Women are too weak physically to serve in combat

[MikeK]

While there are exceptions, women are neither physically nor psychologically designed by Nature to endure the rigors of sustained combat. Any attempt to alter that reality is an ill-advised feminist effort.

 

[geauxtohell]

tell me im wrong

There was this seg in some news showwhere they had to -dumb-down thetests to let get yhewomen to pass

Not ragging on - them - if not for women in the munitions plants in WW2 - probably would never have won

I do not believe they should "dumb down" the tests. I'm certain at least some women would pass without the test being "dumbed down".

The correct term is "lowered the standards".

This becomes an issue in an Infantry unit if a soldier can't carry their load. It puts the whole unit in danger.

Again, another thing I experienced first hand.

What are you going to do when you are on patrol and someone simply quits on you or won't/can't go any further?

You can't leave them and you can't buttstroke them.

In my instance, it was a man that quit on me.

I have no problem with women in the Infantry, but they need to be held to the same physical standards as the men. That ensures that they at least have the physical ability to complete a mission.

Heart is a whole other issue, but that is hardly gender specific.

 

[MikeK]

tell me im wrong

There was this seg in some news showwhere they had to -dumb-down thetests to let get yhewomen to pass

Not ragging on - them - if not for women in the munitions plants in WW2 - probably would never have won

They lowered the physical test for them when I was in the Navy, but as far as I know not the academic stuff. As far as whooping some ass, there are some tough broads out there.
I wonder what thees ladies would say if asked about it.

Those women are extreme exceptions and are analogous to male ballet dancers.

 

[Si modo]

While there are exceptions, women are neither physically nor psychologically designed by Nature to endure the rigors of sustained combat. Any attempt to alter that reality is an ill-advised feminist effort.

And you base that hooie on what evidence?

If a woman can pass the SAME physical requirements as a man, then THAT woman is physically capable of handling the same. True, far more men will pass than women, but many women can pass.

I'd put my psychological strength for stressful situations, chronic and/or acute, up against any man, and likely win. I'd bet that sort of psychological strength is not gender specific at all, either.

As far as their being in combat, I'm pretty sure they already are for most practical purposes. And, as far as having no gender consideration for combat, I leave that decision making up to those putting their lives on the line. That is NOT the politicians or any non-military special interest groups.

 

[The Infidel]

We know women don't have the upper body strength. It's a given and it's the way God made humans. The question is why liberals think it's only fair that American women get the same chance to be killed, maimed in combat or be taken prisoner as men? I don't get it.

maybe on an average you are right.

I have always had upper body strength that blew people away.

Its an average NOT a set in stone rule.

Ask Mohamad Alis daughter about it.

I agree with you on this.... not all women can be judged with a "broad" brush...sorry.

I do however think they should not be on the battlefield where they can possibly be taken as a POW. The fact that there is a girl or should I say woman being held will affect us guys differently than if it is a guy being held. We as men (most of us anyway) want to try to protect the females amoung us, and it may affect the decisions made to get them back.

There is a need for them to serve though... just not out on the battlefield.

This is just one mans opinion and I mean no disrespect toward our fighting women. They are braver than I was.... I never joined, so big props to you gals!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Having served with women in the Army, I can testify firsthand experience they can handle themselves without any problems. Those argue otherwise are either Christians In Name Only are anti-feminists.

 

[earlycuyler]

tell me im wrong

There was this seg in some news showwhere they had to -dumb-down thetests to let get yhewomen to pass

Not ragging on - them - if not for women in the munitions plants in WW2 - probably would never have won

They lowered the physical test for them when I was in the Navy, but as far as I know not the academic stuff. As far as whooping some ass, there are some tough broads out there.
I wonder what thees ladies would say if asked about it.

Those women are extreme exceptions and are analogous to male ballet dancers.

Test that theory. Go to an MMA studio and tell the woman you see in there that. Pleas post video.

 

[The Infidel]

She used to be so pretty....

She used resemble my wife...

My wife is still hawt... cant say as much for Linda

 

[CMike]

Yes. That's why they don't have women in combat.

And if any country needs the manpower (so to speak) it's Israel.

Does Israel know about this?

 

[MikeK]

They lowered the physical test for them when I was in the Navy, but as far as I know not the academic stuff. As far as whooping some ass, there are some tough broads out there.
I wonder what thees ladies would say if asked about it.

Those women are extreme exceptions and are analogous to male ballet dancers.

Test that theory. Go to an MMA studio and tell the woman you see in there that. Pleas post video.

As I said there are exceptions to the rule, some of which are notable. There certainly are outstanding butch dykes and drag queens. But generally speaking the average woman is no match for the average man in activities of a military nature, nor are they expected to be, nor should they be. Heterosexual women are feminine by their essential nature and the idea of engaging in typically male activities is repulsive to them. As the father of three very normal girls, now married women and two of them mothers, I lay claim to some level of expertise on the subject.

I accept that most women will strenuously disagree. And I know that most men will let them believe whatever they wish to just to shut them up.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The average man and average woman both trained in the military arts will do equally well. The technology and required mastery of it have changed much of the dynamics. She won't have to stick a knife in you and saw away, MikeK, she will merely shoot you in the back of the head at night using a sniper infrared scope.

Heck, my 22-year old Marine niece can take you hand to hand if that is how you want to go out.

 

[Dragon]

This is ridiculous.

The military, including combat roles, has different jobs each with its own requirement. Some do require considerable upper-body strength. Does that mean women should be banned from those roles? No. It means that anyone who can't pass a test showing they have enough upper-body strength should be excluded from them. Do that honestly, and more men will pass than women -- because on the average, men do indeed have more upper-body strength. But you make that decision on the basis of the test, not on the basis of gender prejudice. Some women are much stronger than most men.

The only reason to exclude women from combat roles is gender prejudice.

 

[JakeStarkey]

MikeK, some men do not have the upper body strength, some women do.

I have served with all kinds.

Yes, the women what it takes, and you disagreeing with reality means only that you are disagreeing with what is. It is what it is.

 

[Douger]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oHGjTsvWLE&feature=related]Laila Ali vs Suzy Taylor Full Fight + Interview (HQ) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Douger]

MOUNTAINS CLIMBED « Gineth Soto

 

[aplcr0331]

Having served with women in the Army, I can testify firsthand experience they can handle themselves without any problems. Those argue otherwise are either Christians In Name Only are anti-feminists.

You served in the infantry with women?

Define this: "can handle themselves without any problems" Meaining what exactly? Handle themselves physically? Like with the PT test? Or in hand to hand training? So they pair up females with males in training and the women handle themselves that way?

What branch of the military did you serve in and what is your MOS?

 

[aplcr0331]

The average man and average woman both trained in the military arts will do equally well. The technology and required mastery of it have changed much of the dynamics. She won't have to stick a knife in you and saw away, MikeK, she will merely shoot you in the back of the head at night using a sniper infrared scope.

Heck, my 22-year old Marine niece can take you hand to hand if that is how you want to go out.

Women cannot currently be snipers. So they most certainly will not be shooting people in the back of the head with an infrared scope.


"The average man and average woman both trained in the military arts will do equally well" - Will do equally well at what?

How big is your 22 year old Marine neice? What is her MCMAP belt?

I skipped over this whole thread so let me back up and say this: I think women should be allowed to serve in combat. Providing they can pass the required physical requirements at the same level as guys. In other words if a 200PFT score is required to pass ITB/SOI then women should have to have that same score based on the same scale.

Are you arguing that women and men are the same physically? That they can both (taking your average guy and average woman) perform at the same levels during combat?

 

[aplcr0331]

Women boxers and women MMA fighters have nothing to do with women in the military.

 

[Warrior102]

tell me im wrong

There was this seg in some news showwhere they had to -dumb-down thetests to let get yhewomen to pass

Not ragging on - them - if not for women in the munitions plants in WW2 - probably would never have won

OK - You are wrong.

I served beside COUNTLESS women who I was proud to serve with.

 

[Luissa]

The average man and average woman both trained in the military arts will do equally well. The technology and required mastery of it have changed much of the dynamics. She won't have to stick a knife in you and saw away, MikeK, she will merely shoot you in the back of the head at night using a sniper infrared scope.

Heck, my 22-year old Marine niece can take you hand to hand if that is how you want to go out.

Women cannot currently be snipers. So they most certainly will not be shooting people in the back of the head with an infrared scope.


"The average man and average woman both trained in the military arts will do equally well" - Will do equally well at what?

How big is your 22 year old Marine neice? What is her MCMAP belt?

I skipped over this whole thread so let me back up and say this: I think women should be allowed to serve in combat. Providing they can pass the required physical requirements at the same level as guys. In other words if a 200PFT score is required to pass ITB/SOI then women should have to have that same score based on the same scale.

Are you arguing that women and men are the same physically? That they can both (taking your average guy and average woman) perform at the same levels during combat?

Are you saying the average guy and average woman would serve in combat? I would hope not.