3 ms·
Yes. Seems likely. Or, the editor wanted this length and they stopped in medias res. The later period however, might be the most informative for the current si
by ggm 2y ago
Yes. Seems likely. Or, the editor wanted this length and they stopped in medias res.
The later period however, might be the most informative for the current situation. The civil rights struggle and how the military reflected it (or not)
Putting women into combat roles remains divisive. I haven't served, so I downgrade my own views but I think almost all of the objections are parochial, and wrong. Service people or veterans might disagree.
- hagbard_c 2y ago> I think almost all of the objections are parochial, and wrong. What is the objective of a military, and specifically of combat units? Is it to accurately reflect the sexual and racial makeup of society or is it to defeat the enemy? Women can play a role in a military but a 55 kg woman will have a hard time moving her 95 kg wounded comrade in arms out of harm's way. She will struggle to march 30 km with a 12 kg SAW on her shoulder while carrying her personal equipment. Men are, on average, stronger and faster. It is highly likely that whatever opponents the military faces are male. These are not 'parochial, and wrong' objections but simple statements of fact. While a female sniper can be just as effective as a male sniper it is highly unlikely for a female marine or commando to be as effective as a male marine or commando since the former does not depend on physical strength or speed while the latter does.
- gostsamo 2y agoThis is a personal blog with guests, so the editorial policy is not all that strict, I think.