Enmar, on May 13 2003, 03:32 PM, said:
IIRC there are two problems with this claim:
1. Training programs were designed for men and other programs, designed for them, might prove more effective for women. This isn?t fair because it takes men as default and helps prove women can?t do it? it?s a cyclic proof.
2. Muscle mass isn?t everything. Again, IIRC, women?s muscles are more effective when they?re the same size as men?s.
I don?t like "honourary men" or variations on it. It isn?t cute, its about good=men and there's no other way to pronounce your appreciation
On point one: Training is just training. Granted, strength training is strength training and speed training is speed training and endurance training is endurance training, but there's no such thing as male or female training. There's no way to design a training program that women will show a better result from than men, or vice versa. PC though it is not, men just outperform women under the same training because men and women are different critters.
On point two: Actually, no, about women's muscles being more effective at equal size. But it wouldn't matter, because it's RESULTS we're talking about here, and women's muscles being the same size, or even near enough for such a supposed advantage to show up in actual performance, typically is not the case. Also, yes, muscle mass isn't everything, but it also isn't the male body's only superiority to women's. Men also have better speed, endurance, durability, reflexes, gemetrical thinking, and such. This doesn't add to the case for excluding women, because there are always the rare ones on both sides, but it does mean that as long as standards are equal, there will never be anywhere near as many women in the armed forces as men, even if you not only let them in but also give them incentives like higher pay than men. It just can't work.
On that last point without a number: Well, in the armed forces, good=men. Yes, that's how it is. Military activity is a manly thing, so men are better at it, and being better at it is being more manly. Don't pretend that's a prejudice, though; it's just an acknowledgement of the fact that we're talking about a particular context here, not life in general, and any particular contex can turn out to be something that some people are better suited to than others.