|
quote:During the 1998 Australian Open, sisters Serena and Venus Williams boasted that they could beat any man ranked outside the world's top 200. The challenge was accepted by Karsten Braasch, a German player ranked No 203 (his highest ranking was No 38). Before the matches, Braasch played a round of golf in the morning, drank a couple of beers, smoked a few cigarettes, and then played the Williams sisters for a set each, one after the other. He defeated Serena, 6-1, and Venus, 6-2. Serena said afterwards "I didn't know it would be that hard. I hit shots that would have been winners on the women's tour and he got to them easily." Yikes. There are definitely physical differences, it would be pretty unfair to expect someone to compete on a level they're not up for.
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 00:28 |
|
|
Jose posted:those are some impressive steroids Women can take steroids just as well as men can.  HGH gut knows no sex or gender.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:Women should be fully integrated into armed forces however since we have things like guns and vehicles now and don't just swing chunks of metal at each other. As someone who has worked with women in the armed forces, that's not necessarily true. What I mean, is any woman should be able to try, but that doesn't always mean they'll be able. Tank crews still have to change and tighten treads, artymen still need to lift shells and move trails. It's dumb to arbitrarily prevent them from giving it a go though, there are enough wimpy guys who made the cut.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Mariya Oktyabrskaya was a genetic mutant, I guess. You wouldn't know her name if she was typical.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Amazing, how she instinctively knew that she was one of the only women in the world capable of working as a mechanic on a tank, despite being a 38-year-old cannery worker and telephone operator. Oh that's cool. You found one example of a female tanker. I'm sure if you google you'll find more examples of female Soviet tankers. That doesn't mean most women, or even most men are suited for the job. e: Even in a military that has allowed women in the Combat Arms since the 90's, there's not a 50% gender division.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Japan lost WW2 because SJWism led them to have women work as stevedores, where they all died from trying to unload 50-lb bags of rice. What exactly are you arguing here? Women should be allowed to do any job in the military. Any job period, actually. Not all people are suited for all jobs, women are no exception. Many jobs in the military are still physically demanding, and not all people are up to it. Women are often physically smaller and weaker than men and that makes doing those jobs difficult. Because, as you pointed out exceptional women can do a great job, there's no point having rules forbidding them from trying.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Like, historically, your statements are basically horseshit. I spent 5 years lifting 155 shells, but please - tell me how easy it is to lift them. It's not just lifting one, and it's not just lifting them for a short while. It's physical labour, in body armour (so add some weight and awkwardness) and exposed to the sun/wind/rain/snow, with little food and no sleep. That would be hard for anyone male or female. I have worked with and under female troops who are much better at their jobs than I am. Troop commanders, signalers, surveyors, drivers, and yes gunners. Clearly being female didn't impact their ability to do their jobs. The average Canadian woman is 161.0 cm. Based on the Robinson formula (1983), her ideal weight is 54.8 kgs Based on the Miller formula (1983), her ideal weight is 57.7 kgs Based on the Devine formula (1974), her ideal weight is 53.3 kgs Based on the Hamwi formula (1964), her ideal weight is 52.9 kgs Based on the healthy BMI recommendation, her recommended weight is 48.0 kgs - 64.8 kgs So - you expect her to be able to lift most of her bodyweight, all day, for days on end, with lovely food and little sleep. I'm not saying it can't be done, but to say that it ought to be more common than it is is kinda absurd. A Buttery Pastry posted:Not questioning your overall point necessarily, but isn't there more to it than just the question of whether you can lift a shell? You'd also have to be able to do it in a safe and controlled manner, and probably pretty fast too. This hits the nail on the head. It's even a lovely job for the gym-rat juice monkey grunts. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Actually, most people focus on women being weak, rather than women all being clumsy and slow, so they ignore that. But, again, think about this rationally for a second. This is saying that women are incapable of lifting less than their own body weight (in practical terms) safely, in a controlled manner, and quickly enough to be useful. Now, you could provide data suggesting that weightlifting women are just barely able to lift their body weight, but that doesn't exist. Weightlifters =/= the average military recruit. Weightlifting conditions/nutrition/training =/= a military environment. I don't think it's unfair to say most women are "incapable of lifting less than their own body weight (in practical terms) safely, in a controlled manner, and quickly enough to be useful." but that's not a justification to have rules preventing them from entering training to see if they are able to maximize their potential. Effectronica posted:So you're taking the position that most military work involves a great deal of training and conditioning, and endurance is more important than raw strength, but you're still coming down on "women are just too frail to lift heavy weights without drugs". Well, it sure seems like you're open-minded. It is definitely about training and conditioning. Some women can take that training and excel, many cannot. Take Ranger School or USMC SOI for example. Many men fail, and so have many women. It's just that proportionately more men pass, and they weren't all hand-picked to be the poster children with the best shot at success. There's no shame in not being up to snuff. I failed out of Special Forces selection, as did 95% guys I did it with.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:I do enjoy comparing special forces to the artillery though, and so unconsciously too. Chalk that one down to Regimental Pride. I'm down with society encouraging women to work out and join the military. It's really the only way to be sure. You can talk about how suited they are all day, but until there are a fair chunk of women on the guns, it's all academic. e: Women's sports are great! Take hockey for example, Canadian Men's and Women's are consistently the best in the world. The women just can't play on the same level as the men though. That doesn't take anything away from their accomplishments, it's just how it is. They're both amazing teams and a joy to watch. It wouldn't be fair to roll them into one national team because there might be one woman who would make the cut. Frosted Flake fucked around with this message at 22:41 on Oct 5, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
You never hear about all the men that lived after successfully changing a tread. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 00:28 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Whats with all the MRA poo poo lately? Too many damned How is this a MRA issue? Women's sports are awesome, Men's sports are awesome. It's unfair for the two to play against each other. Women provide valuable military service, Men provide valuable military service.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 23:19
|
|
