The only way that makes sense is if he genuinely believes that women are inherently weaker than men and are incapable of achieving comparable physical feats. That, or he's setting up a strawman for some inexplicable reason.
It's easy to handwave when you haven't gleaned that women aren't glass dolls, it's hard for me to see such things through a lens like that anymore. Mostly because I've gotten my ass handed to me by plenty of warrior women in my day.
Egalitarian societies cannot enforce gender roles on such basis.
That, or I'm setting up a strawman for some inexplicable reason.
Quite observant.
Gonna attempt to put this simply since your entire basis for arguing always revolves around such hyperbole:
When people assume that women are automatically inferior to men in terms of physical or mental prowess due to limited scope studies and anecdotal evidence, you are doing two things:
A.) Actively discouraging otherwise qualified women from pursuing such activities. Gender role enforcement is a very big and a very real concern to women, and if you buck the trend you're almost always going to get snarky commentary shit about how the girl must've had it easier. Even if one woman is discouraged from joining the military due to someone on the internet throwing studies that have zero scope or relevance and screaming about how they aren't possibly able to be equal to men, no matter how hard they do try, I think that's a travesty.
B.) Assuming such women don't already exist and serve in the military. I honestly don't think I need to expand on this point. It's an insult to each and every one of them who did try and enter into the military.
-- About 203,000 in 2011, or 14.5% of the active-duty force of nearly 1.4 million.
-- That number comprises about 74,000 in the Army, 53,000 in the Navy, 62,000 in the Air Force and 14,000 in the Marine Corps.
Trust me, those female soldiers, especially the marines, [one of my best friends] are definitely more than qualified despite any type of anecdotal preconceived notion supporting factoids people wish to throw out there. The marine tests are not staggered due to gender AFAIK, either.
Be aware: Trained men are susceptible to danger while in the military too,
even including things like stress. I think I could easily expand this argument to make the same, about-heel-turn argument with men, since the military is a dangerous fucking job no matter what gender is involved. So
that asinine line of thought needs to go away. It's borderline misogyny.
I'll just refer to a very nice graph earlier:
Any profession could use more "Best Of The Best" people. Regarding jobs that require physical strength, most of those Best of the Best types living today are men. However, the majority of people both male and female occupy the middle ground, and would make for "Type B" soldiers at best. Take a look at this chart of raw human strength, measured by each individuals' sex and age: (Source)
(Click to Embiggen)
When looking at the physical strength of people from the A and B trials, there is a larger sample size of Strong Men than there are of Strong Women, and a smaller sample size of Weak Men than of Weak Women. However, take a look at the area between the lines measuring the average strength of Men and Women. These are your "Type B" soldiers; not as strong as the strongest people in the world, but not weak either. You may notice that they're made up of roughly equal parts Men and Women, especially toward the 20-40 years range where most soldiering is done.
If this isn't pretty solid proof of equal service being entirely implementable and possible in physical terms I don't know what is. If we keep running in circles with non facts and preconceived notions this topic may as well get closed. Since folks seem to be wanting to light a tinderbox on fire for no reason.
If we equalize the army tests we'll still have the gender roles being enforced subconsciously [like by people in this topic], which simply needs to stop.
Poll
10 (76.9%)
Author
Topic: Your opinion on women in the military? (Read 51371 times)