Knight in shining armour??? chat & forums.

Posted In Forum:

Home

MyForums

Show ALL Forums

Author

Thread: Knight in shining armour???

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 24 (view)

Knight in shining armour??? Posted: 12/2/2006 6:01:32 PM
You could always reply with: "No, I own a .44"

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 56 (view)

Looking for advice. Youngest son is considering joining the military. Posted: 11/20/2006 5:22:45 PM
If he wants to go, let him. That being said, since he wants to join the marines, let me run the practical comparison: Both will be going to Iraq or Afghanistan, no doubt. Sometime within an enlistment he will go. Marine tours tend to be shorter (6-8 months vs the army year long) A much wider range of job options in the Army, and you can specify your contract to a much greater extent. Army tends to have better quality of life. Marines are far more formally disciplined, and have a much greater personality built in. Combat wise, Army meat-eaters (the combat arms, which I assume your son would opt for) tend to have records on par that of their marine counterparts, at least in the current conflict. Army leaf-eaters...not so much. Army is better funded and has better gear. Both services are running their people ragged right now. Both have comparable education plans. Marines have greater prestige. Contrary to previous posts, army regulars are not just fodder, and marines are not mindless shock troops. Realistically becoming an army infantryman, tanker, or scout is going to have the same level of physical fitness (well..the tankers don't always run so well) and male bonding attached as the marines in a combat role. That being said, there will not be the cult of personality surrounding the profession as there is with the marines. Right now the army is more more concerned with making Iraq-ready soldiers with entry training while the marines are still concnentrating on trying to produce the image of a marine.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 59 (view)

Women in uniform... guys what do you think about this? Posted: 11/2/2006 5:24:19 PM
Handyman, you are quite deluded. The reason you can work with "decency, honesty, and integrity and sometimes even a heavy fist" is because there are people with guns to stop other people from interfering with you. Call it cowardly if you will, but the upper hand is always going to belong to the guys with the weapons. Better then for the best and most weapons to be on the side of all those handy traits you mentioned. When you think about it, the entirety of law is based around the idea that someone has sufficient power to co-erce people into living according to a certain code. In the end you don't pay speeding tickets because its the right thing to do. There is no in built moral system that says "don't go 65 in a 55." You do it because if you didn't pay, they'd jail you. Forcibly if need be. And it wouldn't be a fight you could win. Not even one you would have a chance of winning. The same applies to larger crimes as well, though there may be some pre-built morals on those. That being said, if someone pulls a knife on a state trooper, there's no reason the trooper should feel the need to get in a one on one knife fight. That would be counterproductive, teaching a rule of individual might that is completely against what you claim to stand for. Instead, the trooper shoots the perp, and the fact remains that while you may be able to sneak by the law, you can't just outmuscle it man to man. A final note: manning up is fine for a prestige fight, but if you're gonna get in a real fight over a real issue, fight to win. If he swings a bat, tase him. If he pulls a gun, three or four guys with rifles knock him down. If he's a got a few buddies, you bring thirty. If it means shooting the other **stard from two hundred meters away at night while he can't even see you, go for it. You can be guaranteed he'd happily kill you in the same fashion.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 19 (view)

last time im going to ask Posted: 11/2/2006 4:32:28 PM
Depends on the rest of the person, but failing that. the style also plays a bit. Personal preference only of course. In no prticular order. Blonde: Pony tail, or that one where the hair is pretty short, but it still has a part across the forehead. More artificial styles. Real long is a no go. Brunette: Most short to moderate length natural styles. Sports styles also good. Red: Not frizzy or curled. Avoid sporty styling. Black: Works best either long or medium-short. Some poeple can make anything work though.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 341 (view)

Is it okay for a woman to hit a man? Posted: 11/1/2006 3:10:24 PM
Go for it. Feel free to take a swing just like another guy would. But I'm going to hit back, and I'm probably going to try to seriously hurt you. If its a slap, I'll backhand you to the floor. If its a punch, I'm not stopping until you're incapacitated. If you don't can't handle the prospect of being pounded bloody in return, its a good idea to re-think hitting someone in the first place. The only time I would think retaliation from the man would not be called for is if the woman used it as a means of deterring social physical agression. (groping, feeling, etc.) Obviously if its self defense he's already attacking more than social, so its gonna be an all out brawl.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 38 (view)

Women in uniform... guys what do you think about this? Posted: 11/1/2006 1:39:26 PM
No problems with it, they're often interesting people. Usually they are dedicated, have some ties to the real world guaranteed, and capable of handling their own problems. So, thats a plus. They have a leg up on their counterparts of similiar intelligence/attractivness. However, three things will flip the situation real quick: 1. If you're a disgrace to the uniform. You don't deserve your uniform if you're falling out at mile five. Similiarly, technical/tactical incompetence (like a certain famous female pfc who didn't clean her weapon) means you're risking people's lives, so any positive effects of the uniform are lost and you become little more than a shitbag who doesn't belong. If you were , say, a banker, this would be much less of an issue. 2. You try to overcompensate for being a woman in uniform, especially if you can't live up to your claims. If you can't drag a 250lb victim out of a fire, stay on the hose crew or dispatch. If you can't do something, accept it, and contribute how you can. Slowing a team down just because you need to feel equal is the wrong answer. 3. You stand at "parade pretty." If you try to use sex as a means of job advancement while your at wal-mart, well, no one really gives a hoot. Your co-workers might bytch, but your new position as manager might mean the stocking is done differently. If you use it for job advancement in a uniformed area of work, you are now in charge of high consequence activities because you were more pleasing to the eye. Avoid those pitfalls and you're golden.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 14 (view)

outdoorsey things Posted: 10/30/2006 9:45:30 PM
Its because we enjoy stalking a lone animal silently through the night with nothing more than an oversized knife, leaping on it, besting it in mortal combat, and then wearing its pelt for warmth and status while devouring its remains. Well, not really, but it appeals to the same instinct yeah? And you can bet your ass that if more people possesed the requisite skill set, that would be a popular hobby. Anyhow, camping is basically a license to exhaust yourself, and then after you've gotten exhausted, find out how much you really enjoy fire and food made by your own hand. At the risk of sounding Tyler Durdenesque, it lets you do something where you can see immediate, applicable, real world results with more value than your TPS reports. On that note, you can learn more about a person in a week of camping than you could in months of consequence free interaction. Also, you're allowed to make fire. With saws and axes and knives and stuff. And is that not just freakin awesome?

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 35 (view)

why do guys not just speak their minds? Posted: 10/30/2006 3:04:42 PM
Ah, you seem to misunderstand us OP. When we ask you to "speak your mind" we mean it in a direct sense. I.e. cut the bull, put the information out there, and stop leaving everything you say open to a dozen possible interpetations of which only one can be right. We tend to do this, until its proven that you don't want us speaking our minds at all, you just want useless fluff conforming to your opinion. Then we either a) shut up, or b) put on our best poker face and have at it.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 12 (view)

Can any of us LIVE ALL OUR LIFE without finding TRUE LOVE? Posted: 10/30/2006 2:53:44 PM
I suppose this is going to be a killjoy, but I believe the answer is not only can you, it is quite probable. After all, the reason "true love" as you've termed it, stands out and has such a prominent status in popular culture and entertainment, is its rareness. Wow, lots of commas. Anyhow, besides the unlikelihood of actually encountering true love in the population pool around you, add in the typical mating range. Namely, 20 to 30. You have ten years where your chance of encountering it is highest, with the probability constantly dropping as the local population is paired off. After that you reach a period where much of the population is out of play so to speak, and you yourself are in less than ideal circumstances for searching. You can get lucky, but the already unfavorable odds have really started to stack up.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 12 (view)

Why some guys are shy, and How to deal with them Posted: 10/28/2006 7:06:18 AM
Not always true Toronto. Many "shy" guys are plenty confident, they're just quiet because its good form. After all, for the most part we are taught from childhood by both family and life that unrestrained braggadocio is bad, efficient completion of the task on hand is good, actions speak louder than words, be polite to but wary of strangers, and if you don't have anything useful to say then you should be shutting the hell up. Our "shy" guy now in a social situation follows these tenets. He makes polite small talk, maybe uses a little self-deprecating humor, and generally doesn't make loud moves. For some reason, people assume because he isn't over-extolling his virtues and asking girls if they'd like to knock boots, he must be un-confident. Put him in a situation where the chips are down however, and somehow he's the only one acting while all those confident people around him are losing their heads or debating what course of action to take as proven by whose****is bigger. You would be very surprised what lies beneath many "shy" guys. They may just know its the punch you dodn't see coming that knocks you out.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 92 (view)

did women kill chivalry? what do we need to do to bring it back? Posted: 10/27/2006 1:59:11 PM
JMars has the right idea by looking at the historical roots of the thing to see how it wokrs in modern land, so here's a little more fleshing out: Chivalry originally developed with the advent of the knight/noble as the pinnacle of warfare during the early middle ages. A very expensive, ruling class only pinnacle of the profession which was the basic means of economic expansion. In order to prove your economic worth, you had to be damn good at fighting, and had to treat your equals (i.e. other nobles and knights) under a practical martial code, not a romantic one (For example, ambushes were quite common and accepted, but killing prisoners was frowned upon...you didn't want your throat slit if you were dismounted after all). This ensured the entire system didn't break down. If you failed at this a) knights wouldn't work for you, and b) other nobles, who were doing perfectly well by the system, would come stomp on you. You did NOT have to be chivalrous to the lower classes or the weak, nor were you expected to. Fealty was an entirely different matter. Also at this time, a woman who expected respect had to be good at organizing finances, farms, and armies while following the chivalrous code and politicking. She didn't have to be a sword slinger, but it didn't hurt either. If you didn't meet these standards, you were not granted the right of chivalrous treatment, man or woman. After knights were more or less replaced by an armed lower and middle class, mercenaries, and engineers as the deciding factor in battle, the original warrior code deteriorated quickly. For a while though, it was sill the descendants of the old fighters who held the land and the money. Howvere, in thier old sphere, warfare, knights in shining armor were being alternatively mown down by longbows, stopped by pikes, beaten by professional infantry, or being generally relegated to a specialized role in sieges as machinists and engineers did the real work. This lead to romantic chivalry, which is what most people think of today. Knights in shining armor now jousted for a lady's favor, undertook quests, etc. to prove their worth to the opposite sex. This also lead to courtly love in the form of poems, songs, etc. as mere prowess at arms was no longer sufficient nor did it have ample opportunities for demonstration. Under this new code, women became prizes, and were expected to become subservient in return for special treatment. Those interested in making a mark for themselves ignored this or gamed it and went about repsect the old way. Now, for the modern tie in. These codes did not coexist then, nor will they now. We have learned that women do not want to be subservient, natch, got it. This means romantic chivalry, where you earn special status and treatment by susbervience ain't happening. We will not take your coat, give up our seat, etc. just because you are female, and in return you will no longer aqcuiesce (sic?) to us just because we are male. Fair trade really. I stand up if the president enters the room because he is the president and has paid for that token of respect with his service as authority; you have different genitalia does not merit the same unless you are willing to pay for it another way, namely, knuckling under. It should be fairly obvious why romantic chivalry won't be happening any time soon. What does exist in modern day is the old code, reformed. People tend to treat those they consider worthy of respect, with respect. A basic level is assumed for all people (until they prove otherwise), for example I tend to keep the door open for most strangers within a few quick steps gender irregardless. Among professionals, friends, and family there is usually a mutual level of politeness and etiquette observed beyond this. Those who have advanced further are given greater respect, and those who prove themselves are granted the same. Nothing which would imply weakness or dominance by one or the other, just niceities which make life a little easier and show an appreciation of the other person. As with the old system, the quickest ways to find yourself out of this loop are to ignore it yourself or prove yourself unworthy. If you are a spoiled brat, ungrateful, an overt idiot, etc., bye, you are now like a peasant or rogue knight of old, and the need to be chivalrous towards you is not there. So basically, if you want all the trappings of chivalry, you have two options: earn it or pay for it. And by the way, if you go the earn it route, don't expect any rituals that would make you seem weaker, cause if you were, we wouldn't respect you now would we?

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 66 (view)

Thoughts on Educated Women.... Posted: 10/20/2006 6:03:02 PM
Smart girl gooooood. Dumb girl baaaaaad. Doh.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 5 (view)

To love a military guy in these times Posted: 10/20/2006 5:15:20 PM
We still love you whiskey.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 12 (view)

Is it an Omen that military relationships are destined to fail? Posted: 10/20/2006 5:12:48 PM
A military/civilian marriage is probably the most difficult relationship in the world, especially with current op tempo. Look into the lifestyle fully before you make a hasty call. There are many more issues than the uproot every now and again. Many work. Many fail. Typically the failed ones bomb out in the first few years when the full impact of being a military spouse hits home, or one party cheats on the other. There are also some long term ones that fall apart because they were ok, but not strong enough to survive the current operating environment.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 27 (view)

I am everything he wants : But he just doesnt want me. Posted: 10/20/2006 3:48:44 PM
You know, it osund slike your pretty happy wiht him the way things are. Give a serious thought to this: What does marriage provide you that your current situation doesn't? If you don't have a good answer, why press the issue?

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 20 (view)

is it wrong for me to be a tomboy Posted: 10/20/2006 3:20:25 PM
Good on you. As a side note, while real tomboys are great, fake tomboys are horrible beyond comprehension.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 10 (view)

Army or Navy Posted: 10/18/2006 7:15:25 PM
Oooh..didn't realize it was Canuckistani forces. Don't know how those work. Re: Nos. The majority of Army MOS's provide some sort of after market non-security skill. Signal, Intel, Transpo, Aviation, Ordnance (big bucks in demolition), Quartermaser, AG. Somewhat in MPs. Of course, the meat eater branches tend to be more focused on killing people, so they're kind of SOL, as its not a real applicbale civilian skill. Caveat: if you have a degree you can leverage leadership experience into management positions.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 69 (view)

What do you men think about a women who makes the first move? Posted: 10/18/2006 7:05:25 PM
It certainly simplifies the situation. So, all good I'd say.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 4 (view)

Army or Navy Posted: 10/18/2006 3:27:11 AM
Officer or enlisted? That makes a difference in the decision for sure. For example, if you go naval enlisted, the closest you'll be to thsoe nifty looking fighter planes in loading them up with bombs and maintaining them. As an officer you might fly them. Army officers, junior ones at least, usually fight the same way as their enlisted counterparts, only while maintaining command and control. That being said, heres a quick run down: Army: Very people-centric. Lets you choose your contract (Make sure you have a friend who is/was in review it though; recruiters are tricky SOBs) . Bases mostly in the west and south, but also in Europe and Korea. Deployments every two years or so. Not so much travel unless you base there. Wide variety of potential skillsets to go, from the electronics to sleep-on-the-ground-and-kill-people with everything in between. Bonus pay for arabic translators nowadays too. Navy: More machine centric. Don't know about contract options. Bases mostly along the coast (duh). Frequent sea tours. Travel depends on ship. Nuke subs aren't pulling into foreign ports, frigates will. Skill sets tend to be focused either on mechanical or elcetronic stuff, individual on a ship is much more of a cog in the wheels than his landside counterpart. Life more cramped, but quality of life on a ship is usually at least equal to Army deployed.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 29 (view)

The Scorpion or the Swan Posted: 10/16/2006 8:45:37 PM
Scorpion, though I have a tendency to hide along the bank and promptly kill any swans that stumble over before we get to talking. Bad habit that.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 102 (view)

How to Stop A Bully Posted: 10/16/2006 9:58:50 AM
Joker, while that'd be one way to interpet what I said, I think in the context of thread and my previous posts you'd have to be deliberately trying to misconstrue my words to get that out them. Everything to date bluntly restated and summarized: Beat the living hell out of the bully, hand to hand. He deserves it, and instead of pushing the problem away with the shield of authority you will have solved it. The caveat being that this general attitude does not apply to fights you can't win. I.e., if the bully is pulling a lethal weapon on the kid, alright call higher because the kid can't deal with it. If he's just shirking away from a confrontation he can be reasonably expected to win, calling authority down is really just allowing the kid to keep on living as a victim who relies on others to solve his problems. Also it tells the bully that he has control over the kid, and will regain it as soon as the adults go away.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 21 (view)

Who do you think would win? Posted: 10/15/2006 2:52:12 PM
Assuming prime vs prime: I'd bet on Tyson. Ali could dance, and he was fast as hell, but I just imagine Tyson sucking up a few stiff jabs to get in range to start with the pummeling.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 92 (view)

How to Stop A Bully Posted: 10/15/2006 1:16:13 PM
I agree with tralala here. Stand up, finish the SOB. If you have to wait for the powers that be to step in, a) you'll find you always need the powers that be, b) you'll never be the powers that be, and c) one day the powers that be are going get there too late. Caveat, if its a fight you can't win (i.e gunman versus you) you're out of other options.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 31 (view)

What to do when a drunk guy gets in your face? Posted: 10/15/2006 12:59:26 PM
Well, I always advise agaisnt fighting in the bar, cause you never know when one of his friends has a chair behind you. That said, even if you don't fight, dragging someone out of a bar can be a significant emotional event for them, the kind that may change their attitude. If you effectively bounce him without the tar beating, that gets a message across. Problem is, once you start dragging someone, most people start fighting back or feel they need to fight when they get outside.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 25 (view)

What to do when a drunk guy gets in your face? Posted: 10/15/2006 7:33:09 AM
I would say that if after your last little shoving match he still won't go outside he doesn't have any right to be in your face...so dragging him outside would be somewhat appropriate.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 19 (view)

Overcoming shyness Posted: 10/14/2006 1:17:54 PM
You're (tish) also only expected to remain set in a defense, and present a reasonable objective to induce guys to try their luck. For the OP to decide to go for it, cross the space in between, and then drive home a conversation requires a little bit more activity than looking friendly. He actually has to act, while you need only wait for someone else to build up the courage.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 16 (view)

What to do when a drunk guy gets in your face? Posted: 10/14/2006 11:56:08 AM
Step 1. Avoid him. if that doens't work... Step 2. Ask him to go away. Step 3. Inform him that really, he's pissing you off. Try to get management involved. Step 4. Tell him that there are two options: he backs off or you both go outside for a man dance. Step 5. Fight. Make sure you win, but don't cause any permanent damage. I would advise against the spontaneous crushing blow while he's sitting down with you, easy win, but it will not look good in the eyes of your town or local judge. A proper stand-up behind the bar that you both agreed to is a lot less likely to get police involved and doesn't make you look like an ovvereactive pyscho.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 14 (view)

Overcoming shyness Posted: 10/14/2006 10:50:33 AM
You know that scene in Top Gun where Maaverick won't take the shot, and his REO is saying the shots don't come any better and then they play the sad 80's electronica? His problem isn't that he's a bad pilot, or that he won't get into position for the shot, its that at the least sign that the shot might be bad he breaks off the attack run. Chances are you aren't clinically shy, and are probably a pretty confident person. You mention as much yourself. Its just that whenever you get the least sign from a girl that she might not like you, real or imagined, "the shot's bad, breaking off." This could be a look, body language, or just a tone of voice. She might not even know she's doing it, but you say see her head turn away and its "pull up pull up pull up". After all theres no external pressure to get you to continue, and the very lack of anything serious riding on it makes it easy to leave it be with no other consequence than you don't talk to her. So either you need some iron will type self-discipline to see you through the approach, or you need some sort of extensive external pressure to force you into it. Call it a guess, but thats the problem I see with most self-proclaimed shy people.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 51 (view)

how hard is it for guys to get a date, really? Posted: 10/14/2006 10:30:51 AM
Well, given you're asking the folks on a free dating site, I expect your going to get several responses to the tone of "quite, or at least very difficult to maintain" After all we wouldn't be stooping to this if we were good at it in the real world. That said, it has a lot to do with four major factors: Impression: Inititial appearance, conversation, etc. Charming male models in a fashionable set of clothes are probably going to have an easier time of it than someone ugly as sin wearing their favorite sweatshirt. Selection: Lower your standards, increase your opportunities. Thsi is partly because the pool size expands, partly because the lower your standards, the more likely theirs are low as well. If you ask out the behemoth sitting in the corner without friends, yeah, getting the date might be easy enough. If you're trying to pick up beautiful people, its going to be a lot harder. Aggression: As all these other posters noted, it is reliant on the guy to go on the attack. People who are not naturally socially aggressive will find ita lot harder to get a date. Women all seem to interpet this as a lack of self confidence. E-mails don't count; it doesn't take any form of social agression to shoot an e-mail, and at the same time they don't force a decision like having someone in your face. I suppose you can't blame them, any more than you can blame us for taking one look at a fat woman and mentally discarding her. Status: I guarantee you people defined as successful in life have a much easier go of it than those who don't.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 64 (view)

How to Stop A Bully Posted: 10/14/2006 2:29:25 AM
Perhaps I should clarify that its ok to fight comment. In the bully context, I meant it as "violence in protection of yourself is acceptable, and the current social idea that big brother will handle it for you is completely inadequate. You have to be self reliant for defense, and willing to fight when required." On to the control point. Control is great. If you can get an arm bar/blood choke/guillotine/finger lock/neck strike, and so on and so forth more power to you. In this case it'd be even better cause it would humiliate the bully by its apprent ease. But it takes a lot of practice to get submissions down to a reliable method. Lets assume our ninth grade friend does not have the advantages of going through an extensive comabtives program. Far better then to learn a few simple things and infuse the will to use them aggressively and detsructively, and then work out the finer points later. Maybe you're just meeting aggression with more aggression, but if you aren't up to a substantial level of skill, sitting there non-plussed is an almost certain way to get battered down even by a technically inferior opponent. I think we've digressed form the original poster's point though. Feel free to shoot me a message off forum if you want to go further into this topic.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 270 (view)

Would u date at guy or marry guy who is in the military? Posted: 10/14/2006 2:02:27 AM
I can't help but notice a lot of "of course, and if I loved him, I'd marry him" answers. Dating thing, good on you. But I don't think you quite understand what you're saying with that marriage answer. Simply put, unless you happen to blunder into one of those storybook/movie romances (hint, they make movies about them because they're rare) love alone is going to face some pretty steep obstacles. Obviously there's the away time. There's deployments, with that whole host of issues. I won't get into infidelity, but it is a major issue to the point where platoon and company leadership has to seriously consider its effects on combat potential. Now, presuming you can get through one 12 month separation, are you ready for another in two years time, max? God forbid they're 3ID, they'll practically live deployed with vacations home. Alright, even with that going on, you can't expect to see them all the time when they are home. Train ups, field exercises, schools, NTC/JRTC deployments will all eat up time stateside. Some days are going to be long and hard, not your standard 6 - 5, and they'll always be at the least convenient time. The first time a day predicted to end at 4 ends at 10 that night and you miss your dinner reservations because of arms room issues, you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. If you're marrying an NCO or officer, it'll only be worse because they'll have paperwork to do, soldiers to look after, and assorted other time eating responsibilities beyond that. Are you ready for when they come back form a deployment and they aren't the same person? Maybe they now booze heavily, and you'll be thrilled the first time your spouse jams the brakes or hammers the gas because theres a trashbag with wiring sticking out alongside the highway. Are you strong enough to help them or at least deal with it? Add the omnipresent chance of death and injury to the equation. Don't think its just soemthing that happens at war either. When you work with 60 tosn of moving steel, and your job involves fuel, explosives, machinery, and sleep deprivation, accidents happen. A drop short will kill you just as dead as an enemy, so will rolling a vehicle in a wadi. Next, the military, for all its benefits, does not pay well. At the lower end of the pay chart, making ends meet for a family isn't impossible, but it sure as hell isn't easy. Nothing will tear up a marriage quicker than financial issues and unless your dead on with cash management they will show up. NCO pay is better, but not great either. A couple bad money decisions and you can still count on those late notices. Lets say you marry an officer, the big bucks so to speak. You shouldn't run into debt, but the life of luxury it is not, certainly not compared to what say,a first year college graduate makes. Unless you get a General, they have all sorts of neat toys...but typically they're already taken. Try not to look at this as shallow, just realize that certain lifestyles will require a sizeable outside income to maintain, and at lower ranks it is definitely a hand to mouth existence. Finally lets look at junior enlisted as this group in particular has problems. We're talking your 18-22 year old PFCs, spec 4s, and the occassional SGT and SSG or their branch equivalents. Some of these guys/girls are more or less staright out of high school and into the force, meaning their real world experience is pretty limited. Which is fine when they're single, because even if they blow their payday on a huge night on the town (and some will) the Army takes care of them for the next two weeks until they can do it again. Many will run up bills beyond their paycheck without the help of the local bar scene. If they make too much of a habit of it, they get slapped upside the head and a talking to, but they're still taken care of. Occassionally their leadership may have to make a midnight run down to a holding cell to pick them up for behavior many would call immature, but that same leadership will make sure they're aok before smoking them. Hell, there's even free medical for those times the clap rears its ugly head. They're usually great people and soldiers, but they're still experimenting in the real world. The military gives them a safety net so that they can scrape by in survival mode after fecking up. The problem is this safety net is rarely strong enough to hold two people, so what you get is a marriage being strained to its limits by real world familiarization, and many are just not ready for it. So, looking at all that, if you really think love alone is going to be enough to handle a marriage, you'd better be freakin committed. A military marriage is perhaps one of the msot difficult relationships in the world, and it requires a certain personality and caliber of spouse to make it work. Unfortunately many either don't understand this or don't understand themselves and their hasty "of course, I love them" answer becomes a divorce a few years later.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 61 (view)

How to Stop A Bully Posted: 10/13/2006 11:51:39 PM
Decide, dominate, destroy. He's going to have to fight the bullies, because regardless of the authorities involved, they're not going to stop anymore than you'd stop talking in class because a teacher yelled at you. You might stop for the next five minutes, but after that it'll be right back to talking The trick is to make it just one fight, and you do that by crushing your opponent spectacularly, or at the very least inflicting a load of damage before you get swarmed by his friends and they start putting the boot to you. Doing this requires agression above all else, and that is the advantage of most fighting classes really. You won't learn any wonder-techniques in a month, at least not to the point where you can reliably use them, and the first time you try to use that roundhouse kick in a street-fight is probaby going to be the first time you learn what concrete tastes like, but you can learn to go on the attack and a lot of the time in the real world, thats what counts the most. Before any martial arts enthusiasts faint at that statement, just remember we aren't talking about Bruce Lee here, we're talking about taking a 14 year old kid and making him a violent, victorious BAMF when he gets in a fight three weeks from now. If he want to keep up the karate, wrestling, etc. for a while he can add techniques and flair to his fighting, but I would say the firts most important thing is teaching him a) its ok to fight, and b) it is far preferable to hurt people than for them to hurt you.

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 105 (view)

video games Posted: 10/13/2006 9:26:01 PM
Speaking as a former Warcraft guy, I'd throw this possibility out there: A online game itself may be entertaining, but its the people/camraderie/social alignment that can get "addictive." To start with the game can be fun, as you might be shooting people, doing the fantasy thing, whatever. Generally making things that would be impossible for you to do in real life comparatively easy and fun. So, you're already entertained. Now throw in this: Think about your average job/life. Chances are nobody really relies on you. Your individual success or failure at your job may have some effect on the company, but it is unlikely to drastically affect your co-workers; co-workers who make up the majority of your social environment where skills and abilities mean much. There's no common bond of suffering and acheivement, or if there is, its relatively paltry. Your boss may Manage you, but it is unlikely he Leads you, or has Command of you. If you are a boss, it is unlikely that you are much more than an administrative layer designed to spread out assignments so that they'll be completed. Enter online game. Boom, all of a sudden, in an entertaining environment, you're given a group of forty people whom actually rely on you. Literally, they will fail if you fail, succeed if you succeed, and by the way, you've already spent hours playing with these people, achieving mutual goals. Your leaders will lead by example and motivation, artificicial though it might be. If you are a leader, you have Command with all that entails. Basically all those good warrioresque social needs programmed into you to ensure survival of the species are being met. Obvisously its not real and doesn't effect anything out your little digital realm, but when was the last time you saw your TPS report change the real world? So, when the question comes between upholding your dedication and commitment to thirty of forty people, while doing something you already like, and doing something else, which one gets picked? Quite frankly, if it was spur of the moment video game verus spur of the moment real world, for me real world would always win. There are those whose real world sucks so much that it does not. Now, if you already gave your word that you'd be in x spot at y time, and by the way your failure to make it there just screwed over 39 other people you work with, there'd better be a damn good reason to make you break that. Admittedly, the whole being straddled in chair thing would probably be what I'd qualify as a damn good reason. The guy who picked a game in its entirety over a girlfriend also has some time management issues I woud say, easy enough just to say "look guys, I won't be doing anything between thursday and sunday" ...but I was never as far gone into the game as some people. As a closing side note: to those saying "LOLz1!11 only pasty nerds without balls play warcraft" I would throw this out: the military has an unusually high number of WoW players (probably cause they're pre-dispositioend to all that camraderie and command stuff) and I have a hard time imagining calling people who kill or be killed for a living sackless psty nerds in general. Final sidenote: to all those who

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 33 (view)

A few thoughts on Male / Female Relations. Posted: 10/12/2006 4:20:05 PM
Ye gods, no edit button? Option 2, I'm a moron and cna't find the edit button. "You and your three friend present an excellent opportunity for all three, albeit without the opportunity to muck around wearing body armor "

Newgate

Joined: 10/7/2006

Msg: 32 (view)

A few thoughts on Male / Female Relations. Posted: 10/12/2006 4:15:15 PM
Regarding LC's longish "they can't kill you, so how bad could it really be" post: For starters I think you rather exemplified the entire "you cannot possily know the terror of approaching a woman at a bar" thing. Here this guy (henceforth, the poster) says that he finds intiating social contact with a complete stranger (female variety) in an utterly artifical social environment is something that frightens him in a way you can't understand. He admits that it, in theory, it is consequence free and easy to physically do, but for some reason it takes him an enormous amount of willpower. You (female variety stranger) reply by saying "I don't understand what your problem is, after all, logically it should be quite easy and consequence free." Eh-heh...well glad you make a good example, but that hardly helps any, yeah? Secondly, don't think for a second pride and acceptance aren't just as detrimental as your IED laden purse. No one wants fail, no one wants to be rejected, and no one wants to be that really awkward loser guy. When you think about it, these are more or less the same basic driving social fears that can get people to go kill other people they don't know in countries they don't really care about. You and your group of friends present an excellent opportunity for all three, albiet without the oportunity . I can think of dozens of relatively harmless activities that people refuse to partake in because they're afraid they might make an ass of themselves. I can also think of several painful activities people won't take part in for the same reasons while we're at it. In the social fantasy world of bars and clubs, this is even worse because there is zero chance of redemption through any actual skills or abiltities one might have. In the same lieu, there's no enemy to hit back, nothing to array fear against. You can pysch yourself up to step into a boxing ring, clear a room, or jump off a high dive. If you're deathly afraid of a spider, you can stomp on it or run away, whichever your near catatonic mind chooses. Amusing as it might be to watch, the poster can't exactly run screaming from the bar nor demonstrate his flying elbow drop on you. Also, I highly doubt he and his mates have a last minute huddle involving primitive war cries before storming the bar. Unless we revert to the social practice of clubbing attractive females over the head with heavy objects and then dragging them back to our caves, the poster has to face his potential loss of pride and rejection from a cold start with no way of relieving it, and nothing to validate himself with in front of the group he just suffered the social hit from.

Show ALL Forums