Women can try out to be in the NFL, too. There was a bit of a PR stunt about a woman going to a tryout to be a kicker. Kickers are obviously the least demanding position and therefore most likely to see a woman candidate, and yet she was sort of a joke candidate to begin with and couldn’t even remotely come close to rudimentary qualifications. There aren’t any women who are qualified to play in the NFL. It’s a meritocracy - if there were some freakish woman who would lead your teams to win, an NFL team would hire her. And they would pay her milions a year. There’s a strong incentive for both sides to find such a player, and yet it has never happened, because quite simply women are not competitive with men at the high end of athletics involving power and/or speed.
Similarly, the Navy can feel free to open tryouts to SEALs to women just as women could try to be a linebacker if they wanted. I’m predicting the result will be the same. Unless the Navy softballs them and changes their requirements because they want a woman to pass for some sort of PR reason. The military has a history of this.
I’m saying it’s only very slightly more likely that a woman can pass a legitimate BUD/S school than be an NFL linebacker.
Without showing any awareness of just how much data scatter there is at the tails of a statistical distribution. The “top of the bell curve” is the mean, fyi.
You might try auditing a basic statistics course at your local community college, so you won’t sound so foolish when you talk about it.
Where is your data to show that there can be no women whatsoever who could possibly meet SEAL standards? No more bluster, where’s your data?
BTW, we’re not talking about what you’re telling yourself we’re talking about. We’re talking about not even letting any woman even try, no matter how exceptional a specimen she may be, just *because *she’s a woman and for no other reason.
It was in living memory, btw, that it was obvious that Negroes could never fly fighters as well as whites, and for physiological reasons based on bell curves yada yada. Same fucking thing, dude.
You really aren’t capable of fucking getting it, are you?
What does that even mean? That I should revoke my prediction? That I should stop attempting to inform ignorant people about the requirements of being a special ops soldier?
What is it that I’m “getting over”? Is it some sort of personal failing? Is it the completely made up machismo bullshit you’ve created where I’m threatened by the possibility of strong women?
What you just did may be the most pathetic attempt I’ve ever seen to avoid a legitimate response. Absolutely, shamefully pathetic.
You’re right, the “top” would be the most vertical part. I meant the most right side. You knew exactly what I meant but you decided to be a semantical douchebag as per your usual.
If you applied the same logic you use on here, where are the women who dominate professional sports and Olympic competitions? I don’t mean against other women, with segregated sports. I mean where are these unique women who compete with the best of men in strength, speed, and endurance?
No, we’re not. The OP made no coherent argument. There is no set limitation on what we’re talking about. I have not voiced an opinion that women shouldn’t be allowed to try, just that if it is indeed fair and not designed to allow women to pass, then it’s like the NFL tryouts. Sure, women can come, but they’re not going to make it.
I already addressed this. Races do not have real differences. Men and women do. To say that making any distinction between men and women on the matter of physiology is the same as making judgements on race is to suggest that both are the same. You would then have to be either saying that men and women are the same physiologically, or you’re saying some races are better at some things than others.
If opening BUDS to female candidates is not part of an overall goal or objective to integrate women into all levels of combat forces including special forces then what exactly is the point of the exercise? It’s hardly like there is a need for additional candidates, they’re covered up with applicants.
Allowing* access to compete head to head in BUDS is just fine. In fact I think it should be done because it would be instructive. The point beyond all this posturing is what happens when no women graduate? Women should *be in special forces but if they have to pass BUDS level tests then this isn’t going to happen.
You should get over the idea that you have some sort of special insight into the process the Pentagon uses to enact changes. That your fuzzy grasp on statistics means diddly squat, as the only women who will advance will be the absolute elite performers, not a randomly selected sample of chicks. That your spit-flying anger at the left and rabid defense of the traditional right gives you any perspective worth consideration, as your voice is typical of the Fox news “heroes” that cost your side the election.
What American institution is more cautious and conservative than the military, huh? When even the military brass has a more progressive, inclusive view than you, it’s time to catch up.
This discrimination stuff really puzzles you, doesn’t it?
Good, glad to have you aboard, then. Perhaps you can join in demanding that the regs prohibiting that be lifted. That’s what the thread is about, since you need it explained.
A. How is it posturing?, and B. If no women pass, then there will be no women SEALs, duh.
No shit. And the best woman tennis player is an absolute elite perform, not a randomly selected sample. The women’s competitors in EVERY SPORT IN THE OLYMPICS are the absolute elite performers. And yet in all cases, they would lose by large margins to their male counterparts.
I just stated a few posts ago THAT OBVIOUSLY I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT RANDOM AVERAGE PEOPLE. I’ve made like 500 posts to this thread talking specifically about the most elite performers from both genders. For you to somehow ignore that, and then say I’m not the one capable of getting it, should make your head explode from the cognitive dissonance.
What am I angry at? The women trying to become SEALs? The brass pulling a PR stunt to promote women in new roles in the military? No, if there’s any anger it’s at the ignorance in this thread about what it takes to be a SEAL and the ridiculous failure of anyone to consider why elite men and women in physical prowess are not in the same tier.
And that’s funny, “my side” - I’m as anti-Republican as anyone on this board. I’m not partisan at all, which is why when I see a liberal douchebag circle jerk I can call it like I see it.
The NFL lets women try out too. You’re just assuming that means Ray Lewis will be replaced by a woman this year.
Then what you have knowingly and cynically arranged and constructed is a frustrating and masturbatory waste of time and resources that could have been employed in achieving positive outcomes for women in the military.
If the rational outlook for a positive outcome is logically infinitesimal how much money and effort do you want to pour down that rat hole vs actually constructing a scenario that might actually work?
Well, at least you finally admitted your fear is that men are replaceable. No one will be replaced. When a woman meets all the requirements of the job, it will be because the position is open, and no qualified man will be demoted or fired to make room for her. Feel better?
Haha, what the fuck are you talking about? I’m a fat 31 year old. I’m not a navy SEAL. My job isn’t on the line. What I actually do is something that women can do just fine, so they can replace me as it is. I have no personal stake in this, and your continued attempt to introduce one is just a long line of pathetic attempts at an ad hominem.
Well the good news is that whatever posters on a messageboard may think, the military seems to get it:
Volunteers trying out, as part of research to make an analytical recommendation, rather than just relying on a bunch of hyperbole. Makes a lot more sense to me than people shouting at each other on the Internet.
There is some serious arguing-past-each-other and arguing-with-strawmen going on in this thread, by both sides.
One side is saying “women should be allowed to at least try to pass the test, even if it’s very unlikely that many or any will pass it” and the other side hears “it’s very important that we be politically correct, and say that women are just as good at everything, and now let’s all engage in aromatherapy”. Then the other side is saying “there are physiological differences which make it much less likely for women to be able to pass such an extreme set of challenges than men” and the first side hears “get back in the kitchen, gals, and leave the soldiering to the men”.
Funny, what I’m hearing is a lot of “The Pentagon has no idea what it’s doing and should know better than to threaten to replace men” which is much like what we heard when the fellas came back from WWII and women were fired or forced via social pressure to give up factory jobs.
