Replies

In my decades of experience, the best female pilots were. . . good. . .not excellent, not superb, just good.

This brings us to the discussion of natural warrior aggression in males versus merely acting aggressive. Meaning, the oft-mocked testosterone-driven aggression in males, this aggression is essential to “win,” to achieve, to dominate a thing or mission. In my experience, females when in a warrior environment act like they feel they should act, based on what they observe, and this is forced behavior, not natural, and is reflected in a certain “meanness” which is a far different thing than aggression and performance level is never really equal.

Male testosterone-driven behavior is seen in real life, and in popular media. Whenever a female is placed in a warrior environment they affect the rough language and behavior. . .even in popular media. This is tacit acknowledgement of my point—testosterone IS essential to being a warrior

There is a world of difference between natural aggression and meanness.

And then there is the media and their “Buffy” lie. Buffy can kick the poo out of any male of any size, even if Buffy is 100lbs. This lie permeates popular media and little females/girls are influenced and come to believe this is reality, not fiction. When the real world hits them back it is a shock (”I demand equality but you can’t hit me because I’m a girl!”).

But that is another discussion.

Rear-area ferry pilots, okay. Front line, not okay.

That is all I have to say as I am too tired to get into a more detailed debate at this time. . .wrong thread.

Cheers.

You are exactly right. I spent a couple of years at The Basic School in Quantico, training newly commissioned male and female officers in weapns and tactics.

Suffice it to say that the differences are enormous. I'll never forget when an entire platoon of women refused to move through a swampy area. Directly ordered, and the response was "I'm not going in there." We were dumbfounded, but what are you going to do?

Fortunately, we had no inkling that women would be in the infantry, so we could just chalk it up as "one of those things."

And not only are injury rates higher among women who go through intense training, but there is the whole issue of pregnancy. Just on a raw numbers/staffing level, it's an asinine idea.