Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 143
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    21,592
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7
    You are using a macro perspective to make a micro decision, that is an infringement on the personal freedoms that I thought were important to you.
    If you read my previous posts, you would see that I have no problem letting women into combat roles, provided they pass the physical requirements.

    I'm just informing you that they probably aren't going to pass the physical requirements. Even the butch ones that impressed you. You may think they can beat me in a fight, they most likely can't. But even if they can beat me hand-to-hand, they are likely not as fast, or as strong as I am.
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7
    mean i can beat candace parker at basketball,and it doesnt mean that many,many androgenous woman couldnt hack it as soilders.
    Almost any above average male basketball player could beat just about any WNBA player. A halfway decent male high school basketball team would be a dynasty in the WNBA.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,286
    vCash
    1500
    and Im telling you that Ive travelled the world and seen a far greater sample of people then it appears you have, and while the 6ft 220 barmaids arent common,they are infact larger and stronger then the common male
    which is 5'9" 180 lbs.

    candace parker is 6'4" 180, Your comparison of male elite vs female elite is a false equivalency.
    The debate is the exceptional Vs the average, masculine females VS average males, not the height of prowess that each sex is capable of obtaining.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    anywhere USA
    Posts
    3,092
    vCash
    1500
    stephkyle

    you need to learn about the word SCOPE

    that word destroys your argument of how close we really are.

    in the scope of our universe's size we are close to the sun

    Now if we use the scope humans have with their units of measurement we are far from the sun.

    The same thing can be applied to the difference between male and females.

    I Didn't even need to get complex with you, now because of the person you are you're going to come on here and post three paragraphs of stuff no one cares about.

    by you're argument hell were so close to an ape we may as well let them join to.
    Last edited by raiderfaninTX; 01-24-2013 at 04:27 PM.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,489
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by raiderfaninTX View Post
    stephkyle

    you need to learn about the word SCOPE

    that word destroys your argument of how close we really are.

    in the scope of our universe's size we are close to the sun

    Now if we use the scope humans have with their units of measurement we are far from the sun.

    The same thing can be applied to the difference between male and females.

    I Didn't even need to get complex with you, now because of the person you are you're going to come on here and post three paragraphs of stuff no one cares about.

    by you're argument hell were so close to an ape we may as well let them join to.
    Don't dolphines and dogs serve in the military?

    Can we come up with some benefits to why woman should serve on the front lines.

    I think just like in fire fighting the benefit was there and I could see how in certain ways that a female could benefit an outfit. Take intel for example, If a unit comes to a house and the man doesn't want to speak you could ask the woman to speak to the wife to see if the insurgents are near.

    Just like in fire fighting we divided the work load on who was best at what. For some it was to be the truckie and for some it was to be the mongo of the unit and pull hose. Rope rescue guys were not big I can tell you that much.
    Last edited by Pacerlive; 01-24-2013 at 05:43 PM.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    anywhere USA
    Posts
    3,092
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Pacerlive View Post
    Don't dolphines and dogs serve in the military?

    Can we come up with some benefits to why woman should serve on the front lines.

    I think just like in fire fighting the benefit was there and I could see how in certain ways that a female could benefit an outfit. Take intel for example, If a unit comes to a house and the man doesn't want to speak you could ask the woman to speak to the wife to see if the insurgents are near.

    Just like in fire fighting we divided the work load on who was best at what. For some it was to be the truckie and for some it was to be the mongo of the unit and pull hose. Rope rescue guys were not big I can tell you that much.
    To draw the comparison of fire fighting/police work to an infantry soldier is awful. They are not even close, you just don't drive up to your problem get out deal with it and leave, it is not that simple. Also the physical demands are also totally different. you do not walk 5-7 miles in full fire fighting gear, you do not live for a month or more at the crime scene with mre's and baby wipesr in 120 degree weather. It is very different and I didn't even go to extremes in those examples.

    I do believe women should be okay to serve but there are some bad uninformed comparisons on this forum. People need to take some time and go watch Restrepo to get some perspective on combat arms in the war zone.
    Last edited by raiderfaninTX; 01-24-2013 at 06:12 PM.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,489
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by raiderfanintx View Post

    to draw the comparison of fire fighting/police work to an infantry soldier is awful. They are not even close, you just don't drive up to your problem get out deal with it and leave, it is not that simple. Also the physical demands are also totally different. You do not walk 5-7 miles in full fire fighting gear, you do not live for a month or more at the crime scene with mre's and baby wipesr in 120 degree weather. It is very different and i didn't even go to extremes in those examples.

    I do believe women should be okay to serve but there are some bad uninformed comparisons on this forum. People need to take some time and go watch restrepo to get some perspective on combat arms in the war zone.
    Well you do if you wild fire fighter.

    I think everyone knows there are extreme differences from the fields but I also think its silly to exclude all women from combat. One thought I just had was to just make an entire unit out of woman and see how they do. Sort of like what we did with African American soldiers.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,286
    vCash
    1500
    sorry Raider in Tx, I really dont see your point.
    on the one hand your saying our perception of relativity is skewed by the limitations of our nature, on the other (I think) you are saying that becasue of that we are not close to being equal(?).
    I mean your wrong,if that is your contention,the 'scope" of our differences are really miniscual on just about every comparitive level you can derive.
    Even at a baseline of say 160lbs(dummy drag, fire dept) and a female operates at a 60% effective rate ,thats 64lbs...is that supposed to be a lot?
    In relation to what?
    a grain of sand?
    In addition when comparisons are made to different physical exertions what they find is a narrowing between average differences with the suggested causes being height, weight,length of arm,and a whole long list of genetic factors.
    If you watch MMA, Im sure youve heard Joe rogan Describing how very muscular guys generate explosive knock out force ,but feeding the muscle tiisues exhausts them at a quicker rate.

    This dynamic is expressed across most disciplines.
    In addition,men generally are far more conditioned to physical exertion then women.
    we play sports, we rough house, we compete,and do a whole lot of things which condition our bodies to phyisicality, where as most women do not do these things.
    Most women avoid Muscle building because of its masculine identity.

    But once again we are not talking about MOST. we are not speaking in generalities.
    we are discussing the Very few women who are interested in performing combat duties.
    If I remember correctly your an Ex Army guy right? From the Army Times:


    Officials spent six months testing more than 10,000 soldiers at eight locations. Results proved the new test was harder than the current one but not exactly a smoker.

    The average basic training male knocked out 36 push-ups in one minute, 33 rowers in one minute and ran an 11:02 in the 1.5-mile run. In the current test, male trainees averaged 49 push-ups, 62 sit-ups and a two-mile run time of 15:09.

    The average basic training female soldier hit 19 push-ups in one minute, 31 rowers in one minute and finished the 1.5-mile run at 13:12. In the current test, female trainees averaged 39 push-ups, 61 sit-ups and a two-mile run time of 16:37.

    so out of 10,000 test subjects males performed 10 more push ups, 1 more sit up and finished the two mile run in 1:28 faster then woman.

    is this the "scope" to which you are refering?

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    6,854
    vCash
    1500
    I'm not really sure what to think of this. I think some women should be given the opportunity, but it is naive not to think that the vast majority could not make the cut. This is combat we are talking about where lives are on the line. I'm all about equality, but it's not realistic to think that most women can haul around a hundred pounds of gear while effectively being able to fight the enemy. Not to mention, it brings on a lot of problems while deployed and being out in the field with females being around.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    65,515
    vCash
    1500
    Even if we are to sede the point that women have certain traits that tend to appear more in them that MAY make them less qualified, that shouldn't be an argument to exclude all women from service. This is exactly why we need to make the qualifications physical and mental strengths not whether someone has a different chromosomal pattern than those of the opposite sex. People are not defined by their gender, they are a part of us but they are not the only part of us.
    Member of the Owlluminati!

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    anywhere USA
    Posts
    3,092
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7 View Post
    sorry Raider in Tx, I really dont see your point.
    on the one hand your saying our perception of relativity is skewed by the limitations of our nature, on the other (I think) you are saying that becasue of that we are not close to being equal(?).
    I mean your wrong,if that is your contention,the 'scope" of our differences are really miniscual on just about every comparitive level you can derive.
    Even at a baseline of say 160lbs(dummy drag, fire dept) and a female operates at a 60% effective rate ,thats 64lbs...is that supposed to be a lot?
    In relation to what?
    a grain of sand?
    In addition when comparisons are made to different physical exertions what they find is a narrowing between average differences with the suggested causes being height, weight,length of arm,and a whole long list of genetic factors.
    If you watch MMA, Im sure youve heard Joe rogan Describing how very muscular guys generate explosive knock out force ,but feeding the muscle tiisues exhausts them at a quicker rate.

    This dynamic is expressed across most disciplines.


    In addition,men generally are far more conditioned to physical exertion then women.
    we play sports, we rough house, we compete,and do a whole lot of things which condition our bodies to phyisicality, where as most women do not do these things.
    Most women avoid Muscle building because of its masculine identity.

    But once again we are not talking about MOST. we are not speaking in generalities.
    we are discussing the Very few women who are interested in performing combat duties.
    If I remember correctly your an Ex Army guy right? From the Army Times:


    Officials spent six months testing more than 10,000 soldiers at eight locations. Results proved the new test was harder than the current one but not exactly a smoker.

    The average basic training male knocked out 36 push-ups in one minute, 33 rowers in one minute and ran an 11:02 in the 1.5-mile run. In the current test, male trainees averaged 49 push-ups, 62 sit-ups and a two-mile run time of 15:09.

    The average basic training female soldier hit 19 push-ups in one minute, 31 rowers in one minute and finished the 1.5-mile run at 13:12. In the current test, female trainees averaged 39 push-ups, 61 sit-ups and a two-mile run time of 16:37.

    so out of 10,000 test subjects males performed 10 more push ups, 1 more sit up and finished the two mile run in 1:28 faster then woman.



    is this the "scope" to which you are refering?
    So now take the average women out of basic training, and give me their averages. Basic training is nothing like the real army. It's not even close, then with those push ups the average males weight to females weight, now take locations that are all male and I can say without a reasonable doubt they are graded on a harsher scale with push up standards. Also now factor in endurance, because it is not how you start it is how you finish.

    As some one who was in charge of females and also a line medic when the **** hits the fan and one female cant pull her weight, it risks lives. I do not know the units you were in, but unless you have been on both sides you can draw all the conclusions you want, but there is a reason with most jobs experience counts more than education.
    Hard to say when a woman can't carry here gear out on a long mission, hey were so close on a biological level.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,286
    vCash
    1500
    Endurance is infact the least disparate physical strength characteristic between men and women.

    I struggle to understand what aqctually goes on in here.
    Ive been accused of trying to seem intelectually superior to others, when we are all speaking through a device that allows us unlimited access to information.

    When I dont know something ,or am unsure about it....I research it.
    I mean, its really easy.
    I type in clinical comparrison between men and women strength and endurance.
    I dont read Article, I look for case studies. Article are opinion pieces or have a limited background, case studies hinge on their credibility.

    In other topics, say like the palestinian debate.After hearing all the different views,I rented a PBS 2 hour documentary hosted by different anthropologist and Historical scholars,then I searched for pro Israel writings, pro palestinian writings, and neutral, I spent a week collecting data.

    You guys seem to want to express your thoughts off the cuff and have them validated simply be force of personality,and when you dont get it you pitch a fit and start name calling or insulting people.

    I was in Maintenance units.Both in the airforce and in the Army and Guard.
    I can Imagine some of the less then hardened females that through some romantic notion thought that being a medic would be rewarding, so i understand what your saying.I also know that when you are on the flight line with your toolbox that weighs from 70 lbs and up, and its turn over, no ones offering to carry your box in(lol).

    Ive worked with Fems that sucked it up and shouldered it a mile back to ops, Ive also worked with several that I had to blank my face when they said my name is "barbara" or "diane"(THATS A WOMAN?!).

    again, i spent 12 years in different units.I know our standard for attractiveness is severely effected by the lack of femininty that surrounds us. My point being, the girls that you are looking at thinking , shes mot half bad,are only in comparrison to the ones that are REALLY fed up.

    Those are the ones that Im talking about, the ones that rip a fart louder then you can,the ones that want to stand in a group of guys and blend right in, not looking for attention.

    Ive know plenty.
    while they might not be the norm they are out there, and if they want to get in the sh.. then I say let em.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    6,854
    vCash
    1500
    The only interaction I had with females in the Army was in OCS. When I went through a year ago, it was so hard to get accepted into OCS that it was the best of the best that the Army had to offer. Most females had a PT score around a 300. Our platoon PT average with males and females was 306. Our class had about a 33% attrition rate and the attrition in the female ranks was around 85%. The majority of the drops came from physical events. Which in general were the 10 mile ruck marches where you couldn't fall out over an arms length. And that doesn't even compare to the physical stress you'll have in an infantry unit. There is no doubt in my mind that there are females that could make the cut in combat arms, however, the vast majority cannot make the cut. I just don't know how you can effectively cut out the ones that can't make the cut compared to the ones that can. Especially with the current inequality between male and female standards.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,286
    vCash
    1500
    You have to go longer then 10k in basic(?)And OTS isnt a reflection of what you are saying with all due respect(the best of the best) I appreciate your interest in Getting your bars, many of my friends went tha route as well, some went for Warrent Officers, but your description is inacurate.

    it is not nearly the best of the best Bro,no disrespect, but its not close to being that.Yeah its hard, it needs to be, but that doesnt mean much,you are the best of the best of people INTERSTED in being officers,that didnt get a degree first and JOIN as officers,

    Its a very small pool.In addition,I would expect less then ate up soilders to want to try to get their bars,so you werent dealing with the same 'bruisers" Im talking about(lol).

    In any event ,its really not an issue Im concerned about,I just dont think that eliminating any one from anything outside the merits of their own efforts is unamerican.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    6,854
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7 View Post
    You have to go longer then 10k in basic(?)And OTS isnt a reflection of what you are saying with all due respect(the best of the best) I appreciate your interest in Getting your bars, many of my friends went tha route as well, some went for Warrent Officers, but your description is inacurate.

    it is not nearly the best of the best Bro,no disrespect, but its not close to being that.Yeah its hard, it needs to be, but that doesnt mean much,you are the best of the best of people INTERSTED in being officers,that didnt get a degree first and JOIN as officers,

    Its a very small pool.In addition,I would expect less then ate up soilders to want to try to get their bars,so you werent dealing with the same 'bruisers" Im talking about(lol).

    In any event ,its really not an issue Im concerned about,I just dont think that eliminating any one from anything outside the merits of their own efforts is unamerican.
    10K? I said 10 miles. And yes you do, but the standard in basic training is pathetic and there is no repercussion for falling out. Not to mention, you don't have a time standard in BCT. In OCS it's an automatic drop from the course. I'm sure you did have friends go through when they were commissioning anyone that had a heartbeat. It's not like that anymore. With drawbacks, OCS is what fills out the remaining officer slots after ROTC and the Academies. And trust me, it is the best of the best. We had a few Ivy League graduates and prior service special forces and rangers. Find me a school that the average PT score is a 306 and still has an attrition rate of 33%. But I'm just wasting my breath, because it's pretty evident you have no idea what you are talking about.

    Also what do you mean by, "you are the best of the best of people INTERSTED in being officers,that didnt get a degree first and JOIN as officers," You do realize you have to have a bachelor's degree to become an officer and even apply for OCS? You don't just join to be an officer. You apply which gives you an opportunity to become an officer if you complete the requirements. I wonder if you have even been in the Army because you seem to have no clue about how things operate.
    Last edited by Sox_13; 01-26-2013 at 07:42 PM.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    6,854
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Pacerlive View Post
    Can we come up with some benefits to why woman should serve on the front lines.

    I think just like in fire fighting the benefit was there and I could see how in certain ways that a female could benefit an outfit. Take intel for example, If a unit comes to a house and the man doesn't want to speak you could ask the woman to speak to the wife to see if the insurgents are near.
    We already have that with FET.

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •