Women in Armed Forces

[eastern_bhartiya]

This thread is for strategic discussions, analysis theories and speculation about military affairs and operational stuff, keep your retarded men vs women stuff out of it. Since the 7th may there has been a rise of twitter/x brainrot audience flocking to serious discussion theads and polluting them with same daily twitter front page tirades.

 

[E-195]

Brother u agree male physical aspect. But this post modern war fare is not about physicality .
Imagine drones fifth and sixt gen AI jets, automatic weapons. And sniper soldiers.

And during a mission if a woman is captured or killed it’s no different than a man.

with technology women can be part of the army, women have always been part of any army, but women are not men, different body and different intelligence, war we like it or not is a man`s thing since very likely women try to avoid fights.

sending a drone is not sending a woman but losing a woman in combat is losing a 9 months pregnancy, and 1-3 years nursing, men can always procreate, we are physically stronger and prone more to violence by the hormones we have.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Both G2, US and China are desperate to stop India's growth, both economy and particularly military including exports.

There will be several attempts to destabilize us. Individual US businesses might not want distribution, such as Apple, but the security/deep state sees us as too much of a potential threat to not sabotage.

China's goal should be self explanatory.

It isn't as clear cut. Usa needs us to face off China, China needs to not push us totally into us pocket to stand a chance facing off against usa. This isn't an arch-enemy dynamic like we have between China and Taiwan or India and Pakistan, this is frenemies interaction between sides that fear each other but also need each other to a certain degree.

Women should not be in the military. We are literally paying for lower quality soldiers. It also provides a huge PR boost for the enemy. Imagine the humiliation if the news of female piolet getting captured was true.

There is no rationale to not have women in military positions that don't require brute strength. Ie, not okay for infantry, just fine for pilot or navy commander.

"discipline, leadership, and resilience" non of which women excel in. On average men perform better under stress. Women make most of their decisions based on emotions.

False on last part. Women are far better under stress than men. Can cite u reams and reams of data on this and I ain't a woke or a liberal but I am MSc in math, so challenging me on data is not gonna go well on this.

 

[Roshan]

False on last part. Women are far better under stress than men. Can cite u reams and reams of data on this and I ain't a woke or a liberal but I am MSc in math, so challenging me on data is not gonna go well on this.

Well neither your 'MSc in Maths', a needless and useless appeal to authority in this context nor the vast amounts of non-existent ideologically compromised 'data' to support this conclusion are worth anything in contradicting millenia of lived experience and empirical data points. There are reams and reams of data to prove that they're the more emotinal and neurotic gender too btw, but data is only as useful as the observations it can support so that is neither here nor there.

There is no rationale to not have women in military positions that don't require brute strength. Ie, not okay for infantry, just fine for pilot or navy commander.

The only rationale to have them in ornamental roles is to signal to the world. There are other criteria than just brute strength at play here.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Well neither your 'MSc in Maths', a needless and useless appeal to authority in this context nor the vast amounts of non-existent ideologically compromised 'data' to support this conclusion are worth anything in contradicting millenia of lived experience and empirical data points. There are reams and reams of data to prove that they're the more emotinal and neurotic gender too btw, but data is only as useful as the observations it can support so that is neither here nor there.

It is precisely my MSc in math that qualifies me as expert on data validity. On this topic, data is incontrovertible: women don't just handle stress better than men, they do it a few standard deviation better. It means the gap between average woman's ability to absorb stress to an average man is the same gap between usain bolt and a high school champ in 100m race.

Women also have significantly higher pain tolerance than men, FYI. Despite them having greater pain sensitivity than men. This too is evolutionary consistent with their superior stress management and data is incontrovertible.

There is no " historical lived experience and empirical data points from history" re: stress management between the sexes. You just pulled that outta your arse. I told you, dont fuck around with data with a math expert. Lol.

The only rationale to have them in ornamental roles is to signal to the world. There are other criteria than just brute strength at play here.

and on those criterias, data is incontrovetible: except for strength and stamina, men have no real advantage over women in combat scenarios.

 

[Sanglamorre]

It isn't as clear cut. Usa needs us to face off China, China needs to not push us totally into us pocket to stand a chance facing off against usa. This isn't an arch-enemy dynamic like we have between China and Taiwan or India and Pakistan, this is frenemies interaction between sides that fear each other but also need each other to a certain degree.

There is no rationale to not have women in military positions that don't require brute strength. Ie, not okay for infantry, just fine for pilot or navy commander.

False on last part. Women are far better under stress than men. Can cite u reams and reams of data on this and I ain't a woke or a liberal but I am MSc in math, so challenging me on data is not gonna go well on this.

There's a difference between other armies and Pakistan though. A Capt. Saurabh Kalia like incident with a downed female pilot would have very intense and frankly uncontainable spiraling of incidents.

I'd say any role that doesn't involve frontline is fine.

 

[Roshan]

It is precisely my MSc in math that qualifies me as expert on data validity. On this topic, data is incontrovertible: women don't just handle stress better than men, they do it a few standard deviation better. It means the gap between average woman's ability to absorb stress to an average man is the same gap between usain bolt and a high school champ in 100m race.

Women also have significantly higher pain tolerance than men, FYI. Despite them having greater pain sensitivity than men. This too is evolutionary consistent with their superior stress management and data is incontrovertible.

There is no " historical lived experience and empirical data points from history" re: stress management between the sexes. You just pulled that outta your arse. I told you, dont fuck around with data with a math expert. Lol.

and on those criterias, data is incontrovetible: except for strength and stamina, men have no real advantage over women in combat scenarios.

No Msc in Math doesn't mean you are anywhere near qualified enough to comment on this issue. In this matter it is not even related to your subject lol. It shows why the edu system is a grand failure though when midwits try to use their degrees and credentials like high priests used to do in feudal church controlled Europe regardless of whether they actually have any discernment or ability to think.

And nope, there is no data, not even hopelessly ideologically compromised with a core of feminist power fantasies that in anyway proves 'women handle stress better than men let alone a few standard deviations better' it's just something you pulled out of your ass like the Msc degree you tried leading with. The truth is that the usain Bolt and high school champ comparison you made is much closer in the opposite direction. Both data and cumulative human anecodtal experience proves that, all else is just delusional dishonest hogwash and rhetorical gymnastics, the kind former card carrying CPIM members will be wont to peddle.

'pain tolerance' is not just the ability to give birth btw, there are more painful experiences a human might have to undergo more so especially on the battlefront and women are proven to be far less resilient in this regard compared to men. Most women themselves will attest to this lol. No evolutionary data is consistent with some mythical 'superiority in terms of being able to handle stress' let alone it being anywhere near incontrovertible unless the meaning of stress itself has changed and been revised unrecognizably.

All that I say is not even controversial and wasn't even seen as something to 'study' until quite recently when radfem ideology became a mainstream religion so the most reliable data point that trumps everything else - which itself is far from conclusive or reliable apart from being paltry - is lived experience and conventional wisdom.

No its far from incontrovertible and military itself admits it has to lower standards for female applicants. It is useful only for virtue signalling and improving ESG scores tho so token recruitment can take place. Luckily the men who matter recognise this and won't field them unless we are up shit creek without a paddle.

 

[Decahex]

There's a difference between other armies and Pakistan though. A Capt. Saurabh Kalia like incident with a downed female pilot would have very intense and frankly uncontainable spiraling of incidents.

I'd say any role that doesn't involve frontline is fine.

A repeat of Captain Saurabh Kalia with a female soldier is one hell of a way to unite the country and put aside all differences though. It would invite at least as much outrage as the Pahalgam massacre if not more. Even the normally liberal aman ki asha retards would immediately shut the fuck up.

As much of a potential as this can provide for India to shit fury all over Porkifags, we shouldn't be using the lady officers/jawans as a bait. I'm personally fine if they serve along the Indo-Pak IB but not LoC. There won't be terrorists to muddy waters and deflect blame. If ladies are to be deployed at LoC, they better be from the Artillery or Armored regiments.

 

[Decahex]

God's truth is this. The opportunity we got, lost forever. Be it 47, 65, 71, 99 or current scenario, it proves that we can not negotiate. Moreover, we can not counter the propaganda propagated against us. We decimated almost a dozen high value target deep in Pakistan, but in International arena, this will be reflected as a Truce. No win for India.

The propaganda against India was destroyed the moment even NYT and Al Jazeera had to admit that Porkistan got bombed in broad daylight while there was 0 evidence they could find through satellite imagery of Porki claims. Please stop this narrative war bullshit man. No amount of propaganda or memes can save anyone from cold hard evidence which we presented in spades and ones that could be independently verified. An often chest thumping and super proud nuclear power got it's air bases bombed with 0 proportional retaliation to show for it. The international arena is auto-fellatioing itself with the westerners taking credit for apparently brokering peace. Stop seeking their validation.

 

[Sanglamorre]

A repeat of Captain Saurabh Kalia with a female soldier is one hell of a way to unite the country and put aside all differences though. It would invite at least as much outrage as the Pahalgam massacre if not more. Even the normally liberal aman ki asha retards would immediately shut the fuck up.

As much of a potential as this can provide for India to shit fury all over Porkifags, we shouldn't be using the lady officers/jawans as a bait. I'm personally fine if they serve along the Indo-Pak IB but not LoC. There won't be terrorists to muddy waters and deflect blame. If ladies are to be deployed at LoC, they better be from the Artillery or Armored regiments.

It would be very tricky though. The WC now GC Abhinandan's scenario has put me in deep distrust over the public sanity regarding things like these.

While I do think you're correct about the public uniting, I think it would also force the govt and armed forces hand in taking decisions not at a time of their choosing. Public rage would be incandescent, and would demand reaction the very next hour.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

No Msc in Math doesn't mean you are anywhere near qualified enough to comment on this issue. In this matter it is not even related to your subject lol. It shows why the edu system is a grand failure though when midwits try to use their degrees and credentials like high priests used to do in feudal church controlled Europe regardless of whether they actually have any discernment or ability to think.

And nope, there is no data, not even hopelessly ideologically compromised with a core of feminist power fantasies that in anyway proves 'women handle stress better than men let alone a few standard deviations better' it's just something you pulled out of your ass like the Msc degree you tried leading with. The truth is that the usain Bolt and high school champ comparison you made is much closer in the opposite direction. Both data and cumulative human anecodtal experience proves that, all else is just delusional dishonest hogwash and rhetorical gymnastics, the kind former card carrying CPIM members will be wont to peddle.

'pain tolerance' is not just the ability to give birth btw, there are more painful experiences a human might have to undergo more so especially on the battlefront and women are proven to be far less resilient in this regard compared to men. Most women themselves will attest to this lol. No evolutionary data is consistent with some mythical 'superiority in terms of being able to handle stress' let alone it being anywhere near incontrovertible unless the meaning of stress itself has changed and been revised unrecognizably.

All that I say is not even controversial and wasn't even seen as something to 'study' until quite recently when radfem ideology became a mainstream religion so the most reliable data point that trumps everything else - which itself is far from conclusive or reliable apart from being paltry - is lived experience and conventional wisdom.

No its far from incontrovertible and military itself admits it has to lower standards for female applicants. It is useful only for virtue signalling and improving ESG scores tho so token recruitment can take place. Luckily the men who matter recognise this and won't field them unless we are up shit creek without a paddle.

MSc in math means I am demi-god in judging data validity. As I said, data on female superior ability to handle stress than males isn't just incontrovertible, the gap is literally an ocean wide. Your ideological tilt is showing since you are neither qualified in data analysis nor are you actually aware of the data on the topic.
This topic is well known in evolutionary biology and the biological reason for far superior female ability to absorb stress is rather obvious too- it's a simple case of convergence, where theory predicted decades before is confirmed decades later on data. You are a noob here, so I will give you one get our or jail card for trying to pass off your ignorant chauvinism as my western centric thinking, kiddo.

As far as pain tolerance goes, prima facie that statement in biology is about physical pain tolerance. Females not only have significantly greater pain tolerance, they also have significantly greater pain sensitivity.

Ps: radfem ideology isn't mainstream anywhere. Libfem is the mainstream feminist ideology and radfem are shunned for being anti trans. Get your basics right kiddo.

Pps: military admits to only lowering physical standards for women. No other standards are lowered, so nice try to spin a specific comment of mine into your woman hatred dehatiness.

Ppps: The honour guard of Magadh empire for over 100 years were an all women group. And those 100 years were the 100 years of chandragupta to samprati- the peak of Magadh empire. So much for your historicity, noob.

 

[Vinash]

A state U-15 boys team defeats the US female national team with ease.

FC Dallas under-15 boys squad beat the U.S. Women's National Team in a scrimmage

The match was in preparation for Thursday's USWNT friendly versus Russia

www.cbssports.com

The same happened in Australia too where a state's U-16 boys team beat the female adult national team 7-0.

Australian women's national team lose 7-0 to team of 15-year-old boys

Australia’s women’s football team are ranked the fifth best side in world football. So how did they lose 7-0 to a collection of 15-year-old boys?

www.standard.co.uk

Adult women have less core strength than 16-17 year old boys.

Women haven't evolved to be in battle. Any poster who says women can do as well as men on the battlefield is ignoring thousands of years of human evolution.

 

[Vinash]

MSc in math means I am demi-god in judging data validity. As I said, data on female superior ability to handle stress than males isn't just incontrovertible, the gap is literally an ocean wide. Your ideological tilt is showing since you are neither qualified in data analysis nor are you actually aware of the data on the topic.
This topic is well known in evolutionary biology and the biological reason for far superior female ability to absorb stress is rather obvious too- it's a simple case of convergence, where theory predicted decades before is confirmed decades later on data. You are a noob here, so I will give you one get our or jail card for trying to pass off your ignorant chauvinism as my western centric thinking, kiddo.

As far as pain tolerance goes, prima facie that statement in biology is about physical pain tolerance. Females not only have significantly greater pain tolerance, they also have significantly greater pain sensitivity.

Ps: radfem ideology isn't mainstream anywhere. Libfem is the mainstream feminist ideology and radfem are shunned for being anti trans. Get your basics right kiddo.

Pps: military admits to only lowering physical standards for women. No other standards are lowered, so nice try to spin a specific comment of mine into your woman hatred dehatiness.

Ppps: The honour guard of Magadh empire for over 100 years were an all women group. And those 100 years were the 100 years of chandragupta to samprati- the peak of Magadh empire. So much for your historicity, noob.

The stress tolerance you are talking about isn't related to military activity.

Yes, women have higher stress tolerance ability than men when it comes to domestic stuff and raising babies. Women are better multi-taskers too.

I lose my mind if I spend more than 15 mins with a toddler. My cousin sisters can spend entire day with the same toddler. Technically, that means they have higher ability to tolerate stress than me.

Doesn't mean they'll perform better on the battlefield compared to me.

 

[Vinash]

When humans were still tribals, were the women folk engaging in battles? or were they taken as spoils of war after the men were defeated?

Evolution has the answer: Women never fought in battles. Women typically start screaming and crying at the slightest hint of violence. If two men are fighting on the street, you'll see women screeching like banshees. STAAAAAAAAAAAAP STAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP

Any man who thinks women are evolved to be on the battlefield is a complete idiot who puts his liberal feminist ideology before commonsense.

An 18 year old man can beat an adult woman to death with his bare hands.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

There's a difference between other armies and Pakistan though. A Capt. Saurabh Kalia like incident with a downed female pilot would have very intense and frankly uncontainable spiraling of incidents.

I'd say any role that doesn't involve frontline is fine.

Them raping or mutilating a serving line woman officer is like 100x worse optics to them than us, in the Western perception scale. That's the kind of News even CNN will cover on front page, coz muh feminism and patriarchy are bigger priority for news media than geopolitical interests.

Sure, it's never simple and there are overlapping interests.

However, the US never really supported us against China. They won't unless we surrender and agree to become a vassal.

China doesn't want a competition in the region.

It's a balancing act but from our perspective, we don't want to be close to either G2 and develop our path as much as possible.

Yes, as I said, neither side wants us to succeed, neither side wants to push us hard enough to fall into eithers lap or pull a total wildcard move like making a long term military alliance with russia, Ala 1971.
This is the calculus at play and it'd actually advantage to us, if we recognize the situation and have a clear foreign policy plan on it.

 

[eastern_bhartiya]

When humans were still tribals, were the women folk engaging in battles? or were they taken as spoils of war after the men were defeated?

Evolution has the answer: Women never fought in battles. Women typically start screaming and crying at the slightest hint of violence. If two men are fighting on the street, you'll see women screeching like banshees. STAAAAAAAAAAAAP STAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP

Any man who thinks women are evolved to be on the battlefield is a complete idiot who puts his liberal feminist ideology before commonsense.

An 18 year old man can beat an adult woman to death with his bare hands.

there is nothing wrong with women manning AD posts, being posted in IACCS, or even being heli pilots(non combat), but yes women in combat roles, especially when our enemies are bunch of subhuman islamists is a bad idea, USSR had female troops because their enemy were NATO, heck even nazis had policy of just shooting female POWs, but I can't even imagine what these goatfuckers will do.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

When humans were still tribals, were the women folk engaging in battles? or were they taken as spoils of war after the men were defeated?

Evolution has the answer: Women never fought in battles. Women typically start screaming and crying at the slightest hint of violence. If two men are fighting on the street, you'll see women screeching like banshees. STAAAAAAAAAAAAP STAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP

Any man who thinks women are evolved to be on the battlefield is a complete idiot who puts his liberal feminist ideology before commonsense.

An 18 year old man can beat an adult woman to death with his bare hands.

This is inapplocable since guns were invented. Because prior to it, male speed, strength and stamina dominance made it impossible for women to compete on the battlefield.
What I find is funny, is the only guy who actually is competent with guns and weapons here and has seen plenty of women on the field ( not shooting range but as hunters) is the one everyone is trying to contradict on women's ability to contribute in modern age on the battlefield.

I didn't say women can compete on men on the battlefield. I said they can compete with us just fine inside a cockpit or inside a battleship. I also said what the data says- women have far greater superiority than men in stress tolerance and pain management. Comes with evolution of raising the most incompetent and demanding baby in entire animal kingdom AND managing the most intricate social hierarchies in the entire animal kingdom.
This is why women are far higher than men in EQ and can judge people far better than men can.

 

[Vinash]

But modern warfare is mostly fought with missiles and drones

I know dozens of men in my life who are obsessed with drones, military stuff etc

Exactly 0 women in my family, extended family, friends circles care about it. Now, in a population like ours, I'm sure we can find some women who like such stuff but it's an outlier.

I mean if your goal is to virtue signal about equality go ahead. I prefer competency.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

The stress tolerance you are talking about isn't related to military activity.

Yes, women have higher stress tolerance ability than men when it comes to domestic stuff and raising babies. Women are better multi-taskers too.

I lose my mind if I spend more than 15 mins with a toddler. My cousin sisters can spend entire day with the same toddler. Technically, that means they have higher ability to tolerate stress than me.

Doesn't mean they'll perform better on the battlefield compared to me.

Stress is stress. Handling stress is making correct decisions when you are at elevated levels of anxiety, tiredness, irritation, etc.

That is the scientific parameter for stress- what causes it is largely irrelevant to how one acts under said stress.

Women have faaar better and proven ability than men in making correct choices and optimal decisions under heightened cortisol levels, sleep deprivation, anxiety, etc.

That is what it means, in scientifically tested terms. And in this parameter, we men are literal house cats and women are tigers. The data on that is incontrovertible.

 

[Vinash]

This is inapplocable since guns were invented. Because prior to it, male speed, strength and stamina dominance made it impossible for women to compete on the battlefield.
What I find is funny, is the only guy who actually is competent with guns and weapons here and has seen plenty of women on the field ( not shooting range but as hunters) is the one everyone is trying to contradict on women's ability to contribute in modern age on the battlefield.

I didn't say women can compete on men on the battlefield. I said they can compete with us just fine inside a cockpit or inside a battleship. I also said what the data says- women have far greater superiority than men in stress tolerance and pain management. Comes with evolution of raising the most incompetent and demanding baby in entire animal kingdom AND managing the most intricate social hierarchies in the entire animal kingdom.
This is why women are far higher than men in EQ and can judge people far better than men can.

Women are better with people, men are better with things.

I agree. Which is why stuff that's related to things i.e military equipment should be left to men.