You served in the same number of female led infantry units as I did. Zero.
Army Now Has Female Infantry Officers
- Thread starter AAAintheBeltway
- Start date
You served in the same number of female led infantry units as I did. Zero.
Its called biology. I know some people are biology deniers(Ricter), but the existence of biology has been proven and a consensus has been reached and its been determined that men are biologically different than women.
Going to combat requires physical strength that women simply do not have. Why is it that there is not a single sport that women can compete with men in? Football? Baseball? Basketball? Hockey? Tennis? The reason for this is biology.
Even in golf a few women have tried to compete and did quite badly. Even in car racing they cant win. How many times can you watch Danica Patrick come in last place?
Since this is an undisputed fact, why would they be sent to combat and be expected to perform the same as men?
Going to combat requires physical strength that women simply do not have. Why is it that there is not a single sport that women can compete with men in? Football? Baseball? Basketball? Hockey? Tennis? The reason for this is biology.
Even in golf a few women have tried to compete and did quite badly. Even in car racing they cant win. How many times can you watch Danica Patrick come in last place?
Since this is an undisputed fact, why would they be sent to combat and be expected to perform the same as men?
Dumbest thing this country ever did was grant women equal rights. Other than the uglies who can do the math and science, the rest of the broads are a liability in their profession. Ever wonder why the stocks of companies with women on their corporate boards underperform those companies that are domianted by men?
Last edited:
Women in front line combat positions is generally a bad idea. Are there exceptions? Certainly, but using those exceptions to make across the board changes, which is exactly what will happen, is asking for trouble.
Women can and do play an important role in any military effort. They do not need to be, "charging the hill" so to speak. Another decision that falls squarely into the category of, just because we can, doesn't mean we should.
Women can and do play an important role in any military effort. They do not need to be, "charging the hill" so to speak. Another decision that falls squarely into the category of, just because we can, doesn't mean we should.
Which has nothing to do with whether females could do well in infantry units.
You seemed to be implying that you had some sort of insider knowledge that I lacked. Perhaps you do, I don't know, but this is a new experiment. I don't like experimenting with people's lives who weren't given an option about whether or not to participate.
My earlier posts may have come off as demeaning women's physical prowess or toughness. That isn't my point. I have known several women I would prefer to go into combat with than most men. But they were exceptional, world or national class athletes. They will not be reflective of women put into combat units or put in charge of them.
because when you include women the role of combat will change, and those that don't adapt will die.
Yeah, they pretty much were.
Establish standards that allow for those exceptional women, but allow women.
And therein lies the problem. Just what will these standards be? If they want to be in a combat role then they need to preform exactly, and I mean exactly the same functions as their male counterparts. All the same physical requirements is where the rub will be. You really can't measure emotionally stability under fire until it happens. Men crack up too. Mental capabilities I'm sure they can preform as well. Can they hold up the physical end? If they can, then have at it. However there can be no lowering of the standards. Not one little bit. To do so puts lives in jeopardy needlessly.