time for my 2 cents:

women who want to help in the army should be put in paid brothels behind the front line.
.
.
.
.
gotcha - I was trolling.
Their services should be free.:har:

My guess is you can do three pull ups due to being light weight on nervus system between your ears.

Go take a leak as well....:up::03:

With misogynistic comments like that, it's a wonder why there are not more females on this forum.

Also Sky your statement about women getting colder is not accurate. Women are more sensitive to feeling cold, but actually are better than men at managing and surviving cold, as they tend to have a thicker and more even layer of subcutaneous fat.

Anyhow as for the topic, males and females in the military... Truth be told each sex offers different strengths and weaknesses for military service. Women do not have as much upper body strength, but strength is hardly the determining factor in combat, not in ancient times, and definitely not now. Endurance is more important for hauling gear, which is something most women can do just fine as they do have good lower body strength.

While a woman may not be the most ideal candidate as the squad's support gunner, there are plenty of other roles that they can match males in, or even exceed. For example, physically women are far better suited as fighter pilots than males, they are smaller in size, have less mass, and as a result can tolerate g forces much better. Women also tend to have better manual dexterity and are more agile. Which again makes the good candidates for piloting, or crewing tanks, or sniping, recon, etc.. So perhaps we should raise the bar in those areas.

Some of these physical tests are just arbitrary tests. The real question is who is most best suited for each job.

Best of 2014 anyone?:haha:
Hilarious!:rotfl2:

Next-Gen US Marines

https://scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net/...22167944_n.jpg

You fall for an old myth, that the isolation effect of body fat is what decides this, but we know that this assumption is wrong. We are no seals in cold water. Decisive for human body' thermo-homeostasis is the production of warmth inside the body, and this is not produced by fat, but by muscles and metabolic activity. Since the male body has more muscle mass than the female body, it produces more warmth, and thus the body is better heated.

On average, the male body contains 40% muscles and 15% fat, the female body contains 25% muscles and 25% fat. Go figure.

Bet she could still kick your Civil Air Patrol butt. :yep:

That is correct.

I've met 14 year old Staff Sargeants with better war faces. :O:

EDIT: To be honest, she probably would because I won't fight a woman.

I looked it up even more, and learned this:

The male outer skin is 15-20% thicker than female outer skin. In case of physical cold cinditon meeting the body barrier, bloodciruclation in the skin'S upper layer gets reduced, which is easier to accompli8sh in thin skin than in thicker skin. Woemn'S skin thus becomes up to three degrees colder than a male'S skin int he same situation. So not only produces the femal ebody less inner wamrth, but the sensoric perception of cold is not just imgaination, but bases on a physical reality - in the skin's sensor feedback.

Add this to the overestimation of isolation effects of suvcutaneous fat. The problem with that argument was that most of women'S higher share of fat is concentrated not in subcutaneous fat layers, but in certain body "hotspots", usually those areas that males admire so much. I read that today, the minor isolation gains of subcutaneous fat gets neutralised even more due to Western beauty ideals that prefers a slim figure.

So: women produce less warmth, feel cool outside temperates more intense because their skin in fact IS colder, and the subcutaneous fat layers do not compensate for these negative warmth effect.

Finally, blood pressure. The average blood pressure in the female body is lower than in the male body.

Pretty sure that is just lousy selfy not a "war face" which is nothing but a bunch of hoopla anyway.

Lousy excuse by the way.some of the best fights I ever witnessed where woman vs. a man.In one the man hit first and the woman who was much stronger picked him up
threw him into the ceiling then slammed him into the floor that was it man was down for the count in about 10 seconds.

Saw another one in high school two girls that was the most brutal fight I have ever seen and they knocked out two guys that tried to break it up.

Yes I know.... :shifty:

Well I'm sorry that respect for women is a "lousy excuse"

I've seen some on various shows and heard tons of stories from tons of people.

Fights are fights is how I see it. Most of them start over something that could've been easily solved.

One of my favorite quotes "Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far"

My interpretation is that I will only fight when I have to. I've never been in a major fight but I've had a share of the scuffles.

Never found a reason to all-out fight. Because most of my problems so far can/were solved by other means.

Just because a person has respect for women is irrelevant.I find it very hard to believe that any person if placed in a defensive situation where a female where attacking them would just do nothing because they "respect women".

I split fighting or brawling and self defense in two separate categories.A fight is an activity where all parties involved got into a physical altercation for a foolish reason.

Self defense is another ball game and one could meet one of the meaning of fight by using their hands and feet to defend themselves from another attacker.In such a situation to say that one would not fight a woman is pretty silly and would only get you robbed or hurt or what ever else the female attackers intent was.

Most people have not actually been in any serious fights either so thus far you are not an exception.People who find the need to fight often usually also often find the need to post bail.

Of course keep in mind that the rate of females being the assailant in violet crimes has sharply risen over the past decade so never assume just because someone is a woman that she is not dangerous.

Personally I will respect anyone so long as their actions warrant respect.

If I was in combat, I would want someone who could drag a body away. (alive or dead)


I do not approve of women in mixed combat with men.

I know I am opening myself up to a flame, or may even be considered a troll.

Save your feminism, the I am woman hear me roar crap, women are physically inferior to men, and will always hold the whole mixed unit back.

Unless they are all built like Amazonians, or can pass physical requirements, leave them in the rear.

Political correctness, at the cost of combat efficiency. God Bless America.



edit: Before this supposed change, women already had vastly diminished physical fitness requirements.


Sorry, war is a mans game, get over it, or conform. (beef up, and pass a uniform physical fitness requirement)

I do not want my life in the hands of a 130 pound frau, who can barely carry her pack, who would?

I would want anyone who can maintain self control well enough to return fire.

Truth be told the ability to drag away a dead body is useless in direct combat why waste combat capacity to move a dead body?:hmmm:

In combat the first priority is to gain or maintain fire superiority harsh as this sounds that means that a wounded person is just going to have to wait until their comrades gain enough control of the situation such that it is possible to reach the injured person without risking further casualties.

As I said before the Viet Cong had many female combatants the VC was also expert at fading away and often leaving few bodies behind must have been the males doing all the work.What it really was is they lacked our silly beliefs.

Tome it has nothing to do with political correctness if a person can perform the tasks there should be noting baring them.