The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Hegseth opens up military roles to women.
Poast new message in this thread
Date: March 31st, 2025 8:23 PM Author: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, with a twist: only one fitness standard, not two.
https://x.com/PeteHegseth/status/1906779503025586530
always remember that a man named Ash Carter lied under oath and lied to the public and to the Congress about women and physical fitness. |
 |
Date: March 31st, 2025 8:24 PM Author: Oppa homeless style! what did he say (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48801201) |
|
Date: March 31st, 2025 9:30 PM Author: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, they suppressed a Marine study proving that all-men cohorts thoroughly out-performed mixed chohorts.
to read his bullshit and how he avoids the reality, here is his NPR interview:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/ash-carter-on-a-military-turning-point-for-women-in-combat
|
|
Date: March 31st, 2025 10:24 PM Author: Oppa homeless style! but why do this? i just don't understand. shouldn't they want the best data to make the best decisions?
is this all because shitliberalism is a mental disease? is there some other reason?
fuck this guy |
|
Date: March 31st, 2025 10:26 PM Author: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, so Hegseth's response is, "hey, i won't reverse it but i will stop using the double standard on performance."
watch what's about to happen to critical roles. |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 2:50 AM Author: Wilbur Mercer, permanently embarrassed millionaire (Safari) They need to stop using the double standard on grooming as well (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48802350) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 6:59 PM Author: Deranged Pangolin Marines have some top notch groomers (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48804400) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 10:34 PM Author: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, like, hair? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48805136) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 10:52 PM Author: Wilbur Mercer, permanently embarrassed millionaire (Safari) Yes (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48805192) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 2:58 AM Author: Trumpus Julius Caesar Augustus (TDNW) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48802357) |
Date: March 31st, 2025 10:27 PM Author: ..,,....,,.,..,,..,,...,...,,....,..., Women don't need to be in combat with men the whole thing is ridiculous (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48802037) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 9:18 AM Author: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the push for women in combat was ideological and was political too, because when it came time for promotion to general, etc., men who'd had combat experience always had a massive advantage. to open up the very top ranks for women, it was useful to open up combat roles. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48802601) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 9:40 AM Author: ..,,....,,.,..,,..,,...,...,,....,..., You don't need to open the very top ranks for women (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48802645) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 9:35 AM Author: bigtree Heg's position is an improvement, but it will lose ultimately, because it gives away the premise
"women and men are the same, so we will not discriminate either direction. those who can do the same number of pull-ups will get the same job!"
sure, the 35 pull-up jobs will all go to guys, but youve just restarted the cycle and a few presidents later will echo "women and men are the same" and sneak women into those jobs again.
trump is one term and done, and Heg will never have this job again. May not even last 4 years. He just needs to say "men and women are different and our combat jobs are for men only".
|
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 9:37 AM Author: UN peacekeeper but hes proving that republicans are the real egalitarians (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48802638) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 7:26 PM Author: Peristalsis (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48804473) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 9:39 AM Author: Senior Ethics Official Disagree. This is the right approach. If a bitch can do it, then so be it. (Hint: they cant). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48802642) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 9:50 AM Author: bigtree there are not tons of rules to "civilization", but one of them is that you acknowledge that women and children are different, special, get certain protections and limitations.
conversely, you ask young men to fight and die for your civ occasionally, because there is a woman who will care for them, and children who will honor them back home.
any army saying "if she's strong enough she can be sent to the front lines" should lose, even if none of their women are strong enough. It's not upholding civilization. It's fighting for some bullshit reason that doesnt justify any young man dying. See, e.g., all our recent wars. |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 9:55 AM Author: Muscadine wine If a woman soldier can do 42 push ups in 2 minutes, she is fit for combat.
|
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 9:58 AM Author: bigtree a downs syndrome guy might be fit for the trenches ("point and shoot retard, then run with your rifle while screaming"), but whats the fucking point of sacrificing your life, as a young normal man, if in service to a society that doesnt place some different value on retards and women?
the question isnt just "who can accomplish this task in training", it is "why should we kill and die for this"
the "fit" soldier involves more than upper body strength. he requires the motivation and faith to carry out his orders and risk his life
|
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 10:04 AM Author: Muscadine wine I don't necessarily disagree with any of this, and I agree with you on the big picture.
However, IMHO, if there weren't a million & 1 rules to elevate women to be equal to men, not many women would be in this position. The only reason women exist in any number in the military is because of reduced standards. If you simply hold women to the same (high) standards as men, nature solves the problem here.
This same analysis works in a lot of different aspects of modern life. |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 6:56 PM Author: Senior Ethics Official What youre discounting and ignoring is kikes will rile these people up to further disrupt our society if we outright ban them. The ordering of our ridiculous polyglot society requires pragmatism.
Equal standards is a principle most of our retarded republic can get behind and as such it most effectively undercuts jewish efforts to hamstring the military. |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 7:03 PM Author: ..,,....,,.,..,,..,,...,...,,....,..., Eventually we need to deprive such people the ability to rile anyone up (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48804413) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 9:54 AM Author: Muscadine wine They can't. Even if they can do the runs and the sit ups, the push-up component of the PT test is the end for them:
"The number of push-ups required to pass the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) varies depending on age and gender. Male Soldiers: Age 17-21: 42 push-ups Age 22-26: 40 push-ups Age 27-31: 30 push-ups Age 32-36: 27 push-ups Age 37-41: 24 push-ups Age 42-62: 16 push-ups Female Soldiers: Age 17-21: 19 push-ups Age 22-26: 17 push-ups Age 27-31: 15 push-ups Age 32-36: 13 push-ups Age 37-41: 11 push-ups Age 42-62: 8 push-ups" |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 6:57 PM Author: Faggottini 62 year old female soldier (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48804398) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 8:13 PM Author: Oh, You Travel? ( ) Are they even regular pushups or Girl Pushups? I didn’t know army bitches could even do pushups except like those with gymnast builds (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48804713) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 10:56 PM Author: Wilbur Mercer, permanently embarrassed millionaire (Safari) They are not performed with knees on ground (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48805211) |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 10:28 AM Author: Muscadine wine Regular push ups.
While there are women who can do this, top-athlete women, these are not the women who are currently in the US military. Female soldiers tend to be pretty fat. |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 12:15 PM Author: richard clock this seems like the wrong analysis. whatever hegseth does, president khanna or whomever comes next can just reverse it. it's easier to justify politically reversing "no women in combat" to just going back to what we had before, lower standards and all. it's a tougher sell to argue that we need to explicitly lower standards to allow more women to have the chance to die on the battlefield. pres khanna will probably still do it, but it's a harder case to argue. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48806506) |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 7:02 PM Author: "'''""""'"' the main issue with women in the military is sexual assault and a sort of malacculturation that does an immense amount of damage to their prospects of being healthily reintegrated into society (see: nancy mace and a variety of the now FTM trannies who were once enlisted) many contemporary MoSs don't require the physical strength and acute spatial awareness of a healthy male and i don't have any good reason for why they shouldn't be allowed in gender segregated utility corps if they want to be allowing them in combat zones and in combat MoS positions is retarded but if women want to sort munitions in a warehouse or drive trucks full of junk from Alaska to Oregon I don't really give a shit. the pension plans being available to female veterans may have a sort of eugenic effect in the long run, anyway |
|
Date: April 1st, 2025 10:57 PM Author: Wilbur Mercer, permanently embarrassed millionaire (Safari) Yes (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48805214) |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 11:32 AM Author: "'''""""'"' i have yet to hear a case of a single woman in the marines post 2016 who has not become a headcase from trauma or had their previously existing headcase status worsened by service. even very auxiliary roles like base doctors or what not (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48806391) |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 11:09 AM Author: Trumpus Julius Caesar Augustus (TDNW) Nancy Mace was fucked up when she went in. now she’s power drunk and using the victim mentality as a nuclear shield (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48806331) |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 11:19 AM Author: Muscadine wine Nancy Mace didn't serve in the military (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48806354) |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 11:27 AM Author: "'''""""'"' this is correct and i was unintentionally being too broad my mistake. she was raised in military institutions. i also have her story mixed up in my head with another actual military woman who was in the news around the same time the essence of that particular subpoint still stands. women don't belong around or adjacent to male barracks culture |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 12:02 PM Author: Muscadine wine IMHO, forcing women into these spaces is bad for everyone, especially the women. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48806481) |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 12:09 PM Author: "'''""""'"' many years back i went to a multi-branch recruiting office to ask questions and the female (SSGT?) recruiter had more heavy sadness in her face than a kolkata nun (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48806492) |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 12:17 PM Author: Con Inc e-girl slut factory no it's not
jfc do not talk about this stuff if you weren't in the military yourself please
women are absolute CANCER in the military and destroy everything about a unit |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 12:24 PM Author: "'''""""'"' women historically did fine in auxiliary roles in an industrialized military force and filled roles that manpower didn't exist for in previous eras of conflict the ideal is not the necessitated reality, where military service for increasingly unpopular wars is an unattractive option to military aged people. the simplest solution is just to set up a gender segregated parallel women's corps with a more narrow list of MoS options |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 12:32 PM Author: Con Inc e-girl slut factory no, the solution is not to have women in the military at all. this is completely ridiculous "lib" gobbledygook nonsense
there is almost zero actual "sexual assault" in the military btw, and there never was. it's similar to the "1 in 5 women who go to college are raped during college" statistic. completely made up, completely a product of women lying out of self-interest and delusion
the military is a killing machine, period. it is not a jobs program. it is not a training program. it's for killing other human beings. it is not a place for women in any capacity, period, end of story |
|
Date: April 2nd, 2025 12:14 PM Author: i used to diaper too opening up tp (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5702884&forum_id=2Elisa#48806504) |