DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
The plural of anecdote is not data.Real life results trumps it. I was in the military ...
The plural of anecdote is not data.Real life results trumps it. I was in the military ...
absolute truth you mean.absolute bull.
um no its people rightfully disgusted with your dishonesty and sexism.All this negative projection towards me is just avoidance of the truth.
So calling people girl because they disagree with your sexism and misogyny is not attacking people for their perceived gender?This is not attacking people based on gender: few women qualify for infantry and special ops with the bar set by men.
still a lying sexist pig. your trying to use some single shred of fact to defend your lies. all you done here is lie again and again and again.Its called the truth. Take it up with the military, i didnt write the rules. Lmao
you mean empirical science oh the horrorWtf. Where the hell do people get this endurance bullshit from? Some test in a lab?
so now we find out where you sexism and misogyny comes from, women in combat roles attacks your sense of masculinity.Real life results trumps it. I was in the military and in no way did women have more endurance. Men not only could run faster but longer distance, same with any strenuous task they tire less frequently and able to withstand greater stress level for much longer.
But you're not stating facts; you're stating opinions.
Really believing your opinions doesn't make them any more factual.
Neither, incidentally, does being in the military.
absolute truth you mean.
um no its people rightfully disgusted with your dishonesty and sexism.
So calling people girl because they disagree with your sexism and misogyny is not attacking people for their perceived gender?
still a lying sexist pig. your trying to use some single shred of fact to defend your lies. all you done here is lie again and again and again.
you mean empirical science oh the horror
so now we find out where you sexism and misogyny comes from, women in combat roles attacks your sense of masculinity.
Show us numbers.How the hell am i stating opinions? Do you need the pentagon to call you directly and give you the news?
Yep. Your opinions.My 'opinions' are corroborating military results.
So, people with common sense should just take birch's word on matters...But then again, people with no common sense would need some diagram or spreadsheet on paper to know women dont have the same physical abilities as men.
Let's have one.You just keep ignoring the facts.
People who actually have facts have no reason to name-call. They let the facts speak for themselves. If they had any.But again, you really would have to be dumb as shit ...
i'm not the one evading princess( see i can use gender denigration too) you mean keep posting factsSo basically you're just going to use that to keep evading.
i will i like facts instead of misrepresentations like you like to use.Keep on with your flow-charts and standard deviations, okay?
again you keep using to vastly different standards by combining spec ops and infantry. though you think your proving your point by repeating that. your not. all your proving is a lazy thinker. its your sexism showing. could it be that the reason women don't meet the standards is because they are intentionally but on a level higher than the base line for what the roles actually entail so ass to keep them out? you keep repeating that as your evidence of your point that women shouldn't be in combat roles but its not.Again: Few females qualify for infantry or special ops with the bar set by men.
no one is saying it is. all your showing is your high level of immaturity and poor debating skills.The military is not summer camp. Having a softball arm, excellent with a pellet gun, was a long-distance runner in high school etc is not all infantry and special ops is cracked up to be. Lmao
What do we do with all those tiny little midget-size men who still by definition of hormone belong to the "strongest" gender? Are they being excused?
There is absolutely no logic in what Birch is trying to say here. Not a single thought thought through, only trolling and provoking.
Sounds like someone who just found out he could throw a ball longer than mom and thinks therefore he and all people with penises are Superman.
Let's have one.
People who actually have facts have no reason to name-call. They let the facts speak for themselves. If they had any.
so fucking stupid.So weak.
You just keep ignoring the facts.
no why would i mind. it agrees with with me.Did the marinetimes article really make you mad?
what scientists? did you read the same article? there were no scientists involved. do you not know what a scientist is?They also had scientists confirm that women were not up to par compared to the male combat soldiers.
the only thing pissing me off is your intellectual dishonesty in claiming the article is saying something its not.Now that really pissed you off didnt it?
you also have to be stupid to think the word dumb means stupid.But again, you really would have to be dumb as shit for this to be surprising.
I am certainly willing to concede that the actual facts you posted were lost on me in the sea of insults and generally poor behavior. (Being taken seriously is one of the many reasons why it behooves you to make your points in a civilized fashion, even if you're not getting the generally constructive reaction you hope for. )First of all. Im not the only one name-calling and ive posted the facts. Did you not like what the military had to say?
again you keep using to vastly different standards by combining spec ops and infantry. though you think your proving your point by repeating that. your not. all your proving is a lazy thinker. its your sexism showing. could it be that the reason women don't meet the standards is because they are intentionally but on a level higher than the base line for what the roles actually entail so ass to keep them out? you keep repeating that as your evidence of your point that women shouldn't be in combat roles but its not.
what scientists? did you read the same article? there were no scientists involved. do you not know what a scientist is?
Why is it that every thread in which birch participates turns into a quagmire of crap. Look at the one thing common: the user birch. QED
Yes, we are comfortably sheltered from this type of backwards reasoning..unfortunately not. "Hello?"Its called the law of 'averages'. Or did you think women and men were truly the same? Hello? Besides a midget of a man would still tend to be stronger than a female one or is that still shocking?
This thread is surreal. You people must be really, really, really sheltered.