Women to Serve in Combat? | Can Women Serve in Combat?

Written by Kevin Webb

Can Women Serve In Combat?

The Military Leadership Diversity Commission is recommending that the Pentagon do away with a policy that bans women from serving in combat units, breathing new life into a debate that really should never have developed in the first place. Let’s take a look at the reasons for the current ban, and the reasons why some may be trying to lift the ban that keeps women from serving in direct combat roles.

First, Let Me Be Clear

Let me be clear in efforts to head off any “you hate women” ignorance. This article is not about whether women should be allowed to serve in the military in general. This is specifically about why I personally believe women (female or trans-gendered) should not be allowed to, forced into, pressured, or even given the option to serve in direct combat roles such as Infantry, Sniper, Special Forces, Recon, Ranger, SEAL, Combat Diver, or Delta units. In my opinion, this is a common sense issue… but to no surprise, the “well-educated” people that have done studies and compiled reports commissioned by the government seem to be incapable of utilizing a commodity such as common sense.

And trust me, I have seen many women, especially in the Marine Corps, that were highly capable, willing and able to serve in infantry and combat-related roles. There’s more to it than that. We’re turning our military into a social and civil testing organization, and that IS NOT the purpose of the United States Armed Forces.

Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment. [divider]

Reasons Why Women Should Not Serve In Direct Combat Roles

Strength, equality, logistics, safety and emotions are a few main areas that I would like to discuss regarding women serving in combat roles. Let’s take a look.

Equal Rights But Not Equal Standards
This entire issues is centered around “equality.” So, let’s address this. Many times when women’s rights are fought for in the name of equality, the debate remains a one-way street. They want equality in the fact that women should be allowed to serve in the same roles as males, but the physical fitness requirements for females is a much lower standard than it is for males. This gives the military three options in the name of ‘equality.’

1) We lower the standard for males

2) We raise the standard for females

3) We maintain different standards for both genders.

Since the male physical fitness requirements are virtually impossible for the average (and even above average) female Marine to score well in, that means we’ll instead be left with lowering the male’s PFT standard… which brings me back to politics watering down the strength of our military.

In the Marine Corps, a women does a flexed arm hang, while men do pull-ups. This is because women just aren’t built to do pull-ups. Women have 31 minutes to run their 3-miles, while males must do it in 28 minutes (18 minutes is perfect). The crunches standard is the same for both males and females (50 minimum). Even with the new pull-up standard that the Marine Corps is trying to implement, the standard is still unequal. Males must do 20 pull-ups to get 100 points, while females only need to do 8 pull-ups for 100 points. Where is the equality?

So, are we going to lower the standards at which we are required to perform any job in the military… especially in the Marine Corps?

Physical Aspects: Strength & Build
Infantry jobs in the military are the muscle behind the United States Armed Forces; literally and philosophically. In the Marine Corps, our infantry will travel up to 25 miles a day by foot, carrying heavy machine guns, large communications devices, and enough gear to break a donkey’s legs. I’ve personally seen the toll that these hikes can take on females during Marine Combat Training, with much less gear. Even some males struggle with this. A 5 foot female trying to hike at the same rate of march as a 6 foot male makes for completely insufficient progress. Anyone that has been through MCT can attest to that.

The fact is that the average female is not built with the same physical capabilities regarding strength and size as the average male, which is a good thing. One of the primary factors that makes me attracted to my wife (and why so many other men are attracted to their wives) is that she has a female figure and build.  This is science, not opinion. Simply put, females are just not genetically built for combat roles. This is why the current rule of male-only infantry positions exists. It is common sense that dates back to Sun Tzu, the Spartans, and even early wars fought in the Old Testament of the Bible. Men fought those wars, not women. Same goes for Special Forces type roles such as Recon, Rangers and SEAL’s. The physical rigors required for these roles are beyond what females can handle efficiently.

Logistics: Being a Female
Infantry units are often in the field for weeks at a time; many times having to build make-shift shelters along the way. Yes, female Marines are trained in combat and field ops, but they are not meant for long-term missions or extended field tasks. It’s no secret that female hygiene requires much higher maintenance than that of a male in regards to daily, weekly, and monthly hygiene maintenance. Things like using the head (bathroom), periods, and pregnancies must all be considered.

Safety: Will Pregnant Women Serve In Combat?
If this alone isn’t enough reason for why women shouldn’t serve, then I’m not sure what is. The fact is that many women do not know right away if they are pregnant. It is very possible for a female to get pregnant, and then end up in the field before she even knew about it. Then you have a whole new set of logistical issues to tackle, and possible a new set of parameters set on females that might serve in combat roles. Think about it for a minute. Think about all of the new rules, restrictions, and paperwork that will flow from this.

Emotional Aspects: The Mind To Destroy, Break & Kill If Necessary
Due to the higher levels of estrogen found in females, it is scientifically proven that women are more emotionally imbalanced than men. This could be a major factor when you consider the fact that combat roles often include violence (even in training), harsh climates, gruesome experiences and tragedies that make even the hardest of men curl up in the fetal position. Throughout the history of the world, women have been restricted from combat roles because of this, and the only countries that currently use females in combat, like Israel, do so because of the lack of male personnel for defense. America doesn’t lack male personnel volunteering for infantry. Why leads me to the question of why they think women should serve in the first place. It’s all about politics. Politics like these do not belong in the military on any level.

Efficiency: My Final Conclusion
The questions should not be “can women serve in combat?” Instead, the question should be “should women serve in combat.” There is a big difference. In the end, the overall efficiency becomes effected and affected when you start putting large groups of females into combat-related jobs. Females serving in combat roles should be reserved for emergency uses only. The factors listed above regarding both training and actual combat need to be considered.

We must also ask ourselves – is our military in need of women serving in infantry roles? The answer is no. Men are begging to get in and serve in the infantry, so what’s the point?

It’s being said that this “equal rights” agenda is to make the “workplace for fair for females.” More fair?! Since when has our great military been about making things fair? We exist to win wars and defend a nation, not go around caving to every civil rights group that thinks our military is no fair. Let’s all thank God for a moment that our early settlers did not have this same corrupted mentality during the Revolutionary War. America might have never existed.


The Liberal Agenda To Dismantle The U.S. Military

If you haven’t noticed recently, Americans are finding out that the easiest way to ruin a country, is to give the government more control, and let the government start fusing politics into every aspect of your life. If you want to speed up the destruction of a country, then start pulling the military apart, piece by piece. But don’t do it openly. Instead, have congress vote in a group like the Military Leadership Diversity Commission to fabricate garbage to sell to the American people about why women should now be allowed to serve in combat units, and train as infantry Marines and Soldiers.

I said they wouldn’t stop with repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), and they won’t stop with allowing women to serve in combat roles. Soon people with mental inefficiencies, handicaps, and no physical fitness standard will be allowed to serve, and it will be fought for all in the name of social justice and civil rights. And as you read this, you’re saying “that will never happen.” And as you read this… it is already happening.

This is just another piece on the political checker board. Females aren’t being ostracized in any substantial number. The limitations placed on them in regards to combat positions have long-standing, well thought out purposes. It has NOTHING to do with social justice, women’s rights, civil rights… or equality. It has everything to do with making decisions and regulations based on military efficiency.

Our military is THE most efficient, most-trusted sector of federal government in America. Leave it alone. Nothing else even comes close to be as efficient or as trusted as our military. The post office is a mess, social security is a joke, government-run healthcare (Obamacare) is a disaster, the tax code is a scam, welfare abuse, and congressional approval remains extremely low. How about we start with putting made-up committees into those sectors first?

Sprinkling in some social justice, empowering special interest groups, distorting civil rights, turning EVERYTHING into a political opportunity, growing government, buying “safety” at the cost of freedom, and “leveling the playing ground” so everyone can be a winner is nothing short of a preface for disaster, and the collapse of a nation that was born out of values that are in complete contrary to these games being played.

Anytime the government wants to transform something, they simply create a committee or a commission to “oversea” a particular area that they want changed. After a while, they create reports that they use as evidence for their social, political, security, civil rights, big government cause. Then they do what they can to convince America that the government should control our health care, fast food, guns, security, money, cars, utility bills, energy, music, education system, and the list literally goes on forever. When will we stop it?

I recently wrote an 8,000 word report on why the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) policy should have remained in place. Part of that report included how once DADT was repealed, the current radically liberal administration would just go after the next vertebra in our military’s structure. This time they’re doing in the name of females having “equal rights” in the military. As if women are somehow being held back because they are not allowed to serve as infantry or special forces. Women not being allowed to serve in combat units has a purpose, just like DADT had a purpose. Whether you agree with the purposes or not is another story, but both had/have legitimate reasons to remain in place.


In The Words Of An 0331 Marine Infantryman

This article regarding women serving in combat has also sparked a nice debate between a large group of Marines over at Leatherneck.com. Below is a first-hand response from an Infantry Marine regarding women or females being able to serve in combat jobs in the military. You can view the thread here.

*The below response is the original response from a registered user at Leatherneck.com. Only formatting and heading standards have been altered.
It is difficult to explain the variety of problems that would and could arise in such a situation. It’s just the culture and mentality of a line unit, a true infantry/victor unit. We’re just different from the rest, and we pride ourselves in that fact.

When I go work elsewhere on base, whether it be with CLB or in Margarita, I can’t stand working around females and look forward to getting back to Horno amongst my brothers where we don’t have to worry about the *****ing from the women or the problems they bring with them. Don’t get me wrong, they’re great to look at and take a whiff of, helps you bring your mind back to some sort of sanity, but they bring nothing but problems to a unit.

The main argument I keep hearing from their side is that this segregation hinders their advancement. What The FK?! Do they not realize that the grunts are the slowest advancing community in the entire military? The politicians and public have no business what so ever in military affairs.

The grunt community is very vulgar, in speech, actions, and thought. We have to deal with physical and mental stressors for long periods of time, continuously. We relieve stress through actions that many would consider wasteful, plainly destructive, and borderline immoral, this is how we maintain sanity in this line of work. We enjoy being away from women because this is where men act like men(far different than acting like a gentleman).

Psychological aspect of women in combat units:

No matter who you are, seeing a woman get shot down, blown the fk up, or even getting your hands bloody treating her after such, will absolutely mentally destroy a man. Blood drunk, full of rage, rampage, blood lust, whatever you wish to call it, he will kill anything he sees as a reason for her now current dire state. Either that or he’s going to freeze up full of self reflect on why he just failed as his basic job as a man to protect women from harm. Either way, a negative outcome.

The mind of women is based in emotion, for the majority. Emotion is a major factor that as soon as it creeps into a conscious mind during a firefight, is crippling. It will throw rational thought out the window, make the individual think and act more slowly, inhibit muscle memory created through training, and much more. Women are not designed to handle the mental aspect of what they will find on a battlefield, it’s nature.

Can women serve in combat? • Physical aspect:
Women cannot hike. They can’t carry the weight we carry, and what is necessary. They do not have the stamina needed to continue the fight either. One can even get in to anatomy and bone structure, biological proof that the hip design of women is not meant to carry excessive weight for any period of time beyond that of a child during pregnancy. Men are designed to do the heavy lifting as the women are designed to give birth. After the hips, the joints and back have their slight differences as well. And when women can’t carry the load, it gets distributed to the men, increasing their already heavy load and increasing the difference in weight between what the women carry compared to the men.

Can women serve in combat? • Logistical aspect:
Women require more supplies necessary to their continued existence. Men need one baby wipe a day, face/neck, arm pits, feet, balls, and we’re done. Women may be able to go a little less than a month like that, though I find that highly unlikely they will get that far, but this is the bare minimum. Now we have to deal with pads or tampons, and the cramps, fatigue, irritability, and everything else that comes with it that I should have tied in to the physical and psychological aspects as well. Women often demand separate sleeping facilities and accommodations. Is a woman really going to sht in an ammo crate over an open trench on the side of a mountain with a platoon of guys around her? Doubt it, and if she does, you’re going to have more than a handful of guys looking over for a peek even if they’ve seen this particular ax wound before, it’s a guy’s nature.

Can women serve in combat? • Basic nature aspect:
Men are here to protect and care for women, basic plain and simple. When we fail at that, it affects us, especially when it is completely avoidable. Why intentionally put our women in harms way? There is no reason. Tell those who think* they truly desire to go to combat with us that they have no idea what they are asking and wishing for. They do not want this, and if they do, give them my number because she’s my brand of crazy. Not everyone can be/have everything they want and dream about as a kid, it’s not how life works.

All men are not created equal. So why do we keep teaching and forcing this illogical fallacy upon generation after generation.

“All societies are based on rules to protect pregnant women and young children. All else is surplusage, excrescence, adornment, luxury, or folly, which can — and must — be dumped in emergency to preserve this prime function. As racial survival is the only universal morality, no other basic is possible. Attempts to formulate a “perfect society” on any foundation other than “Women and children first!” is not only witless, it is automatically genocidal. Nevertheless, starry-eyed idealists (all of them male) have tried endlessly — and no doubt will keep on trying.”- RAH as Lazarus Long


The Equal Rights Cover

Equal rights debates have always gotten on my nerves simply because the argument is ALWAYS a one-way street. The “equal rights” supporter typically only fights for the rights that they view as benefits. This is another example of a special interest group doing their best to create a problem that doesn’t exists so they can implement their solution to “fix” it.

For instance, this debate is a fight to allow women the right to serve in combat as infantry. In many cases, the military chooses your job for you. Does this mean that the military will choose and force women into infantry/combat jobs, MOS’, and fields? If that’s the case, then look out very shortly for a new special interest group fighting for women to have the right to not be forced into infantry.

You see where this is going? The same place it always goes… back to the constant circle of special interest groups and bureaucratic bull crap infiltrating a smoothly running operation that isn’t broken, and doesn’t need fixed.

About the author

Kevin Webb


  • Kevin, Thank you for your service and commitment to our nation and to our military. I would just like to say respectfully that the don’t ask, don’t tell law SHOULD have been repealled. Admiral Mike Mullen the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as well as the Vice Chair General James Cartwright USMC and Admiral Gary Roughead the Chief of Naval Operations gave very compelling testimonies on why the law should be abolished. As Admiral Mullen said, the law is contrary to the forthrightness of our military. In congress, the lawmaker who spearheaded repeal of DADT was US Representative Patrick Murphy (D) PA, the first OIF Veteran to Serve in Congress. The repeal was endorsed by the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America among others. Gays have ALWAYS served in our military and the law is now in the dustbin of history in the same graveyard as Jim Crow.

  • I Don’t think there should be LARGE numbers of women serving in Combat roles, but I have met Women that are very qualified for Combat roles, Some even more qualified a few men. They should be giving the opportunity to prove themselves. Not all women want to serve in Combat, but there are the select few that do and are very qualified. NO standards should be lowered, or requirements. Just my two cents.

    Semper Fi

  • It would unfair to assume that everyone in disagreement is pegging you as a “woman hater” or that they are uneducated, biased or in favor of the liberal agenda. Your first point make the most sense to me. Points about hygene and pregnancy are easily addressed in short term assignments…Long term birth control (3-6) months ceases menstration and 98% chance of pregnancy. Your last point I believe you would find difficult to qualify…Can you sight a study that proves Estrogen in women makes the more “emotionally unstable than men”? When was the last time you saw a female school shooter or mass murderer (like the one in Tuscon)? I think women who are unfit would not make it through the rigors of training and would be ruled out but I am with John…there are some that would prove themselves qualified and capable and they should not be held back…may be few but isn’t that the motto…the FEW and the STRONG…..

  • PS>>>It also makes sense to me that it is intrinsic in males (at least semi-healthy to healthy ones) to protect women…this makes more sense that the other arguments presented.

  • I forgot to mention that, while this debate started over “equal rights,” that equal physical fitness requirements do not exists… yet.

    Males have much higher standards when it comes to physical fitness, which means in the name of “equality” they will either have to lower male standards, or raise female standards. Since the male standards are virtually impossible for the average female Marine to execute, my guess is that they would resort to lowering the male standard.

    This brings me back to my point regarding political checker board garbage games watering down and destroying the strength of the U.S. Military.

  • I 100% agree, and I am a female that believes that women are fully capable of doing some things that men can do, and sometimes better, but infantry is not the place for a woman especially for the reasons that you listed.. If we continue to let the government impose on things that they have no business doing, we will soon have completely government controlled lives..its ridiculous…government is best which governs least.

  • …In addition, I don’t believe that God’s design for the woman was to be at the front line of combat. Emotitionally and phsycially…women are not wired like men. I agree that there are women who are willing and able to participate, but their endurance and emotional state is not like that of a man’s. Yet again…I’m opposed to the Government’s actions on this issue. What’s new.

  • Should women be allowed to serve in combat? Yes… BUT only if the standards are equal. Not on the current skewed scale that are the standards of the Marine Corps. If they start measuring everything evenly then women should be allowed to work towards the same goals. No more additional 3 minutes for the run time, flexed arm hang instead of pull ups, no completely different time/rep requirements. I served 6 years in the Marines Corps and have aruged this point the entire time. Until expectations are equal then there will never be “equality.” But unfortunetly most people want “equality” in regards to the good things but not the work/bad.

    I do enjoy your blog btw.

  • You have forgotten the most compeling reason of why women should not be serving in combat
    and that is the treatment they would receive if they should happen to become POWs. This is due to the cultural differences of how women are treated in other countries.They would be more likely to be killed and of course raped & tortured then a male POW.Also knowing this could possibly effect the actions of the male soldiers and cause infinite more problems then it is worth..

    • Ann,

      You have raised an extremely good point here. Some would say that their capture is still possible as non-infantry, but I would agree that it is more likely to happen as infantry that as logistics, admin, cook, ammo depot, etc. I think trucks drivers have a pretty high risk of capture to though.

      I will do some research and at it into the article.

      Great input.

      Semper Fi!

      Kevin Webb


    Ok, I can agree with you that girls shouldn’t be in combat, I hear you and I understand the reasons very good
    But Im a girl, and I know myself, and one thing is being a girl and another a boy, and we dont want to be like boys, WE ARE NOT EQUAL, just girls ok?
    Yeah we have bodies consider more tiny than boys, but WE CAN GO TO CAMBAT without any trouble we can be more quick in react, and we have more cold blood than boys
    we should be allowed, just like guys
    yeah personal hygene, well, its not that complicated as you put it
    we also can be tough and we can be soldiers, one of the things females have itS that we are very loyal and when we comitte to something we do it no matter what
    My most precious dream its to become a marine
    some few years ago I was 100% ignorant in the subject, and I belived there were no girls in the marines, then they told me yeah, but they never see combat and they even give me the same reasons as you did, and I was so pissed off about that, reasently I found out thet WE CAN BE IN COMBAT and now im more pissed
    remeber this, we girls can take whatever it comes, we can deal really good with all the shit better than men and we dont break
    just make a simply reasearch, go and look for all the girls that have been rape, they deal with that in great ways, others cant, but hey
    not all can be marines
    Im not saying we are better or the same than men, no we are not, and God save us if I ever think that, we are girls we are 100% different than you guys, but we can be soldiers too, remeber the vikings? their womens use to fight
    about captures
    well I know their is tourture
    I know their is rape
    Iknow its hell
    belive me I know,
    I was kidnapped for one year
    and Im here totally ok, Im gonna get married in a few months, with my hereo, he was a marine in the gulf war
    I live my life like nothing it happend
    so I know what means to be capture
    but if you have your mind in the right place the will to live wins
    I pray to God every day to be better in everything
    My dream its to be a Marine, I know it will never happend Im 23 and Im just to old for that =(
    but at least knowing we as girls can go to cambat it gives me joy and hope
    cause I know we can take it
    we are different but at least what girls and boys can share its this, we both can be proud soldiers

    Alway remebering we are different, I hate girsl pousing as boys, cause that is so wrong
    we dobnt ven have to have the same right, that thing about equals its just wrong
    You cant ask thart girls and boys have to be the same, how??
    but as I said it before, we can be soldiers, and at least we can share that, with our different right
    But let us be in combat, cause we can take it
    Im very stubborn, maybe Im wrong thinking girls should be in combat
    but I just feel it burning in my blood, I just wish I can be there and its a very intense feeling
    I know its even hard for guys to accept us in the military, what we are doing there? right?
    but I think it should be optional, if girls wanted ok, go, if not ok dont go, and please DONT BELIVE IN THE EQUAL RIGHTS BULLSHIT, IM NOT A BOY I DONT WANT THE SAME RIGHTS AS A BOY, IM A GIRL I WANT MY OWNE RIGHTS

  • Dani..no offense, but it will do no one any good to hear a lecture about “girl power”. Sure, you may be loyal. but making a statement like “one of the things females have itS that we are very loyal and when we comitte to something we do it no matter what” This is a joke. right?
    We, as in half of humanity? what a pointless post. The whole point of sending out armed warriors to accomplish a goal is to achieve that goal, and to do so it is a CO’s duty to put forth his best warriors to do so. Why send a woman, if you could send a man? may sound sexest. But just because many woman are brave enough for combat, does not make up for the fact that they are physically and mentally less built for combat. If women were sent to combat, loads of bs complaints about sexual harrasment etc would be filed and it can only bring the infantry unit down, not up. The Marine Corps Infantry isn’t broken, so don’t try and fix it.

  • I agree that most women are not built or emotional stable for infantry. I do think, though, that there is a few who are built and emotionally ready for infantry. I have met many tough, strong, and able girls.
    I think girls should be allowed to be in infantry if they have all the qualities. I don’t mean to say all girls who want to do infantry should be allowed. I mean the women who are able and pass all the man requirements should be allowed to have the chance.

  • I’ve recently entered into study of continued discrimination towards women (please, I don’t mean to accuse by this statement) and some of this seemed to parallel what I have been investigating. Just my thoughts on the matter:

    1) A sound argument. The answer is to accept dual standards, if a traing regimen can be devised to test the limits of male endurance, then it can be done for females as well.

    2) This is my greatest concern. Not because of the standards for entry but because of the what sort of treatment there might be “amongst the ranks” as it were. I would fear that fellow soldiers, who should be considered friends, might acutally be some of the most harmful enemies (psychologically and physically). However, it is not as though minority groups haven’t encountered this sort of opposition before and have chosen to pursue their ideals in the face of the odds against them (which, might I add, would be a fine trait in any soldier).

    3) The hygiene argument seems weak at best.

    4) There are certainly measures that can be taken to prevent this but of course, even in event of an unplanned pregnancy the end result would be evacuation from the front, as with wounded

    5) The biological differences, as far as cognition goes, have been proven to be trivial at best (see debate between Pinker and Spelke @ MIT). As far as physical differences, any fighter worth his salt will tell you that the strongest fighters are by no means always the victors and, if you want to consider unit endurance and mobility as well, then its merely another variable in commands chain of thought.

    Please remember that there are also many men who are not emotionally conditioned to combat as well.

  • girls should be alowed to serve combat positions some girls train just as hard as guys and to the girls that don’t i say forget them i am a girl i train really hard everyday i want to met not only the girl requierments but the boys to im not saying girls are better or even the same as guys but we can be strong they should not lower the standards for girls that is just weaking the military girls should train just as hard we are able thats all i got to say sorry for all typos

  • When I served in Iraq in 2006-07, we had women who served in harms way. One was a Staff Sgt who was a convoy commander on security duty. She knew her stuff and her gunner was a woman who did an excellent job. While this type of combat action does not compete physically with ground pounding, the women who served in our security unit had courage and kept their cool under fire. Had I had women in a an infantry unit and had to depend on them to carry heavy loads, walk all day, etc….I can’t say for sure. I know men who can’t do it, but I do feel that women can stand their ground and perform under hostile conditions…I am witness to abilities under fire. I would accept any of the half-dozen women from my old unit …any time…any place…as gun truck security personnel.

  • This article was very disturbing to read and I disagree with alot that you say. It angered me to read it to be honest. Like who do you think you are? Why don’t you just stick all the females to be housewives, thats probably where you think we all belong. And the whole DADT is about damn time that happened. You know how many gays and lesbians have been serving our damn military, our country, why should they be any different and have to hide who they are? They shouldn’t and I’m glad someone has finally stood up for that right.

    • @Sgt – Please don’t take anything in my article personal. It’s simply my opinion, and some very logical issues that have the potential of happening the down the road.

      Maybe you could address some specifics in regards to what “angered” you.

      For instance, do you at least agree that if equality is provided to women in the military, then they should also have equal requirements? Personally, that is my only questioning reason. My other points were simply statements to get people thinking.

      I have yet to hear a good argument from anyone as to why a female should be able to be in SF or MARSOC related fields. Again, if it’s about equality… then it needs to be about equality everywhere, not just where people pick and choose, right?

      I love discussing this stuff, so maybe you can present some logical thoughts or ideas to give me more insight. Just saying that it makes you angry doesn’t do much in helping me learn another perspective.



  • I agree but disagree. I dont think that females should not be able to because we are less qualified, but i do believe that a mans nature is to protect women, and having women on the battlefield getting injured would disturb and distract a man to save her risking himself and his safety more so than it would if it were an injured man, and for this reason i do not believe that females should be infantry

  • Just an FYI. I served in a branch in the military, not marine but served with more than a few, that gave me access to become a part of specialized form of spec ops. I had served with women for approximately two years off and on with no ill affects mentioned above. The women were required to be on birth control the entire time and their periods were artificially repressed for extended times. Our KIA rate was 90% and our WIA rate was 100% (added for context). I will give you some strong anecdotal evidence of why women should and can be in SF or MARSOC. Women are very effective in these conditions. Septerfuge, sapping, close in assination, sniper, faster against men in cqcb, etc. Just like most soldiers some go crazy some do not. Some die some don’t. Just like watching the guy you went through basic and advanced training with get blown apart or dead a thousand different ways you get used to watching the “girl” you were just harmlessly flirtng with get dead. If a person can get used to such things. Emotionally women do not stop to cry in the middle of an engagement any more than men do. They may do so after but not during. It is true most men are built like jeeps and women are built like italian sports cars- bad analogy but apt. However women are better at adapting and overcoming situations and panic less than men. Womanly hysteria is far overblown. Yes it takes a special mindset for this work but that is true for anyone. As far for cleanliness never an issue, there are safe medical pretreatments that work wonders just not well known. For hauling equipment robots will be taking that over for every grunt in the field soon. See you tube. And with us we were fast, light, efficient, lived off the land and fallen enemies. Never an issue. I may have missed some things but I never felt hinderd by females when the enemy “came over the hill” so to speak. Just some hard one experience when most are talking theory and what ifs.

    • @Daniel,

      Thank you for the input, and your service.

      You may be forgetting though… infantry is not always a requested MOS. Therefore, you’d have female military members being assigned infantry without requesting it (at least that’s how it would work if this REALLY were about equality). Nobody is doubting that there are capable females, I would however argue that there is a reason for the so-called “inequality.” Males and females are NOT equally built. Like it or not. That’s cold, hard facts. Therefore, there will always be jobs and positions that males will dominate in, especially in regards to physical aspects. Just as women will always dominate in certain fields of their own.

      If it’s really about equality, then females should be forced into infantry MOS fields just as some males are. Right? How do you honestly think that would go over?

      Mothers of America would be on the news every single night talking about how their daughters are being mis-treated by the U.S. military.

      Remember, the basis of the argument here is equality, not capability.


  • I feel when it comes to the physical aspect women can do what men can do, but it is a rarity and it would be even more rare if a women could do a grunts job. with that being said a female surrounded by male marines and in close proximtiy would definitly lead to foul play. and if women did pass all the test a infantry marine could then just imagine the ratio of females to males in a line company. She would be treated horribly by her comrades and would be seen as a piece of ass. In my personal experience i hace witnessed that most women throw the red flag as soon as they get chewed out. how do i know this. I signed up in 2005 as an 0311 marine and got a special assignment in Bangor, Washington standing post. We were soon joined by the Navy Military policed and both male and female did not like how us grunts ran things in the wire. and our whole operation and way of conduct was rudely interupted and we had to be “nice”. believe me the navy guys were bitching just as much as the females. When we had to correct a women we couldnt yell at them and we couldnt curse at them as well. all in the mean time the chicks are popping out babies to get out of post and sexual harrasment charges were sky rocketing. Marine corps infantry is no joke and i wouldnt want my worst enemy to have gone through want i went through, let alone a female. So im saying this, women are very well qualified to be grunts but the infantry way would be changed forever in conduct and to possibility for sexual assualt would be very high, and women wouldnt that many other women to shoot the shit with per say. and believe ladies when it just men around and you are out the picture you wouldnt believe the thing we say and do. and all that comfortableness in a line unit would be tarnished

  • I’m a dutch citizen and have been following community college classes for the militairy.
    We had groundtroops,communications,mechatronica,and constructions.
    At the beginning we had 3 girls in the groundtroops class and 4 a 5 months laternone because they found it not as fun as they had hoped or wanted it to be and chose one of the other classes to be part of (you get assigned to a class and you get practical training on your particular class ). In the Dutch military women ARE aloud to be in a combat mos.
    We have females in our infantry. We have air assault infantry and The armoured infantry. Without any exception they are serving in the armoured infantry division. Personally I am desperate to become a air assault soldier ( red beret ) when my injuries are healed. And maybe after serving here becoming a marine. Who knows … But my point is : here we females have too different standards but apart from that, in The infantry and boot camp we are all required to do the same things males do and we carry the same as the males. The infantry fem. Do winter , jungle and other training’s just like man and while it takes Time they are respected by the males for what they do as soldiers and not on there gender. Conclusion : females in combat roles ate a possibility but except for the sport they must meet the same standards and then it will not weaken the unit but make it stronger.

  • Hi,
    I’m doing an assignment on this topic and would appreciate your help.

    I was wondering where you got this information from?

    “In the Marine Corps, a women does a flexed arm hang, while men do pull-ups. This is because women just aren’t built to do pull-ups. Women have 31 minutes to run their 3-miles, while males must do it in 28 minutes (18 minutes is perfect). The crunches standard is the same for both males and females (50 minimum).”

    Also, what is the direct link to the exert on the Leatherneck website? I can’t seem to find it.

    Can you name some prominent people who do not support women in combat roles?


  • As a former Marine who served in the infantry from 2000 to 2004 and saw combat I can say that from an ancedotal perspective women should NOT serve in infantry units. While women have received much attention for operating on convoys there is a big difference between sitting on a turret and physically moving on foot and fighting with full combat gear. Sitting and shooting or fighting in a defensive position requires much less effort than moving at a fast pace several kilometers while under fire (as well as returning fire). Physically the average female marine will not have the strength to match her male counterpart. I am not saying there are not some female Marines that could physically outperform a male infantry Marine but they are rare finds. Most just do not have the muscular build to carry the amount of gear while being able to effectively fight.

    The other issue is that in infantry units (or at least the one I was in – 3/6) if a guy begins to fall out on a hump (forced march) or some other type of physical training then they usually get their a** kicked right their on the spot and some form of hazing will ensue thereafter as a form of motivation. Adding females to the mix is going is either going to dilute the training or they will get “different treatment” which will probably create conflict. I just can’t imagine the staff sergeant taking off his helmet and bashing it into a females Marines face when she starts falling back because her pack is causing muscle spasms after 10 miles into the hump.

    Lastly, after being on a naval ship for an approximate total of a full year and seeing the difference between intergrated male and female units the difference is quite amazing. Discipline is reduced, guys are getting into arguments with other guys about why the other guy is sleeping with his girl. Females are hating other females because they are hooking up with guys that they were interested in. I remember one female sailor getting sent back stateside because she got knocked up by another sailor while on the ship. Oh, and she was also married to some other guy (oops). There was higher ranking females and males sleeping with subordinates as well. Basically, it was a circus full of all kinds of drama. I guess that might be ok on a ship but in a combat unit were cohesion is so important the last thing that is needed is drama. I say all of this not to degrade women because after all it takes men as well to make this drama but when you add the phyical and culturural aspects to the mix then it makes sense to keep boys and girls seperated from serving together in infantry units, spec ops, and such.

    I also have a cousin who is serving as an officer in the Airforce and I am very proud of HER service.

  • Personally i think women that are qualified for infantry should be able to go ahead and do it. I am not saying lower the standards i am saying set equal standards for both men and women. Now i see everyone is concerned about women messing with the men in their units mind set,or slowing them down, but has anyone thought about all women units? I think they would know how to handle all the problems that arise …
    As for the physical stuff actually testosterone makes people more competitive,unpredictable, and prone to rage. Hence the side effects of steroids.
    And then there is the men must protect women crap because its the natural thing. Well then how does it work when male officers have to shoot at a woman strapped up with bombs? A man will hesitate to kill a woman or child a woman will not…Women are actually more vicious than men it is the “mother” instinct. Women are less likely to crack under stressful situations i mean then how do they make it through giving birth w/o breaking down mentally….
    But what do i know?….These are just my speculations. 😉
    Sorry for all the typos 😛

  • I want to serve in the front lines, but I don’t think women can do as well as men because we aren’t built the same way. I don’t think that standards for the men should be dropped though. I think the standards for women should be set to what women are capable of, even though it’s not as high as the standards for men. I think only the most driven women should be allowed do be in combat. And I think that in combat with all the equipment you have to carry around you wouldn’t be able to tell who is a women, so men wouldn’t need to protect the women, if they can’t even tell the difference. But that is just my opinion(:

  • I am a girl and I have wanted to serve in the marines ever since I was little like 6 and I am only 11 now but want to serve on the frontlines and I think that if a women can pass the test like men then they should be alowed to that’s just what i think

  • Women can actually be built up to the same level of fitness as a man of the same build and size. In May of 1995, a 24 week study with women spenind 90 minutes a day, five days a week building themselves up for the endurance test. They ran a two-mile wooded course wearing 75 pounds rucksacks and performed squats holding 100-pound barbell on their shoulders. 75 percent of these women passed the SAME PFT as men. So that theory of yours has been proven wrong. Also There has been men who cant hold their own to even protect their mother, whilest some women can, and vice versa. If men go crazy about every woman they see they should even be in the military to begin with. If a woman can make it to the standards then yes, she should be able to serve in ground units and do direct combat just as any man. Many to ALL of your theories have been proven wrong, so please before you go one about how you believe women should not be in the military. please do some extra research on the topic. K? Yeah.

    • Heather,

      You are wrong. Are you even in the military? Trust me… this is not a topic you can discuss without having first-hand experience or knowledge of it.

      The facts laid out in this article are not theories. 75% of women cannot score a first class PFT based on the male’s standards. Any “study” that says otherwise is propaganda.

      I’ve been in the Marine for a few years now… and have YET to see any female Marine do more than 4 pull-ups… let alone 20.

      And how about you address the fact that the current system is not broken… so why change it? Why would someone go through the effort of changing a system that is not broken by adding elements that will only create more logistical problems?


  • One reason why it is an issue to let women serve in combat is because most branches of service like to promote and give command opportunities for those who have experienced and have engaged in combat. With not allowing women the chance to ‘try out’ for these combat positions, then a HUGE glass ceiling has been established that makes it more difficult for women to get promoted at the same % rate as men.
    I do not believe that PFT standards need to be reduced for women; if the combat job requires a military member to be able to run, lift, ruck, or shoot at a certain level, then by god hold everyone to that standard. A PFT test only tests how healthy a member is for their gender, height, weight, but combat job requirements are strictly that- requirements. If a woman can meet those requirements then let them serve in combat. As for the woman ‘hygiene’ issue, well- there are many ways to curb the effects of menstral cycles; there are many women who are on something or another that prevents ‘the flow’ from flowing. As for men ‘going blood crazy’ to seeing a woman next to them getting shot, that should not be happening because we are all trained in the military to be able to react certain ways under pressures and situations. There is no reason why it couldn’t be incorporated into training to prepare our young men for such situations; just like you guys get trained to handle other situations. I’m 100% sure that bringing in women right now without any sort of integration training for military members would be disastrous, but just like they did to prepare members for the repeal of DADT (the 3-tiered integration program we should have all received), they can do that to prepare members for women in combat (just at a higher and more specialized level).

  • Like it Or not women most likely will be allowed in combat sooner or later, more likely sooner than later if you keep up with this topic you should know this and get over it. Yes I’m a female who wants to be in infantry(going EOD instead) but im also a realist. I completely understand that most women cannot meet the pt requirements. But seeing how I’m not a biased asshole, I see and believe one ultimate fact, the limits of the human body both male and female are sky high. You just have to be mentally strong and dedicated enough to train and push your body. Just think about it, the fastest human can run 27 mph. Worlds strongest man competitors run insanely long relays carrying hundreds of pounds and quite frankly make everyone else look like pussies. Worlds strongest woman can bench 500lbs and squat almost 1000lbs. My point, why are they so good? Cuz they trained their asses off. Of course in these extreme cases genetics plays a role but you get my point. I’ll be honest, 5’3″ and 100lbs isn’t the ideal frame of an infantrymen, that’s just how it is. But the average women can meet the pt requirements for infantry. I’m speaking from kinesiology standpoints and REAL research on the human body is structured and what it can handle, not bs girl power views or bs “females are inferior” views. The reason why when women are finally allowed in infantry there will be few is because only the few put in the hard work and dedication to train their body. Except for rare cases, NO HUMAN is naturally physically able to meet infantry pt standards. So how do the men do it? They train their body on their own and then are trained by the military. Again speaking from kinesiology standpoints, women are just as capable of building muscle and strength as men believe it or not. Women are born with less NATURAL strength then most men but can acquire it just as men can.

  • Women and men should have the same PT requirements when entering the military because when it comes down to it they will be performing the same tasks as any other individual and as for all the other crap, such as hygiene, drama or psychological stuff that’s all bs. It’s either your able to perform with what they give you or you can’t, your mind can handle it or you can’t, you can act as a unit and avoid the drama or you can’t… it doesn’t matter what gender you are, a soldier needs to act and perform the duties of a soldier. As for women causing psychological crap because of seeing them get shot down or w/e, I’m sure it would be the same if they had to shoot down a woman. When it comes down to it you can either handle being a soldier or you can’t… Plain and simple.

  • I am doing a paper on this subject and I go to an all girl school so of course I am pushing for girls to be able to fight in combat. HOWEVER, reading your article I’ve come to agree with bits and pieces. Yes, physically the average female cannot do the same as the average male that is just a scientific fact. But that is why there is the word AVERAGE, there are women who can meet those requirements listed above just as well as men and therefore should be allowed to fight NOT because of the equality issue but because they are capable. A couple things I didn’t agree with you is the whole emotional aspect. That is a total stereotype that women do not have the stomach, I can say the same thing about men it has nothing to do with gender whether or not you can shoot someone. Thats up to the individual. Another thing was the man’s natural instinct to protect the women. (just a note on the side..what about abusive husbands? or rapist? wheres the natural instinct there) All I am saying is that not every man is the natural saver of women. also i don’t think it is any easier to watch your friend being shot down then it is a woman. Plus with the whole hygiene thing and pregnancy. 1st don’t sleep around and you won’t get pregnant…pretty simple. 2nd if you are not a girl you really don’t get to say much about the periods because you have no idea and you never will, every woman is different with her period and there are more than one way to keep that under control. Just to leave one thing: requirements should NOT be lowered and if a woman cannot keep up then she shouldn’t be put in combat it’s really that simple all the other stuff people brought up is personal problems that can be dealt with self control.

  • Most of this information is total crap and stereotypical, if women want to be in infantry LET THEM! It seems to be working just fine for Canada; mabye America should get out of the 1940’s and give women equal opportunities in the military as men, it is insulting that people just assume that women can’t do the things that men can, like kill people and do sit-ups, its pathetic and people need to get a life and stop discriminating!

    • Abby-

      Your rant sounds ridiculous. The truth is that females can’t, as a whole, perform the same tasks as males in a large-scale basis… which is how the military operates. Quit ranting and address the issues presented here if you want people to take you seriously.

      Kevin Webb

  • Kevin Webb,

    I want to make it clear that I don’t want to sound naive, I am simply stating that some of this information, if its still accurate, needs to be reassessed to fit to society today; I was not intending to rant or bitch about the current system, I was simply stating that it needs to change; me wanting to be a marine in infantry, I feel strongly about this topic and wanted to get my two words in…I apoligize if I came off harsh…ooh rah


  • I would like to change my opinion. After doing more research and really thinking on this subject and i have changed my mind. I think women should be in the military but not on the front lines. By saying this (as a female and I do consider my self a feminist) does not mean that I think women are lesser people or incapable because there are plenty of women who are very capable. All I am saying is that because women can does that mean we should? We do not let children do certain things even though we know they can be quite capable of things but because they should not. Not to compare women to children at all but I am trying to make my point and put into perspective. I see it now as a safety issue to the women. Not because of periods or anything like that. For example women POW are treated horribly and cruelly(rape) and not saying that men aren’t are horribly tortured too. However, if we as a country have an opportunity to save women from this situation shouldn’t we? Isn’t that how we are raised to respect women? Even kids are taught not to hit girls. I am not sure if anything what I have said makes sense but I would just like to bring up an new perspective on the situation.

  • Dear Admin,
    I believe that by not allowing women to fight in combat you have trampled the entire Declaration of Independence underfoot. It states equality for all. Event the laws right now are unjust. She must have the freedom to chose whatever position that she wants. I believe that women should go through a pregnancy test before going into the armed forces. I know a girl who’s mother and father were in the twin towers and her brother died fighting in Afghanistan. If imagine the feelings of this girl if she joined the army and on arrival she was told that just because she was a women she couldn’t avenge her family.

    • Ross,

      I understand your point, but with your thinking we would also have to allow ALL military personnel the “right” to be in Special Forces. The military has standards that one could argue go against our founding documents. We have to cut our hair, measure all of our clothes to the perfect fit, maintain a certain physical fitness level, and the list goes on. If a Marine (or Soldier) fails to meet these requirements, then they are relieved of their duty. They aren’t relieved because it is Constitutional or unconstitutional to do so, they’re relived because they could not meet the required standards.

      In the civilian world it could be related to something like a pediatric dentist or child care facility, which typically has only a female staff. The “female only” staff is not unconstitutional or somehow impeding the rights outlined in the Declaration of Independence, but because of logistical and societal reasons (i.e. families feel more comfortable leaving their children with females than with males). The same concept can be applied here.

      Kevin Webb

  • On the first point. It would not need to be required that standards are lowered to settle the equality issue. With a job such as special forces and infantry the physical fitness requirement is of the utmost importance. So therefore let only the women who can pass the standards in. And trust me..it is nothing less than sexist to say that there are not plenty of women who could if given a chance. After all you gave no data…no research…no numbers or references on your stance that the standards are impossible for women. Also…the majority of men in this country can’t pass the physical fitness test for the Marine Corps…does that mean we should just get rid of those jobs?

    On the physical build and structural argument. I point above….just because not many could make it does not mean it should not be allowed.

    On the hygiene issue. you really should do some research before you make such comments. there are various female hygiene products that could sustain a woman for months on end. And before you make the argument..they are light..and easily stowed in gear. Look it up.

    The pregnancy issue is simply laughable. If we can airlift injured soldiers off the front lines…then we can do it for pregnant women. after all…you have months to do so before it becomes a real issue. So as far as danger of the pilots and drivers, well with that kind of time frame you can make arrangements.

    And your argument of psychological mind frames. what data are you working with?! Once again you offer no references to these “scientifically proven” statements. You know there are many studies which offer both sides right? I would like to see where you are getting this information from and how current the research data is.

    And your comment that throughout history that women have been restricted from combat is simply ignorant and false. you really need to research before you speak from now on. some of the best snipers in the history of the world were Russian females. FEMALES. Look it up. You can Google that information for gods sake. Not to mention the countless other nations that let women into their services and it has NOTHING to do with limited personnel.

    So….to offer my conclusion.

    you need to offer the actual statistics…the actual data….references if you are going to make claims that what you are saying are facts and proven. Basically what you are working with is what the military has fed to people and soldiers.

    oh and P.S. I have served. I was SF, and I see no real issue with women joining those ranks. Because many of the “findings” in history to prove the superiority of men were skewed.

  • Take a look at the various countries that not only allow women in their service..but also those that allow them in combat.


    also….here is something on the fact that neither men nor women are more or less unstable than the other


    oh..and a resource to show that men and women have identical muscle structure and the ability to attain equal strengths with proper training.


    I have more if it is needed.

  • This is so stupid women should have the same rights to do any job a man can do! Not all women are emotional, some are less emotioal then men.I bet some women could take killing others easy and wouldnt bother them some men it does.A woman can use the bathroom in front of a man if he has to look oh well because your gonna know what everyones body looks like anyways if you gotta live with them that long.If not they could find a place to use it and men should have the decency not to look if they here to protect us! WE dont need extra supplies ever heard of birth control so get a life we can do anything you can do and probably much better.Set our pt test higher we will succeed.Guys against women in combat really piss me off. Im a 17yr old female and i want to be a sniper and you know what i plan on it dont try and get in my way either,ill fight to get what I want.

  • I don’t mind women serving as long as standards do not drop to make it easier for women to enter the battlefield any closer than they had perviously. In addition, I hope that if needed to be that those females that do elect to go into the infantry field can kill if given the order. In other words, I would not like the female that did not follow orders and her actions indirectly caused a fellow Marine to get hurt. Before going off on me, I know that some women can do as told; in short, I did not mention the word “all” at all concerning them. What I mean when I said the second sentence was that some females tend to be soft and gentle sometimes and hesitate to make hard fast decisions. Furthermore, concerning the fact is that changing the standards so that many females are able to enter the infantry field is totally messed up in my mind. There is a reason for having the standards that we have; in part, because of the high stress and demand that are emplaced upon our grunts. I hope that when I reenlist if I can that the Marine Corps makes good decisions concerning that, because all of these changes are causing me to doubt whether I want to or not. In other words, I miss the guys that I was with back then and hope to be with them soon.

  • Military units MUST be focused on their respective missions without regard to civil or political agenda. Military service is about serving our country and not ourselves. The service is NOT supposed to be an extension of school or any other form of career preparation with the associated equal opportunities. For that, one should consider college, civil service, or an apprenticeship of some kind, wherein they can enjoy all manner of equalities.

    Gender based considerations of ANY kind are contrary to mission focus, Consequently, any form of sexual activity, regardless of orientation, is and should be discouraged and prohibited, not because of morality, but to maintain discipline.

  • You seem to only be commenting on the people who’s arguments are vulnerable, what do you have to say about the birth control issue, as there are many options available, I would know, I’m on them. Why don’t you address the topics you’ve stated without once again commenting on how women and men would need equal standard or how obvious it is that we have different body shapes.

  • As a female veteran, I do believe there is an ethical consideration. That is – how does the skill set fit in with accomplishing the mission? The question is not “I want to serve my country in the way I demand to serve my country”, instead of “how can my skills best serve the needs of the country.”

    There is nothing dishonorable about women serving so that it best effects the desired outcomes.

    Women have had to qualify with weapons for many, many years now in the event of an emergency. To make that a part of the ordinary landscape of a combat mission isn’t considering long term repercussions. It doesn’t take biology seriously. It’s also only listening to a few who should probably be bounced out because they are demanding something from the organization to support their own goals.

    Bottom line: the females demanding the military change it’s position knew what they were getting into when they joined. That they don’t understand the reasons is not the problem of the military. It’s not the military’s job to fulfill the wishes of the soldier. It’s called taking orders.

    I can just see if a male demanded that they wanted out of that mandatory 11B (or is it 11C) for a PMOS. That wouldn’t fly.

    Do the job; do the tour. Then be on your way to blaze trails. Just be careful who you run down in the process.

  • For most of my adult life I felt that women should not serve in combat roles for many of the same reasons you describe in your article. I am an older man now, and I have experienced first-hand the destructive nature of feminism as it is applied in our culture. I will simply say, too much too fast. For the most part the wellbeing of men and children has been sacrificed for women to accomplish their well intended but society killing goals. Women want equality with men, but they want to cherry-pick through the traditionally male role responsibilities, obligations and customs.

    Where are all the women when more police, firefighters, wildfire fighters, combat soldiers, and any other dangerous job that almost entirely are performed by men need filling–jobs that can be deadly serious? We have let women get away with a series of highly hypocritical contradictions in their definition of equality. I submit that until women willingly and in large numbers begin to fill the most dangerous career fields, then they should be forced into combat positions right along side men. We will still get the job done–we can reinforce with extra men.
    The point, however, is that women will begin being killed in battle in large numbers for which they will be given no special consideration over men. Men die all the time in the line of duty while performing very dangerous jobs. I want to see that death toll to be 50% female. I don’t care if it is in the military, fire and police departments, and other dangerous work.

    Hoorah! You’ve come a long way baby–just not far enough. Come live, fight, and die at our sides. I welcome you aboard.

  • Allowing women in combat positions should be considered, and is, an act of Sabotage. The “good” intended politicians and feminists behind it are, intentional or unintentionally, working for the enemy. National Security is and should be the absolute priority over career oriented individuals. Either men or women. Both, should be required to perform the same.The military is not the place for societal “experimentation”.
    And no, the system shouldn’t have to “adapt” or “accommodate”. Is the other way around. If there are some women more “capable” and mentally and physically “tougher” than some men, then, doing 20 push-ups, shouldn’t be a problem. Lowering standards doesn’t help the system, it weakens it.
    Adding to the comment about dangerous jobs women don’t do. I would also add to the list other jobs that women conveniently leave out for the men to do. Construction workers, i would like to see them dig and carry 20 and 50 lb bags of concrete on a daily basis. among many other back-breaking tasks. What about Oil Refineries? Mining?
    I am not interested in the anecdotical side of it. i know there are “some” women doing those jobs. They would be the exception that confirm the rule, so don’t bother me. I am not as tolerant and polite as Mr
    And please. This is not a debate

Leave a Comment