[freedom462]

if they do it without lowering the standards one iota from what they were when only men were doing it, then all power to them, I’m not gonna tell any of them no. Nor will I tell them that they are being retarded or amoral.

Now let’s see just how many of theme keep to those same standards.

[ansel12]

Females can’t do it so of course the standards will be lowered, just as they have been in every other situation from law enforcement to firefighting for the last 45 years.

When they say women will “be allowed” to get into a job they are unqualified for, it means, “there will be women in this job, period” regardless of what that takes.

Anyone who thinks that women will be allowed to fail and that any job will just remain all male once it is decided that it won’t, is out of touch with reality.

[fr_freak]

if they do it without lowering the standards one iota from what they were when only men were doing it, then all power to them, I’m not gonna tell any of them no.

I will, and here's why: let's say only 2 or 3 of these women manage to pass the course, even if the standards are maintained. Despite the fact that 3/19 passing is a success ration of approximately 16% (and doesn't even necessarily demonstrate overall fitness for actual combat), the idiots in our government and the top of the military will point to it and proclaim that this demonstrates that women can do everything men can do. They then open the infantry up to all women, and THEN adjust (i.e. dumb down) the standards to keep the success ratio higher.

On top of that, physical fitness performance aside, women are still women. They ovulate, get periods, get moody, get PREGNANT, and have weaker bones, less muscle, and less cardiovascular capacity. These are immutable facts. All of these things will actively interfere with sustained combat operations, but hey, if she can do 10 pull-ups, we'll call it good.