I'm a little uncomfortable with the idea of women in combat roles but I believe in Libertarianism to some extent, so I can't support any discriminatory policies against American citizens. I say that the standards should be the same, and if a woman can pass them, let them fight if they want. I know some girls who are in better shape than dudes, literally. Its the same way I feel about gay marriage, it weirds me out a little bit, but I don't believe the government should be telling people what to do. That's why I can't fully embrace the Republican party, they tout the rhetoric of small government, freedom, less intervention, etc., but then turn around and say that gays can't marry, people can't smoke marijuana in the privacy of their own homes, and women can't fight. Its totally hypocritical. If they can pass the same test as the male soldiers, I say let them fight.
A woman with a PT score of 280 can be significantly weaker and slower than a Male with a lower PT score. In fact, simply due to age I received a higher PT score than men who were faster and stronger than myself. In addition to the age desperaty, females have a much more forgiving grade scale than males, so an older female can easily outscore a younger male even-though the younger male is much stronger.
When the military required women to perform on the same level as men, Liberal Feminists cried discrimination, and policy was changed.
IMO there should only be one scale. The military should not adjust for age or sex.
That's why I maintain that it's not about ability. At 30, I wasn't the stud that I was at 18, but I could still do a 25 mile hump, with full kit, showing up at the end, on my feet; suckin' a little more wind than I would have 12 years earlier, but on my feet and ready for the fight, just the same.
Another true story: When I was with 5/6 infantry, at Fort Polk, we held an expert infantry test. Two female officers were allowed to participate in the testing, althought they wouldn't be awarded an expert infantry badge, even if they passed.
The EIB test ain't no bull****. It takes a week to administer the test. The first day is by far the toughest, physically. Testees have to complete a 12 mile road march, with full kit, in 3 hours. The raod march ends at the rifle range, where they have to immediately disassemble their weapon in the required 2 minute standard and re-assemble it in the same time, then immediately go on the firing line and qualify expert--a minimum score of 36 hits our of 40.
For those who don't know any better, walking/running a 4 mph+ average, for 12 miles is a full blown mother ****er; even without a load on your back. Don't believe me? Try it.
Anyway, these two females smoked the test. One finished the road march in 2:45 and the other in 2:50. Damn good scores, considering that less than 50% of testees successfully complete the road march and are disqualified, before they even get started. They disassembled their weapons inside the required time; one shot a 40 out of 40 and the other shot a 38 out of 40. Again, damn good, considering that the testees who manage to complete the road march, completely bolo the rifle qual.
In short, these two chick knocked it out of the park. But, again, it's not just about a woman's ability to meet the physical requirements. There's sooooo much more to soldierin' than that.
AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.
just because I tell you how it currently is...doesn't mean I agree with it. got it?????
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.