Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Marcella; P-Marlowe; Lancey Howard; Girlene; jazusamo; bigheadfred; smoothsailing; 4woodenboats

You are correct, Marcella, that upper body strength will mean that a man can evacuate a wounded female, but that a wounded female cannot evacuate a wounded male. What this will eventually lead to is a bitterness and cynicism within the unit that will seriously degrade small unit morale.

The notion being advanced that some women can meet the standards set for the men is a red herring because the male standard has a minimum and a maxium as does the female standard. Essentially, the maximum female standard regarding upper body strength barely exceeds the minimum male standard, and with the youngest troops, those likely to be on the front lines and in small unit engagements, the maximum female score is exactly the same as the male minimum allowable score.

This is a significant difference, because the notion is that a soft, young, Nintendo, couch potato male is expected to vastly improve. He can get out of basic training with that low score, but the future intent is to move him much higher on the chart, and especially if he is going to a and infantry or other front line type small unit.

With this female that is exactly the same as the lowest male standard, she is considered to be the ultimate female at her age, incredibly in shape and the epitome of what an in-shape female is to be.

IOW, there isn’t much improvement that’s even considered possible

However, let’s consider urban warfare and consider female height versus male height. Are the females able to reach a high window for an alternate entry point, or are they always going to have to come in the door?

Consider as well that a female must IMMEDIATELY be removed from the front lines as a response to pregnancy with zero impact on her career. How many would time their ovulation just to get out of hell? I had an wise old female military surgeon tell me once....quite a few.

What is the replacement flow? How long does it take to get a replacement? How badly is a squad hurt if it loses 1,2, 3 people out of 10? Enormously. Who has your back then? Which squads now have to pull double, triple duty?

Enormous morale problems are on the horizon.


35 posted on 01/25/2013 11:50:31 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: xzins

Don’t disagree with anything you wrote. If a female cannot throw a wounded soldier over her soldiers in an evacuation, she has no business in combat.


36 posted on 01/25/2013 12:10:40 PM PST by Girlene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

To: xzins; Lancey Howard; Girlene; jazusamo; bigheadfred; smoothsailing; 4woodenboats

I hate to be politically incorrect, but if I am on the fourth floor of a burning building with a broken leg, the last person in the world I want to see coming up the fire ladder is some 120 pound affirmative action female.

And if I am am a wounded soldier lying on a hill in a fire zone, the last person I want to see coming to carry me out of the line of fire is some 120 pound affirmative action female.

Women can pull a one pound trigger, but they can’t carry a 240 pound man across a battle zone on uneven ground.

I think it is time to bring back the draft. Make it a requirement that at least 20% of ground forces be taken from the ranks of draftees. That would put an end to this whole social experiment involving homosexuals and women.


37 posted on 01/25/2013 12:12:24 PM PST by P-Marlowe (There can be no Victory without a fight and no battle without wounds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

To: xzins
“You are correct, Marcella, that upper body strength will mean that a man can evacuate a wounded female, but that a wounded female cannot evacuate a wounded male. What this will eventually lead to is a bitterness and cynicism within the unit that will seriously degrade small unit morale.”

Thanks for your reply. Let's go back to cave man days. There was no affirmative action there, it was the strongest would survive and the weak wouldn't unless the stronger helped the weaker. Men hunted together to get the food and there was no woman in that group. Why was that? Because even at their stage of development, they had the sense to know that woman was not as strong as they were.

I live by myself and wish I was as strong as a man, but guess what? That is never going to happen because muscles are aligned on men differently from women.

Our legs are also not like a man's leg. Women's knees are slightly turned in and when they run, you can see it - a man will run faster due to this.

I hold two medals for the 50 yard dash and for hurdles - against women, not men. Several years ago, I found out why I was a fast runner. An MRI was done from my knee down on my right leg. The attendant had to adjust the mechanism and she said, “You must have been a runner because your leg is more than normal length for a woman from the knee down.”

I never knew that, I just knew I could run fast. Being able to run fast would be an asset in the military, but I could never match a man in strength - it would be idiotic to think I could. I was a psychological therapist and an EMT, not a runner for my livelihood.

Cavemen knew, could see, women couldn't hack hunting for the beast - what's wrong with us that WE can't see it?

38 posted on 01/25/2013 1:34:59 PM PST by Marcella (Prepping can save your life today. Going Galt is freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson