Thursday, November 14, 2019

Women in Combat: A Failed Social Experiment

Given that they saw no significant difference between men and women the Obama Defense Department opened all military jobs to women. The military might not have had much ammunition, it might not have had very many functioning fighter planes, but it sure had diversity.

How is that one working out?

The CNS news service reports (via Maggie’s Farm):

In a new report, the Center for Military Readiness says that 84% of women fail the New Army Combat Fitness Test and that “all military officials should drop the ‘gender diversity’ agenda and put mission readiness and ‘combat lethality’ first.”

“It makes no sense for recruiters to devote more time and money recruiting ‘gender diverse’ trainees who are more likely to be injured, less likely to want infantry assignments, and less likely to remain through basic training or physically-demanding combat arms assignments for twenty years or more,” states the  CMR report.

Reality bites. It bites into the best theories. As for the Obama efforts to introduce more diversity into the military, here was the plan:

“Pentagon leaders pushed for gender quotas of 25-30 percent of women and 10 percent in the Marine Corps,” which the CMR says led to lowering the requirements with the implementation of the “gender- neutral” Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT). 

The result:

In this ACFT, women have “a high failure rate,” states the CMR report. The final results will not be released until October 2020 but the report contends that the results will not change “the inevitable: more female injuries, less-demanding training for men, and overall standards that are ‘equal’ but lower than before.”

Why are we so desirous of putting women in situations where they are far more likely than men to suffer injuries? Could it be that the Obama Defense Department enjoyed watching women fail and enjoyed watching women be injured. 

Misogyny anyone:

“Women are serving with courage as they always have,” said the CMR. “But in two major categories – unequal physical capabilities and sexual misconduct – signs of a failing social experiment are increasingly obvious.” 


UbuMaccabee said...

No, the left hates and fears the military and is working double-time to undermine any and all military traditions and standards. They use women and alphabets to dilute the services, by making them weaker and to lower morale. Large numbers of women in the military would charge the culture irrevocably. The left has also been promoting leftist officers and their efforts to infiltrate the JAG is about complete. The left remembers what happened in Spain, and they don’t want a replay of Franco. Trump is allowing the true Vikings who remain in the service to have voice and get traction. Greater lethality, exactly right. MAGA

Sam L. said...

Can you say, "Long Overdue", boys and girls? Yes, I knew you could.

My late wife started in the AF as a missile maintainer. Messed up her back in fairly short order, lowering 70-pound items into the silos, and then lifting them up. A few years later, women could be trained to be missile launch officers (no heavy lifting required). I forget just how long ago (5-8 years, IIRC) I read that one of the missile wings sent out all female missile launch crews to man the 15 launch control centers. This was well after I retired.

Stuart Schneiderman said...

n.n commented:

A progressive confusion that conflates sex and gender. A rabid diversity (i.e. color judgment) that denies the equal and complementary, in this case, physiology, of the male and female sex, of the masculine and feminine gender, respectively. Whether it is planned parenthood, dodo dynasties, and social dysfunction, or defeating demographic destiny through disinformation and affirmative action, there is overwhelming evidence that one or more waves of female chauvinists ("feminists") are phobic of women (as competing interests or collateral damage), men, and babies, too.