View Single Post
Old 01-24-2013, 12:08 PM   #44
Requiem
~~~
 
Requiem's Avatar
 
~ ~ ~

Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Earth Division
Posts: 22,307

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Gilgamesh
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
Actually they are. You really think that these people are going to be satisfied with unequal numbers of men and women on the front lines? Plenty of fire departments have already been through this. This crap is always done piecemal: Step 1) Demand they let women in but leave physical standards as they are. Step 2) Criticize physical standards as too high if not an X percentage of women are represented according to as they should by the beliefs of left-wing gender bean counters. Step 3) Lower physical standards to let more women in. It's already happening.

Btw, you aren't considering the implications of a mixed-gender front line in terms of sexual tension and the likelihood of having preggos waddling around.
The military's top official seems to think that the combat ban of women in the military is a primary driving force in the tension you described.

And where is the evidence that lowering of physical standards to let more women into the military is already happening?

I've had this discussion with a lot of ex-military friends, who either went on to elite special forces or are currently still serving who think this is a bad idea. I've also had my friends who are recruiters tell me that standards have never been higher than they have now, and they turn away a lot more people than they ever get into the service.
Requiem is offline   Reply With Quote