Right that would be grammatically correct but “as snowflake as” or “as cringe as” or “as incel as” or “as [political/pop culture term] as” is slang these days that is sort of Gen Z/online-coded and adds a little edge or snark
I agree those are more grammatically clear, but the confusion is that Steve is using a form of expression that is a modern online-ish way of speaking (and as I said above, more Gen Z-coded).
“as [noun] as” where the noun functions as an adjective kind of changes the meaning. It sounds snarkier and imbues the noun with a pejorative vibe.
So Steve’s title is less sincere sounding and more sarcastic than all the rewritten titles above. They may be more correct but don’t pack the same punch.
That said, for people who are unfamiliar with this way of speaking, it probably won’t pack a punch and just sound confusing!
Sure, poor me, who would have used cringy, lol. But hey, this is only the results of Gen Z exiting K-12 without being taught rigorous grammar. They wouldn't have used cringe as adjective if it would have been marked down in essays. Otherwise their precious 5.0 GPA score based on APs would have taken a hit.
It's not something restricted to the US. By now, it's all over the Global West (I think). However, it would be funny to know how the things are in Russia, China, or even in Hungary? Do they have the same slip-down in grammar?
Right, it’s Gen Z manipulating language and then older ppl like Steve and me who are too online absorbing it until it sounds normal to us too.
Gen Zers definitely did not get taught rigorous grammar or rigorous anything! But instead of just sounding uneducated, they also seem to be inventing their own way of speaking which is interesting.
Happened too, when old Anglo-Saxon was replaced by the hybrid Anglo-Norman language (that gave rise to Middle English). A very interesting transition. But that is like 800 years ago. Time for another turn *grin*
I don't know who could do that. I'd suggest some parallel public service for women, but all these programs devolve to the left, now even the military. I wonder if trans men and/or women have to sign up for the draft.
The female social strategy is not limited to feminists. It is also certainly not limited to the military or other such institutions.
Evasion of Responsibility is a pre-existing social strategy that gets dropped onto existing institutions. We cannot speak in these terms in the feminist era, so we are already locked into a default pro-Female position and it goes on.
A lot of those pushing women in the combat military and so on were bad actors with personal problems, like Nancy Mace (borderline personality disorder).
That sounds like a rather drastic way to dodge the draft.
Military equipment is designed to be just barely small and light enough for most _men_. Any weight reductions just make room for more ammo, fuel, or armor.
Lower physical standards for women just don’t make sense.
I noticed back in the 90s that many fictional TV shows that wanted to show the fitness of women for combat and law enforcement inadvertently showed the opposite, usually because they were aimed at a female audience. Like the MIT prof, they couldn't understand what doesn't look exemplary to men.
Will you be attending the Dodgers/Phillies game on Wednesday? The last time the Dodgers knocked the Phillies out of the playoffs was when Bill Russell singled home Ron Cey in the bottom of the 10th off of Tim McGraw's father. The run was unearned due to an error by the generally reliable Garry Maddox muffed a Dusty Baker fly ball with two outs
Since this series happened the Phillies have prevented the Dodgers from reaching the World Series three times
Country music superstar, along with his wife Faith Hill. Tug was a 21-year-old minor-league pitcher when he knocked up Tim's mother, who was a waitress still in high school. However her parents sent her to live with relatives and Tug was not involved in his upbringing, so score a point for Nature
I'm not even in the military but I was bothered by his attack on "fat generals". I concede he knows more about the military than I do, but surely at the top level you can make some concessions to get the intellect you need for certain specialized tasks? No? It all comes down to how good everyone looks in uniform?
When I think of fat generals I think of general burkhalter from Hogans Hero’s. I think he is loosely based on Hermann Goering who became known for being fat, corrupt and degenerate. As a side note the actor who played the actor (Leon Askin) lived to be 97.
Sadly, it is hard to find the time to be degenerate when one must lift weights, run laps and do calisthenics regularly to meet tough fitness standards.
I thought of Leslie Groves, the colonel who got the Pentagon built, then general in charge of the Manhattan Project. In the John Adams opera Doctor Atomic, Groves sings morosely about unsuccessful attempts to limit his eating.
The fitness requirements are adjusted for age. The problem is the generals can't demand privates be fit when they're so far from it themselves. They've been wearing camo whenever possible to hide the fat.
Fun fact: in 1945, the army had about 188 generals over something like 12,000,000 troops. I realize the military has become much more specialized since then, but 653 seems like a lot.
According to Grok (and I'm a bit suspicious of accuracy after asking a few Battle of Britain questions and getting very wrong/made up answers, but anyway) 296 ships; 250-270 active duty admirals; approximately 9,000 active-duty captains (O-6 rank). This represents the senior-most non-flag officer grade, where captains typically command major ships (e.g., destroyers, cruisers, or amphibious vessels), lead squadrons, or hold key shore-based billets. Promotion to captain requires 17–22 years of service on average. Quite remarkable, thats one Admiral and thirty Captains per ship. You could probably crew some ships with just Captains.
The issue with beards is a back door way to run off many black services members. The twice a year PT test requirement is a way to run off those with permanent medical issues (called profiles in the Army). The issues with hair in about making the military less welcoming to women. Also, Hegseth made no mention of tattoos.
The requirement for daily PT shows no thought to everyone who is not in a line position.
that makes sense. WRT tattoos don't military people have tattoos going back a long time, especially sailers? I recall reading that one of the 4 star admirals in WWII got a tattoo which was unusual but loved by the enlisted men because they all had them.
Your comment refers to "everyone who is not in a line position" i.e. staff. I doubt Hegseth is going to be ordering grunts on to the PT field during deployments or active combat or training missions. There is lots of downtime in the military.
Hegseth said duty day. So that means that nurses and docs will spend less time with patients to work out and get haircuts. Hegseth also forgot that he could be creating a pathway for docs to eat their way out of the army.
They sleep and eat and go on leave as well. You seem to have this mental picture of SAC bombers sitting idle on the tarmac because all the pilots are working out and getting haircuts. Do you have any idea how staffing and scheduling works in large organizations?
Being fat, even if highly intelligent and of obvious value to the military, signifies a lack of self-discipline, willpower and control of temptations. It is a fair criticism, especially in such a hierarchical, physically demanding and excellence based area. Fat generals will lose some respect and lower morale.
As a person with a life long weight problem and excellent self discipline in all other aspects of life, I guarantee you that obesity is not simply, or at least not always, a failing of discipline. That's a facile explanation that appeals to people who like to feel in control and superior.
Almost everyone has some behavior they cannot control. It's just that some are more accepted and/or glamorous than others.
But you’re not in the Army nor are you a general. My comment is primarily aimed at fat military personnel who are subject to different rules and expectations.
Churchill criticised one of his WW2 generals for insisting his officers do circuits. He asked if Napoleon would make his generals do it. "Perhaps it was the other fellow he made run".
BTW- I'm not against requiring officers, even generals to engage in exercise. My point is even with good conditioning, a middle aged guy can have excess body fat. If I'm being honest though, my actual point is that Hegseth was making me feel bad about myself.
Sadly, that hugely publicized, high-level cave-in set off a preference cascade in the direction of wokeness, with the next big domino to fall being James Dewey Watson, who is still the world's greatest living biologist at age 97.
I would say that the cited women's (Bobbie Scholly and Nancy Hopkins) reactions prove both Hegseth's and Summers' points. If women become physically ill when criticized or questioned, then they belong neither in the faculty lounge of the math or science departments or on the battlefield (new strategy for American enemies: make fun of women and they will all run away).
Whether women are "tough enough for combat" or "can't breathe because this kind of bias makes me physically ill" depends very much on what is required in the situation.
Despite projecting an image of fierce independence, feminists resort to emotional blackmail when they don't get their way, which is pretty standard female behavior since - forever?
One of the reasons feminism makes most women bitter and miserable is because they essentially tell women to act like men in terms of their interests, goals, and sexual behavior. It creates a lot of mental dissonance and it's extra work to try and fight one's inherent nature. It's also a turnoff to a massive share of their potential dating pool, so many of them feel alienated and unsatisfied and rather than consider modifying their behavior, feminism says the problem is with everyone else. Brunches cannot fix this.
Actually, I think many feminists accentuate the worst aspects of the female personality. Maybe weaponize it is a better term. There definitely have been better and worse "waves" of feminism. Equality or Second-wave feminists seem to have had the best political and personal goals., and it's no coincidence that they were the more middle-class and moderate than what came before and after them. They wanted an equal (not better) shot at entering some fields such as law and medicine. They didn't want to dismantle the nuclear family, and they viewed home-making and child-rearing most positively. They wanted sex crimes to be taken more seriously, including those against men ( if you count prison rapes, men's numbers skyrocket). They were largely reacting to the excesses of the radical leftist domestic terrorists of the Sixties to Eighties. And they were pretty non-political.
Of course, today they are taught as evil capitalist tools of the man, if they are academically acknowledged at all. I'll be Sixty soon. I remember when my bright mother couldn't get equal pay, a credit card, or a mortgage with her own money. All she wanted was an equal shot at these things. She wasn't pro-sex, anti-sex, or anti-male. My folks died still married. She just wanted me to go to college, have some life choices, some kids, and a good husband. Of course such women weren't perfect. Who is? But you would not believe how much this type of equality feminism is reviled in academia, often by sexually predatory lesbian feminists.
I definitely do not have your historical knowledge about the various iterations of feminism, just the variety that seems to have poisoned Gen X and younger. I am also grateful not to have anything to do with academia! Seems like a toxic environment in a lot of places and it certainly hasn’t produced any ideas in my lifetime that improved our society - quite the contrary.
Whether it's an 8404 or 1310, you have to be physically able to do the job. No women who are not physically fit enough to perform get passed through.
For example, female FMF corpsmen get exactly the same training as males. They do the multiple hikes totaling 20 miles, they do the Marine Corps PFT, and they do the special obstacle course that includes a litter drag through mud.
There are definitely differences in male and female performance that are worth taking into consideration. For example, studies indicate that female pilots perform better under high-stress flight scenarios than men, making fewer errors and maintaining better control. Female pilots have also shown a greater ability to consistently and accurately respond to critical information during stressful flight situations than men.
Despite male and female pilots having nearly identical visual attention patterns and flight experience, female pilots make fewer flight control errors when stress levels increase. While both genders pay attention to the same information during flight, women are more consistent and accurate in how they responded to it.
Quoting from the official Army publication, WOMEN IN COMBAT ARMS: A STUDY OF THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR:
"A look at the data on aircraft accidents is useful to make an assessment of performance of female pilots. As the data highlights, women are involved in fewer aircraft accidents than all-male crews -- comprising only 3% of incidents. As women comprise roughly 10% of all Army aviators, the evidence suggests that women operate aircraft more safely than men. As it pertains to just AH-64 aircraft, 100% of all accidents, both in garrison and in theater, involve all-male crews, suggesting that female attack pilots may be even more safe in the performance of flight duties.
"These women are Army aviators who have served in attack aviation roles, without restriction, since the beginning of major combat operations in the Global War on Terror. This research shows that over a decade of females serving on the front lines alongside their male counterparts, there is no significant stigma or other prohibitive factors that would degrade the effectiveness or lethality of combat arms units in war."
Going back to World War II, while executing the same flight profiles, the accident rate per 1,000 hours of flying time for men was 0.88 while for women (WASP and WAFS) it was 0.60.
"... female FMF corpsmen get exactly the same training as males. They do the multiple hikes totaling 20 miles, they do the Marine Corps PFT, and they do the special obstacle course that includes a litter drag through mud."
This is misleading. The PFT explicitly requires lesser physical fitness for women. For example, men are required to do pull-ups, while women are allowed to hang from the bar. Requirements for men and women should be the same. But they are not.
Yes. The women who have famously passed Ranger School and, I believe, Special Forces selection, were treated far differently than their male counterparts.
There are a lot of appropriate jobs for women in the military, just not all jobs. The military serves the purpose, too, of providing young people from unsupportive backgrounds discipline and direction. I know and respect several female veterans, including doctors, nurses, educators, and non-combat personnel.
The hang from the bar thing is from the early teens, I think.
While there are plenty of hospital corpsmen that's not the case with FMFs because there is a high attrition rate due to the fast operational tempo, emotional exhaustion and burnout. This especially affects IDCs who are also FMF-trained. It's a very tough job. Would you rather have no corpsman or a female corpsman who can only do three pull-ups but will save your life?
It seems very odd that women get an easier standard starting at age 31 and a further reduction at 41, but men have to go all the way to *51* to get even a small reduction. This would imply that women’s strength peaks earlier than men’s strength and declines more quickly. That is not the case; if anything, women’s strength declines less with age.
Bring back fainting couches.
And the vapors.
Who has the room?
I don't want to nitpick but I think the title has one "as" too many (or too few). Shouldn't it be:
Are Feminists Delicate Flowers as the MSM suggests?
or
Are Feminists as Delicate as Flowers as the MSM suggests?
If you're going to nitpick, you should spell "want" correctly.
Every correction of another's spelling or grammar is accompanied by a typo of one's own.
Paulus' Corollary to Murphy's Law.
These days we can blame in on spell correct.
as if as!
LOL
Yep, those spellcheckers - devilish!
*grin*
The two, and only two, occurrences of "as" are fine.
But clearer wording would be "Are Feminists Flowers as Delicate as the MSM suggests?"
I think he’s using "delicate flowers" informally as an adjective
Like “Is your liberal mom as snowflake as the media suggests?"
I've never heard "snowflake" used in that way.
Version that would make sense in a standard way: “Is your liberal mom as [much of a] snowflake as the media suggests?"
Right that would be grammatically correct but “as snowflake as” or “as cringe as” or “as incel as” or “as [political/pop culture term] as” is slang these days that is sort of Gen Z/online-coded and adds a little edge or snark
I think the Discussion would be clearer if one converts the Question to a Statement.
The criticized statement would have then been:
Feminists are as Delicate Flowers (as the MSM suggests).
I think the "normal" sentences would have been either
Feminists are Delicate Flowers (as the MSM suggests)
or
Feminists are as Delicate as Flowers (as the MSM suggests).
"Feminists are as Delicate Flowers" would be to my taste missing another adjective, like fragile:
"Feminists are as Fragile as Delicate Flowers" would have been OK
I also don't think snowflake would be used as adjective, because one could easily use snowflaky or snowflakish...
I agree those are more grammatically clear, but the confusion is that Steve is using a form of expression that is a modern online-ish way of speaking (and as I said above, more Gen Z-coded).
“as [noun] as” where the noun functions as an adjective kind of changes the meaning. It sounds snarkier and imbues the noun with a pejorative vibe.
So Steve’s title is less sincere sounding and more sarcastic than all the rewritten titles above. They may be more correct but don’t pack the same punch.
That said, for people who are unfamiliar with this way of speaking, it probably won’t pack a punch and just sound confusing!
Sure, poor me, who would have used cringy, lol. But hey, this is only the results of Gen Z exiting K-12 without being taught rigorous grammar. They wouldn't have used cringe as adjective if it would have been marked down in essays. Otherwise their precious 5.0 GPA score based on APs would have taken a hit.
It's not something restricted to the US. By now, it's all over the Global West (I think). However, it would be funny to know how the things are in Russia, China, or even in Hungary? Do they have the same slip-down in grammar?
Right, it’s Gen Z manipulating language and then older ppl like Steve and me who are too online absorbing it until it sounds normal to us too.
Gen Zers definitely did not get taught rigorous grammar or rigorous anything! But instead of just sounding uneducated, they also seem to be inventing their own way of speaking which is interesting.
Happened too, when old Anglo-Saxon was replaced by the hybrid Anglo-Norman language (that gave rise to Middle English). A very interesting transition. But that is like 800 years ago. Time for another turn *grin*
The feminist women want it both ways - entitled to preference regardless of ability, yet deferred to on account of its lack.
Those wily females, I can never figure out what they want.
Not the ones I know. They know their limitations and respect their brother soldiers.
I’m glad to hear it. How can we screen out the other sort?
Trump is doing it.
We need a method that will persist into the next Democratic administration.
I don't know who could do that. I'd suggest some parallel public service for women, but all these programs devolve to the left, now even the military. I wonder if trans men and/or women have to sign up for the draft.
It might be more a matter of _how_. Ideally at least one faction of feminists would defend it.
It's been said that one of the key female strategies is Evasion of Responsibility.
See: https://x.com/curtdoolittle/status/1648057143784886280
The female social strategy is not limited to feminists. It is also certainly not limited to the military or other such institutions.
Evasion of Responsibility is a pre-existing social strategy that gets dropped onto existing institutions. We cannot speak in these terms in the feminist era, so we are already locked into a default pro-Female position and it goes on.
A lot of those pushing women in the combat military and so on were bad actors with personal problems, like Nancy Mace (borderline personality disorder).
That sounds like a rather drastic way to dodge the draft.
Military equipment is designed to be just barely small and light enough for most _men_. Any weight reductions just make room for more ammo, fuel, or armor.
Lower physical standards for women just don’t make sense.
I noticed back in the 90s that many fictional TV shows that wanted to show the fitness of women for combat and law enforcement inadvertently showed the opposite, usually because they were aimed at a female audience. Like the MIT prof, they couldn't understand what doesn't look exemplary to men.
Can transwomen have authentic hysterics?
Straight men can be hysterical too. Less common, but happens!
I always figured the Butt Kickin' Babe trope was aimed at adolescent boys.
Why would a boy like that trope?
Dunno, but some do. Steve has said so himself. Teen girls and adult women recognize the absurdity of the trope.
Makes no sense to me, and I was a boy, once.
Maybe it's just the transsexuals? They seem to enjoy absurdity.
An outfit that's a second skin and shows a lot cleavage means everything else is ignored.
O/T
Will you be attending the Dodgers/Phillies game on Wednesday? The last time the Dodgers knocked the Phillies out of the playoffs was when Bill Russell singled home Ron Cey in the bottom of the 10th off of Tim McGraw's father. The run was unearned due to an error by the generally reliable Garry Maddox muffed a Dusty Baker fly ball with two outs
Since this series happened the Phillies have prevented the Dodgers from reaching the World Series three times
Tug McGraw was a very good pitcher.
Who's Tim??
Country music superstar, along with his wife Faith Hill. Tug was a 21-year-old minor-league pitcher when he knocked up Tim's mother, who was a waitress still in high school. However her parents sent her to live with relatives and Tug was not involved in his upbringing, so score a point for Nature
Oh, come on, you're pulling my leg! Surely, there is no such thing as a "country music superstar".
I'm not even in the military but I was bothered by his attack on "fat generals". I concede he knows more about the military than I do, but surely at the top level you can make some concessions to get the intellect you need for certain specialized tasks? No? It all comes down to how good everyone looks in uniform?
GAAAAAAA-AAAAAAYYYEEEEE!!!!!
When I think of fat generals I think of general burkhalter from Hogans Hero’s. I think he is loosely based on Hermann Goering who became known for being fat, corrupt and degenerate. As a side note the actor who played the actor (Leon Askin) lived to be 97.
Sadly, it is hard to find the time to be degenerate when one must lift weights, run laps and do calisthenics regularly to meet tough fitness standards.
I could do it
Burkhalter was a model of integrity and military brainpower, compared to Mark Milley and our other fat generals.
Heads vill roll !!!
I thought of Leslie Groves, the colonel who got the Pentagon built, then general in charge of the Manhattan Project. In the John Adams opera Doctor Atomic, Groves sings morosely about unsuccessful attempts to limit his eating.
The fitness requirements are adjusted for age. The problem is the generals can't demand privates be fit when they're so far from it themselves. They've been wearing camo whenever possible to hide the fat.
Wait--camo hides the fat? I have a new style to indulge!
This may be partially motivated by wanting to get rid of generals. There are 653 O-7s and up in the US military, which is probably about 353 too many.
That makes sense. When you have too many people it's time to start enforcing standards.
Fun fact: in 1945, the army had about 188 generals over something like 12,000,000 troops. I realize the military has become much more specialized since then, but 653 seems like a lot.
I’m told the USN has more admirals than ships.
According to Grok (and I'm a bit suspicious of accuracy after asking a few Battle of Britain questions and getting very wrong/made up answers, but anyway) 296 ships; 250-270 active duty admirals; approximately 9,000 active-duty captains (O-6 rank). This represents the senior-most non-flag officer grade, where captains typically command major ships (e.g., destroyers, cruisers, or amphibious vessels), lead squadrons, or hold key shore-based billets. Promotion to captain requires 17–22 years of service on average. Quite remarkable, thats one Admiral and thirty Captains per ship. You could probably crew some ships with just Captains.
Thank you- I was close, but no cigar.
And how many are woke liberals? The white rage general is the one I’m thinking of.
The issue with beards is a back door way to run off many black services members. The twice a year PT test requirement is a way to run off those with permanent medical issues (called profiles in the Army). The issues with hair in about making the military less welcoming to women. Also, Hegseth made no mention of tattoos.
The requirement for daily PT shows no thought to everyone who is not in a line position.
that makes sense. WRT tattoos don't military people have tattoos going back a long time, especially sailers? I recall reading that one of the 4 star admirals in WWII got a tattoo which was unusual but loved by the enlisted men because they all had them.
Sailors, maybe, sailers, probably not.
Hehe- on this site spell correct just gave up on sailer :)
I believe the services have policies on facial, neck, or hand tattoos.
"The requirement for daily PT shows no thought to everyone who is not in a line position."
That's an odd way to phrase it. Are you saying, "Spare some thought for the poor desk jockeys!" They would actually benefit most from daily PT.
Think about ant job that involves 24/7 operations during peace time from healthcare to op centers to aircraft carriers to flightlines.
Your comment refers to "everyone who is not in a line position" i.e. staff. I doubt Hegseth is going to be ordering grunts on to the PT field during deployments or active combat or training missions. There is lots of downtime in the military.
Hegseth said duty day. So that means that nurses and docs will spend less time with patients to work out and get haircuts. Hegseth also forgot that he could be creating a pathway for docs to eat their way out of the army.
They sleep and eat and go on leave as well. You seem to have this mental picture of SAC bombers sitting idle on the tarmac because all the pilots are working out and getting haircuts. Do you have any idea how staffing and scheduling works in large organizations?
Black guys can't shave their beards?
A significant number of blacks have curly enough beards that trying to be clean shaven creates ingrown hairs.
Being fat, even if highly intelligent and of obvious value to the military, signifies a lack of self-discipline, willpower and control of temptations. It is a fair criticism, especially in such a hierarchical, physically demanding and excellence based area. Fat generals will lose some respect and lower morale.
As a person with a life long weight problem and excellent self discipline in all other aspects of life, I guarantee you that obesity is not simply, or at least not always, a failing of discipline. That's a facile explanation that appeals to people who like to feel in control and superior.
Almost everyone has some behavior they cannot control. It's just that some are more accepted and/or glamorous than others.
But you’re not in the Army nor are you a general. My comment is primarily aimed at fat military personnel who are subject to different rules and expectations.
Churchill criticised one of his WW2 generals for insisting his officers do circuits. He asked if Napoleon would make his generals do it. "Perhaps it was the other fellow he made run".
BTW- I'm not against requiring officers, even generals to engage in exercise. My point is even with good conditioning, a middle aged guy can have excess body fat. If I'm being honest though, my actual point is that Hegseth was making me feel bad about myself.
The worst part is, Summers caved instead of fighting back.
Sadly, that hugely publicized, high-level cave-in set off a preference cascade in the direction of wokeness, with the next big domino to fall being James Dewey Watson, who is still the world's greatest living biologist at age 97.
I would say that the cited women's (Bobbie Scholly and Nancy Hopkins) reactions prove both Hegseth's and Summers' points. If women become physically ill when criticized or questioned, then they belong neither in the faculty lounge of the math or science departments or on the battlefield (new strategy for American enemies: make fun of women and they will all run away).
They certainly prove Steve's point.
Whether women are "tough enough for combat" or "can't breathe because this kind of bias makes me physically ill" depends very much on what is required in the situation.
Well, there's always the rigors of childbirth. Thereare different types of strength.
Despite projecting an image of fierce independence, feminists resort to emotional blackmail when they don't get their way, which is pretty standard female behavior since - forever?
One of the reasons feminism makes most women bitter and miserable is because they essentially tell women to act like men in terms of their interests, goals, and sexual behavior. It creates a lot of mental dissonance and it's extra work to try and fight one's inherent nature. It's also a turnoff to a massive share of their potential dating pool, so many of them feel alienated and unsatisfied and rather than consider modifying their behavior, feminism says the problem is with everyone else. Brunches cannot fix this.
Actually, I think many feminists accentuate the worst aspects of the female personality. Maybe weaponize it is a better term. There definitely have been better and worse "waves" of feminism. Equality or Second-wave feminists seem to have had the best political and personal goals., and it's no coincidence that they were the more middle-class and moderate than what came before and after them. They wanted an equal (not better) shot at entering some fields such as law and medicine. They didn't want to dismantle the nuclear family, and they viewed home-making and child-rearing most positively. They wanted sex crimes to be taken more seriously, including those against men ( if you count prison rapes, men's numbers skyrocket). They were largely reacting to the excesses of the radical leftist domestic terrorists of the Sixties to Eighties. And they were pretty non-political.
Of course, today they are taught as evil capitalist tools of the man, if they are academically acknowledged at all. I'll be Sixty soon. I remember when my bright mother couldn't get equal pay, a credit card, or a mortgage with her own money. All she wanted was an equal shot at these things. She wasn't pro-sex, anti-sex, or anti-male. My folks died still married. She just wanted me to go to college, have some life choices, some kids, and a good husband. Of course such women weren't perfect. Who is? But you would not believe how much this type of equality feminism is reviled in academia, often by sexually predatory lesbian feminists.
I definitely do not have your historical knowledge about the various iterations of feminism, just the variety that seems to have poisoned Gen X and younger. I am also grateful not to have anything to do with academia! Seems like a toxic environment in a lot of places and it certainly hasn’t produced any ideas in my lifetime that improved our society - quite the contrary.
You cannot imagine.
Activism has become a major racket.
Where are the smelling salts!!
Whether it's an 8404 or 1310, you have to be physically able to do the job. No women who are not physically fit enough to perform get passed through.
For example, female FMF corpsmen get exactly the same training as males. They do the multiple hikes totaling 20 miles, they do the Marine Corps PFT, and they do the special obstacle course that includes a litter drag through mud.
There are definitely differences in male and female performance that are worth taking into consideration. For example, studies indicate that female pilots perform better under high-stress flight scenarios than men, making fewer errors and maintaining better control. Female pilots have also shown a greater ability to consistently and accurately respond to critical information during stressful flight situations than men.
Despite male and female pilots having nearly identical visual attention patterns and flight experience, female pilots make fewer flight control errors when stress levels increase. While both genders pay attention to the same information during flight, women are more consistent and accurate in how they responded to it.
Quoting from the official Army publication, WOMEN IN COMBAT ARMS: A STUDY OF THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR:
"A look at the data on aircraft accidents is useful to make an assessment of performance of female pilots. As the data highlights, women are involved in fewer aircraft accidents than all-male crews -- comprising only 3% of incidents. As women comprise roughly 10% of all Army aviators, the evidence suggests that women operate aircraft more safely than men. As it pertains to just AH-64 aircraft, 100% of all accidents, both in garrison and in theater, involve all-male crews, suggesting that female attack pilots may be even more safe in the performance of flight duties.
"These women are Army aviators who have served in attack aviation roles, without restriction, since the beginning of major combat operations in the Global War on Terror. This research shows that over a decade of females serving on the front lines alongside their male counterparts, there is no significant stigma or other prohibitive factors that would degrade the effectiveness or lethality of combat arms units in war."
Going back to World War II, while executing the same flight profiles, the accident rate per 1,000 hours of flying time for men was 0.88 while for women (WASP and WAFS) it was 0.60.
"... female FMF corpsmen get exactly the same training as males. They do the multiple hikes totaling 20 miles, they do the Marine Corps PFT, and they do the special obstacle course that includes a litter drag through mud."
This is misleading. The PFT explicitly requires lesser physical fitness for women. For example, men are required to do pull-ups, while women are allowed to hang from the bar. Requirements for men and women should be the same. But they are not.
Yes. The women who have famously passed Ranger School and, I believe, Special Forces selection, were treated far differently than their male counterparts.
There are a lot of appropriate jobs for women in the military, just not all jobs. The military serves the purpose, too, of providing young people from unsupportive backgrounds discipline and direction. I know and respect several female veterans, including doctors, nurses, educators, and non-combat personnel.
Read "Troubled" by Rob Henderson. Several friends and acquaintances did not make it through their first enlistment and were chaptered out.
Thanks.
Let them enjoy their vapors out of uniform. Other side of the coin - no fayx women in real women's spaces.
“I don’t need you to open my door for me!”
“Did you see that rude man just walk up and get in line first, in front of me?”
Reply to Air Dog:
Pull-up standards for women to pass the PFT:
Ages 17–20: 1 pull-up
Ages 21–25: 3 pull-ups
Ages 26–30: 4 pull-ups
Ages 31–40: 3 pull-ups
Ages 41–51+: 2 pull-ups
For men:
Ages 17–20: 4 pull-ups
Ages 21–25: 5 pull-ups
Ages 26–50: 5 pull-ups
Ages 51–4 pull-ups
So you are partially correct.
The hang from the bar thing is from the early teens, I think.
While there are plenty of hospital corpsmen that's not the case with FMFs because there is a high attrition rate due to the fast operational tempo, emotional exhaustion and burnout. This especially affects IDCs who are also FMF-trained. It's a very tough job. Would you rather have no corpsman or a female corpsman who can only do three pull-ups but will save your life?
It seems very odd that women get an easier standard starting at age 31 and a further reduction at 41, but men have to go all the way to *51* to get even a small reduction. This would imply that women’s strength peaks earlier than men’s strength and declines more quickly. That is not the case; if anything, women’s strength declines less with age.
Which service and where is the link?