We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Military Propriety Reform (2607)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Normand Pluralist Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: April 2608
Description[?]:
| As has been shown elsewhere, military morale, and consequently, military eficacy, improves in armies with segretated units. We propose that Sekowo modernize its military and ensure that its eficacy is at its highest by providing an environment ideal for morale. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Women in the military.
Old value:: Women serve alongside men.
Current: Women serve alongside men.
Proposed: Women serve in segregated units.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 01:38:23, July 17, 2008 CET | From | 帝国公明党 (Teikoku Kōmeitō) | To | Debating the Military Propriety Reform (2607) |
| Message | We are against sexism. If soldiers act like that, then they should simply receive disciplinary action and therapy to make them see women as totally equal to men. |
| Date | 04:14:24, July 17, 2008 CET | From | Sekowan Independent Party | To | Debating the Military Propriety Reform (2607) |
| Message | While we totally disagree with the DSP's idea of a solution, we also believe that there should be equality in the ranks of our military. Instead of announcing the differences between our soldiers, let us better utilize them. Let our faster, mobile, agile soldiers be placed in positions where those talents are helpful. Let our sharpshooters be placed in sniper units. Let our strongest, bravest, be placed where they can do the most good. Let none of their genders be as important as the individual skills they bring to the front lines in protecting our great nation! |
| Date | 05:04:35, July 17, 2008 CET | From | Revolutionary State Socialist Party | To | Debating the Military Propriety Reform (2607) |
| Message | While we think that mixed units may have some negitive psyocological effects on our own troops, as they are already integrated, I see no need to break them up. |
| Date | 05:13:09, July 17, 2008 CET | From | Normand Pluralist Party | To | Debating the Military Propriety Reform (2607) |
| Message | I believe the Independents were gone when it was discussed that intergender units worsened morale. It's not a matter of skillboth men and women may be capable of performing oustandingly as soldiers. It is a matter of the culture that comes with the military. Language, substance abuse, and licentiousness are quite common among the rank and file, and it can be very demoralizing for men and women to be subject to advances from those interested in them sexually for whom they have no interest. Moreover, it can cause additional PTSD and trauma for individuals to see those of the opposite gender killed in action, and the impact on morale is significantly worse than when the killed is of the same gender. This is not an issue of skill, it is one of morale. We believe that the soldiers of Sekowo should be of the greatest morale. We need not shoot ourselves in the foot on this one. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 250 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 270 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 80 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow real-life brand names (eg. Coca Cola, McDonalds, Microsoft). However, in the case of military equipment brand names it is permitted to use simple number-letter combinations (eg. T-90 and F-22) borrowed from real life, and also simple generic names, like those of animals (eg. Leopard and Jaguar). |
| Random quote: "Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber." - Plato |