In your 7 years...did you ever deploy? Because unless you are in a unit unlike any I have ever seen I cant imagine you not being fully trained and qualified before deployment. Weren you title 10? Guard? reserve?
No Lives Matter
This isn't about lowering the standards. Removing an arbitrary chromosomal qualification doesn't lower the standards. Right now, all women are excluded from front-line and submarine service for one reason: they have no Y chromosome.
That has caused equal rights groups to protest this arbitrary disqualification. This political pressure you speak of already exists.
Removing the Y chromosome qualification does nothing to lower the standards for performance, because there is no military situation in which a Y chromosome is required to perform the task.
Removing this particular requirement, which is arbitrary, removes the "it's an arbitrary standard" argument from the protesters that currently exist.
So the only difference between the status quo and the proposed change is that the arbitrary Y qualification is removed.
There is no reason to lower the other standards in order to achieve equal rights because any person, regardless of their chromosomal structure, who meets the standards, will be accepted into the role.
Thus, equal rights are achieved.
If the protests continue after equal rights have been established, they are not seeking equal rights, but a lowering of non-arbitrary standards.
Being equal in rights does not mean being equal in ability.
The way to offset the political pressure is to remove the unequal rights, and allow unequal ability to be the discriminator.
Will there be discrimination? Of course. The whole point of having standards is to discriminate.
Will these standards be based on gender? No, they will be based solely on ability.
The reason your argument makes no sense is because it calls for discrimination based on something other than ability. It presumes that the peg is always square based on arbitrary, non-ability related measures.
That's exactly the reason why the feared protesters have a legitimate case. In essence, you empower their cause by continuing to use arbitrary non-merit based disqualifications.
That's why they are not only present, but they are actually justified in their cause.
The standard you are supporting is a lack of equal rights, and as such, it means that they are correct to oppose your views.
If no women can achieve the standards, it won't be because they don't have the right to achieve them. In this scenario, it means that the protesters may be present, but they are unjustified in their cause.
It seems that if your biggest fear is protesters, the best way to counteract them logically speaking is to remove the justification for their argument. In this case, it means removing the Y chromosome requirement.
Tucker Case - Tard magnet.
Stop ignoring the reality and get your head out of your ass and listen to what we are saying.
No Lives Matter