Replies

I'm a former AF officer and served with female officers.

Back in the day, the physical training regimens were not identical for males and females, and generally speaking, they probably need not be -- but as soon as the reality that they are not the same is seen by male cadets, there is an instinctive surge of disapproval. It takes a minute to assess the difference and draw some conclusion about its fairness.

The problem is if one is exhausted at that moment one is not inclined to do some extra mental work to decide whether or not "they are getting off easy". One looks, one sees they are doing pushups from their knees and not their toes, or one sees that because they are there you have to memorize additional uniform regulations for inspections. It's extra work. It is never clear it is extra work that really needs to be done in order to kill the enemy most effectively.

The presence of women there is social engineering. There is no evidence that their presence wins wars more effectively then if they were not there. Winning wars should be the ONLY criterion for deciding admittance.

The presence of women there is social engineering. There is no evidence that their presence wins wars more effectively then if they were not there. Winning wars should be the ONLY criterion for deciding admittance.

And there you have it.
You may be called a bigoted
sexist
misogynist

but I challenge anyone to refute the facts you state. Cannot be done.

the physical training regimens were not identical for males and females, and generally speaking, they probably need not be --

I think the requirements should be EQUAL. That's what they want, that's what they should have. A female pilot died a few years ago because she was allowed to do things she wasn't qualified to do! That's insane.

Could there be a secondary non-combat academic schedule for those women (and maybe men) who can't pass the physical training regimens? There are many other non-combat positions to place gifted, hard working, dedicated people.

I also wonder what the the definitions of sexual assault is? A pat on the tush or rape? Were these ladies drunk or sober? After the Tailhook "scandal" I've become a tad cynical.

I don't know where any of MY former USAF Pilots are.
If I did, I would ping them to this thread, and particularly to your post.
You could talk to Major___, who got a medal, primarily based upon my input to his classified project.
You could ask General B.Gann if he remembers any significant mission/life saving actions contributed by any female USAF NCOs.
You can take your candy @ssed anti-female-in-the-military attitude to the loser section of the peanut gallery and stay there.
Or you can do what I advised all my questionable airmen to do, go AWOL before I shoot your ignorant,chicken sh!t,incompetant self.
And yes indeed, my mamma did in fact wear combat boots, as did her daughter, one of her three sons, and several of her grandaughters.

There is no evidence that their presence wins wars more effectively then if they were not there.

Much the same can be said of, say, Texans. Would you therefore want to keep Texans out of combat? And yes, I know Audie Murphy was a Texan, but heros are a military oddity who almost never make any difference in the outcome of the war.

Whatever the "root cause" of sexual assaults at the AF Academy might be, the fact is such assaults are carried out by cadets.

Frankly, I don't care how provoked one of these guys might be by the sight of women failing to perform the same physical training as the men, but it's my tax dollars at work and I'm not investing them in his libido!

This sort of thing is a fraud on the public treasury. Best thing we can do for these fellows, and any like them who come along thinking it's a free feel and a free feed at the public trough, is to stuff them in the county jail for 6 months to 2 years!