By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Women are not fit for front line combat!

Tagged games:

 

Why can't women be on the front line?

They're physically not fit. 62 32.29%
 
They can do it if trained properly. 102 53.13%
 
That's not women's duty. 12 6.25%
 
I'm weak so I can't fat... 16 8.33%
 
Total:192
Goatseye on 20 April 2016
OttoniBastos said:
JWeinCom said:
If you were going into battle and had a choice between having Ronda Rousey watch your back or Justin Bieber who would you pick?

Make decisions on a case by case basis.

Thing is,Bieber wouldn't pass in test ,thus, we don't need to choose him in the first place.

The point is,most women are not Ronda and even she admitted that she would be able to beat a trained guy with the same weight as her.

Plus, lowering the standards means that women way below "Ronda" will get into the military just because the army wants to increase political statistics.

   There is a program in the military to prepare people before they join the boot camp. It gets you up to military standard if you attend it and prepares you also mentally for the boot camp psychological challenges.

  The only problem (kind of) is that it's not mandatory, so women, which have no physically strenuous job occupation, skip this and go unprepared for the job.

  I guess with some women I know in the military you would be in the kitchen making sammiches. XD, I hope the mods find a humor in this.



Around the Network
OttoniBastos on 20 April 2016

.

Last edited by OttoniBastos - on 27 July 2018

OttoniBastos on 20 April 2016

.

Last edited by OttoniBastos - on 27 July 2018

Goatseye on 20 April 2016
OttoniBastos said:
COKTOE said:

And most men are starting with a much better baseline than most woman. Apply the same training to a man, and he's still going to be much further ahead. In any physical test.

It's not a competition though.It's about having the best soldiers that maximize the mission success and minimize potential losses.

Like i said in that post,i don't mind affirmative actions in normal day jobs where nobody's life is at stake, but the moment we start letting people who are objectively less capable to archieve the best performance get into a job where best performance possible is crucial then we have a problem.

Besides,If women start with a worse baseline(which depends of the indiviual) they should do more and not less to compensate that.

EDIT:sorry for the double post.

What do you know about that? How do you maximize the efficiency of a modern army up? Is it physically or mechanically?

What's the training regiment of US soldiers do you know? They sit more in the classroom or shoot house/range than lifting weight.

What you're rambling about affirmative action? This is not a political dispute you want it to be.



OttoniBastos on 20 April 2016

.

Last edited by OttoniBastos - on 27 July 2018

Around the Network
Goatseye on 20 April 2016
OttoniBastos said:
Goatseye said:

   There is a program in the military to prepare people before they join the boot camp. It gets you up to military standard if you attend it and prepares you also mentally for the boot camp psychological challenges.

  The only problem (kind of) is that it's not mandatory, so women, which have no physically strenuous job occupation, skip this and go unprepared for the job.

  I guess with some women I know in the military you would be in the kitchen making sammiches. XD, I hope the mods find a humor in this.

Personal attacks are meaningless specially when you're using anecdotal evidence against empirical evidence like:
http://www.npr.org/2013/12/27/257363943/marines-most-female-recruits-dont-meet-new-pullup-standard

Plus,you're implying i said or think women should go to the kitchen and not military when i actually never said that.My point is women should not have special/lower standards to get into military just because we want to balance the gender split into everything.If only 1% of the women are capable to reach the required standard so be it.

Crack a smile, there's another sentence after the one you highlighted.

Women are not trained to meet those physical standards they set. Their jobs does not demand exerting physical training to develop enough muscle mass to meet infantry standards. However, like in your article says, if they are trained, they can do it.

Just like most recruits when join the military, they're not ready physically and mentally for the frontline. Thus, actions must be taken to get them up to standard.



COKTOE on 20 April 2016
OttoniBastos said:
COKTOE said:

And most men are starting with a much better baseline than most woman. Apply the same training to a man, and he's still going to be much further ahead. In any physical test.

It's not a competition though.It's about having the best soldiers that maximize the mission success and minimize potential losses.

Like i said in that post,i don't mind affirmative actions in normal day jobs where nobody's life is at stake, but the moment we start letting people who are objectively less capable to archieve the best performance get into a job where best performance possible is crucial then we have a problem.

Besides,If women start with a worse baseline(which depends of the indiviual) they should do more and not less to compensate that.

EDIT:sorry for the double post.

I agree with you. I think there might be some miscommunication going on here. :)



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."