LINK: "A Question of Standards-Women in Combat" by Jude Eden
This chart below explains it.
Keep in mind how the military must operate-they cannot prioritize the capabilities of a single person (such as a single female who might be physically more capable than a number of randomly picked males) because in battle, people are lost and must be replaced on the fly. (and this goes for men, too)
The military therefore has to deal with large numbers, medians, and averages when dealing with everything from average boot size to average strength and capability.
And this does not even broach the subject of mixing young men and women together in a dangerous environment far from home, the effects on the morale of a unit, or the differences in supply chain.
Israel had data about the co-ed units in combat, and it didn’t support the concept; while women could fight (the Uzi and Ephod vest could accommodate smaller/weaker soldiers), the effect on the male soldiers when females would get shot up was extremely damaging psychologically.
She seems to have a very realistic approach; the differences can’t be ignored without putting troops and missions in jeopardy. A super-strong woman may do well, but only because she is able to do the same tasks as the men with whom she must be interchangeable; that doesn’t happen with lowered standards for all women.
The new type of warfare fought from behind computer screens and within vehicles may be more “female-friendly”, but it doesn’t win wars; boots on the ground with rifles do that (as the Taliban just showed us).
Mixing young men and women together in a dangerous environment.
Not to take away anything from the female but it can induce risks.
Female pilots don’t increase any risks like ground combat does.
It isn’t just strength but temperament. Look at the 1990’s and the first gulf war. Half the women decided to get pregnant or obtain other outs and did not deploy. Women also tended to do desk duties so men had no place to go when injured.
Bottom line: Women do not pull their weight in combat positions.
Thank you for the link.
Thanks for the info.
Thanks for the info.
Thanks for the link and the extracted chart. The chart really captures the central issue with an easily-understood graphical depiction of reality.
No offense intended, but don’t waste my time. What’s your point?
Excellent....yet I didn’t see lung capacity addressed.
Excellent post.