TheRPGSite

Fan Forums => The RPGPundit's Own Forum => Topic started by: SHARK on October 09, 2021, 03:50:35 AM

Title: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: SHARK on October 09, 2021, 03:50:35 AM
Greetings!

Here is a video taken at a base in Iraq. A apparently bad-ass US Army *woman* challenged a Marine Infantry grunt to a boxing match, bragging before the match that she could beat any Marine.

Brandon Tatum provides interesting and funny commentary.

The Army chick is *big*--she's large, and evidently weighs 219 pounds.

She gets ruthlessly smoked. She gets crushed to the floor in the first few seconds of the match. The match continues, is refereed, and is entirely supervised. The US Army chick gets fucking beat down every stretch of the way.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Kiero on October 09, 2021, 06:27:13 AM
Classic example of a woman thinking because she's large and relatively strong (perhaps she's a powerlifter and used to out-lifting many men around her), that means she's tough. Except she's clearly not in very good condition for fighting (look at the roll of fat around her middle) and won't be equal to a man in her weight class.

That Marine didn't look exceptional as a fighter, but she didn't appear to give him any trouble at all. Against a better fighter - even one lighter than her - it would have been even shorter still.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Ruprecht on October 15, 2021, 04:02:58 PM
What is the old Mike Tyson saying: Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.

She's probably never had a guy willing to actually punch her in the head (and only in the head) and she took that as her superiority instead of the last vestiges of chivalry. In the ring, and supporting the honor of the Marines that chivalry was gone.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: SHARK on October 15, 2021, 05:20:21 PM
Classic example of a woman thinking because she's large and relatively strong (perhaps she's a powerlifter and used to out-lifting many men around her), that means she's tough. Except she's clearly not in very good condition for fighting (look at the roll of fat around her middle) and won't be equal to a man in her weight class.

That Marine didn't look exceptional as a fighter, but she didn't appear to give him any trouble at all. Against a better fighter - even one lighter than her - it would have been even shorter still.

Greetings!

That's an excellent point, Kiero. Tatum also observes that the Marine grunt probably isn't anything particularly special--in his unit--and he proceeds to absolutely destroy this chick without even breaking a sweat. As you mention, there are *monster* Marines, and one of them would have utterly crushed her even *sooner*.

Whenever this kind of nonsense comes up, I can't help but think of all of these examples, just like this here, that make an absolute mockery of women being "Equal to Men", and "Women being in Combat Units". As crushing as these examples are--I am reminded entirely how a Chinese soldier, Russian, or Iranian soldier that is in a real fight against our forces--when encountering some stupid American woman, like this one here--they won't stop at just crushing her, and embarrassing the shit out of her.

They will stomp the fuck out of her and kill her--and women just like her--in mere moments. More blood, more stupid, pointless death--while at the same time, taking up time and resources that we could actually be spending on hardened men warriors that at least have something of a chance in combat--but instead, we want to as a nation and as the military institutions go--indulge the fucking Marxists and the Feminists in these kinds of delusional fantasies.

True leaders would have the balls to tell these women and anyone that supports such BS to get their heads out of their asses and fucking live in the real world. Women are not equal to men, and women should not be in Combat Units. Cry, bitch, and moan, that's just the fucking truth and the harsh reality. The military is not a social engineering play shop, but an organization designed for killing, fighting, and winning wars.

Anything--and anyone--that detracts from that core mission is unsuitable, and must get the fuck out.

From what I understand, the same kind of Marxist and Feminist BS has also been infiltrating the British military forces, as well as other Western European nations. Nothing good will come of that, for certain. The American military is rapidly deteriorating at an alarming rate, in part due to all of this kind of BS. We have even had official Veteran studies here composed not only of generals and admirals, but other officers and enlisted, that have presented reports to the Pentagon that the embracement of Marxism, Feminism, SJWism, Wokism, all that--has seriously damaged America's ability to fight and win wars.

*SIGH* Writing this stuff makes me want to smoke a cigar. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Daztur on October 15, 2021, 09:04:00 PM
Classic example of a woman thinking because she's large and relatively strong (perhaps she's a powerlifter and used to out-lifting many men around her), that means she's tough. Except she's clearly not in very good condition for fighting (look at the roll of fat around her middle) and won't be equal to a man in her weight class.

That Marine didn't look exceptional as a fighter, but she didn't appear to give him any trouble at all. Against a better fighter - even one lighter than her - it would have been even shorter still.

Greetings!

That's an excellent point, Kiero. Tatum also observes that the Marine grunt probably isn't anything particularly special--in his unit--and he proceeds to absolutely destroy this chick without even breaking a sweat. As you mention, there are *monster* Marines, and one of them would have utterly crushed her even *sooner*.

Whenever this kind of nonsense comes up, I can't help but think of all of these examples, just like this here, that make an absolute mockery of women being "Equal to Men", and "Women being in Combat Units". As crushing as these examples are--I am reminded entirely how a Chinese soldier, Russian, or Iranian soldier that is in a real fight against our forces--when encountering some stupid American woman, like this one here--they won't stop at just crushing her, and embarrassing the shit out of her.

They will stomp the fuck out of her and kill her--and women just like her--in mere moments. More blood, more stupid, pointless death--while at the same time, taking up time and resources that we could actually be spending on hardened men warriors that at least have something of a chance in combat--but instead, we want to as a nation and as the military institutions go--indulge the fucking Marxists and the Feminists in these kinds of delusional fantasies.

True leaders would have the balls to tell these women and anyone that supports such BS to get their heads out of their asses and fucking live in the real world. Women are not equal to men, and women should not be in Combat Units. Cry, bitch, and moan, that's just the fucking truth and the harsh reality. The military is not a social engineering play shop, but an organization designed for killing, fighting, and winning wars.

Anything--and anyone--that detracts from that core mission is unsuitable, and must get the fuck out.

From what I understand, the same kind of Marxist and Feminist BS has also been infiltrating the British military forces, as well as other Western European nations. Nothing good will come of that, for certain. The American military is rapidly deteriorating at an alarming rate, in part due to all of this kind of BS. We have even had official Veteran studies here composed not only of generals and admirals, but other officers and enlisted, that have presented reports to the Pentagon that the embracement of Marxism, Feminism, SJWism, Wokism, all that--has seriously damaged America's ability to fight and win wars.

*SIGH* Writing this stuff makes me want to smoke a cigar. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well then I suppose that it's a good thing that modern warfare involves remarkably little hand to hand combat.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Shasarak on October 15, 2021, 09:20:48 PM
Well then I suppose that it's a good thing that modern warfare involves remarkably little hand to hand combat.

(https://i.redd.it/gep9n6107of61.png)
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: SHARK on October 15, 2021, 09:24:06 PM
Classic example of a woman thinking because she's large and relatively strong (perhaps she's a powerlifter and used to out-lifting many men around her), that means she's tough. Except she's clearly not in very good condition for fighting (look at the roll of fat around her middle) and won't be equal to a man in her weight class.

That Marine didn't look exceptional as a fighter, but she didn't appear to give him any trouble at all. Against a better fighter - even one lighter than her - it would have been even shorter still.

Greetings!

That's an excellent point, Kiero. Tatum also observes that the Marine grunt probably isn't anything particularly special--in his unit--and he proceeds to absolutely destroy this chick without even breaking a sweat. As you mention, there are *monster* Marines, and one of them would have utterly crushed her even *sooner*.

Whenever this kind of nonsense comes up, I can't help but think of all of these examples, just like this here, that make an absolute mockery of women being "Equal to Men", and "Women being in Combat Units". As crushing as these examples are--I am reminded entirely how a Chinese soldier, Russian, or Iranian soldier that is in a real fight against our forces--when encountering some stupid American woman, like this one here--they won't stop at just crushing her, and embarrassing the shit out of her.

They will stomp the fuck out of her and kill her--and women just like her--in mere moments. More blood, more stupid, pointless death--while at the same time, taking up time and resources that we could actually be spending on hardened men warriors that at least have something of a chance in combat--but instead, we want to as a nation and as the military institutions go--indulge the fucking Marxists and the Feminists in these kinds of delusional fantasies.

True leaders would have the balls to tell these women and anyone that supports such BS to get their heads out of their asses and fucking live in the real world. Women are not equal to men, and women should not be in Combat Units. Cry, bitch, and moan, that's just the fucking truth and the harsh reality. The military is not a social engineering play shop, but an organization designed for killing, fighting, and winning wars.

Anything--and anyone--that detracts from that core mission is unsuitable, and must get the fuck out.

From what I understand, the same kind of Marxist and Feminist BS has also been infiltrating the British military forces, as well as other Western European nations. Nothing good will come of that, for certain. The American military is rapidly deteriorating at an alarming rate, in part due to all of this kind of BS. We have even had official Veteran studies here composed not only of generals and admirals, but other officers and enlisted, that have presented reports to the Pentagon that the embracement of Marxism, Feminism, SJWism, Wokism, all that--has seriously damaged America's ability to fight and win wars.

*SIGH* Writing this stuff makes me want to smoke a cigar. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well then I suppose that it's a good thing that modern warfare involves remarkably little hand to hand combat.

Greetings!

*Laughing* Sure, buddy. Just like Sec Def McNamara and the other morons in the Pentagon during the 1960's declared that "Modern Warfare involves remarkably little close-in aerial dogfighting, so there's no need to arm our Fighters with close-range auto-cannon." Many American fighter pilots and bomber air-crews going into North Vietnam suffered and died from such arrogance. In the blood and fire of battle, such stupid ideas were soon thrown out, and the word came down to arm up every fighter aircraft with 20mm auto-cannon, and for the military to jump back into close-air combat training programs.

The modern battlefield features plenty of occasions for hand-to-hand combat, and numerous other physically demanding tasks on a regular basis. In any event, it is absolutely stupid to be having small, weak women anywhere near combat units. Doing so only ultimately wastes the lives of such women--who may better serve in other roles and capacities--and also increases the danger and risk towards suffering unnecessary casualties amongst other combat troops.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Kyle Aaron on October 15, 2021, 09:55:16 PM
There are real and significant differences between men and women, as is shown in this video. However, I think the bigger factor in this particular case was skill level.

In the video, it's plain that the woman was unskilled, and that she had never before experienced being punched in the head by anyone of any gender, age, size or skill level. The man was no master, but he'd felt a punch, and been eye-to-eye and toe-to-toe with someone willing and able to hurt him.

In my game Conflict, you choose a career path and throw dice for which skills you get, like Classic Traveller. An optional rule for realism which nobody has ever wanted to use was: you choose careers, and the GM throws the dice for which skills you get, and doesn't tell you. You don't find out until you actually try the thing. You can assume you have all the skills, or none - it's up to you.

Dunning-Kruger is a real effect - you need a certain level of competence in order to be able to assess your level of competence. One of the difficulties with a post-industrial society like that of the West is that many of the jobs we do have less than tangible outcomes. How do we know an office manager is good at their job?

However, the skills of conflicts and trauma have very tangible outcomes. A paramedic friend was treating an assault victim who said, "Oh yeah, it was my jiu-jitsu skills that saved me." He replied, "Mate, I hate to tell you, but if you're in my ambulance - you lost." And that patient left the ambulance in no worse shape than he entered it - so the paramedic succeeded.

Fewer and fewer people do jobs with tangible measurable outcomes, and thus more and more people are able to deceive themselves that they're extremely competent in a wide domain. I call it the Rainman Effect: "Definitely, definitely an excellent driver." But all he'd done was drive around in circles slowly with nobody else around. That's different to taking a corner at speed at night in the rain with other vehicles around.

Gender, size - of course all these things matter. But skill? If you haven't been tested, you just don't know.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Shasarak on October 15, 2021, 10:31:06 PM
In my game Conflict, you choose a career path and throw dice for which skills you get, like Classic Traveller. An optional rule for realism which nobody has ever wanted to use was: you choose careers, and the GM throws the dice for which skills you get, and doesn't tell you. You don't find out until you actually try the thing. You can assume you have all the skills, or none - it's up to you.

Since when does playing an amnesiac fall into the "realism" column?

Does my character have any ranks in Piloting?

Only one way to find out.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 15, 2021, 11:00:48 PM
Classic example of a woman thinking because she's large and relatively strong (perhaps she's a powerlifter and used to out-lifting many men around her), that means she's tough. Except she's clearly not in very good condition for fighting (look at the roll of fat around her middle) and won't be equal to a man in her weight class.

That Marine didn't look exceptional as a fighter, but she didn't appear to give him any trouble at all. Against a better fighter - even one lighter than her - it would have been even shorter still.

Greetings!

That's an excellent point, Kiero. Tatum also observes that the Marine grunt probably isn't anything particularly special--in his unit--and he proceeds to absolutely destroy this chick without even breaking a sweat. As you mention, there are *monster* Marines, and one of them would have utterly crushed her even *sooner*.

Whenever this kind of nonsense comes up, I can't help but think of all of these examples, just like this here, that make an absolute mockery of women being "Equal to Men", and "Women being in Combat Units". As crushing as these examples are--I am reminded entirely how a Chinese soldier, Russian, or Iranian soldier that is in a real fight against our forces--when encountering some stupid American woman, like this one here--they won't stop at just crushing her, and embarrassing the shit out of her.

They will stomp the fuck out of her and kill her--and women just like her--in mere moments. More blood, more stupid, pointless death--while at the same time, taking up time and resources that we could actually be spending on hardened men warriors that at least have something of a chance in combat--but instead, we want to as a nation and as the military institutions go--indulge the fucking Marxists and the Feminists in these kinds of delusional fantasies.

True leaders would have the balls to tell these women and anyone that supports such BS to get their heads out of their asses and fucking live in the real world. Women are not equal to men, and women should not be in Combat Units. Cry, bitch, and moan, that's just the fucking truth and the harsh reality. The military is not a social engineering play shop, but an organization designed for killing, fighting, and winning wars.

Anything--and anyone--that detracts from that core mission is unsuitable, and must get the fuck out.

From what I understand, the same kind of Marxist and Feminist BS has also been infiltrating the British military forces, as well as other Western European nations. Nothing good will come of that, for certain. The American military is rapidly deteriorating at an alarming rate, in part due to all of this kind of BS. We have even had official Veteran studies here composed not only of generals and admirals, but other officers and enlisted, that have presented reports to the Pentagon that the embracement of Marxism, Feminism, SJWism, Wokism, all that--has seriously damaged America's ability to fight and win wars.

*SIGH* Writing this stuff makes me want to smoke a cigar. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well then I suppose that it's a good thing that modern warfare involves remarkably little hand to hand combat.

Greetings!

*Laughing* Sure, buddy. Just like Sec Def McNamara and the other morons in the Pentagon during the 1960's declared that "Modern Warfare involves remarkably little close-in aerial dogfighting, so there's no need to arm our Fighters with close-range auto-cannon." Many American fighter pilots and bomber air-crews going into North Vietnam suffered and died from such arrogance. In the blood and fire of battle, such stupid ideas were soon thrown out, and the word came down to arm up every fighter aircraft with 20mm auto-cannon, and for the military to jump back into close-air combat training programs.

The modern battlefield features plenty of occasions for hand-to-hand combat, and numerous other physically demanding tasks on a regular basis. In any event, it is absolutely stupid to be having small, weak women anywhere near combat units. Doing so only ultimately wastes the lives of such women--who may better serve in other roles and capacities--and also increases the danger and risk towards suffering unnecessary casualties amongst other combat troops.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
It's the same fucking delusion. They think territory can be somehow 'held' with drones/aircraft.

The only reason I'm not getting even more pissy is because I used to think that line of bullshit too.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Kyle Aaron on October 15, 2021, 11:22:38 PM
Since when does playing an amnesiac fall into the "realism" column?
I'm always amused at how distressed people get at the suggestion that they may not be an excellent driver after all. One of the more painful experiences back on the SJGames forum was watching fat nerds stat themselves, basically as ninja commandos. I've had that experience in person, too - sitting in a game group with an infantry war veteran who gave himself fewer and lower skills than the reservist who'd never been deployed.

To be clear about the Conflict rules:

The game makes a distinction between general skills which anyone can do, just not well or quickly, and specialist skills, which nobody can do without training. Basically anyone can do CPR, for example, but how well they don't know until they try - though some are under the delusion they'd be brilliant at it. But few people are under the delusion that they can do internal surgery without training.

Anyone can drive, shoot, punch, cook, etc. Default, zero-level. It's not GURPS or something where if you don't have it then you're fucked, it's more like Classic Traveller or AD&D1e where the GM goes, "sure, you can try that."

But having the skill beyond default level means you can do it well, or quickly. With the optional rule, you don't know how well or quickly until you're tested in a crisis situation.

As the woman in the video demonstrated. She knew how to throw a punch, how to defend, etc. As did the guy. But how well under pressure? That's a different question.

Again, nobody wants that realism option. Nobody wants to be like the woman in the video. That's why it's an optional rule - really it's just there for people to think about the difference between games and reality. In games, you have an exact measurement of your skill. In reality few people do, and so they think they're definitely, definitely an excellent driver. Or boxer, as it may be.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: deathknight4044 on October 16, 2021, 12:32:46 AM
Classic example of a woman thinking because she's large and relatively strong (perhaps she's a powerlifter and used to out-lifting many men around her), that means she's tough. Except she's clearly not in very good condition for fighting (look at the roll of fat around her middle) and won't be equal to a man in her weight class.

That Marine didn't look exceptional as a fighter, but she didn't appear to give him any trouble at all. Against a better fighter - even one lighter than her - it would have been even shorter still.

Greetings!

That's an excellent point, Kiero. Tatum also observes that the Marine grunt probably isn't anything particularly special--in his unit--and he proceeds to absolutely destroy this chick without even breaking a sweat. As you mention, there are *monster* Marines, and one of them would have utterly crushed her even *sooner*.

Whenever this kind of nonsense comes up, I can't help but think of all of these examples, just like this here, that make an absolute mockery of women being "Equal to Men", and "Women being in Combat Units". As crushing as these examples are--I am reminded entirely how a Chinese soldier, Russian, or Iranian soldier that is in a real fight against our forces--when encountering some stupid American woman, like this one here--they won't stop at just crushing her, and embarrassing the shit out of her.

They will stomp the fuck out of her and kill her--and women just like her--in mere moments. More blood, more stupid, pointless death--while at the same time, taking up time and resources that we could actually be spending on hardened men warriors that at least have something of a chance in combat--but instead, we want to as a nation and as the military institutions go--indulge the fucking Marxists and the Feminists in these kinds of delusional fantasies.

True leaders would have the balls to tell these women and anyone that supports such BS to get their heads out of their asses and fucking live in the real world. Women are not equal to men, and women should not be in Combat Units. Cry, bitch, and moan, that's just the fucking truth and the harsh reality. The military is not a social engineering play shop, but an organization designed for killing, fighting, and winning wars.

Anything--and anyone--that detracts from that core mission is unsuitable, and must get the fuck out.

From what I understand, the same kind of Marxist and Feminist BS has also been infiltrating the British military forces, as well as other Western European nations. Nothing good will come of that, for certain. The American military is rapidly deteriorating at an alarming rate, in part due to all of this kind of BS. We have even had official Veteran studies here composed not only of generals and admirals, but other officers and enlisted, that have presented reports to the Pentagon that the embracement of Marxism, Feminism, SJWism, Wokism, all that--has seriously damaged America's ability to fight and win wars.

*SIGH* Writing this stuff makes me want to smoke a cigar. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well then I suppose that it's a good thing that modern warfare involves remarkably little hand to hand combat.


https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2015/09/10/mixed-gender-teams-come-up-short-in-marines-infantry-experiment/


Quote
- All-male squads and teams outperformed those that included women on 69 percent of the 134 ground combat tasks evaluated.

- All-male teams were outperformed by mixed-gender teams on two tasks: accuracy in firing the 50-caliber machine gun in traditional rifleman units and the same skill in provisional units. Researchers did not know why gender-mixed teams did better on these skills, but said the advantage did not persist when the teams continued on to movement-under-load exercises.

- All-male squads in every infantry job were faster than mixed-gender squads in each tactical movement evaluated. The differences between the teams were most pronounced in crew-served weapons teams. Those teams had to carry weapons and ammunition in addition to their individual combat loads.

- Male-only rifleman squads were more accurate than gender-integrated counterparts on each individual weapons system, including the M4 carbine, the M27 infantry automatic rifle and the M203 grenade launcher.

- Male Marines with no formal infantry training outperformed infantry-trained women on each weapons system, at levels ranging from 11 to 16 percentage points.
In a findings briefing sheet, officials also noted that there were tasks female Marines routinely struggled with that posed no similar challenge to their male counterparts.

In scaling an 8-foot wall obstacle, researchers wrote, male Marines would throw their packs to the top of the wall, while female Marines "required regular assistance" to do the same. During simulated casualty evacuations involving a 200-pound dummy, mixed-gender groups were notably slower at the task, except in cases when a single Marine would move the dummy using a fireman's carry. And in those cases, "it was most often a male Marine who 'evacuated' the casualty," according to the findings analysis.

A team from the University of Pittsburgh recorded athletic and biological data from each Marine volunteer before, during and after the assessment. The average differences between male and female participants may explain, in large part, the disparity in overall performance. Among their findings:

- The average male Marine volunteer was 178 pounds with 20 percent body fat; the average female volunteer weighed 142 pounds with 24 percent body fat.
In anaerobic power and capacity, female Marines averaged 15 percent lower levels than their male counterparts.

- In anaerobic power performance, the top 25 percent of female performers and the bottom 25 percent of male performers overlapped.
In aerobic capacity, female Marines demonstrated levels 10 percent lower on average than male Marines.

Over the course of the assessment, musculoskeletal injury rates totaled 40.5 percent for women, more than double the 18.8 percent rate for men.
In all, female Marines sustained 21 "time-loss" injuries which took them away from task force duties for a day or more. Nineteen of the women's injuries were lower extremity injuries and 16 percent took place during a task that required movement while carrying a load. Officials said they could not immediately provide the comparable injury rates for men but said lower extremity injuries were the most common among male Marines as well.

Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Godfather Punk on October 16, 2021, 03:53:43 AM
In reality few people do, and so they think they're definitely, definitely an excellent driver.
But can they accurately count toothpicks at a glance?
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Spinachcat on October 16, 2021, 04:28:15 AM
Since when does playing an amnesiac fall into the "realism" column?

Does my character have any ranks in Piloting?

Only one way to find out.

THIS would be hysterical in a Paranoia game! Memory wiped clones don't know their abiltiies and only find out when it's too late!
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: oggsmash on October 16, 2021, 10:06:24 AM
There are real and significant differences between men and women, as is shown in this video. However, I think the bigger factor in this particular case was skill level.

In the video, it's plain that the woman was unskilled, and that she had never before experienced being punched in the head by anyone of any gender, age, size or skill level. The man was no master, but he'd felt a punch, and been eye-to-eye and toe-to-toe with someone willing and able to hurt him.

In my game Conflict, you choose a career path and throw dice for which skills you get, like Classic Traveller. An optional rule for realism which nobody has ever wanted to use was: you choose careers, and the GM throws the dice for which skills you get, and doesn't tell you. You don't find out until you actually try the thing. You can assume you have all the skills, or none - it's up to you.

Dunning-Kruger is a real effect - you need a certain level of competence in order to be able to assess your level of competence. One of the difficulties with a post-industrial society like that of the West is that many of the jobs we do have less than tangible outcomes. How do we know an office manager is good at their job?

However, the skills of conflicts and trauma have very tangible outcomes. A paramedic friend was treating an assault victim who said, "Oh yeah, it was my jiu-jitsu skills that saved me." He replied, "Mate, I hate to tell you, but if you're in my ambulance - you lost." And that patient left the ambulance in no worse shape than he entered it - so the paramedic succeeded.

Fewer and fewer people do jobs with tangible measurable outcomes, and thus more and more people are able to deceive themselves that they're extremely competent in a wide domain. I call it the Rainman Effect: "Definitely, definitely an excellent driver." But all he'd done was drive around in circles slowly with nobody else around. That's different to taking a corner at speed at night in the rain with other vehicles around.

Gender, size - of course all these things matter. But skill? If you haven't been tested, you just don't know.

  Disagree.  I worked with amateur and professional fighters for years, male and female.   The difference is sex.   I can take a good amateur man, and he will beat the UFC champion female in his weight class probably 7 out of 10 times.  I take a barely professional male, and it is going to be measured more like 88/100, and likely more.   

   She could have been the same skill and he was, and she would be beaten just as badly, I would also say I think their skills were similar, it is not she was not used to getting hit, she was not used to getting hit like *that*, as in by a man. 

  edited to add:  I think they were likely similar skill level, probably around 6 months or so of exposure to boxing for 2-4 sessions a week.  She did not make the mistakes or the behaviors I would expect out of a complete newb, and I can not assess how well the guy would do if pressured, as he was simply hitting a heavy bag (and sloppily at that) the whole time.

 Also added:  I know you have quite a bit of experience lifting weights.  Take the squat for example, any female who can squat 300 pounds is very exceptional.  Any male, who can not squat 300 pounds is considered well below average after any sort of time training (6-12 months).
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: oggsmash on October 16, 2021, 10:12:42 AM
Classic example of a woman thinking because she's large and relatively strong (perhaps she's a powerlifter and used to out-lifting many men around her), that means she's tough. Except she's clearly not in very good condition for fighting (look at the roll of fat around her middle) and won't be equal to a man in her weight class.

That Marine didn't look exceptional as a fighter, but she didn't appear to give him any trouble at all. Against a better fighter - even one lighter than her - it would have been even shorter still.

Greetings!

That's an excellent point, Kiero. Tatum also observes that the Marine grunt probably isn't anything particularly special--in his unit--and he proceeds to absolutely destroy this chick without even breaking a sweat. As you mention, there are *monster* Marines, and one of them would have utterly crushed her even *sooner*.

Whenever this kind of nonsense comes up, I can't help but think of all of these examples, just like this here, that make an absolute mockery of women being "Equal to Men", and "Women being in Combat Units". As crushing as these examples are--I am reminded entirely how a Chinese soldier, Russian, or Iranian soldier that is in a real fight against our forces--when encountering some stupid American woman, like this one here--they won't stop at just crushing her, and embarrassing the shit out of her.

They will stomp the fuck out of her and kill her--and women just like her--in mere moments. More blood, more stupid, pointless death--while at the same time, taking up time and resources that we could actually be spending on hardened men warriors that at least have something of a chance in combat--but instead, we want to as a nation and as the military institutions go--indulge the fucking Marxists and the Feminists in these kinds of delusional fantasies.

True leaders would have the balls to tell these women and anyone that supports such BS to get their heads out of their asses and fucking live in the real world. Women are not equal to men, and women should not be in Combat Units. Cry, bitch, and moan, that's just the fucking truth and the harsh reality. The military is not a social engineering play shop, but an organization designed for killing, fighting, and winning wars.

Anything--and anyone--that detracts from that core mission is unsuitable, and must get the fuck out.

From what I understand, the same kind of Marxist and Feminist BS has also been infiltrating the British military forces, as well as other Western European nations. Nothing good will come of that, for certain. The American military is rapidly deteriorating at an alarming rate, in part due to all of this kind of BS. We have even had official Veteran studies here composed not only of generals and admirals, but other officers and enlisted, that have presented reports to the Pentagon that the embracement of Marxism, Feminism, SJWism, Wokism, all that--has seriously damaged America's ability to fight and win wars.

*SIGH* Writing this stuff makes me want to smoke a cigar. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well then I suppose that it's a good thing that modern warfare involves remarkably little hand to hand combat.

   I think you probably know very, very little as to what is expected of a modern infantry soldier.   The same sorts of things that matter in hand to hand combat (strength, speed, aggression) matter quite a bit in a fire fight, kicking in doors, literally running through plaster walls, dragging wounded comrades, etc. 
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 16, 2021, 11:09:24 AM
Classic example of a woman thinking because she's large and relatively strong (perhaps she's a powerlifter and used to out-lifting many men around her), that means she's tough. Except she's clearly not in very good condition for fighting (look at the roll of fat around her middle) and won't be equal to a man in her weight class.

That Marine didn't look exceptional as a fighter, but she didn't appear to give him any trouble at all. Against a better fighter - even one lighter than her - it would have been even shorter still.

Greetings!

That's an excellent point, Kiero. Tatum also observes that the Marine grunt probably isn't anything particularly special--in his unit--and he proceeds to absolutely destroy this chick without even breaking a sweat. As you mention, there are *monster* Marines, and one of them would have utterly crushed her even *sooner*.

Whenever this kind of nonsense comes up, I can't help but think of all of these examples, just like this here, that make an absolute mockery of women being "Equal to Men", and "Women being in Combat Units". As crushing as these examples are--I am reminded entirely how a Chinese soldier, Russian, or Iranian soldier that is in a real fight against our forces--when encountering some stupid American woman, like this one here--they won't stop at just crushing her, and embarrassing the shit out of her.

They will stomp the fuck out of her and kill her--and women just like her--in mere moments. More blood, more stupid, pointless death--while at the same time, taking up time and resources that we could actually be spending on hardened men warriors that at least have something of a chance in combat--but instead, we want to as a nation and as the military institutions go--indulge the fucking Marxists and the Feminists in these kinds of delusional fantasies.

True leaders would have the balls to tell these women and anyone that supports such BS to get their heads out of their asses and fucking live in the real world. Women are not equal to men, and women should not be in Combat Units. Cry, bitch, and moan, that's just the fucking truth and the harsh reality. The military is not a social engineering play shop, but an organization designed for killing, fighting, and winning wars.

Anything--and anyone--that detracts from that core mission is unsuitable, and must get the fuck out.

From what I understand, the same kind of Marxist and Feminist BS has also been infiltrating the British military forces, as well as other Western European nations. Nothing good will come of that, for certain. The American military is rapidly deteriorating at an alarming rate, in part due to all of this kind of BS. We have even had official Veteran studies here composed not only of generals and admirals, but other officers and enlisted, that have presented reports to the Pentagon that the embracement of Marxism, Feminism, SJWism, Wokism, all that--has seriously damaged America's ability to fight and win wars.

*SIGH* Writing this stuff makes me want to smoke a cigar. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well then I suppose that it's a good thing that modern warfare involves remarkably little hand to hand combat.

   I think you probably know very, very little.
Fixed that for you. Daztur's an idiot.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Rob Necronomicon on October 18, 2021, 02:00:27 PM
It's in interesting question... The example isn't great, as the chick has no skills. And the chap isn't a competent boxer but he's more skilled than she is, and he's bigger too. So it's a mismatch from the off.

You can't really ignore the science, though. Men, as a general rule, are bigger, heavier and stronger and therefore far more likely to win.

That said, a highly trained woman in unarmed combat can level the playing field. Lets not forget that there are some very skinny lads in the army too - who would have struggled against a bigger guy like that Marine. Plus, I know a few women who train in Mauy Thai (and boxing) and also compete. They are not only physically tough but mentally very resilient as well. I'd put them up against any average street thug. Plus, they are built like tanks! But they are the exception.

Unarmed combat in the armed forces is given lip service at best these days (which is bad, imo). Sure, it's a very low skill on the chain - Guns first and all, but it's good to have when you're in a jam. Plus, most of the force's close combat training these days are based of shit that won't work. I remember when the Marines were going on and on about BJJ. LOL Yeah, try taking some guy to the floor who wants to stick a knife down your throat. Oh, and it 'aint so easy to 'roll about' on a battlefield while wearing body armor and carrying all that gear. Such backward thinking... Basically because it was trendy at the time. Now it's even worse, going back to some traditional martial arts shit, or so I'm told.

When they had the likes of Kelly McCann (and that lineage) training them back in the mid 80's they were far better prepped.









Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 18, 2021, 02:42:48 PM
It's in interesting question... The example isn't great, as the chick has no skills. And the chap isn't a competent boxer but he's more skilled than she is, and he's bigger too. So it's a mismatch from the off.

You can't really ignore the science, though. Men, as a general rule, are bigger, heavier and stronger and therefore far more likely to win.

That said, a highly trained woman in unarmed combat can level the playing field. Lets not forget that there are some very skinny lads in the army too - who would have struggled against a bigger guy like that Marine. Plus, I know a few women who train in Mauy Thai (and boxing) and also compete. They are not only physically tough but mentally very resilient as well. I'd put them up against any average street thug. Plus, they are built like tanks! But they are the exception.

Unarmed combat in the armed forces is given lip service at best these days (which is bad, imo). Sure, it's a very low skill on the chain - Guns first and all, but it's good to have when you're in a jam. Plus, most of the force's close combat training these days are based of shit that won't work. I remember when the Marines were going on and on about BJJ. LOL Yeah, try taking some guy to the floor who wants to stick a knife down your throat. Oh, and it 'aint so easy to 'roll about' on a battlefield while wearing body armor and carrying all that gear. Such backward thinking... Basically because it was trendy at the time. Now it's even worse, going back to some traditional martial arts shit, or so I'm told.

When they had the likes of Kelly McCann (and that lineage) training them back in the mid 80's they were far better prepped.
Yeah, well, when you don't have the skills to back up your tough talk, expect things to get unpleasant. From the OP:

"A apparently bad-ass US Army *woman* challenged a Marine Infantry grunt to a boxing match, bragging before the match that she could beat any Marine."

That's not just a failure in training, that's a failure in judgement. You're not going to see me picking a physical fight with one of Uncle Sam's crayon-eating Misguided Children. Not unless he's got leg irons attached and I'm equipped with a spiked baseball bat. And even then the Vegas odds would NOT be in my favor.

Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Rob Necronomicon on October 18, 2021, 02:45:22 PM
It's in interesting question... The example isn't great, as the chick has no skills. And the chap isn't a competent boxer but he's more skilled than she is, and he's bigger too. So it's a mismatch from the off.

You can't really ignore the science, though. Men, as a general rule, are bigger, heavier and stronger and therefore far more likely to win.

That said, a highly trained woman in unarmed combat can level the playing field. Lets not forget that there are some very skinny lads in the army too - who would have struggled against a bigger guy like that Marine. Plus, I know a few women who train in Mauy Thai (and boxing) and also compete. They are not only physically tough but mentally very resilient as well. I'd put them up against any average street thug. Plus, they are built like tanks! But they are the exception.

Unarmed combat in the armed forces is given lip service at best these days (which is bad, imo). Sure, it's a very low skill on the chain - Guns first and all, but it's good to have when you're in a jam. Plus, most of the force's close combat training these days are based of shit that won't work. I remember when the Marines were going on and on about BJJ. LOL Yeah, try taking some guy to the floor who wants to stick a knife down your throat. Oh, and it 'aint so easy to 'roll about' on a battlefield while wearing body armor and carrying all that gear. Such backward thinking... Basically because it was trendy at the time. Now it's even worse, going back to some traditional martial arts shit, or so I'm told.

When they had the likes of Kelly McCann (and that lineage) training them back in the mid 80's they were far better prepped.
Yeah, well, when you don't have the skills to back up your tough talk, expect things to get unpleasant. From the OP:

"A apparently bad-ass US Army *woman* challenged a Marine Infantry grunt to a boxing match, bragging before the match that she could beat any Marine."

That's not just a failure in training, that's a failure in judgement. You're not going to see me picking a physical fight with one of Uncle Sam's crayon-eating Misguided Children. Not unless he's got leg irons attached and I'm equipped with a spiked baseball bat. And even then the Vegas odds would NOT be in my favor.

Indeed! She's clearly as thick as whale omelette... I mean, if you're going to talk all tough and look for fights then you'd better be able to back it up.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Pat on October 18, 2021, 07:01:43 PM
It's in interesting question... The example isn't great, as the chick has no skills. And the chap isn't a competent boxer but he's more skilled than she is, and he's bigger too. So it's a mismatch from the off.

You can't really ignore the science, though. Men, as a general rule, are bigger, heavier and stronger and therefore far more likely to win.

That said, a highly trained woman in unarmed combat can level the playing field. Lets not forget that there are some very skinny lads in the army too - who would have struggled against a bigger guy like that Marine. Plus, I know a few women who train in Mauy Thai (and boxing) and also compete. They are not only physically tough but mentally very resilient as well. I'd put them up against any average street thug. Plus, they are built like tanks! But they are the exception.

Unarmed combat in the armed forces is given lip service at best these days (which is bad, imo). Sure, it's a very low skill on the chain - Guns first and all, but it's good to have when you're in a jam. Plus, most of the force's close combat training these days are based of shit that won't work. I remember when the Marines were going on and on about BJJ. LOL Yeah, try taking some guy to the floor who wants to stick a knife down your throat. Oh, and it 'aint so easy to 'roll about' on a battlefield while wearing body armor and carrying all that gear. Such backward thinking... Basically because it was trendy at the time. Now it's even worse, going back to some traditional martial arts shit, or so I'm told.

When they had the likes of Kelly McCann (and that lineage) training them back in the mid 80's they were far better prepped.
Yeah, well, when you don't have the skills to back up your tough talk, expect things to get unpleasant. From the OP:

"A apparently bad-ass US Army *woman* challenged a Marine Infantry grunt to a boxing match, bragging before the match that she could beat any Marine."

That's not just a failure in training, that's a failure in judgement. You're not going to see me picking a physical fight with one of Uncle Sam's crayon-eating Misguided Children. Not unless he's got leg irons attached and I'm equipped with a spiked baseball bat. And even then the Vegas odds would NOT be in my favor.

Indeed! She's clearly as thick as whale omelette... I mean, if you're going to talk all tough and look for fights then you'd better be able to back it up.
I respect her for trying. You don't know your limits until you test them.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: GriswaldTerrastone on October 18, 2021, 07:02:40 PM
What disturbs me is the hypocrisy. On the one hand women want the old-fashioned "men shouldn't hit women" mentality to prevail, yet they want to be in the military and police. Not to mention movie portrayals.

Baby Boomer women had the benefit of "social momentum" from the past, but as recent news reports show, that momentum is almost gone.

Tough.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Rob Necronomicon on October 18, 2021, 07:04:48 PM
It's in interesting question... The example isn't great, as the chick has no skills. And the chap isn't a competent boxer but he's more skilled than she is, and he's bigger too. So it's a mismatch from the off.

You can't really ignore the science, though. Men, as a general rule, are bigger, heavier and stronger and therefore far more likely to win.

That said, a highly trained woman in unarmed combat can level the playing field. Lets not forget that there are some very skinny lads in the army too - who would have struggled against a bigger guy like that Marine. Plus, I know a few women who train in Mauy Thai (and boxing) and also compete. They are not only physically tough but mentally very resilient as well. I'd put them up against any average street thug. Plus, they are built like tanks! But they are the exception.

Unarmed combat in the armed forces is given lip service at best these days (which is bad, imo). Sure, it's a very low skill on the chain - Guns first and all, but it's good to have when you're in a jam. Plus, most of the force's close combat training these days are based of shit that won't work. I remember when the Marines were going on and on about BJJ. LOL Yeah, try taking some guy to the floor who wants to stick a knife down your throat. Oh, and it 'aint so easy to 'roll about' on a battlefield while wearing body armor and carrying all that gear. Such backward thinking... Basically because it was trendy at the time. Now it's even worse, going back to some traditional martial arts shit, or so I'm told.

When they had the likes of Kelly McCann (and that lineage) training them back in the mid 80's they were far better prepped.
Yeah, well, when you don't have the skills to back up your tough talk, expect things to get unpleasant. From the OP:

"A apparently bad-ass US Army *woman* challenged a Marine Infantry grunt to a boxing match, bragging before the match that she could beat any Marine."

That's not just a failure in training, that's a failure in judgement. You're not going to see me picking a physical fight with one of Uncle Sam's crayon-eating Misguided Children. Not unless he's got leg irons attached and I'm equipped with a spiked baseball bat. And even then the Vegas odds would NOT be in my favor.

Indeed! She's clearly as thick as whale omelette... I mean, if you're going to talk all tough and look for fights then you'd better be able to back it up.
I respect her for trying. You don't know your limits until you test them.

I respect anyone for getting in a ring when it comes to full contact sports. Win, loose or draw... But if she was shooting her mouth off, then she pretty much got a good hard lesson. Also, it was pretty shitty not to touch gloves with the dude at the end.

But yeah, I respect her 'grit' but not her unsporting attitude.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Kyle Aaron on October 18, 2021, 08:38:27 PM
The difference is sex.   
I did not say that sex did not matter. What I did say was that skill matters, too, and the clip was a good illustration of a person of low skill not understanding until too late that they had low skill.
Quote from: oggsmash
I think you probably know very, very little as to what is expected of a modern infantry soldier.
Most do know little of it. In short: whatever the profession, it never hurts to be stronger and tougher. Nobody ever says, "I wish I wasn't so strong, it makes my job so hard." The only question is, since getting stronger and tougher requires training, how do you balance that with all the other things you need to train?
Quote from: Rob
Unarmed combat in the armed forces is given lip service at best these days (which is bad, imo).
I think it's been that way for a long time, it certainly was in the Australian forces in the 1990s, same in NZ and UK from what I saw of them. And I was told it was the same in the early 1970s. The military like all large bureaucracies is very slow to change.
Quote from: Rob
I respect her 'grit' but not her unsporting attitude.
I took that as a measure of her disillusionment. Angry and disappointed with herself, she projected that onto her opponent.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Kiero on October 19, 2021, 06:37:11 AM
You can't really ignore the science, though. Men, as a general rule, are bigger, heavier and stronger and therefore far more likely to win.

Not only that, men are stronger for the same amount of weight. Compare Olympic lifting records in the same weight category, for men and women, the men's records are significantly more.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: KingCheops on October 19, 2021, 11:07:32 AM
You can't really ignore the science, though. Men, as a general rule, are bigger, heavier and stronger and therefore far more likely to win.

Not only that, men are stronger for the same amount of weight. Compare Olympic lifting records in the same weight category, for men and women, the men's records are significantly more.

Were significantly more.  Now that men are allowed to compete in women's categories...
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: jhkim on October 19, 2021, 01:14:05 PM
Not only that, men are stronger for the same amount of weight. Compare Olympic lifting records in the same weight category, for men and women, the men's records are significantly more.

Were significantly more.  Now that men are allowed to compete in women's categories...

At the present time, the men's records are still significantly more - essentially unchanged from prior years. I presume you're talking about transgender athletes, but the only transgender athlete to participate in Olympic weightlifting has not won any medals, placing last in her group of women in the last Olympics.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: DM_Curt on October 19, 2021, 04:58:15 PM
Not only that, men are stronger for the same amount of weight. Compare Olympic lifting records in the same weight category, for men and women, the men's records are significantly more.

Were significantly more.  Now that men are allowed to compete in women's categories...

At the present time, the men's records are still significantly more - essentially unchanged from prior years. I presume you're talking about transgender athletes, but the only transgender athlete to participate in Olympic weightlifting has not won any medals, placing last in her group of women in the last Olympics.
I understand that she lifted significantly more during the preliminaries/qualifying, than during the actual event. I'm not saying that they threw the event out of a personal agenda (everyone has an occasional bad day and the simpler explanation of is usually the more likely), but their failure to win is just 1 datapoint when Male-to-Female trans athletes have done pretty well overall, and Female-to-Male athletes don't seem to have made much impact.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: SHARK on October 19, 2021, 05:42:34 PM
Classic example of a woman thinking because she's large and relatively strong (perhaps she's a powerlifter and used to out-lifting many men around her), that means she's tough. Except she's clearly not in very good condition for fighting (look at the roll of fat around her middle) and won't be equal to a man in her weight class.

That Marine didn't look exceptional as a fighter, but she didn't appear to give him any trouble at all. Against a better fighter - even one lighter than her - it would have been even shorter still.

Greetings!

That's an excellent point, Kiero. Tatum also observes that the Marine grunt probably isn't anything particularly special--in his unit--and he proceeds to absolutely destroy this chick without even breaking a sweat. As you mention, there are *monster* Marines, and one of them would have utterly crushed her even *sooner*.

Whenever this kind of nonsense comes up, I can't help but think of all of these examples, just like this here, that make an absolute mockery of women being "Equal to Men", and "Women being in Combat Units". As crushing as these examples are--I am reminded entirely how a Chinese soldier, Russian, or Iranian soldier that is in a real fight against our forces--when encountering some stupid American woman, like this one here--they won't stop at just crushing her, and embarrassing the shit out of her.

They will stomp the fuck out of her and kill her--and women just like her--in mere moments. More blood, more stupid, pointless death--while at the same time, taking up time and resources that we could actually be spending on hardened men warriors that at least have something of a chance in combat--but instead, we want to as a nation and as the military institutions go--indulge the fucking Marxists and the Feminists in these kinds of delusional fantasies.

True leaders would have the balls to tell these women and anyone that supports such BS to get their heads out of their asses and fucking live in the real world. Women are not equal to men, and women should not be in Combat Units. Cry, bitch, and moan, that's just the fucking truth and the harsh reality. The military is not a social engineering play shop, but an organization designed for killing, fighting, and winning wars.

Anything--and anyone--that detracts from that core mission is unsuitable, and must get the fuck out.

From what I understand, the same kind of Marxist and Feminist BS has also been infiltrating the British military forces, as well as other Western European nations. Nothing good will come of that, for certain. The American military is rapidly deteriorating at an alarming rate, in part due to all of this kind of BS. We have even had official Veteran studies here composed not only of generals and admirals, but other officers and enlisted, that have presented reports to the Pentagon that the embracement of Marxism, Feminism, SJWism, Wokism, all that--has seriously damaged America's ability to fight and win wars.

*SIGH* Writing this stuff makes me want to smoke a cigar. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well then I suppose that it's a good thing that modern warfare involves remarkably little hand to hand combat.

   I think you probably know very, very little.
Fixed that for you. Daztur's an idiot.

Greetings!

Hey Ghostmaker! *Laughing* Yeah, you are right, of course. Daztur is a fucking idiot. This isn't the first Liberal, Jello-commentary he's made here. I thought I would be nice, though. ;D

I remember when I was in college, in my Women's Studies classes. (The university imposed a graduation requirement that all students, regardless of stated Major, had to complete a minimum of two "Gender and or Minority Studies classes). Many of these students, as well as the fucking woman professor, would straight-faced insist--and then shrilly shriek--that women were absolutely as strong as men, and could do anything men could do, equally, and usually better. I used to enjoy immensely making the woman professor laugh condescendingly at me, and then watch her get red-faced, flushed, and increasingly emotional and angry as I continued to present scientific fact and evidence from other disciplines that made her assertions a laughing stock of absurdity. Nonetheless, she and most of the women students in the class persisted with this phony, fraudulent charade. It really is a cult-like ideology. Feminism, Wokism, SJWism, Marxism, it all has roots in the same ideological family. It was like being in an episode of "The Twilight Zone". You remember that show? From way back? Yeah, it felt like that. Meanwhile, my History professors, Biology professors, Political Science professors, Anthropology professors--they all would and did vehemently disagree and contradict everything that the Women's Studies professor taught and believed.

That was over 20 years ago now. The fucking brainwashing has only gotten far worse, my friend. Now, this malignant, soul-crushing ideology isn't limited to the Women's Studies Department, or the Minority Studies Department. Now it is required teaching in every department, apparently, everywhere in the country.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: oggsmash on October 22, 2021, 08:37:36 AM
Not only that, men are stronger for the same amount of weight. Compare Olympic lifting records in the same weight category, for men and women, the men's records are significantly more.

Were significantly more.  Now that men are allowed to compete in women's categories...

At the present time, the men's records are still significantly more - essentially unchanged from prior years. I presume you're talking about transgender athletes, but the only transgender athlete to participate in Olympic weightlifting has not won any medals, placing last in her group of women in the last Olympics.

  Badly injured with a blown out elbow in the deep 40's.   I think saying what you do here, with zero context is misleading.   Healthy, that would not have been the case, at all.   I can understand there are lots of people with zero actual experience in contact sports and strength sports, so their perception of those worlds comes from black and white on paper, or talking heads on screens.   
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: oggsmash on October 22, 2021, 09:11:42 AM
The difference is sex.   
I did not say that sex did not matter. What I did say was that skill matters, too, and the clip was a good illustration of a person of low skill not understanding until too late that they had low skill.
Quote from: oggsmash
I think you probably know very, very little as to what is expected of a modern infantry soldier.
Most do know little of it. In short: whatever the profession, it never hurts to be stronger and tougher. Nobody ever says, "I wish I wasn't so strong, it makes my job so hard." The only question is, since getting stronger and tougher requires training, how do you balance that with all the other things you need to train?
Quote from: Rob
Unarmed combat in the armed forces is given lip service at best these days (which is bad, imo).
I think it's been that way for a long time, it certainly was in the Australian forces in the 1990s, same in NZ and UK from what I saw of them. And I was told it was the same in the early 1970s. The military like all large bureaucracies is very slow to change.
Quote from: Rob
I respect her 'grit' but not her unsporting attitude.
I took that as a measure of her disillusionment. Angry and disappointed with herself, she projected that onto her opponent.

  For clarity:  I do not disagree that skill matters.  What I meant is, I can not see that the guy is skilled beyond the bare bones basics.  Given the woman's body language and what she did when hit, she is the same level (around 6 months in a gym 2-3 times a day).  100 percent of the difference as to the outcomes in that ring were because the guy hit harder, was faster, and a lot stronger.   I agree she was low skill.  But so was he.  This was not a case of him having good skill, and hers being poor.  They were both low skill.  We never even see how the guy would react if hit, because he is essentially just hitting a heavy bag (and sloppily at that).    If both parties are low skill, then another determination will decide a victor.  In this case, strength, speed, power...ie the things separating a man and a woman, so sex was the big factor.

   I am not arguing that if she was Amanda Nunes she could not have had a much better result (but the reality is Amanda is strong and fast too, and we put her in there with a 145 pound male pro, she gets her ass kicked badly) but it would be for skill reasons of course, but also more physical parity.   Again, Amanda in there fighting a 145 pound male UFC entry level fighter...she gets destroyed, and it will not be due to lack of skill.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: 3catcircus on November 06, 2021, 11:06:10 AM
I find it deeply offensive that women leftist feminazis continue to demand equal rights for women *and* declare trans to *be* women - until they have to compete with them. 

I have no problems with treating everyone the same.  But if you demand equality, then you need to practice equal responsibility.

Should women be in combat, law enforcement, firefighting, construction?  Possibly, other than in the US, because other nations don't change the requirements.  If you need to lift 200 lbs to qualify, then you need to lift 200 lbs. Regardless of gender. If you need to shoot a 300 on the firing range, you need to shoot a 300. Regardless of gender. And it needs to be *all* requirements - no exceptions.

In my younger days when I was in a submarine, I've seen a female machinist from the submarine tender carry a 200 pound pump motor strapped to her back up a vertical ladder to get it off the boat and into the tender's repair shop.  She was terrified of being on the submarine due to the tight quarters.  Would I want her serving in submarines? No.  Likewise, we had men transfer off because they couldn't handle the tight quarters. We also had men who couldn't lift enough weight to do things like drag an unconscious person out of a burning compartment.  They *should* have also been removed.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 01, 2021, 09:19:57 PM
Greetings!

Here is a video taken at a base in Iraq. A apparently bad-ass US Army *woman* challenged a Marine Infantry grunt to a boxing match, bragging before the match that she could beat any Marine.

Brandon Tatum provides interesting and funny commentary.

The Army chick is *big*--she's large, and evidently weighs 219 pounds.

She gets ruthlessly smoked. She gets crushed to the floor in the first few seconds of the match. The match continues, is refereed, and is entirely supervised. The US Army chick gets fucking beat down every stretch of the way.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK


Greetings brother!

Well it's the progressive thing to do (or so I'm told by my moral betters), to beat the crap out of a woman is the Je ne vais plus of progressivism.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: oggsmash on December 01, 2021, 09:27:33 PM
I find it deeply offensive that women leftist feminazis continue to demand equal rights for women *and* declare trans to *be* women - until they have to compete with them. 

I have no problems with treating everyone the same.  But if you demand equality, then you need to practice equal responsibility.

Should women be in combat, law enforcement, firefighting, construction?  Possibly, other than in the US, because other nations don't change the requirements.  If you need to lift 200 lbs to qualify, then you need to lift 200 lbs. Regardless of gender. If you need to shoot a 300 on the firing range, you need to shoot a 300. Regardless of gender. And it needs to be *all* requirements - no exceptions.

In my younger days when I was in a submarine, I've seen a female machinist from the submarine tender carry a 200 pound pump motor strapped to her back up a vertical ladder to get it off the boat and into the tender's repair shop.  She was terrified of being on the submarine due to the tight quarters.  Would I want her serving in submarines? No.  Likewise, we had men transfer off because they couldn't handle the tight quarters. We also had men who couldn't lift enough weight to do things like drag an unconscious person out of a burning compartment.  They *should* have also been removed.

  I had all of a submarine I wanted in prototype (in SC where they have the submarine bolted to the pier).  I was not so much claustrophobic, but I am not small and have wide shoulders, and carbon steel (especially in the machine spaces on that old style sub) is completely unforgiving to the human body.  I had a perma bruise on both shoulders over the 6 months we were there.   No thanks.  I would also say I liked the idea of seeing sunlight, but when underway, I am not so sure anyone in reactor department sees the sun anymore on a surface ship than on a submarine, unless you go to great lengths to do so.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: 3catcircus on December 01, 2021, 10:05:31 PM
I find it deeply offensive that women leftist feminazis continue to demand equal rights for women *and* declare trans to *be* women - until they have to compete with them. 

I have no problems with treating everyone the same.  But if you demand equality, then you need to practice equal responsibility.

Should women be in combat, law enforcement, firefighting, construction?  Possibly, other than in the US, because other nations don't change the requirements.  If you need to lift 200 lbs to qualify, then you need to lift 200 lbs. Regardless of gender. If you need to shoot a 300 on the firing range, you need to shoot a 300. Regardless of gender. And it needs to be *all* requirements - no exceptions.

In my younger days when I was in a submarine, I've seen a female machinist from the submarine tender carry a 200 pound pump motor strapped to her back up a vertical ladder to get it off the boat and into the tender's repair shop.  She was terrified of being on the submarine due to the tight quarters.  Would I want her serving in submarines? No.  Likewise, we had men transfer off because they couldn't handle the tight quarters. We also had men who couldn't lift enough weight to do things like drag an unconscious person out of a burning compartment.  They *should* have also been removed.

  I had all of a submarine I wanted in prototype (in SC where they have the submarine bolted to the pier).  I was not so much claustrophobic, but I am not small and have wide shoulders, and carbon steel (especially in the machine spaces on that old style sub) is completely unforgiving to the human body.  I had a perma bruise on both shoulders over the 6 months we were there.   No thanks.  I would also say I liked the idea of seeing sunlight, but when underway, I am not so sure anyone in reactor department sees the sun anymore on a surface ship than on a submarine, unless you go to great lengths to do so.

"Reactor Department." What is this department that had enough bodies of which you speak?  I was always a bit envious whenever I heard surface nukes talk about having enough bodies for watchstanding, separately manning a workcenter, *and* having enough leftovers stuck in Reactor Training division.  I think we topped out at 9 people in RC div.  Three section watch rotation underway with the chief standing four section supervisory watches.  Three section duty days inport.  And handling maintenance and drills.  Lack of sunlight was the least of our worries - it took quite a while for everyone to get qual'ed - at one point we were port/stbd inport duty days.  Luckily, because overall the crew was so small, we were pretty tight as opposed to the 4000+ people CVN city-states where I've heard that gangs (like Crips and Bloods gangs) abounded.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Kiero on December 02, 2021, 06:19:46 AM
At the present time, the men's records are still significantly more - essentially unchanged from prior years. I presume you're talking about transgender athletes, but the only transgender athlete to participate in Olympic weightlifting has not won any medals, placing last in her group of women in the last Olympics.

Unchanged for time immemorial, because the male body is vastly superior to the female in virtually every avenue of athletic endeavour (barring VO2 efficiency).
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: oggsmash on December 02, 2021, 12:41:29 PM
I find it deeply offensive that women leftist feminazis continue to demand equal rights for women *and* declare trans to *be* women - until they have to compete with them. 

I have no problems with treating everyone the same.  But if you demand equality, then you need to practice equal responsibility.

Should women be in combat, law enforcement, firefighting, construction?  Possibly, other than in the US, because other nations don't change the requirements.  If you need to lift 200 lbs to qualify, then you need to lift 200 lbs. Regardless of gender. If you need to shoot a 300 on the firing range, you need to shoot a 300. Regardless of gender. And it needs to be *all* requirements - no exceptions.

In my younger days when I was in a submarine, I've seen a female machinist from the submarine tender carry a 200 pound pump motor strapped to her back up a vertical ladder to get it off the boat and into the tender's repair shop.  She was terrified of being on the submarine due to the tight quarters.  Would I want her serving in submarines? No.  Likewise, we had men transfer off because they couldn't handle the tight quarters. We also had men who couldn't lift enough weight to do things like drag an unconscious person out of a burning compartment.  They *should* have also been removed.

  I had all of a submarine I wanted in prototype (in SC where they have the submarine bolted to the pier).  I was not so much claustrophobic, but I am not small and have wide shoulders, and carbon steel (especially in the machine spaces on that old style sub) is completely unforgiving to the human body.  I had a perma bruise on both shoulders over the 6 months we were there.   No thanks.  I would also say I liked the idea of seeing sunlight, but when underway, I am not so sure anyone in reactor department sees the sun anymore on a surface ship than on a submarine, unless you go to great lengths to do so.

"Reactor Department." What is this department that had enough bodies of which you speak?  I was always a bit envious whenever I heard surface nukes talk about having enough bodies for watchstanding, separately manning a workcenter, *and* having enough leftovers stuck in Reactor Training division.  I think we topped out at 9 people in RC div.  Three section watch rotation underway with the chief standing four section supervisory watches.  Three section duty days inport.  And handling maintenance and drills.  Lack of sunlight was the least of our worries - it took quite a while for everyone to get qual'ed - at one point we were port/stbd inport duty days.  Luckily, because overall the crew was so small, we were pretty tight as opposed to the 4000+ people CVN city-states where I've heard that gangs (like Crips and Bloods gangs) abounded.

  I probably missed the "ship board gangs" but we had 3 section watches for most of the time I was on board.  We did eventually hit 4, but for nucs what I have noticed is being bigger didnt mean more time, it just meant more people with less time to put all over the place.  Work days over lapped watches, and you didnt get to miss work just because you came off the mids.  I am sure there were more relaxed surface reactor departments, but our head REALLY wanted to be a full bird captain, so I can not say my time was really much more available than buddies of mine who were on subs.   But you know the saying, choose your rate, choose your fate.  You had to want to be on a sub to be on a sub....  were you fast attack?  Because if you were not I may have to take the complaint with a grain of salt given that slack time Boomers got.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: 3catcircus on December 02, 2021, 04:59:32 PM
I find it deeply offensive that women leftist feminazis continue to demand equal rights for women *and* declare trans to *be* women - until they have to compete with them. 

I have no problems with treating everyone the same.  But if you demand equality, then you need to practice equal responsibility.

Should women be in combat, law enforcement, firefighting, construction?  Possibly, other than in the US, because other nations don't change the requirements.  If you need to lift 200 lbs to qualify, then you need to lift 200 lbs. Regardless of gender. If you need to shoot a 300 on the firing range, you need to shoot a 300. Regardless of gender. And it needs to be *all* requirements - no exceptions.

In my younger days when I was in a submarine, I've seen a female machinist from the submarine tender carry a 200 pound pump motor strapped to her back up a vertical ladder to get it off the boat and into the tender's repair shop.  She was terrified of being on the submarine due to the tight quarters.  Would I want her serving in submarines? No.  Likewise, we had men transfer off because they couldn't handle the tight quarters. We also had men who couldn't lift enough weight to do things like drag an unconscious person out of a burning compartment.  They *should* have also been removed.

  I had all of a submarine I wanted in prototype (in SC where they have the submarine bolted to the pier).  I was not so much claustrophobic, but I am not small and have wide shoulders, and carbon steel (especially in the machine spaces on that old style sub) is completely unforgiving to the human body.  I had a perma bruise on both shoulders over the 6 months we were there.   No thanks.  I would also say I liked the idea of seeing sunlight, but when underway, I am not so sure anyone in reactor department sees the sun anymore on a surface ship than on a submarine, unless you go to great lengths to do so.

"Reactor Department." What is this department that had enough bodies of which you speak?  I was always a bit envious whenever I heard surface nukes talk about having enough bodies for watchstanding, separately manning a workcenter, *and* having enough leftovers stuck in Reactor Training division.  I think we topped out at 9 people in RC div.  Three section watch rotation underway with the chief standing four section supervisory watches.  Three section duty days inport.  And handling maintenance and drills.  Lack of sunlight was the least of our worries - it took quite a while for everyone to get qual'ed - at one point we were port/stbd inport duty days.  Luckily, because overall the crew was so small, we were pretty tight as opposed to the 4000+ people CVN city-states where I've heard that gangs (like Crips and Bloods gangs) abounded.

  I probably missed the "ship board gangs" but we had 3 section watches for most of the time I was on board.  We did eventually hit 4, but for nucs what I have noticed is being bigger didnt mean more time, it just meant more people with less time to put all over the place.  Work days over lapped watches, and you didnt get to miss work just because you came off the mids.  I am sure there were more relaxed surface reactor departments, but our head REALLY wanted to be a full bird captain, so I can not say my time was really much more available than buddies of mine who were on subs.   But you know the saying, choose your rate, choose your fate.  You had to want to be on a sub to be on a sub....  were you fast attack?  Because if you were not I may have to take the complaint with a grain of salt given that slack time Boomers got.

Yep, I was fast attack.  Both on a Permit (Thresher) class deathtrap and a first-gen 688.  Two ORSEs, a WESTPAC, an EASTPAC, rabbit ops, some secret squirrel shit, and two decommissionings.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: oggsmash on December 02, 2021, 05:13:24 PM
I find it deeply offensive that women leftist feminazis continue to demand equal rights for women *and* declare trans to *be* women - until they have to compete with them. 

I have no problems with treating everyone the same.  But if you demand equality, then you need to practice equal responsibility.

Should women be in combat, law enforcement, firefighting, construction?  Possibly, other than in the US, because other nations don't change the requirements.  If you need to lift 200 lbs to qualify, then you need to lift 200 lbs. Regardless of gender. If you need to shoot a 300 on the firing range, you need to shoot a 300. Regardless of gender. And it needs to be *all* requirements - no exceptions.

In my younger days when I was in a submarine, I've seen a female machinist from the submarine tender carry a 200 pound pump motor strapped to her back up a vertical ladder to get it off the boat and into the tender's repair shop.  She was terrified of being on the submarine due to the tight quarters.  Would I want her serving in submarines? No.  Likewise, we had men transfer off because they couldn't handle the tight quarters. We also had men who couldn't lift enough weight to do things like drag an unconscious person out of a burning compartment.  They *should* have also been removed.

  I had all of a submarine I wanted in prototype (in SC where they have the submarine bolted to the pier).  I was not so much claustrophobic, but I am not small and have wide shoulders, and carbon steel (especially in the machine spaces on that old style sub) is completely unforgiving to the human body.  I had a perma bruise on both shoulders over the 6 months we were there.   No thanks.  I would also say I liked the idea of seeing sunlight, but when underway, I am not so sure anyone in reactor department sees the sun anymore on a surface ship than on a submarine, unless you go to great lengths to do so.

"Reactor Department." What is this department that had enough bodies of which you speak?  I was always a bit envious whenever I heard surface nukes talk about having enough bodies for watchstanding, separately manning a workcenter, *and* having enough leftovers stuck in Reactor Training division.  I think we topped out at 9 people in RC div.  Three section watch rotation underway with the chief standing four section supervisory watches.  Three section duty days inport.  And handling maintenance and drills.  Lack of sunlight was the least of our worries - it took quite a while for everyone to get qual'ed - at one point we were port/stbd inport duty days.  Luckily, because overall the crew was so small, we were pretty tight as opposed to the 4000+ people CVN city-states where I've heard that gangs (like Crips and Bloods gangs) abounded.

  I probably missed the "ship board gangs" but we had 3 section watches for most of the time I was on board.  We did eventually hit 4, but for nucs what I have noticed is being bigger didnt mean more time, it just meant more people with less time to put all over the place.  Work days over lapped watches, and you didnt get to miss work just because you came off the mids.  I am sure there were more relaxed surface reactor departments, but our head REALLY wanted to be a full bird captain, so I can not say my time was really much more available than buddies of mine who were on subs.   But you know the saying, choose your rate, choose your fate.  You had to want to be on a sub to be on a sub....  were you fast attack?  Because if you were not I may have to take the complaint with a grain of salt given that slack time Boomers got.

Yep, I was fast attack.  Both on a Permit (Thresher) class deathtrap and a first-gen 688.  Two ORSEs, a WESTPAC, an EASTPAC, rabbit ops, some secret squirrel shit, and two decommissionings.

  Then you did in fact...have to work for a living.  Had an adviser is NNPS who was fast attack.  He said it sucked. 
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: oggsmash on December 02, 2021, 05:15:13 PM
Did you want fast attack?  I never met anyone who wanted one.  Every sub guy I knew or talked to went subs to be on a boomer...and some of them got a surprise.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: 3catcircus on December 02, 2021, 08:04:50 PM
Did you want fast attack?  I never met anyone who wanted one.  Every sub guy I knew or talked to went subs to be on a boomer...and some of them got a surprise.

I wanted a boomer on the Left Coast and the only availability was East Coast.  Then an "urgent need" came for reactor operators - for a fast attack.  That was going into decomm in 6 months.  Lots of local target services ops until the PCS from SD to PH.  Decomn sucked for the first half (Pearl Harbor took over a year to decomm).  Shift work with no days off for like 4 months straight.  Days spent the entire time getting paperwork signed off so that swings could set initial conditions so that the midnight boys could do the work.  Things for better for awhile after all of the preps were done but sitting there in Maneuvering on a shutdown watch breathing in welding slag for 6 hrs wasn't fun at all.  Nothing like tasting metal knowing that you're being poisoned...  After we were able to secure watches in the plant, things got a lot better - until they started loaning us out to other boats so we could "maintain proficiency." Even though there were no 594s in Pearl and all the 637s weren't in need.  So - how do I "maintain proficiency" in an entirely different plant other than spending the time getting qualified?!?!  I lucked out (I guess) in that the boat they loaned me to was the one I got sent to after my first boat was far enough along decomm that they could release us, so I was further along in quals then I would otherwise be.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Kyle Aaron on December 02, 2021, 10:03:41 PM
3catcircus, I have to say, your comment is a really great example of why in game groups I've found the ex-military guys don't care much about skill systems. Whatever you're qualified in you won't be posted to do, and whatever needs to be done you won't be qualified in.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: thedungeondelver on December 03, 2021, 12:33:37 AM
3catcircus, I have to say, your comment is a really great example of why in game groups I've found the ex-military guys don't care much about skill systems. Whatever you're qualified in you won't be posted to do, and whatever needs to be done you won't be qualified in.

And whatever you ask for you absolutely positively will not get.  The US military will go out of their way to put you as far from that as possible.  Case in point: a friend of mine was activated when ODS kicked off.  He wanted a transfer to a field unit; the conventional wisdom of the time said that there'd be CBRN flying around, and his specialty (medical and viral pathology) would be a hot commodity in theater.

They sent him from Florida (where he lived at the time) to a hospital in Spokane to wash out test tubes and beakers for 7 months, then cashiered him in the big post-cold-war/post-ODS draw-down.

Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 03, 2021, 08:04:06 AM
I am reminded of a line from Heinlein's Glory Road:

"Major Ian Hay, back in the “War to End War,” described the structure of military organizations: Regardless of T.O., all military bureaucracies consist of a Surprise Party Department, a Practical Joke Department, and a Fairy Godmother Department. The first two process most matters as the third is very small; the Fairy Godmother Department is one elderly female GS-5 clerk usually out on sick leave."
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: 3catcircus on December 03, 2021, 08:22:04 AM
3catcircus, I have to say, your comment is a really great example of why in game groups I've found the ex-military guys don't care much about skill systems. Whatever you're qualified in you won't be posted to do, and whatever needs to be done you won't be qualified in.

It's not so much this, as it is the sheer incompetence by the mid-grade officers - those too scared to get out after their 5 year commitment and not senior enough to have experience, that made it suck.  Much less of that in the submarine community than in Big Navy.

That having been said, you do learn the art of the skate, and to wield the power of the E-4 Mafia, when you're newly onboard.  On a submarine, it's a bit different in that E-5 and E-6 really aren't more liferesque, and even the chiefs aren't terrible.  Vastly different being able to just knock on the CO's door and say "Hey, boss, I need to talk to you about..." than being on a carrier where you aren't even allowed to be in certain passageways or certain decks so the O-gangers don't have to see the peasants...  The CO on my 2nd boat would occasionally just quietly come down to the engine room at the end of the workday when inport and plop down in Maneuvering or wander into the roving watchstander - disconcerting at first until you realized he just wanted a chance to get away from his Dept Heads and find out what the real issues were and what things he could instantly fix. Because, usually, officers mangle the CO's orders. A "hey Eng, can you get E-Div to dial up the temperature a few degrees on my hot water heater?" by the time it got down to the guy tasked with the work, became "The CO's hot water heater is broken - you can't leave for the day until you fix it." Or worse "CO secured showers until further notice." The CO knew it was easier to grab one of the EMs and ask them to dial up the temp - he could do it himself, but it was E-Div's gear and going to the guy who would be doing the work directly got him hotter water in 5 minutes instead of taking all day and possibly not having hot water...  Big picture things went through the normal chain of command.  This guy knew what was the best way to get things done.

There are certain intangibles that manifest in tangible ways that make the difference between military leaders that are worth a damn vs the "politicians in military uniforms" just punching tickets.
Title: Re: Boxing Match Between a US Army Woman and a Male Marine Infantryman
Post by: 3catcircus on December 03, 2021, 08:23:20 AM
I am reminded of a line from Heinlein's Glory Road:

"Major Ian Hay, back in the “War to End War,” described the structure of military organizations: Regardless of T.O., all military bureaucracies consist of a Surprise Party Department, a Practical Joke Department, and a Fairy Godmother Department. The first two process most matters as the third is very small; the Fairy Godmother Department is one elderly female GS-5 clerk usually out on sick leave."

And she's usually the only one who gets shit done...