May 26, 2005

Deadlier than the Male

Now for something a little different: Women in Combat.

The US House just dropped a bill that would have restricted women's roles in a combat zone. Right now, women can do most jobs in the Army except for front line combat jobs like infantry, armor, artillery and special forces. Women can do all the "combat support" jobs like MPs, engineers, logistics and so on. The thing is, that in Iraq those jobs are in the combat zone too, and 35 women have died in Iraq. Duncan Hunter (R-Stone Age) thought that this would not do, but got shot down by, amongst other people, the Joint Chiefs. The Army is already facing a personnel shortage, dropping women from key roles didn't go over well.

Personally, I think that women should serve in all roles. Yes, men are stronger than women for the most part, but even most combat jobs like driving a tank or pointing an artillery piece don't deal with strength. And for the jobs that deal with strength, sorry a lot of women can't cut it. But some could.

Take special forces for example. Most women would not have a chance of making the cut for SF. Most men can't make it. But I bet you anything that some women could. And those women would be something. I think we could find a use for a few deadly women in this whole shadowy war on terror thing, eh?


Laura said...

Wow, where do I start? First, let me commend you on acknowledging that women can be just as stupid as men and volunteer to put their asses on the front line to get blown to pieces. However, when you go on to talk to about how women aren't as strong as men, you start to make me mad.

While it's true that on average, the male of the species is larger and has more upper body strength, there is quite a decent percentage of the female population that could definitely kick some ass. I, personally, can't imagine why a woman would want to put herself on the front lines, but if they're volunteering and they're capable (which many women are, contrary to what you clearly think) then they ought to be allowed.

Personally, I think it's a macho thing. The poor little soldiers wouldn't be able to live it down if "some woman" saved their asses, so women aren't put into those positions. But that's not because the female of the species has shortcomings, it's because the male does.

Tyler said...

Yes.....I do believe a few...a very, very, very, very few percentage of women could handle intense combat roles. But there are also a very, very, very, very few percentage white men that can handle playing cornerback in the NFL. Black athletes dominate that position for a reason: They're faster!, You have to go with the best when the stakes are high. So you get the best. Overall the black athlete is better at this position. Just like men are far superior to women in nearly all physical abilities. So even if it were allowed, don't expect too many to make it.

There are not, as you say, "many" women capable of hard core special forces type military roles. There are hardly any. So what exactly do you mean by "many"? Maybe 4 out of millions could make it. That is certainly not "many". Do you realize that the average woman can't even do a pull up? And that most can't do more than one? So that means at the very least you're going to have women in these combat roles who are capable of at least 10,15,20 pull ups? Very rare

And thats just one proxy to measure strength. What about speed? Women, no matter how tone, can't get down to a man's body fat percentage, and you can't run fast if you're a fatty. They don't posses enough quick twich muscle fibers as men. So perhaps a woman can be "strong"....but strong and fast???

Even if a woman or two could make it in hard core combat military roles, it proves nothing. They'll always be out numbered by men because men are stronger!

By the way, I could beat you and all your female friends in an arm wrestling match.

Know this you must...

Laura McConnell said...

Have you met my girlfriend, Tyler? I'm pretty sure she could take you.

Laura McConnell said...

And to clarify what I said before. The "many" women I spoke of that would be able to hand special forces or front line combat, comes from that, admittedly rather small group of women that are actually willing and able to volunteer for the army. I am not talking about the average pretty girl, I am talking about women who have made their life's work out of being physically fit and active.

Most women who are not capable of that sort of physicality don't even bother joining the military. But of those who do, many are capable of performing these tasks. It's not their ability that keeps them off the front lines. It's that the men, who make up the majority of the military, can't handle the concept of having their asses saved by a woman.

Wingnut said...

Let's all agree on this: Men wouldn't survive in this world if it weren't for women.

Nope, I can't do a pull up..In fact, I'm sore from one softball game. This is not the point though.

The point is that women may not be physically stronger than men, but they are much much stronger in other ways. I'm constantly amazed at how strong women are! Take child birth, miscarriages, pressures from work, raising a family, keeping the men in their life calm when their tempers rise, etc. Women rock!

Tyler said...

Very well, I will agree with those words!

But hey, I wouldn't mind being saved by a woman. I mean shit, If I were shot and imobilized on the battlefield and someone told me Natalie Portman was going to rescue me, how could I not like that?!?!

Granted the woman rescuing me would probably look more like Cameron Manheim or Grace Jones than Natalie Portman or Scarlett Johansson, but I can dream.....

The Craig said...

God I love it when I get everybody whipped up. To keep things moving, let me suggest that their are arguments to let women be soldiers despite strength differences. For one, women might be better peacekeepers than the swinging dicks that make up most of our soldiers. We will be doing a lot of peacekeeping this century. Second, there is real advantage for the US to have people who might look like Natalie Portman and can kill you with a spoon. Just think of the poor terrorist, who just like Tyler, is have a fantasy, when bamn! right between the eyes.

jess said...

can i just note that i'm a proud constituent of duncan hunter? The man is an ass. I send online messages to him and my senators all the time. The lovely senators reply to online messages with online messages thanking me for my opinion. But hunter, the idiot/tree killer, responds to every one of my online messages with a snail mail response. Now, is that really necessary?