Would you Want Your Servants to Read This?

  fourm member 12:18 09 May 14
Locked

The full quote is 'Is it a book that you would even wish your wife or your servants to read?'. In case you've never seen it, it was said by the prosecutor in the Lady Chatterley's Lover trial of 1960. It is usually seen as a benchmark for how out of touch the establishment was.

Today, Gen Lord Dannatt, speaking about women in combat roles said he thought it was wrong for women to be in units that might be ordered 'to attack a hill...'.

That struck me as an out of touch comment. Surely, the days when fighting was about using infantry to take the high ground are long passed.

Happily, he's retired so his out of date views no longer have any weight.

  TopCat® 13:14 09 May 14

I tend to agree with Lord Dannatt as a former 1950/60s serviceman. Women played an outstanding role in all three main services during and after WWII. Very few, thank goodness, actually faced an enemy in combat alongside male personnel back then, but I do believe it is wrong for them to be deployed, say, on naval fighting ships where untold carnage could ensue during battle.

As for the infantry front line role, they could play an important part on resupply duties delivered close to the front and bringing back medical casualties by return.

Women still have the military choice of serving this country but they should not in my opinion be armed to do it. TC.

  Woolwell 16:02 09 May 14

I'm sorry to have to disagree with Topcat about women in the Navy. When I joined it was a male only service and I was still around when women first went to sea. They are just as capable as their male counterparts. Sex is immaterial regarding carnage. What was wrong with women going to sea was the way it was introduced. The senior female ratings (were Wrens but not any more) just did not have the necessary experience. Women are just about to become submariners.

However the Army and Royal Marines are different. There is a requirement to have physical strength. If a woman can pass the same physical strength test then there should not be a problem. There must not be positive discrimination whereby women can pass a lower standard. I cannot imagine a woman passing the Green beret course or yomping. This is not sexism but realism regarding the different physical capabilities of males and females. It is why men and women do not compete in the same Olympics events. Fighting over difficult ground (attacking a hill) is not in the past.

It is old hat to consider that men will protect women. That was a line trotted out when women first went to see. It doesn't happen.

There is a problem with pregnancy and maternity leave.

  Woolwell 16:03 09 May 14

"sea" not "see" in third para.

  rdave13 16:36 09 May 14

Woolwell, totally agree with your post. Your typo made me chuckle and glad I'm not the only one typing them. :)

Jock1e, Took me about 40 years of marriage to realise this was not true., with an older and younger sister I learnt at a very early age that they are definitely not the weaker sex..

  Mr Mistoffelees 16:44 09 May 14

I find that keeping the servants illiterate makes them easier to control.

  bumpkin 17:09 09 May 14

Those days are gone, now they are extortionists wanting £100 a day (Must be cash of course)for a bit of gardening.

  john bunyan 17:18 09 May 14

I agree, in general, with Woolwell and will not repeat his comments. fourm member says "Surely, the days when fighting was about using infantry to take the high ground are long passed.". Usually FM does his homework, but on this he is totally wrong. The Falklands may be a while ago but "taking the high ground" was key to the success of 3 Commando Brigade, ably bolstered by paras, guards and Ghurkhas. 45 Commando , when the Atlantic conveyor was sunk, yomped 120 miles in semi arctic conditions carrying 110 lb. loads and still "attacked the hill". Similarly in Afghanistan SF units attacked Bora Bora carrying similar loads. Another SF unit climbed a 12000ft mountain in one night to establish an OP to help the CIA. Provided that a woman could pass the tests , then fine. One woman did pass the green beret course. Many women have proved their bravery in battle (medics, bomb disposal ,and in combat in SOE in WW2 ). Provided women (there will be few in view of the sheer weights to carry) pass the relevant test fine. For those who have heard of it I doubt if they could do the Pen-y-Fan dance... Fan Dance

  morddwyd 19:27 09 May 14

Surely, the days when fighting was about using infantry to take the high ground are long passed."

No and they never will be.

No matter how much air power, sea power,armoured and any other support you have, territory is taken, and hels, by boots on the ground, the grunt on the ground with a gun.

Kipling's "Poor Bloody Infantry"

They are the sharp end, and the rest of us operate in their support.

I used to take great delight in telling the elite of the V-Force this!

On the subject of the the thread, I've served on the same unit as my wife, and if she had been in danger I suspevt that I might hjave been more concerned about protecting her than in my primary duties.

That cannot be a good thing.

  TopCat® 21:18 09 May 14

Woolwell

In my defence of what I stated earlier I'm sure women are currently doing a fine job aboard our naval ships. The picture that stays in my mind is the terrible scenario that would face them if the ship was devastated and set ablaze by enemy action. Climbing about twisted, red hot and mangled steelwork trying to quench the fires would task even the strongest of men. The sight of the dead, dying and wounded wouldn't even bear thinking about.

Not that I know or would expect naval women to be allocated to damage and fire control duties, even in peacetime, but in the event of a substantial loss of 'hands' at sea they could be quickly pressed into service in order to save the ship. TC.

  TopCat® 21:19 09 May 14

Woolwell

In my defence of what I stated earlier I'm sure women are currently doing a fine job aboard our naval ships. The picture that stays in my mind is the terrible scenario that would face them if the ship was devastated and set ablaze by enemy action. Climbing about twisted, red hot and mangled steelwork trying to quench the fires would task even the strongest of men. The sight of the dead, dying and wounded wouldn't even bear thinking about.

Not that I know or would expect naval women to be allocated to damage and fire control duties, even in peacetime, but in the event of a substantial loss of 'hands' at sea they could be quickly pressed into service in order to try to save the ship. TC.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Huawei P10 review

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

How Nearly Normal created super-fun papercraft for Google

47 iPhone camera tips to help you take better photos