disagree....a man with the same skill and weight will beat a woman....that's just the way it is...does that mean they are the far superior? no....it's just women have attributes that men don't have...It's amusing when someone makes a holistic argument, and someone focuses on one specific part of that argument instead of considering it holisticallyI mentioned several things women are socialized not to practice, not all of them were about sheer strength, and sheer strength isn't enough to make someone good at combat. One thing I learned in wrestling is technique can often out perform strength, this applies to more than just wrestling. Sheer strength may be supplemented by other things to make women good soldiers, and even better than some men.
Honest question - women and men roles in Ukraine
- Thread starter descartes
- Start date
............. the government imposed a rule that forced this, it has nothing to do with anything genetic or any choices made by either gender, did you not read even the first page of this thread...... or are you telling me that you believe that men are incapable of evacuating children?????
well, first to disagree with what I said, you would need to accurately portray the magnitude of the statements I made, but since you are talking in absolutes and I was not, it seems you either didn't read or you didn't understand what I said.
they are and I'm just saying the government made the choice to have the men stay because they more needed in warfare..
I disagree that women can do better in warfare than men. if skills alone is the basis....we should have nba with women playing no wnba... we should have mma only and no woman.
If you're assuming hand combat, then maybe. Fighting in a war in general - you way off your mark.
Ever heard of women snipers? Take your big head clean off. All it takes is a finger and poof, you're gone... or she could be a drone operator or a tank commander etc.
Women are much different psychologically. Men can thrive in violence, while women aren't emotionally suited for such environment. They're of course different physiologically as well, but I'm not talking about strength. Women need a lot more in terms of hygiene than men etc.
Anywho, the way things are developing lately, we might soon find ourselves in WWIII. Then you can put all your theories to the test.
Women are also more likely to store fat than men and thus more likely to survive conditions with food scarcity. In times of war women have often cared for those severely wounded, I wouldn't write us off in our emotional capacity to handle warfare. Women handle stress better, on average, and though we are more likely to experience ptsd, we are also more likely to seek treatment for it. There are many women who are amazing soldiers and climb up the ranks because of this, of course, I know you know this.
This is just comedy hour now 
.
But still very enlightening. I like to see how people think. Or not think. Confirmed a lot that I suspected.
Thanks to all that participated.
.But still very enlightening. I like to see how people think. Or not think. Confirmed a lot that I suspected.
Thanks to all that participated.
Answer the question. Nobody knows what you're trying to say... I don't even think you do... it's all deflection.
Btw, yes, it's true that men and women shoot guns equally well. Yet for the vast majority of sports that require both strength and skill, we have different gender-based leagues for good reason.
Equality doesn't mean what you think it does.
Last edited:
Women did not see any significant combat experience until the advent of breech loading firearms. The Soviet use of women as snipers and pilots in WWII is pretty much the earliest example of women in combat; but even then women were not used as front line infantry.
I will remind you that the Amazons as well as the series ‘Vikings’ are fictional works.
Incorrect. Up until the advent of modern firearms the effectiveness of a weapon depended on the strength of its wielder. A bow’s range depends on the weight of its draw which is limited by the strength of the one who draws it. Similar limitations apply to swords, spears and shields. This is why neither the Romans, nor the Greeks, nor the Zulus sent women into combat.
Your position is based on arguments which are demonstrably faulty. Society does not discourage women from working out, or engaging in any other feat of athleticism. This is can be empirically proven by noting the plethora of professional female sports leagues/federations such as MMA, Women’s Hockey, Women’s basket ball and the entire women’s half of the Olympics. It must further be noted that these activities are segregated by gender because the average physical differences between men and women are such that women just can’t compete with the men. Further evidence of this is given by the recent spate of transgendered women dominating female sports; women can’t compete with men when it come to top end physical strength.
Para 1. Wrong, take a history class.
Para 2. I mean, it's pretty clear that I was excluding the use of weapons from my definition of hand to hand combat, but go off.
Para 3. The availability of options for women is not sufficient to prove that women are equally encouraged to participate.
I'm going to try this one last time to see what you're truly made of...
Let's pretend Ontario is under attack. There are plenty of able bodied men and women, and there is no conscription, or rules barring women from doing whatever they please, because equality.
There are plenty of men and women willing and able to stay and fight, and plenty of men and women willing and able to evacuate with the children. Also, in this scenario, assume no one wants you anywhere near their children.
I submit that YOU would flee, and leave the fighting to others, while you lived off your womanly ability to store fat, until the fighting was over. Then you could return, and remind everyone how everything was the man's fault and women are equal, while also being better at everything.
sure =) if you say so =)
Edit: holding women to a different standard than men is pretty hilarious, you assume no women will stay and fight (even Ukraine shows your argument here is flawed), and no men will flee or try their best to get out of their duties (Trump and many others who avoid being drafted proves this argument wrong as well). Arguing in bad faith, as usual.
Last edited:
There's equality and then there is reality. The two dont often meet.
Things you learn on TERB:
1. Becoming obese has nothing to do with diet, caloric intake, and sedentary lifestyle. It's all genetic, they're actually healthy gym rats, and are perceived as sexually attractive by most people.
2. Women and men are equally physically strong; the only reason why men dominate sports is because of socialization
3. There are as many genders as there are pronouns, and you can switch genders at the drop of a dime depending on how you feel on any given day of the week.
Those that make these claims also claim that they're proponents of science.
It must be something in the water...
1. Becoming obese has nothing to do with diet, caloric intake, and sedentary lifestyle. It's all genetic, they're actually healthy gym rats, and are perceived as sexually attractive by most people.
2. Women and men are equally physically strong; the only reason why men dominate sports is because of socialization
3. There are as many genders as there are pronouns, and you can switch genders at the drop of a dime depending on how you feel on any given day of the week.
Those that make these claims also claim that they're proponents of science.
It must be something in the water...
Last edited:
Can you define what the mans duties are?
Also, can we not have a thread where a TD symptom comes up?
