Question for lkanneg

Started by contrarymary, Sep 11, 2005, 04:03 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down


It almost men really can't *bear* the thought that a woman can meet the same physical and mental standards for a job.

Some men, perhaps. But not the majority.
quot;I can resist anything but temptation."

 Oscar Wilde

Mr. Nickle

It almost men really can't *bear* the thought that a woman can meet the same physical and mental standards for a job.

Probably no more than there are women who can't *bear* the thought that very often the best man for the job is a man.
Don't mention the war! - Basil Fawlty



Just another question.  Again, it's honest.  I have no ulteriior motive.  I don't dislike feminists at all - I don't hate anyone, really, not even T's evil ex and not even George W. Bush -

Do you really believe men and women are equal?

You stated as much (and I missed it - even though it was your first point.  Hence this edit.  Now do you see why I think I'm a dumbass?)

I do not. No way, no how, not in any stretch of the imagination.

And that's a good thing.  We have different strengths and, ideally, these strengths should be used to complement one another, not to compete with one another and certainly never to tear one another apart.

Sadly, some women perceive (rightly or wrongly) that their particular strengths are not valued as much as men's strengths.    I certainly felt that way myself for some time.

Now, it would seem, some men are feeling that they are not valued.  And why is this?  I'll ask the men here to answer that one.

I feel too much effort has gone into permitting and enabling women feel good (read: entitled) for nothing other than being female.  

One should feel one has value because one has actually done something valuable.  It's not an entitlement - one has to earn it.  AND it can not, must not, come from any source other than one's own heart and mind.   A few laws (affirmative action/anti-harrassment/whatever) aren't going to make self-entitled, self-absorbed slackers feel good about themselves - male or female.

It doesn't matter if it is baking cookies for a sick neighbor or designing a new software program or writing a song which will orchestrate someone else's life, or if it's carrying another human  to safety - these things are all valuable, and life would not be complete without everyone's contributions.  The important thing is to contribute - and feel good about what you have contributed.  My own modest contribution (and forgive me for being self-aggrandizing) is noticing everyone's feelings - and acting where I see a need.   I'm not your equal, lkanneg.  I couldn't hope to be. I'm not, say, Galt's equal either.  But I'll bet, as far as being thoughtful, generous, considerate and kind, some here may not be MY equal.    No, thoughtfulness is not the same as being able to rescue a 220 lb. man from a fire.  Is it worthless, though?  

A good comedian is certainly valuable on a Friday evening with a glass of wine and some friends, or when one is depressed, but on Monday, and the trash is piled outside your home, you would be plenty pissed off if the trash collector did not show up.

Are the contributions mentioned above equal?  No, not really.  Are they all equally important?  No, not really.  But which would you do away with?
quot;I can resist anything but temptation."

 Oscar Wilde


Quote from: "lkanneg"
It almost men really can't *bear* the thought that a woman can meet the same physical and mental standards for a job.

Absolutely!  Because...

2. I am deeply appreciative of all the things feminists of past generations have done to make it possible for me to have the life I have and I feel as if I am identifying with them by also calling myself a feminist.

4. The large strides forward in equality that women have achieved, are very new in the history of humankind. Only a fool would take them for granted and assume they're unassailable. "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson.

...we are certain that when she does we'll never hear the end of it.


2. I am deeply appreciative of all the things feminists of past generations have done to make it possible for me to have the life I have and I feel as if I am identifying with them by also calling myself a feminist.

Appreciation.  Thank you for the reminder - yes, all trailblazers for a worthy cause deserve gratitude - as well as the rank and file which backed the leaders up.   Many women as well as the men  have fought hard over the years to afford us all the lifestyles many of us have now - and in different ways.

I don't know too much about the early suffragettes - but I strongly suspect they had a lot of men supporting them.  Still, I understand your point.  Thanks for sharing that with me.
quot;I can resist anything but temptation."

 Oscar Wilde


Quote from: "Dr Evil"
Pie!!!!! :1blue1:

Well, somehow it evolved into apple crisp.  T's a great cook.  Somehow I got the impression you live in Maryland?  We should drive some down to you.... :)
quot;I can resist anything but temptation."

 Oscar Wilde


Quote from: "lkanneg"
I believe in the social, economic and political equality of the sexes, which is the definition of feminism.

So you believe in the definition of feminism... but what does it mean?
The spreading of information about the [quantum] system through the [classical] environment is ultimately responsible for the emergence of "objective reality." 

Wojciech Hubert Zurek: Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical


Quote from: "lkanneg"
After all, if she really *couldn't,* then there wouldn't be a need to bar her based soley upon her gender, would there?

The military is not there to make you feel comfortable, or empower you as a woman, or raise your self-esteem.

The military has to process 10s and 100s of thousands of people in an efficient way.  From the studies I have seen, the capabilities of the average woman are not just below those of average men, they are far, far below them.  And averages are important when you're talking about bulk movements of people into certain areas.  No one cares about one superpower GI Jane when you're talking about bulk processing.  

Most women can't throw a hand grenade far enough to avoid blowing THEMSELVES up.  Them's the facts, Jack, whether they fit into the square hole of femnist ideology or not.

That may be the most efficient way for the military to handle things - aside from a whole lot of other issues involving women in combat positions.  Maybe they know more about it than an empowered feminist.

Quote from: "lkanneg"
It almost men really can't *bear* the thought that a woman can meet the same physical and mental standards for a job.

Men don't care as much as an empowered feminist would like to think.  It's simply designed to taunt men here, or otherwise play on the usual manipulation buttons of shaming men in some way that we all know so well from feminists.


By the way, a simple thought experiment may point out reality vs. "equality" (or pretend equality).

If an all-female division went up against an all-male division in ground combat, who do you think would win?  Maybe feminists should institute a provision in the next War Convention about men having to take it easy on women in ground combat.


Galt brought up GI Jane, I saw bits of that film at the weekend, in that film it was mentioned that Male solders respond differently when a female colleague  is down, the dwell too much or put too much effort in trying to save them compared to if they were male, the chivalry factor i suppose.

How true is this or is it just something that was in a film, anyone know?

he Light That Burns Twice As Bright Burns Half As Long - Blade Runner

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
John Stuart Mill
English economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873)

The Gonzman

Women in Ground Combat

A Proposal For An Experiment


Let's look bluntly (I'm not sure how you look bluntly, but I'm going to have at it) at whether women should be permitted in ground combat. And then I will make a splendid and fair-minded proposal, which will be applauded by radical feminists everywhere. My guess is that I'll be awarded life membership in the National Organization for Women.

Should women be in ground combat? Good lord no. Females have no place in the infantry, artillery, or armor. They are too weak, too delicate, and too small. They fade after about a day of heavy marching and lifting. They just get in the way. They will get men killed. The idea is bad, everyone who has been in the military understands it, but no one has the moxie to tell feminists "No."

Maybe you haven't been afoot in a war zone. I have. In the mid-Sixties in was in armor in Viet Nam with the Marine Corps, spent a fair amount of time carrying a rifle, went through infantry training in Camp Geiger, which you don't want to try unless you are one healthy young buck. Let me tell you some things about ground life in war zones.

It's brutally physical. Try unloading a truck carrying mortar rounds. Hump sixty pounds uphill in Asian heat for an hour. When I was a Marine a flame-thrower weighed, if memory serves, seventy-five pounds. Try humping that sucker up hills of greasy North Carolina clay when you slide back almost as much as you go forward and your lungs are burning till you can hardly breathe. Try breaking track on armor when a platoon in trouble needs fire support right now. Don't talk about it. Don't theorize. Try it. In Lejeune we force-marched day after day, on three and a half hours sleep. No, that's not exaggeration. Try it.

OK. Go to your local gym. If you aren't a member, pay the ten bucks for a day pass, and watch. Stand around for a couple of hours, and watch what men lift. Watch what women lift. See whether you can detect a pattern.

Women don't lift slightly less than men, and aren't slightly weaker. They lift enormously less. They are catastrophically weaker.

Don't take my word. Go. Look.

I'm 53, five-feet-ten, 180, in better shape than average for my size and age, but nothing spectacular. I never amounted to much as an athlete. I go to the gym to stay strong enough to carry my scuba tanks. If I walked into a Marine gym and said I was the strongest guy there, the Corps would have to be disbanded, because you can't fight while uncontrollably laughing.

But I'm far and away the strongest woman I've seen at Gold's in ten years of membership.

For example, I do fifteen sloppy reps on the bench machine with 250, and fifteen reps with 200 on the lat pull-down machine (the chin-up machine, if you will). It's respectable. That's all it is. There are guys there who could lift that much with me sitting on top of it.

I've never seen a woman bench more than eighty (which is real rare, but not even warm-up weight for a man). I don't think I've ever seen a woman pull eighty on the lat machine. Twenty to forty is normal for them.

Don't call me sexist. Don't tell me I'm trying to be "macho." (Or do: I don't care.) Go look.

Want documentation? There is a branch of research called exercise physiology, which has studied the physical capacities of men and women in near-infinite detail (largely to help in training athletes.) Check relative cardiac capacity, erythrocyte counts, muscle-mass-to-body-mass. I'm not making wild assertions. You can find all of this in any university library.

Now, what do these physical differences mean for society outside of the military? Almost nothing. A woman doesn't need strength to be a surgeon, professor, senator, journalist, or CEO. But weak women will get men killed in war. I've seen wars. I've been on casualty wards. So have a lot of men. For us, war isn't abstract, and getting men killed to appease feminists isn't cute.

I promised to make a splendid proposal. Here it is. Let's take 100 males just out of basic training, and 100 females, also just out of basic and chosen at random. Let's take them all to Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, in a rainy October. We'll put sixty-pound packs on them, give them rifles and a full load-out of ammo.

Then we'll force-march them, at a fast pace set by an infantry sergeant, until they drop. I mean literally drop: can't stand up any longer. No stress time-outs, no little green cards to wave, no trucks to carry their gear, no slowing down. Hump till they fall. This is what happens in combat: grim, unremitting physical effort with no sleep. Maybe it's humping with rifles and seven-eighty-two gear, maybe it's breaking track on a P-5, maybe it's unloading those miserable six-bys. It's physical.

If the women keep up, I'll shut up. If they keep up, all critics of putting women in the infantry will have to shut up. Here is a wonderful opportunity for radical feminists everywhere. But know what? I'll get a lot of screeching and howling because of this column, accusing me of sexism and patriarchy. What I won't get is a call by feminists to make the test. They know what would happen.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the Shadow of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am the MEANEST son-of-a-bitch in the valley.

The Gonzman

Women In The Military II: Voices From The Field

Things Your Anchorperson Won't Tell You


Some time ago I wrote a column on women in or around ground combat, and the extent to which the services are lowering standards to make feminization seem to work. You won't hear much about this in the mainstream media. For one thing, the media favor feminization. For another, guys still in uniform have to be very careful about opening their mouths: It's a guaranteed career-ender for an officer. Some, especially the retired and therefore safe, nonetheless talk. Examples of my e-mail follow:



I was perhaps one of the first commanders to have women in a combat command (the 3d Bde, 2nd Armored Div, called "Brigade 75") in Grafenwoehr, FRG, between April 1975-February 1977. In the Order of Battle Section of the MI Detachment which I commanded, the three enlisted intelligence analysts were unquestionably competent in technical skills and surpassingly adept in camp administrative tasks. They gave convincing briefings and, in a brigade which had no women dependents because of its six-month rotation of maneuver battalions (from Fort Hood and back), I never had any problems in getting men to pay attention to them.

However, in field settings, they invariably wore out after 24-36 hours of steady maneuver operations. Small in frame and of typically delicate musculature, I could not assign them to clamber up the 577 tracked vehicle, to string the razor wire around the tactical ops center perimeter, nor to engage in the rapid physical actions required to set up and tear down the gear during our frequent shifts of position. They had to sleep longer hours, to be worked around, and sheltered from harm during times of frenetic activity.

I'm sure that you know the end of the story. The brigade chain of command turned a deaf ear to my professional judgment that women had no place in combat support units. These officers were all veterans of Viet Nam, as I was. It was therefore a paradox to me that men whose professions had caused them to risk themselves in warfare, and who might one day might be called upon to sacrifice themselves and the lives of those they led for the good of the Nation, would demonstrate such cowardice in the face of their senior leadership.

Simms Anderson, LTC, USAR, Rtd.


All--[this was posted to an Internet list dealing in military matters: Fred]

To buttress Mr. Reed's observations, there is an excellent video out by PBS of all places called Politics and Warriors: Women in the Military. The footage of the trainees would put to rest any notion of "gender equity" -- the film shows men flying over logs, leaping over walls, ripping through obstacles courses and women pathetically floundering. Small, weak women demurely approach a dummy and say in a high pitched, sweet voice, "kill," while lighting tapping its "head" with the butt of a rifle, while men aggressively tear at the thing and charge on to the next target.

While a feminist General says in a voice-over that women can carry men, albeit maybe 2-4 women are needed but that women can get the job done, incredibly damning footage reveals the contrary. On the one hand, men with great ease jump on top of a horizontal pole and carry a heavy rubber casualty on a stretcher over it, while a group of women flounder pathetically at the same task (albeit a lower pole if one is observant). The stretcher is pushed against the pole at an angle, since they can not push it over, and the casualty slides off of the thing. As the women discuss what they should be doing, one of them says over and over "We're losing the casualty, we're losing the casualty." Seeing is believing! And this video is well worth it.

Best, Kate Aspy [Aspy recently served in the enlisted Army: Fred]


Fred--Your article "The Realities of Women in Combat" really struck a chord with my experience in the Air Force. I was a shop chief with the 28th Avionics Maintenance Squadron in the 1980s. There were two women assigned to my shop. One was really sharp at her job, but she couldn't change an RT-274/APN-81 without male assistance. The other couldn't even carry her own tool box to the flight line!

Supposedly, we supervisors were assured by the brass, these women were screened before being allowed into avionics maintenance by having to pass weightlifting standards. Yeah, right. They had to be able to lift 50 pounds. An RT-274 weighed in at 125 pounds plus. I don't know what the problem was with the woman who couldn't carry her own tool box. But I couldn't get rid of her due to pressure from the brass. So, I put her in a weight training program at the base gym. Until her honorable discharge and a pat on the back for a job well done, she never carried her own tools. She, therefore, was never able to pull weekend duty alone; there had to be a male assigned as well to carry her end of the job as well as his own.



Germany, about ten years ago. We were on an FTX with some female GIs and had to put up the TOC tent. It was summer and hot. The girls were in t-shirts, some with no bras. You can imagine how that was. The guys ended up putting up the tents while the females stood around and gave encouragement.

That's normal. Every guy in the unit thinks, damn, if I'm nice to them maybe I'll get some R-and-R in the bush tonight.




Here is a "no-shit" story from a career Army NCO who recently completed his instructor's course at an Army training center...quick, get the PC Gender Police... "In the instructors training course, we were taught that the proper way to erase a chalk board is with vertical strokes, not horizontal strokes. Horizontal strokes may cause a woman's breasts to jiggle."

Roger Charles
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the Shadow of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am the MEANEST son-of-a-bitch in the valley.

The Gonzman

Women In the Military

More Letters From The Field


About our policy of putting women into military jobs for which they are not suited:

It isn't working. It isn't coming close. Sure, many women many jobs in the service do fine work. They know who they are. So does everyone else. The others are the problem. Regarding which:

For years I wrote a syndicated military column, and still get a lot of email from the troops. The following are some of these letters, edited for brevity and to obscure the writer's identity. Note the contrast with what you read in the newspapers.


My last tour was during Desert Storm, [which was] basically the first real test of females in a combat zone and, in my opinion, failed miserably.

For example, an effort was made to reunite the females in our outfit with their husbands that were serving in different units to celebrate Thanksgiving together. The result was that 3 females evacuated due to pregnancy following these "conjugal visits". Furthermore, one of the girl Sgts decided to cash in on her gender and amassed quite a sum of money in her off hours.

During convoy "rest stops", any males found to be on the curb side of the vehicles were punished under Art. 15, UCMJ, for "spying on the ladies" while the "ladies" were relieving themselves. Now a vehicle must be checked during stops: oil, tire air pressure, trailer hitches, etc. How can one do it when they are limited to the road-side only?

Upon arriving at our Saudi Arabia / Iraq border containment area tents were erected. Of course you know who was detailed to erect the female tents! Right, the males!

Then there was the issue of latrines, you've seen them with the cut off 55 gal. barrels to catch the dung. Guess who was not detailed to the s- -t burning detail? Right again, seems the decision was made to keep the girls away from such a common task.

Can you imagine being in a Hummer on a cross country ride in the middle of the desert and it comes time for a potty break? There are no bushes, trees, rocks, just miles and miles of sand. The female has to go #2 and refuses to go behind a sand dune because there might be somebody watching from a distant dune.

When suggested that she lean up against a tire on the passenger side, she refuses because she might get her clothes dirty leaning against the wheel. When given a shovel to dig a "cat hole", she gets offended.

The bottom line is this, for each task the "girls" could not or would not do, a male was diverted to accomplish the mission, a Captain dug her a hole and instructed her how to use it, pathetic.


US Army (Retired)

Dear Fred,

As one of a long string of Captains who have recently departed the United States Army, I can assure you that this is not about money. As far back as I can remember, all I ever wanted was to be a soldier. I realized that goal as an Attack Helicopter Pilot.

[In training] I was told that falling out of a run at the Warrant Officer Entry Course was grounds to be set back. I saw men set back. I saw women fall out constantly, but were kept. During a briefing from Perscom, the Lieutenant Colonel told us that any woman in that room could raise their hand and he would put them in AH-64 [Apache: a sophisticated anti-tank helicopter] training. He told the men in the room that there was not enough money to train them.

Later I served with a woman who had raised her hand. She was now pregnant and wanted nothing more to do with the Army. A slot had been wasted on a quota.

The same quota system also placed women in my unit supply room who couldn't lift a tent. So, while we were already under manned, now I had to pull soldiers off of the perimeter, to help out the women. These were also the same women without the upper body strength to pull back the charging handle on an M-60.

No, it is not about the money. It is about the destruction of an institution that we once held dear.

Name withheld.

From a long-time friend:


Speaking of our political correctness, I will tell you something that I only know anecdotally--that is to say, I have no survey figures to pass on, but am relating what I see and what appears to be true to me. Do not use my name if you ever relate this in any way. I have been in [several] Reserve Army units during my Army career. I have been involved in many others through annual training sessions and TDY assignments. It appears that a significant number of the women in the Reserve units are minority single mothers. In some units, they seem to be a majority of the women in those units, but that may be merely my overreacting to what I was seeing.

Each is supposed to have a "child care" plan provided as part of their mobility record. However, upon questioning, those few I talked to revealed that they had no such plan. Call-ups frequently result in the minority (and some white single mothers) women suddenly "discovering" their mobility child care plan won't work for some reason (in fact, it never existed and I even suspect some of planning it that way). We find out that we lose 10-15% of each unit being called up. In war, a 15% combat loss is considered devastating.

Standards have all been removed for women to allow them to meet quotas where otherwise few or no women would be present. There are a few men who cannot meet physical requirements and they are eliminated. Many women cannot even reach the triggers of the service pistol or M-16 rifle. Many cannot shoot on the ranges, and say that if action occurred, they would cower in their Hummvees or foxholes because they could not fight and kill. These should not be allowed in the military at all, but they are kept in for political correctness reasons.

Again, this is anecdotal, but it is a serious problem in this politically correct military whose general officers are committed to telling the politicians what they want to hear: that women in the military are working out. They aren't.

You know the story. . . .

Name withheld
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the Shadow of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am the MEANEST son-of-a-bitch in the valley.

dr e

It almost men really can't *bear* the thought that a woman can meet the same physical and mental standards for a job.

Oh please.  What rubbish.  Lumping all men into a negative characterization is against the rules here.  Now you are starting to act like a typical feminist in  thinking that you know what men are thinking.  Here's a clue for you, you don't.  You make assumptions based on your ideology and since the ideology is based on hate the assumptions are so far off they are laughable.  

I am very much in favor of performance standards and then letting the chips fall where they may.  Whoever passes is in, whoever doesn't is not.  No gender crap.

Your worry over the armed forces discrimination is really quite amusing since if there is any discrimination at all it is a result of women being treated as a protected class and given special preferences.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

The Gonzman

Military Pretenses

More Reasons Not To Enlist


The military has fallen apart. It needs fixing. The Pentagon pretends otherwise.

Because until after Desert Storm I wrote a military column that appeared in Army/Navy/Air Force Times, men still in uniform recognize my name and email me. The following are examples, with identification removed. The country will pay in lives for the things they describe.

The problem is not that we have women in the military. There are women in the services who have jobs they can do, who do them well, and who are dedicated to the military. They, and the men around them, know who they are. Rather the problem is (1) feminization of military values, (2) recruitment of low-grade women with no commitment to the armed services, and (3) unwillingness to discipline them.


I am (a helicopter instructor pilot) at (a base.) The other day I was sailing along in the simulator with my two flight students when we got into a discussion about 14 hour flying days in combat.

One of the students asked the question "What did you do, pee in a bottle?" Well the female soldier working the console heard this, keyed the mic and said "You better watch it up there, someone said pee in a bottle." The two students were taken aback by this as was I. I quickly told this young Warrant Officer that the female soldier was correct. I can teach you to kill men and women and to blow things up but I can't allow you to say "Pee in a bottle."

Ask any man in the military today what the first thing he does before he opens his mouth and without fail you will hear "I look over my shoulder to see if there are any females in the area." Please don't use my name because I too am always looking over my shoulder.


I just read your comments concerning any young man joining the military of today, [I said, "Don't do it": Fred] and I concur 100%. I go to LeMoore NAS for the Base Exchange and the Commissary, and in the process meet many of the base personnel. One thing I notice all the time is that they are either retiring as soon as they can, or are leaving without a retirement, because of the downturn in discipline and morale.

One Petty Officer told me that his relief on watch was three hours late. His Chief asked him not to write it in his report because then the person would have to be put on report, and since it was a black female, the Chief would have his butt reamed by the C.O. for not being more considerate. . .


Here are a few more [examples of what happens today in the military] for you.

"Ma'am do you think when the time comes that you have to pull the trigger going into an LZ you are going to be able to do it?" "Oh no, I could never kill anyone. Since I had my baby my whole outlook has changed." Then why are you here? "I just thought it would be something fun to do."

"Ma'am, could you tell me the definition of this term in aviation." Her reply "Who gives a shit?" The same female student was caught reading a novel when she was supposed to be studying for her checkride. "You're damn right I was reading a novel, I'd have been bored to death otherwise" She busted several checkrides but she is out there occupying a seat today.

"LT, do you understand the Colonel has given a direct order prohibiting you from driving your POV to the flight line?" "So, what's he going to do, keep me after school?"

How about the LT that broke into the Post Golf Courses Pro Shop and stole a golf bag? He cut himself badly when he busted out the window so the MP's checked the hospital on post and caught him. He still is in flight school.

Then there were the two female flight students who were caught red handed shoplifting at the PX and were allowed to finish flight school.

You will love this one. If a student falls asleep during class we are not allowed to wake them up. We have to take their name and send it up through channels. We also are not allowed to say anything about them being late for class, again we have to take their name and send it up through the chain of command and you know how effective that is.

You are right on the money when you say don't let your son join!!!!


Your most recent article on gender crap... I mean gap, in the military reminded me of the most ridiculous thing I ever saw in my almost 20 years in this business. It was in the Stars and Stripes last year. I was stationed south of Seoul when I read about this MP outfit in Korea that had a... I think it was called a Sympathy Belt? Anyway it was a device that was strapped on to the abdomen of the user... in this case a male captain, 0-3, the unit commander, to simulate a pregnancy late in the third trimester. The idiot looked absolutely moronic in his Maternity Battle Dress Uniform (yes, we have 'em...) The idea is to develop appreciation for what his knocked up soldiers (ugh) are experiencing.

This was part of the mandatory CO2 (Consideration of Others) training required along with our Violence in the Workplace prevention training.... honest to God... in the g.d. Army!! Prevention of Violence in the military.... kinda like Prevention of Sports in the Stadium....


I agree with your opinion about women in the military. But I don't think your proposal for a 'force-march' is necessary to resolve this issue. Every time we conduct a brigade run during PT your point is made. The women in the formations drop out in droves.

I don't understand why these women can't keep up. You would think that an exercise like running would be an equalizer between the sexes, but it's obviously not. It goes back to want you've said about lowered standards coupled with a hesitancy on the part of the chain-of-command to enforce even these sorry standards out of fear with getting slapped with an EO complaint, which in turn can be career ending. The whole situation is rather pathetic.

Keep telling it like it is.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the Shadow of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am the MEANEST son-of-a-bitch in the valley.

Go Up