Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WillyPete
Has no-one heard of the mythological Amazons?
|
I am rapidly approaching middle age. I haven't worked out in over a year. I am grossly out of shape in terms of endurance, I'm lucky I'm not fat. I have yet to meet a woman who I couldn't beat the living crap out of had I wanted to. Yes I know out there, there are some who could take me, but we have to be honest about physiology. Men as a rule are stronger and faster. I also think that there is an evolutionary advantage men have with spacial relationships, and our natural aggression can be a plus in combat too.
I never bought into the whole gender stereotyping theory that we make girls into 'girls' by how we treat them. Little girls act differently than little boys and they grow up to be different. In a perfectly gender neutral world, boys would still fight boys and girls would still want to play house.
Now I know modern combat isn't always about who is the fastest and the strongest, but I am perfectly content to send the boys to war while the girls stay home.
Hell, from a species point of view it makes sense. Women are more important to the next generation than men are. The next generation of children is not limited by the number of males, but the number of females. The only time it makes genetic sense to send women into war is where your very survival as a people is in question.
So in rambling conclusion, to me, women in combat goes against who and what we are. Women can fight but only when there is no alternative, they have not evolved for it, they are not as good at it, and I can't see why anyone would want to send them to war. History has had some notable women warriors, but they are notable due to their rarity. Either human kind has tried to keep women down for all of its history by not 'letting' them fight, or their may be some damn good reasons for it.
What I really want to know is, why do people want to see them in combat?