Quote Originally Posted by AmericanPride View Post

From the perspective of the Army, I think it would be more effective reforming itself as an institution (in regards to culture, advancement, etc)
How?


Quote Originally Posted by AmericanPride View Post
I think this is a cultural (and subsequently structural) question, not a sex or gender one. History is replete with examples of fierce and capable female warriors and/or soldiers. But women have for the better part of history been regulated to specific roles in society, usually far from any battlefield. I doubt that very much has to do with women being less capable of fighting - I think it's more true that if women are less capable of fighting than men, it's because women in general have been regulated into that position by social structure. I haven't read the literature in depth, but I'd be interested in a discussion of the role of women in the Soviet armed forces during world war II as soldiers, snipers, partisans, etc. Someone on this board may have extensive knowledge on it.
It is replete with them? Really? Name me some, excluding Joan D'Arc, which is the only one I can come up with without using the power of Google. Whoever they were, I'd argue that it probably wasn't in their job description that, before they could even start fighting, they had to wear 60%+ of their body weight in various armor/other gear.

I suppose the fact that a WNBA team would get crushed by a good high school boy's basketball team, and virtually any men's collegiate team, is a result of social structure? As Keyshawn Johnson says, "C'mon, man!"