Message from @Nathan James 123
Discord ID: 632586436268392468
🤢
If they are worthy enough
Then i don't see why not
They aren't which means the requirements are dropped. Which means lower quality personel.
Only 17% of people voted for the "yes, as long as they pass the same tests as men"
😦
They certainly shouldn't be in the army in front-line service.
I don't know why lowering the standards for women is even an option
(((Diversity)))
People in high stress scenarios tend to behave badly
Especially emotional women.
We don't need front line pregnanices either.
During WW2, the women were sent to support the army by being in other roles. Nurses are one such role
Nor front-line relationships
That's not front-line combat @Mavalance
I know
Their requirements ARE different during the training and examinations.
which is why i suggest that they be sent into other ways to support the army
as not every role is front-line
Netherlands really wants a EU army, don't they?
@Nathan James 123 how very Authoritarian of you.
Exactly as that scale says 😉
the last thing i read was that they had an 80%+ rejection rate for the physical tests
more like 90% actually
The physical tests i do believe should be the same put on those who are men. It should extremely gratuatous and difficult. Yet my thinking does lead me to believe that there is a path of strength women can take that does not have to be the same as men. It just hasn't been found yet.
The S.A.S has an extremely low entrance rate. around 7%. Not everyone should be able to get into these branches
"The S.A.S has an extremely low entrance rate. around 7%."
For men.
I wonder how they've weakened the requirements for women.
It was an example. Women shouldn't be getting in either if they don't meet the same requirements
@Mavalance Can you explain what you mean here "Yet my thinking does lead me to believe that there is a path of strength women can take that does not have to be the same as men."
Seduction of male enemy combatants @4SidedTriangle
@Nathan James 123 Actually might be a legitimate reason for MI6 but not the Army. In fact didn't the Russians train there female spies in seduction.
You're all missing the obvious reasons
Logistics
@4SidedTriangle Considering women are generally physically weaker than men, especially in upper body strength. It then does not make sense for them to be carrying the same as that of a man. The ability to shoot a gun effectively to kill the enemy is important, so why should women carry the same as men when they aren't as physicallly able?
>Weaker @Joshu
So more of them are required for the same task