What is your most radical or unpopular opinion concerning the military?

SSG (Join to see) - how has no one else voted up the mini me third arm? Fantastic, if not apparently obscure, reference. And Cpl Tom Surdi, don’t worry, the Marines will start to get issued that arm like device, about 3-5 years after the production version finally gets to the Army.
There’s nothing wrong with working smarter, as opposed to harder.

Airborne overated? Only a Dirty LEG say such a thing! Say that if you get through jump school and are assigned to a Airborne Unit. 5 jumps in jump school does not you airborne. You are airborne when you make your cherry jump which a leg would not understand.

MSG Danny Mathers - hahaha ok. airborne is irrelevant, you wear a french peasant's hat, and your writing is terrible.

I think I'll keep My Jarhead Mouth shut on this one...!

I agree for combat-arms type jobs where life and death really can come down to physical strength and/or stamina. The reason for the lower PFT/PFA standards is grounded in sound physiological science (as opposed to new-age voodoo science), so I accept it. That said-- I CAN'T do everything you can do better. I also accept that. (Too many women don't.)

That said-- there are things I CAN do better than you.

Interestingly, the same physiological differences between men and women that render women physically weaker than men also render women MORE capable than men in some capacities. Women's bodies are significantly better at handling g-forces (narrower blood vessels) which-- if we were going on strict physiology-- would limit the field of fighter pilots exclusively to women. We would also survive hypothermia significantly longer than men of similar body composition if we ended up punching out over the North Atlantic. Also our natural ability to mentally multitask (as opposed to men who are linear rather than multidirectional thinkers) and our being generally physically smaller so as to allow our aircraft to be designed around our smaller bodies and instrumentation around our smaller fingers... Be careful what you wish for, boys.

Bottom line-- as a measure of general overall health and fitness, I'm okay with the double standard. As a measure of capability to do a job-- such as a combat-arms course-- then only one minimum standard for all is acceptable.

LCDR (Join to see) - I think you've been reading too much vox and buzzfeed. If you look at NASA and military studies you learn women have a better recovery time with G force. Toleration was equal, women recovered in less days. Yes, it is cool that women recover in less days from the stress, but they pass out at the same rate as men. You should really ignore what you see in the huffington post and read actual studies to pull out the relevant information. Men and women are suited equally to withstand G force (until men are 65+). Women have smaller recovery periods which is a benefit. Exceptions to every rule, this isn't true for everyone, it's just true for most people.

I can only imagine you got your information about hypothermia from the NYTIMES. That one isn't even partly true. Women on average suffer the effects of cold much sooner and harsher than men. It's body composition differences. If we limited it to comparable body size, that is a stupid test because men and women don't have comparable body sizes. I'm a big guy and most other men are bigger than women too. We generally withstand cold better than the females we grew up with. In most families across the world, brothers can withstand the cold and hypothermia better than their sisters. There is nothing wrong with that and it doesn't make us better, but it's silly to listen to people who lie to feel superior. It's just biological differences, we don't need the lies. Sure, people who are used to colder temperatures can handle the cold better than those who can't, but that's regardless of gender. Exceptions to every rule, this isn't true for everyone, it's just true for most people.

No one can multitask well and everything that claims men or women do it better is hogwash. Everyone is bad at it. That being said on average women multitask MORE than men. On average a woman is multitasking more things at once than the average man is. On the same note on average, men multitask with less MISTAKES than women. Now I could hazard a guess the less mistakes is because we multitask less. So that doesn't prove that men multitask better than women any more than the fact that women multitask more things proves women multitask better. The truth is, on average, if you need someone to multitask many things at once, you are more likely to be successful if picked a woman, but if you are looking for accuracy, you are more likely to be successful if picked a man. Exceptions to every rule, this isn't true for everyone, it's just true for most people.

Your final point is true, women have smaller body frames and you could make aircraft smaller. I don't see this as a good option though. Making aircraft smaller because women can fit into them just isn't practical. They should be big enough that pilots, regardless of gender can fit into them. Exceptions to every rule, this isn't true for everyone, it's just true for most people.

Finally, please don't look at my message as an attack on you. It isn't. But women who claim superiority have infiltrated common beliefs. Even the best of us have fallen prey to the misinformation spread by these people and they are very often spread especially through media such as NYTIMES, Buzzfeed, Vox, Huffpo, CNN, MSNBC. I'm not claiming fox is trustworthy, because no biased media is. I simply left out fox because they don't spread lies like "women can withstand cold and hypothermia better than men." and "this new study shows women are smarter than men."

I recently had to explain to people that rapists rape because they want sex. Exceptions to every rule, this isn't true for everyone, it's just true for most people. They were shocked to learn that most rapes aren't about power. But after I explained to them that information was made up by a feminist journalist who believed all men wanted power over women, they had no choice but to realize their school teaching was flawed.

You are completely right about this though

"That said-- I CAN'T do everything you can do better. I also accept that. (Too many women don't.)

That said-- there are things I CAN do better than you."
Those things you can do better just isn't as much as mainstream thought believes it to be.

Um... I'm not 100% sure where you get the idea that I am some kind of liberal-news-following feminist. Could not be farther from the truth. There was a lot of tongue and cheek in my post, but the bottom line is that equal =\= same.

All of the differences I mentioned are based on science- not liberal/ feminist propoganda. Women have smaller blood vessels resulting in a greater concentration of blood near our vital organs. We also have a higher body fat percentage (on average). The unfortunate truth (for dudes) is that women's bodies are designed to survive and to protect developing babies, while men are designed to be strong but expendable. It is about perpetuation of the species, but there are fringe benefits to women's body design such as limiting the rate at which blood can be affected by Gs or extreme temperatures (although I'll concede that blood to the brain is not included in that set of 'vital organs'). The 'similar body construction' concept regarding cold temperature resistance is a fallacy... What makes sense is to use the 'average' body composition in such comparisons. It is another case of twisting data to support a predetermined conclusion.

Brain scan technology has demonstrated that women's brains function multidimensionally whereas men's are 'single focus'. Multidimensional brains are naturally better suited for multitasking. Neither is necessarily better or worse-- just different.

While I appreciate your 'disclaimer' that your post was not meant as an attack-- after accusing me of keeping company with possibly the worst group of people in the world (man-hating, progressive feminazis)-- you should realize that I understand and appreciate men more than most women do. I understand their collective faults a well as their collective strengths, and am very much a champion of male supremacy in fields where it is appropriate-- largely in fields where physical strength is required. I believe that humanity works best when men as women capitalize on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's shortcomings, and generally exist in a symbiotic (rather than competitive) dynamic. Unfortunately, I am kind-of a unicorn in that sense.

Right, and sending college-aged girls with their biological clocks ticking overseas to spend their days in a truck with middle-aged men who aren't going to see their wives for at least 6 months, is like dangling a steak in front of a starved tiger in close quarters and asking it to behave. Especially if the steak is doing everything she can to tempt the tiger. People can say it won't ruin EVERY marriage. The thing is, why risk that? They want to support the families of deployed servicemen, THAT does NOT support those families! It is no consolation that he had a moral choice, he wasnt thinking with his proper head. Every man is faithful to a point, and that point is different for all men, but they all have their breaking point. Every. Single. One. Uh huh, don't lie. Men are perves.

CSM. I get it. Social crap is my bug.

I'm agree CSM. What you're saying is especially true when you get down to soldiers my age as well. It goes all the way up the chain. I understand the military as a whole has always had infighting, but having to modern day social norms even on the company level is rediculous. Everything from female hair regs, men wearing earrings, this transgender surgery debacle, and even affirmitave action in the army (I can't really speak for other branches though I'm sure it's true for them too.)

I joined in 1964, might have to take "past practices" guidelines, back a little further. However not all practices en vogue back then were worthwhile.

LCDR (Join to see) - She led the news every night for a while if I remember correctly. That was a shit show.

And no one remembers even the number of men that were taken prisoner with her much less their names. To her credit-- once she was rescued-- she was adamant about the position that she wasn't 'special' but rather only one of many... Of course she took the lucrative book deal (who wouldn't) but she didn't try to play herself off as some kind of hero among mere mortals. The media did that all on their own.

LCDR (Join to see) - I don't remember the coverage, I didn't have access to much television at the time because I was somewhere in the theater of operations too. (Before CHU's and take your own internet/ TV) I do remember wondering what all the fuss was about when we got back.
I think it is high time to get real equality, which also means the crappy stuff.

SPC Chase Laux - the old chauvinistic line on this one would have countered, "The more support positions filled, the more bodies for combat positions."

The sad part is that the people who are supposed to be the leaders, the officers that is, are bred in the colleges of this nation... which is where a lot of these left-wing wackjobs are being produced.

If that is why the gender confused sign up then I would say send them back home where they can seek counseling and move on.

SFC Jim Ruether - Agree completely.

I believe if they have completed the transformation prior to entering the service they should be accepted with open arms if they qualify. But they should not be transformed at the expense of the taxpayer unless they have completed at least 10 years of service and have been deployed at least once to a combat zone. But as long as the taxpayer has to pay for convicts to be transformed during their incarceration by court order this will be a sticking point!

This is probably the hardest idea to answer I have seen in the discussions on this site. Bringing back the draft would blow up the military budget. They would have to be housed, clothed, fed, trained for 6 moths, and paid. Then they would have to go in the reserves to finish their six year commitment again costing the previously mentioned costs.
And we would never be able to get everyone to serve. No mandatory service would not work in this country as there are too many that would fall into this category every year. The draft did not really work after WWII as the service was cut from about 10 million to about 2 million and not everyone was drafted after then.

SPC Earl Semler i was in during the draft... mandatory government service is not a draft

Sgt Wayne Wood - So was I and I know it was unfair But Mandatory service is more expensive, how do you pay for it?

SPC Earl Semler with all the ‘public works’ on infrastructure that need work, get rid of unions & prevailing wage and we’ll come out ahead.

We can take money from the inner city programs that accomplish nothing.

We can remOve redundant & duplicate welfare programs.

I agree. Let loose the dogs of war (within reason).

MSG Johnathan Mathes - I do train my soldiers very well at every opportunity I am given if we aren't forced to be in the motorpool or forced to knock out random silly tasks. Maybe as an MP you guys were much more squared away and had all the time in the world for training, I guess.
Thank you for your comment.

No I didn’t say anything about being more squared away and if the shoe fits then wear it if not don’t.. my point is that everyone bitches about troops and their training ... everyone .. including me ... when in reality we as NCOs are to blame ... for not taking the time or effort to unscrew our peers... i dint know you couldn’t train soldiers at the motor pool... call hip pocket training.. excuses only carry us so far..

MSG Johnathan Mathes Fair enough, you are correct. So true.

Sorry sometimes it’s hard to express your meanings without being really careful

I agree, you know how many 91B's I've seen that don't even know how to add coolant to an m915, or use NATO slave cables? Hell, even 88M's that don't understand the term "Operator Level" when asking me to tighten the bolts on their mirror!?