Any thoughts on "Women in combat report".

Look at this way, she has a higher chance of getting into a car accident and dieing than being captured. That is why I stated I never worried about Bullet, he was actually safer statistically flying the F-15E than driving everyday on 95 to the Pentagon.
 
futureAFA said:
I agree. I thought by “set standards” you initially meant just PFT and things along those lines.

And Vampsoul, I don’t understand how it would necessarily make it more functional? I understand having multiple PT test though, that makes sense.
Click to expand...

Functional= think more military-type exercises rather than "how many sit-ups can you do in 2min".
 
vampsoul said:
Functional= think more military-type exercises rather than "how many sit-ups can you do in 2min".
Click to expand...

So maybe like time for 100m fireman carry with a 180lb. dummy? or something along those lines. Simulating mission situations.
 
I have no problem with females serving in the combat roles, if a minimum physical task standard is published and enforced equally between males and females.

I give you my perspective. When I went to Air Assault School, there were some females in my class. Some of them could run 2 miles faster than me, do more push ups, do more sit ups. However, none of them beat me on the 12 mile ruck march. The only reason I mention this to emphasize the stamina portion of the physical standard. Being a combat soldier, especailly infantry type, is not a 100 yard dash then rest, it's a marathon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top