absolute truth you mean. um no its people rightfully disgusted with your dishonesty and sexism. So calling people girl because they disagree with your sexism and misogyny is not attacking people for their perceived gender? still a lying sexist pig. your trying to use some single shred of fact to defend your lies. all you done here is lie again and again and again. you mean empirical science oh the horror so now we find out where you sexism and misogyny comes from, women in combat roles attacks your sense of masculinity.
How the hell am i stating opinions? Do you need the pentagon to call you directly and give you the news? Or do you just ignore even the statistics of the military and its standards? My 'opinions' are corroborating military results. But then again, people with no common sense would need some diagram or spreadsheet on paper to know women dont have the same physical abilities as men.
What do we do with all those tiny little midget-size men who still by definition of hormone belong to the "strongest" gender? Are they being excused? There is absolutely no logic in what Birch is trying to say here. Not a single thought thought through, only trolling and provoking. Sounds like someone who just found out he could throw a ball longer than mom and thinks therefore he and all people with penises are Superman.
So weak. You just keep ignoring the facts. Did the marinetimes article really make you mad? They also had scientists confirm that women were not up to par compared to the male combat soldiers. Now that really pissed you off didnt it? But again, you really would have to be dumb as shit for this to be surprising.
Show us numbers. Yep. Your opinions. If you want to give us facts, refer us to the facts. So, people with common sense should just take birch's word on matters...
Let's have one. People who actually have facts have no reason to name-call. They let the facts speak for themselves. If they had any.
i'm not the one evading princess( see i can use gender denigration too) you mean keep posting facts i will i like facts instead of misrepresentations like you like to use. again you keep using to vastly different standards by combining spec ops and infantry. though you think your proving your point by repeating that. your not. all your proving is a lazy thinker. its your sexism showing. could it be that the reason women don't meet the standards is because they are intentionally but on a level higher than the base line for what the roles actually entail so ass to keep them out? you keep repeating that as your evidence of your point that women shouldn't be in combat roles but its not. no one is saying it is. all your showing is your high level of immaturity and poor debating skills.
Its called the law of 'averages'. Or did you think women and men were truly the same? Hello? Besides a midget of a man would still tend to be stronger than a female one or is that still shocking? This thread is surreal. You people must be really, really, really sheltered.
First of all. Im not the only one name-calling and ive posted the facts. Did you not like what the military had to say? Is everyone going to keep pretending these are just my findings and opinions? Lmfao
so fucking stupid. no why would i mind. it agrees with with me. what scientists? did you read the same article? there were no scientists involved. do you not know what a scientist is? the only thing pissing me off is your intellectual dishonesty in claiming the article is saying something its not. you also have to be stupid to think the word dumb means stupid.
I am certainly willing to concede that the actual facts you posted were lost on me in the sea of insults and generally poor behavior. (Being taken seriously is one of the many reasons why it behooves you to make your points in a civilized fashion, even if you're not getting the generally constructive reaction you hope for. ) Please, what post number was that.
You've made no point at all this entire time except this now: You think they should lower the standards because its 'intentionally' keeping them out of combat roles? Also, its peculiar people are reacting to what the military decides as if i've got something to do with it. Uh no, they arent lowering the standards for special ops. And if you noticed the link for infantry with its lower standards, the males still outperformed and they arent lowering the standards. Well, yet. Why is this bothering you so much and many here? Isnt this a big step at least in letting women try?
This is very peculiar here why people are upset. The fact men are generally better at certain tasks more suitable for military and combat is just obvious from life experience and observation, even without military statistics. They tend to have quicker and better reflexes, hand/eye coordination, physically stronger and faster. But im glad someone started this thread so any passersby can witness just how extremely liberal (dishonesty) sciforums leans. Just as the extreme conservative right. This belief in the literal equality of the sexes. You should be asking why arent men getting pregnant. Lmao
Why is it that every thread in which birch participates turns into a quagmire of crap. Look at the one thing common: the user birch. QED
Any passersby can see the links i posted by the military which was blatantly ignored and then i was attacked repeatedly even when i was the only one making any real posts. I was the only one who had any experience with the military on top of the fact it was also their findings. And they will see also see just how bizarrely strange many of you are for this to be anywhere surprising.
Yes, we are comfortably sheltered from this type of backwards reasoning..unfortunately not. "Hello?" Haha, oh so a midgetman is stronger than a midgetwoman? I don't know, we have to consult the midgets on this. A midgedman is however most likely to be weaker than an "average" woman, I would guess, unless it's an extremely well trained midget, or skilled in combat. Are there any research done on this? Why does this matter to you? Are you feeling threatened by a female presence in your life? If you truly care about the evolution and improvement of the military forces, diversity is the key imo, with a wider range of qualities more creative and intelligent solutions could occur, which could apply to most workplaces too. But then again, that was never the military intention.
Lets consider these blatantly dishonest and nasty attacks. That im a lazy thinker, sexist, all opinions etc. while they had zero content or thought except personal attacks or just bs. yet no one had anything to contribute or it had nothing to do with the us military's decision to open up combat roles to women which they decided to not have differing standards. Besides the fact, most women just dont qualify for combat (us military) and thats the military's findings. This part just really got under their skin something awful. Lmao How stupid or naive can anyone be to first find these results perplexing and then pretend this is just someones opinion when its the military's own records.
