Justin Bieber and Justin Timberlake. Gone is the man's man."
...the ignorance. I just can't even reason with the logic of someone who doesn't understand gender constructs.
"If and when this does happen, you will see the wholesale destruction of more than 200 years of tradition which has separated our Armed Forces from those of the rest of the World."
Doomsday prophecy point! Because change always results in the worst scenario. Tradition is always better. /sarcasm
This person is arguing about the culture of the infantry primarily, which can and has been changed. Accepting women does not have to, nor will it, lessen the effectiveness of the infantry in anyway. If capable women want the chance to serve in the infantry, they should be given that opportunity.

There is not even a correlation between those things.
By your logic, you weighing in at all on women right's is invalidated.

Didn't I just write that I was waiting for a guy to point out the baby thing?
I have a question for you, then. If a man and a woman complete training and conditioning, are verifiably equal in their competencies and qualified for their duties, why should the woman not be allowed to serve?

Well, we add drugs like steroids into the equation, the unnatural effects of those things skew the equation and change arguments.

I, personally, would not choose military life. That is not based on my gender, but based on my personal beliefs and other interests in life. My argument is not irrelevant because of this. I am sorry you feel that way, but there are many women who are willing to be trained and will proudly serve this country in combat or in various other military careers. I don't believe anyone, veteran or not, has the authority to tell someone who is trained properly and verifiably that he or she cannot serve in the military because of their gender. Or any arbitrary reason of the like.

Didn't I just write that I was waiting for a guy to point out the baby thing?
I have a question for you, then. If a man and a woman complete training and conditioning, are verifiably equal in their competencies and qualified for their duties, why should the woman not be allowed to serve?

I, personally, would not choose military life. That is not based on my gender, but based on my personal beliefs and other interests in life. My argument is not irrelevant because of this. I am sorry you feel that way, but there are many women who are willing to be trained and will proudly serve this country in combat or in various other military careers. I don't believe anyone, veteran or not, has the authority to tell someone who is trained properly and verifiably that he or she cannot serve in the military because of their gender. Or any arbitrary reason of the like.

Ah, you've misunderstood what privilege is. You may have busted your ####### and worked hard your entire life - I do not say anything to the contrary. However, your privilege is that you were born to a sex with a superior gender in today's society. You have never been told that your gender limits what you can do (unless it's have a baby, which I'm sure you'll retort with something similar other than reflecting on this).
Because females are discouraged from playing football even as kids? I was one of three girls in a FLAG football league as a kid. I played two years of contact before I was no longer allowed to play in the league due to being female. So. Look at society for that answer before jumping to the assumption that it is only physical limitations.
I was waiting for someone to tell me I am discredited due to my lack of military experience. Points for you for being the first. I have already admitted my disinterest in military life and careers, and if me admitting that discredits me in your eyes then that is your loss for a healthy debate. But you lack a ####### and I'm sure you've weighed in on everything from abortion rights, to birth control, to gender based affirmative action.
I'm beginning to question your reading comprehension. The average man to become a soldier completes training. Hence they are no longer your average man off the street. As I've said twice now, training and conditioning are necessary for both men and women.

Ah, you've misunderstood what privilege is. You may have busted your ####### and worked hard your entire life - I do not say anything to the contrary. However, your privilege is that you were born to a sex with a superior gender in today's society. You have never been told that your gender limits what you can do (unless it's have a baby, which I'm sure you'll retort with something similar other than reflecting on this).
Because females are discouraged from playing football even as kids? I was one of three girls in a FLAG football league as a kid. I played two years of contact before I was no longer allowed to play in the league due to being female. So. Look at society for that answer before jumping to the assumption that it is only physical limitations.
I was waiting for someone to tell me I am discredited due to my lack of military experience. Points for you for being the first. I have already admitted my disinterest in military life and careers, and if me admitting that discredits me in your eyes then that is your loss for a healthy debate. But you lack a ####### and I'm sure you've weighed in on everything from abortion rights, to birth control, to gender based affirmative action.
I'm beginning to question your reading comprehension. The average man to become a soldier completes training. Hence they are no longer your average man off the street. As I've said twice now, training and conditioning are necessary for both men and women.

Please, do not imply or question my mental ability just for voicing a different opinion and perspective from your own. Thank you.
I am under the belief that the infantry would function best when it was comprised of those who demonstrate that they are sufficiently capable and sufficiently trained regardless of gender. This is not a "make it half and half" thing. This is allow women the opportunity to at least prove themselves.
I think the strength of women would surprise you, as your sweeping generalization reflects gender roles and beliefs constructed by society and is not related to actual biology. My personal competencies are not relevant as I neither would like to serve in the military, nor have I done that specific task. I do, however, know women who could do just that and many men who could not.
EDIT: Also your belief in the lesser effect of women stems from a social norm to perceive women as the lesser gender and sex. Another construct.

It's yet another misleading/baiting title. The "Obama endangering rural commuters and bumming out tours" he posted yesterday was of the same misdirection, I believe.

Well, the Patriot is the Master Baiter.

Interesting how Obama is at fault for a program that began in 1985. Shouldn't that be Get Your Free Reagan Phone?

Technically, the K-1 is slightly faster. It used to be a bigger difference. If you were to get married there, it would just mean restarting the process for the CR-1 and prolonging the wait, sadly. All of us waiting on the K-1 are just as bummed about the wait as you are, but this is a great community full of people ready to support you guys in the process.

I am anti-guns, in general, but this was a well written (transcribed, more accurately) piece that offers a lot of insight into a rational (maybe typical?) gun owner's mind. I would curiously read his book to find out others' thoughts from a similar perspective. I wish more pro-gun arguments were so eloquent and calm, as I found it was much easier to understand his perspective.
I feel like this article/interview represents a larger problem than just gun control in this country. It represents a division in this country along political party lines that is so intense that we don't know what to do when we disagree with one aspect of the party we identify ourselves as. The labels of "liberal/democrat" and "republican/conservative" are so vehement and violent when used by the opposing party. If you identify as one party primarily, but disagree with them on certain issues you aren't a true "liberal/conservative/democrat/republican" because how could you not back the party 100%? It's ostracizing. I identify so well with Baum when he discusses feeling like an outsider because he doesn't believe how he "should" as a liberal when it comes to gun rights.

it's all gonna be okay, dennis rodman's gonna work it out.

I'm going with scorned lover.

We talk a lot, to the point of nauseousness, but it keeps things healthy and strong.
Also, with the in-laws, your husband should act as your defender and the intermediary. He is the one who needs to watch out for you and your feelings with them, in my opinion. Let him talk to them about this issue and urge them to be more sensitive.

Actually for a September filer, 10-12 months is about right if CSC stays at the same rate they have been processing for the last few months.
But unacceptable.
Your fee dollars at work

Technically, the K-1 is slightly faster. It used to be a bigger difference. If you were to get married there, it would just mean restarting the process for the CR-1 and prolonging the wait, sadly. All of us waiting on the K-1 are just as bummed about the wait as you are, but this is a great community full of people ready to support you guys in the process.

If you look at embassy reviews, you will see that AP is common for Middle Eastern-sounding names - particularly when going through embassies like London and Western embassies (when coming from a country that is primarily Muslim, it is not as common for people to be placed in AP for their names alone). It's an unfortunate result of the current political climate in the US. I don't think Ippsy Pippsy was trying to say anything bad about Islam or Muslims, but was commenting on a trend that can visibly be seen in data. High fraud is another reason for frequent AP and denials. And age difference can be a red flag, it is commonly talked about in this forum. No, it is usually not reason for denial but it can and does raise questions for some people especially at certain embassies. It is great that you had a painless process, but please don't use your sole experience as reason to reject other more painful processes that revolved around these issues.
To the OP, as others have said, your options right now are mostly limited to student visas and trying for the diversity lottery. Work visas are extremely difficult to come by for most people.

If you look at embassy reviews, you will see that AP is common for Middle Eastern-sounding names - particularly when going through embassies like London and Western embassies (when coming from a country that is primarily Muslim, it is not as common for people to be placed in AP for their names alone). It's an unfortunate result of the current political climate in the US. I don't think Ippsy Pippsy was trying to say anything bad about Islam or Muslims, but was commenting on a trend that can visibly be seen in data. High fraud is another reason for frequent AP and denials. And age difference can be a red flag, it is commonly talked about in this forum. No, it is usually not reason for denial but it can and does raise questions for some people especially at certain embassies. It is great that you had a painless process, but please don't use your sole experience as reason to reject other more painful processes that revolved around these issues.
To the OP, as others have said, your options right now are mostly limited to student visas and trying for the diversity lottery. Work visas are extremely difficult to come by for most people.

I agree I would have aborted. I feel Ms. Kelley made the best decision for herself, not for the child.

We're talking about India here, and the government basically saying that a man can legally rape his wife. We are not talking about women who abuse the system in the United States and we're certainly not talking about your possible date rape incidents.

:thumbs: :thumbs: I'm a libertarian and a capitalist and my problem with Walmart is that the government is practically subsidizing most of their workforce. Without government assistance with childcare, food, medical expenses, and potentially even TANF, most of these workers could not even afford to work at Walmart. That isn't the free economy...it is a corporation working hand in hand with entitlement programs to bleed the country dry.