To: farmfriend
They must meet the requirements of the game. But, it's well known that physical requirements for female trainees are relaxed and reduced.
That is what I am suggesting we have when we only send men into combat. Inequality based on sexism.
You're a victim of social engineering, my friend. Social engineers think that the parameters of physical reality are created by one's beliefs. Well, maybe they are, but certainly at a level unreachable by those same engineers.
![](http://home.hiwaay.net/~wterrell/william.gif)
237 posted on
03/25/2003 8:54:39 AM PST by
William Terrell
(People can exist without government but government can't exist without people.)
To: William Terrell
What an interesting thread. I wonder what are the statistics on the demographics of the posters. Only an opinion without any substantiation but my guess is:
Those opposed to women in the services will tend to be:
1.) male
2.) high school ed or lower
3.) blue collar, certainly not professional
4.) no military experience or if there was military experience, certainly not at an officer level.
5.) belong to a fundamentalist religion.
246 posted on
03/25/2003 9:07:03 AM PST by
drjoe
To: William Terrell
But, it's well known that physical requirements for female trainees are relaxed and reduced. I know they are and I have repeatedly said that that policy is wrong. I am not a victim of social engineering. I see you have fallen in the "women should be protected" trap. You miss my point and judge me wrongly.
248 posted on
03/25/2003 9:28:33 AM PST by
farmfriend
( Isaiah 55:10,11)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson