Pete Hegseth taking heat over the idea that women should not serve in certain combat roles.
In 2015, the Marines put out a study comparing male squads with mixed-sex ones. The all-male teams were faster on 69% of tasks. The squads with women were faster on 1.5% of tasks. The all-male squads "were faster than the gender-integrated squads in each tactical movement," it found. Also, women were more than twice as likely to suffer a "musculoskeletal injury."
So trust the science only works when that science doesn't undermine your woke ideology. Obviously, there is a place for women in combat. The Israeli army has women serving across the board. In fact, they have all women units in their military. The issue here is whether or not you should have elite forces that only includes the best of the best without worrying about whether or not it appeals to the politics of certain people. Best of the best when it comes to life and death military activity should not be looking at race, creed, or sex. It should be ignoring every aspect of anything other than performance.
We should also ask ourselves what is best for our military infantry as well. If the reality is that an all-male infantry works better than a sexually integrated infantry, then shouldn't that also be a discussion? Moving forward there are going to be plenty of roles in the military that does not include carrying a gun into a firefight. In fact, the days of an infantry might be slowly fading away. Why not allow common sense to play a part in who does what? There are physical differences, so we should take these into account.
Of course, as it pertains to physical differences there are still those who demand the opposite:
"The new woman revealed by this scientific data is as strong, strategic, and smart as anyone else," states the blurb for the book "Inferior: How Science Got Women Wrong -- and the New Research That's Rewriting the Story."
Many people agree. "Among those who see differences between men and women, there is little agreement about whether these differences are mostly based on biology or on societal expectations," Pew Research reported in October.
The new witch doctor science that suggests the only reason women are deemed physically inferior is society not biology. Apparently, the reason why men need to deadlift 340 pounds versus 210 for women in the military fitness tests is just a matter of expectation. The fact that the average women is 6 inches shorter and 30 pounds lighter and have different hormones is apparently not relevant.
Hollywood doesn't help, as every action movie or action television show now seems to have women routinely beating up larger and stronger men with superior fighting skills. Sometimes those women don't even need to have any sort of training, they just are capable in general of physically beating men. The problem here is that this type of gender-neutral ability exists only on television, not in the real world. But it may become a thing where people who are not engaged or exposed to any physical confrontations in their life start to believe that what happens on television is real, only to find out exactly what happens when a 130-pound-women takes on 200-pound-man in real life.
The bigger problem here is that reality is undermined by what people want reality to be. Someone like Hegseth who accepts that a sexually integrated military is objectively inferior to an all-male military is going to be attacked for not ignoring objective reasoning in favor or the new woke understandings.
All that being said, Trump was elected twice and at least a portion of this was to undo political correctness in 2016 and now wokeness as it is described in 2024. There is little reason to suggest that this shouldn't start with the military, which has gone full knucklehead into the woke ideology.
Comments