Women in Armed Forces

[GaudaNaresh]

Soft science is basically what you described and yet you choose to double down on your position so yes it only proves the point I eas making. Never mind that these fields are an unholy intersection of of several of these and so both the data and the conclusions it generates ought to be treated with sone skepticism considering that these fields are quite ideologically compromised nowadays so come with a slant. If it flies in the face of common sense and what we cna clearly observe it is the opposite of 'scientific'.

There is no such data, not anything that is of any use anyway. You can verify this with a random sample size of 1k men and women on the street at any time to see if it holds good both for stress testing and pain tolerance, even the women themselves will attest to it never mind society since it's one of those things that's bloody obvious. It must be something related to pregnancy if that is what it concluded never mind that it never would've had any equivalent data point on the mens side to compare to but ran with it anyway lol. Then again I'm sure the soyence will also say 'men can get pregnant now' and because it comes with the veneer of science we may get to a point where a like for like comparison may even be possible and the likes of you will say it is conclusive and incontrovertible.

Bipin Rawat knew his onions and could use common sense, it hadn't taken leave of him like a lot of others who are bitten by the DEI bug. Thankfully the men who matter now aren't either since it's their asses on the line. Israel feels the need to do it probably because of a lack of numbers and there too they make a clear distinction. In an ideal world it'd never happen.

Your exception doesn't do anything to disprove the rule. It certainly doesn't make any case for having women in combat roles the same way you do men. its not on us if they couldn't have men do what these women couldve done back then anyway, not that either you or I are capable of getting into the nitty gritties and granular details or the fact of this 1000 odd honor guard you seem to be clinging onto now for making your point. You can weigh this against million demonstrable and easily accessible examples of women being liabilities in battle and themselves asking to be saved and kept safe so they dont end up as war bounties. It's not that it cannot ever be done but the opportunity cost is not worth it on a social level.

Bro I am mathematician. Which means I can tell from your dataset whether your conclusions are valid or not.
That's why I am doubling down: If you got data that adds up, I don't care if your field is astrophysics or plumberology.

When you say there is no such data to a mathematician, you are simply saying you don't know of such data.

I treat Data with far more skepticism than you do, trust me, since my job used to be data analysis and math dudes Don't even finish reading thesis Paper title before they start looking for the data file.
That's why we don't do " nonsense field/propah science field" and go by reputation, we simply look at data because we can catch the 1 in 1000 paper that is valid in data as well as dismiss the 999 of them that are invalid.

I would ask a simple question to you: habe you read chanakya and seen WHY he accepts women only cadre as royal guard ?? He gave his reasons. And chanakya is definition of nationalist. So why did he see women royal guard as a net positive?? What were his reasons ?

 

[GaudaNaresh]

You are unnecessarily getting into the weeds with topics that have nothing to do with what we are discussing to make what point im not sure with superfluous historical nuggets of information that are quite irrelevant so you can shove your appeal to authority again.
If the yardstick for gynocentrism is devi/shakta worship and recognising the divine feminine then this exists throught India in some way or form. Knowledge production of a certain kind is not the calling card of only a region or two that you determined is only and only because of what you think is Tantric buddhist medieval Indian woke degenerate culture that is feminine pro Max. That's all I was highlighting. There's enough rich literature and high culture from regions that didn't follow what you think this particular region of interest produced to highlight that it's more an effect than a cause. At the very least it's over determined and owes to a wider value system that the society adopts. Even the Bengalis in the late 1800s are markedly different in their intellectual calibre compared to a century later when arguably not much of the Dharmic value system actually changed that much.

Tantric Buddhism and tantric Hinduism isn't shaktaism. Why are you talking on this when you don't even know the difference?? Shaktas were FYI the main opposition to tantric Hinduism before the kulin brahmans arrived.

My comment isn't binary on/off: it's not like women centric societies are baby level at defence or that male centric societies are literally frozen in time with 0 rate of change. It's a matter of scale and it's clear cut apparent that societies that are male centric form better top down governance and security state while societies that are women centric are grassroot level change oriented that are worse as security state. Yes there are other regions of India with intellectual output but historically they all pale into insignificance to bengal-bihar region. That is historical reality

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Child care and nurturing is not the most stressful job in the world. Don't kid yourself. And so no, they are not more adept at 'dealing with stress' than men. Saying there is data to support this again and again when there isn't and you're just hallucinating things doesn't count for anything. Women being the more emotional and neurotic sex who are more prone to meltdowns and letting their hormones get the better of them is not just basic biology but can also be backed up with data and real life observations that have a sample size basically the whole of human civilization to attest to it. There are no ifs and buts about it unless you're in denial or don't know head or tail of what you're talking about, especially with regards to being 'stress resistant'. Generally and broadly that means not succumbing to frequent emotional outbursts, especially not experiencing negative emotions more intensely than is necessary, keeping a calm head in a crisis - more than just dealing with a bawling baby -, being rational and logical along with courage, basically pre requisites if you intend to lead/govern. You're not telling me women have men beat in all this as a group unless you're on a wind up and have psyched yourself to buy into falsehoods that patently don't hold upto any scrutiny. And no, your personal anecdotes about some poker game don't matter here.
I mean they can barely effectively govern themselves and we are supposed to buy that the whole social hierarchy is handled by women as a conclusion to the fact that biologically they are supposed to raise/nurture kids? Talk about a gigantic leap of logic with basically squat-all data to back it up except/ in spiyr of shrill rhetoric.

Childcare is THE most stressful job in existence. You will realize this when you have a baby and your whole life will be made to change, including sleep schedule, due to that annoying overdemanding tiny Human.

In fact this is why women are such peace-makers and have far more patience than any other female of any other species: If it wasn't for human females capacity to tolerate stress, they'd bash in the head of the baby in Six months flat. This is also why females of other species show far less patience with their kids- they haven't evolved to care for such incompetent tiny ones like we have.

Being more prone to meltdown etc doesn't negate the fact that women score about 2x-3x higher than men in stress management tests. As I said, data is absolute on this.

Women also negotiate far better than men. This is a proven axiom in diplomacy and corporate world, this is literally why 99% of human resource bigwigs are women- their better handling of stress and hierarchies makes them far better conflict resolution people than men.
Duh.

 

[Roshan]

Bro I am mathematician. Which means I can tell from your dataset whether your conclusions are valid or not.
That's why I am doubling down: If you got data that adds up, I don't care if your field is astrophysics or plumberology.

When you say there is no such data to a mathematician, you are simply saying you don't know of such data.

I treat Data with far more skepticism than you do, trust me, since my job used to be data analysis and math dudes Don't even finish reading thesis Paper title before they start looking for the data file.
That's why we don't do " nonsense field/propah science field" and go by reputation, we simply look at data because we can catch the 1 in 1000 paper that is valid in data as well as dismiss the 999 of them that are invalid.

I would ask a simple question to you: habe you read chanakya and seen WHY he accepts women only cadre as royal guard ?? He gave his reasons. And chanakya is definition of nationalist. So why did he see women royal guard as a net positive?? What were his reasons ?

Well despite their best efforts people are prone to lapses, mistakes and Blind spots. What can I say? Data doesn't lie but your interpretations can always be way off. Not talking about you per se but in general. And this can happen despite skepticism.

If you're going to hang your hat on Chanakya then you better also accept his other gender realist views re women. We don't need to mandate honor guards only because Chanakya might've thought they served some purpose for Chandragupta Maurya.

 

[Roshan]

Tantric Buddhism and tantric Hinduism isn't shaktaism. Why are you talking on this when you don't even know the difference?? Shaktas were FYI the main opposition to tantric Hinduism before the kulin brahmans arrived.

My comment isn't binary on/off: it's not like women centric societies are baby level at defence or that male centric societies are literally frozen in time with 0 rate of change. It's a matter of scale and it's clear cut apparent that societies that are male centric form better top down governance and security state while societies that are women centric are grassroot level change oriented that are worse as security state. Yes there are other regions of India with intellectual output but historically they all pale into insignificance to bengal-bihar region. That is historical reality

Are bhai I didn't say Shaktaism is Tantric HInduism and buddhism. The discussion veered so far off course that now soon even I will forget what we were actually discussing.
I don't agree with your conclusions not when you yourself are not that clear on what is women-centric and what is male centric. Hard disagree on intellectual output, the debate was on the cause. You think it is only because of being women centric that this happens when you obviously cannot prove this and had to take a big historical detour and sidetrack the whole discussion.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Well despite their best efforts people are prone to lapses, mistakes and Blind spots. What can I say? Data doesn't lie but your interpretations can always be way off. Not talking about you per se but in general. And this can happen despite skepticism.

If you're going to hang your hat on Chanakya then you better also accept his other gender realist views re women. We don't need to mandate honor guards only because Chanakya might've thought they served some purpose for Chandragupta Maurya.

Data interpretations aren't "off" when divergence is by a few factors ( ie, 2x,3x,4x etc). It's absolute. This is as asinine as saying India has higher rape per capita than the West and Indians just report less, when rape per capita in the west is 20x more than that of India.

As for chanakya, I don't blindly follow anyone. Even chanakya got a few things wrong and I can tell you what they are. Coz I have read him and analysed him.

The reason chanakya favoured women only guard for the royal guard of the most powerful empire of its time, is because he saw the 'Brianne of tarth and renly ' scenario: women of lower station treated exceptionally well by a man of high status tend to fall in love with them and you will always protect the ones u love better than the ones you don't.
He saw the main job of royal guard to not be sword saints but those who will keep an hawkish eye out for poisoning attempts or throw themselves in line of fire to protect their high value target.
So he saw women as better fit for this role and specifically instructs emperors to seek a female royal guard, pick them from the lower classes and shower them with love that they are effectively protecting their husband, not their leige.

Whether you agree or disagree with him, this is the rationale he presented.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Are bhai I didn't say Shaktaism is Tantric HInduism and buddhism. The discussion veered so far off course that now soon even I will forget what we were actually discussing.
I don't agree with your conclusions not when you yourself are not that clear on what is women-centric and what is male centric. Hard disagree on intellectual output, the debate was on the cause. You think it is only because of being women centric that this happens when you obviously cannot prove this and had to take a big historical detour and sidetrack the whole discussion.

But I have proven this- both in modern times and historical times- those who do 'naari shakti' have a far faster rate of social change than those who do ' nari enslavement'.

Social phenomena isn't a phenomena driven science, it's all correlative conclusions. Thwrr is no magic formula or chasing one specific variable or data point like trying to find the Higgs boson.

All sociology and all of psychology (except experimental behavioural psychology) are based on correlative analysis.

I don't see how you can disagree that sum total output of culture and literature of bihar-bengal is greater than rest of India combined in history. 80% of Indian universities existed in bihar Bengal region. 90% of Indian holy men- from Buddha to mahavir to chaitanya to even guru nanak have strong bihar-bengal connection.
Bihar-bengal is literally the defining culture of indian-ness and our divergence from the Iranian cousins is fundamentally based on this difference.

 

[Roshan]

Childcare is THE most stressful job in existence. You will realize this when you have a baby and your whole life will be made to change, including sleep schedule, due to that annoying overdemanding tiny Human.

In fact this is why women are such peace-makers and have far more patience than any other female of any other species: If it wasn't for human females capacity to tolerate stress, they'd bash in the head of the baby in Six months flat. This is also why females of other species show far less patience with their kids- they haven't evolved to care for such incompetent tiny ones like we have.

Being more prone to meltdown etc doesn't negate the fact that women score about 2x-3x higher than men in stress management tests. As I said, data is absolute on this.

Women also negotiate far better than men. This is a proven axiom in diplomacy and corporate world, this is literally why 99% of human resource bigwigs are women- their better handling of stress and hierarchies makes them far better conflict resolution people than men.
Duh.

It can be if you want to ignore every other circumstance or instance where the stakes and so stress is much higher and it's a matter of life or death how you handle it which rearing a child certainly isn't. It's not like the women do it alone either for the most part, raising a kid effectively is a matter of governance and not just nurturing and it takes a whole village to do it like they say. The biological imperative to raise kids makes women more neurotic and prone to anxiety, transferring the same to the kids and the spouse too apart from their inherent insecurity due to hormones and their physical weakness which they tend to be acutely aware of unless tempered by a man and the stability he brings. You can see this in the demands women tend to make for a partner if they have the slightest self awareness. That they don't bash a kid's head in out of a sense of irritation doesn't mean they would handle the stress in some other crisis or circumstance where they are expected to take responsibility well, the 2 are vastly different scenarios and have vastly different demands.
Women historically have been responsible for a lot of conflicts instead of being the peace makers you claim them to be with their chaotic nature, the wise in any village who solved conflicts too were usually the elderly men and not women for a reason. This chaos finds some stability/healthy expression only in family life and child rearing.

If women are more prone to frequent meltdowns and emotionalism despite the toxic gynarchy we now live in both with and without PMS, then these stress tests and their results are not worth the paper they're printed on to put it simply. And then too I press X to doubt like they say. We know this anyway without any useless study to validate the obvious.

Bargaining for extra dhaniya when buying vegetables doesn't make you a better negotiator, their pettiness and narcissism often can completely gazump any delicate situation in diplomacy making the situation worse. HR like careers were made for women and lend themselves to female nature quite well which depend on very rigid processes, group conformity and shrew like scolding for failing to do so, it's not a great case to make and most orgs can function quite smoothly without them. Ask anyone who works in an org with strict DEI requirements and they will tell you what they think of their HR dept. That running joke in the Office exists for a reason with Michael and the HR guy lol.

 

[Roshan]

But I have proven this- both in modern times and historical times- those who do 'naari shakti' have a far faster rate of social change than those who do ' nari enslavement'.

Social phenomena isn't a phenomena driven science, it's all correlative conclusions. Thwrr is no magic formula or chasing one specific variable or data point like trying to find the Higgs boson.

All sociology and all of psychology (except experimental behavioural psychology) are based on correlative analysis.

I don't see how you can disagree that sum total output of culture and literature of bihar-bengal is greater than rest of India combined in history. 80% of Indian universities existed in bihar Bengal region. 90% of Indian holy men- from Buddha to mahavir to chaitanya to even guru nanak have strong bihar-bengal connection.
Bihar-bengal is literally the defining culture of indian-ness and our divergence from the Iranian cousins is fundamentally based on this difference.

Good thing no one ever did nari enslavement then anywhere in the subcontinent. We are splitting hairs here anyway since the disagreement is on where it issues from.
Social phenomena are a result of a lot of correlations some more true than others. Just because they tend to be correlated doesn't mean that any and all correlations are correct and not just coterminal. The conditions for this nari shakti came before, not after was my initial point lest i myself forget it. That was the fundamental point being made in response to your claim. Now whether this and this alone is responsible for intellectual output of this region which you think is singularly distinguished in this regard due to it's dharmic style woke women empowerment relative to the rest of the lumpen subcontinent is upto you. I don't intend to take this further if you still feel the need to belabor it.

 

[Suryavanshi]

Guys instead of doing all this word celling can you guys stay on the topic?
Topic went from women in combat to naari shokti, higgs boson and philosophy.

It's not that deep.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

It can be if you want to ignore every other circumstance or instance where the stakes and so stress is much higher and it's a matter of life or death how you handle it which rearing a child certainly isn't. It's not like the women do it alone either for the most part, raising a kid effectively is a matter of governance and not just nurturing and it takes a whole village to do it like they say. The biological imperative to raise kids makes women more neurotic and prone to anxiety, transferring the same to the kids and the spouse too apart from their inherent insecurity due to hormones and their physical weakness which they tend to be acutely aware of unless tempered by a man and the stability he brings. You can see this in the demands women tend to make for a partner if they have the slightest self awareness. That they don't bash a kid's head in out of a sense of irritation doesn't mean they would handle the stress in some other crisis or circumstance where they are expected to take responsibility well, the 2 are vastly different scenarios and have vastly different demands.
Women historically have been responsible for a lot of conflicts instead of being the peace makers you claim them to be with their chaotic nature, the wise in any village who solved conflicts too were usually the elderly men and not women for a reason. This chaos finds some stability/healthy expression only in family life and child rearing.

If women are more prone to frequent meltdowns and emotionalism despite the toxic gynarchy we now live in both with and without PMS, then these stress tests and their results are not worth the paper they're printed on to put it simply. And then too I press X to doubt like they say. We know this anyway without any useless study to validate the obvious.

Bargaining for extra dhaniya when buying vegetables doesn't make you a better negotiator, their pettiness and narcissism often can completely gazump any delicate situation in diplomacy making the situation worse. HR like careers were made for women and lend themselves to female nature quite well which depend on very rigid processes, group conformity and shrew like scolding for failing to do so, it's not a great case to make and most orgs can function quite smoothly without them. Ask anyone who works in an org with strict DEI requirements and they will tell you what they think of their HR dept. That running joke in the Office exists for a reason with Michael and the HR guy lol.

You are yet again talking out of your ass.
Men play virtually zero role in child raising in toddler stage or baby stage and all your structure and male parenting comes into play at age 7+ or so, when the most stressful job of raising a child is done.
Stress management is like any other scenario- you get better at something by routine and consistent exposure and women are routinely exposed to consistent amount of stress in child raising at this most demanding stage than men by a huge margin.

And yes, those who are exposed to more stress and handle one stressful scenario are better at handing other stressful scenarios. Because as I said, stress management is about making optimal choices in a stressed state of mind- where your cortisol levels are through the roof.
This is why women also make far better decisions when sleep deprived than men- because sleep deprivation is extremely stressful on the body and women handle stress better.
You are not going to impress a math guy with overwhelming data on topic with standard anecdotal crap, sorry.

HR process is rigid?! Lmao. Wtf. HR is the most 'play fast and loose and just resolve conflict by any means necessary' sector of corporate world. Because it's a field BASED on negotiations.
Once you work corporate you will realize this.

Your " We all know this without useless study" shows that your views aren't data driven. Mine are. Data is god to mathematicians is perhaps why I don't play fast and loose with feelings and anecdotes like you do.

 

[Roshan]

Data interpretations aren't "off" when divergence is by a few factors ( ie, 2x,3x,4x etc). It's absolute. This is as asinine as saying India has higher rape per capita than the West and Indians just report less, when rape per capita in the west is 20x more than that of India.

As for chanakya, I don't blindly follow anyone. Even chanakya got a few things wrong and I can tell you what they are. Coz I have read him and analysed him.

The reason chanakya favoured women only guard for the royal guard of the most powerful empire of its time, is because he saw the 'Brianne of tarth and renly ' scenario: women of lower station treated exceptionally well by a man of high status tend to fall in love with them and you will always protect the ones u love better than the ones you don't.
He saw the main job of royal guard to not be sword saints but those who will keep an hawkish eye out for poisoning attempts or throw themselves in line of fire to protect their high value target.
So he saw women as better fit for this role and specifically instructs emperors to seek a female royal guard, pick them from the lower classes and shower them with love that they are effectively protecting their husband, not their leige.

Whether you agree or disagree with him, this is the rationale he presented.

Instead of fixating by what degree it's off the question is around the data's merit and it's real world applicability. If it isn't, then it doesn't matter if it's 100, it's uselessness is absolute. If i know for a fact that the chicks around me will break physically even before threatens to twist their arm then it doesn't matter what some bs study says about pain tolerance. Just as an eg.

He may have been right in this context but he also had his reasons when he said women are inherently deceitful and untrustworthy or whatever else he felt needed to be done for the sake of internal security. Now you can agree with one and disagree with the other or agree with both and say they are true in certain scenarios instead of being universal. We are free to acknowledge it without wholly accepting it.

 

[Nutcracker]

Muh whamen will win these buttons, guns and drone wars. Lmao, How many bytches are beating Dawgs in trap shooting ?? Whats the gender specific winning scores for trap shooting Olympics ? How many female pro gamers winning international eSports titles ?
Nada ..

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Guys instead of doing all this word celling can you guys stay on the topic?
Topic went from women in combat to naari shokti, higgs boson and philosophy.

It's not that deep.

I think the argument is better served by what @Anants said and exploring what social gains we get from making women feel like part of the national defence solution than be the ones defended and in this we should study social effects of women in military of israel - Israel doesn't draft women coz they are underhanded- if they were underhanded, they would remove military exemption for ultra orthodox kibbutzim Jews who make up roughly 15% of Israeli male population.

I myself interact a lot with Israelis since....Well I spent a year in israel as masters exchange student and have kept friends there. All I can say, is I wish I had a mother who served in military and I would've avoided 10 years of feeling in the dark on woke virus and Vasudeva kutumbakam nonsense.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Muh whamen will win these buttons, guns and drone wars. Lmao, How many bytches are beating Dawgs in trap shooting ?? Whats the gender specific winning scores for trap shooting Olympics ? How many female pro gamers winning international eSports titles ?
Nada ..

As a gun owner, this is what I know- women do just as good if not better than men with rifles. They do a bit worse in shotgun shooting and are faaaar worse with the handgun. Dunno about assault rifles- they are banned here so we don't get to see how well someone uses it or not.

As for esports- it's like asking how many medals has India won in ice hockey. Women are like 1% of video game community so they'd have to be literally far superior to men like arachnid females to outshine us in a field we make up 99% of participants.

 

[Nutcracker]

As a gun owner, this is what I know- women do just as good if not better than men with rifles. They do a bit worse in shotgun shooting and are faaaar worse with the handgun.
As for esports- it's like asking how many medals has India won in ice hockey. Women are like 1% of video game community so they'd have to be literally far superior to men like arachnid females to outshine us in a field we make up 99% of participants.

How bout air pistol? Does that also give recoil to fragile komal kali? Compare score of that ples.

 

[Roshan]

You are yet again talking out of your ass.
Men play virtually zero role in child raising in toddler stage or baby stage and all your structure and male parenting comes into play at age 7+ or so, when the most stressful job of raising a child is done.
Stress management is like any other scenario- you get better at something by routine and consistent exposure and women are routinely exposed to consistent amount of stress in child raising at this most demanding stage than men by a huge margin.

And yes, those who are exposed to more stress and handle one stressful scenario are better at handing other stressful scenarios. Because as I said, stress management is about making optimal choices in a stressed state of mind- where your cortisol levels are through the roof.
This is why women also make far better decisions when sleep deprived than men- because sleep deprivation is extremely stressful on the body and women handle stress better.
You are not going to impress a math guy with overwhelming data on topic with standard anecdotal crap, sorry.

HR process is rigid?! Lmao. Wtf. HR is the most 'play fast and loose and just resolve conflict by any means necessary' sector of corporate world. Because it's a field BASED on negotiations.
Once you work corporate you will realize this.

Your " We all know this without useless study" shows that your views aren't data driven. Mine are. Data is god to mathematicians is perhaps why I don't play fast and loose with feelings and anecdotes like you do.

I'm not you are by making dishonest exaggerations, lol. Theres literally an extended network of relatives for the most part to help during that stage of a child's growth and this lack of sleep affects the man too btw who has to go out and still earn his wage.
Women are exposed to child raising stress which is far from the most stressful job out there. You don't have any data to prove this though simple rudimentary reasoning can bust this quite easily. The other more stressful jobs which one is subjected to must make them even more stress resistant, not to mention having the biological neurochemical tools to better deal with it which was the original point. Being able to deal with one does NOT mean you are equipped to deal with every stressful situation out there, to say so is dishonest bull and is based on a lot of fanciful assumptions.

HR is literally a bunch of elaborate processes that have been dumbed down for adults like school kids to follow with myriad guidelines on what to do in case an incident happens at the workpalce. That's literally all there is to it. There's a whole history around it and how HR depts was where wokeism was incubated in USA.

My data is based on real world observations which even a simpleton can grasp, your mathematical data is just mostly befuddling ideological slop which you like to think is cold hard data because your Msc degree didn't teach you any discernment other than going 'muh data' even if the data itself doesn't attest to what you think it says and by itself is supposed to clinch every argument out there. not the way it works. You throw in anecdotes, feels and exaggerations of your own while you're at it and talk like someone who never touches grass but can only project like women do when they lose arguments and accuse the one pointing it out to you of it.
If data was god to you and you actually knew how to interpret it you wouldn't be masturbating to all these 'studies' which don't say what you think they do. It circles back to my original point about modern high priests and useless degrees with midwits who don't know how to use it so are forced to rely on these cheap gotchas.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

How bout air pistol? Does that also give recoil to fragile komal kali? Compare score of that ples.

Air pistol falls under handgun. Nothing gives more recoil than a bolt action rifle for the same calibre bullet, unless you have a silencer on. Which I dunno how it impacts everything because again, here, silencers are illegal commodity and you get your guns confiscated if you even put in a digital order for a silencer.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

I'm not you are by making dishonest exaggerations, lol. Theres literally an extended network of relatives for the most part to help during that stage of a child's growth and this lack of sleep affects the man too btw who has to go out and still earn his wage.
Women are exposed to child raising stress which is far from the most stressful job out there. You don't have any data to prove this though simple rudimentary reasoning can bust this quite easily. The other more stressful jobs which one is subjected to must make them even more stress resistant, not to mention having the biological neurochemical tools to better deal with it which was the original point. Being able to deal with one does NOT mean you are equipped to deal with every stressful situation out there, to say so is dishonest bull and is based on a lot of fanciful assumptions.

My data is based on real world observations which even a simpleton can grasp, your mathematical data is just mostly befuddling ideological slop which you like to think is cold hard data because your Msc degree didn't teach you any discernment other than going 'muh data' even if the data itself doesn't attest to what you think it says and by itself is supposed to clinch every argument out there. not the way it works. You throw in anecdotes, feels and exaggerations of your own while you're at it and talk like someone who never touches grass but can only project like women do when they lose arguments and accuse the one pointing it out to you of it.
If data was god to you and you actually knew how to interpret it you wouldn't be masturbating to all these 'studies' which don't say what you think they do. It circles back to my original point about modern high priests and useless degrees with midwits who don't know how to use it so are forced to rely on these cheap gotchas.

Real world observations isn't data. That's anecdote.
This conversation has zero meaning if you can't even tell data from anecdote.
You don't have data. You have anecdote. Which any science grad pisses on.
And ofcourse you think you know better than a math masters on how valid a data set is.

And yes being better at handling stress means you are better at handling stress. Regardless of what the stressful scenario is, because handling stress better is dependent on making more optimal choices under high cortisol levels. Duh.
The one who tolerates pain better does so regardless of whether it's pain from a hammer or a knife. As I said, your position is simply driven by your feelings.
I use anecdote to make data relatable. If you wish I can instead talk of median value and p-values.
Whereas you use anecdote as replacement of data. Which any science Grad will laugh at as nonsense.

And lastly, apni aukaad me raho. If you wish to challenge me on my understanding of data, i Will make a thread on it and challenge you to data analysis. Are you game for that or are you going to peddle your western trash mindset of challenging experts on topic you are a fool in ? Your call.

 

[Roshan]

Guys instead of doing all this word celling can you guys stay on the topic?
Topic went from women in combat to naari shokti, higgs boson and philosophy.

It's not that deep.

It started with some chomu troll in the Sindoor thread saying Indian men are weak and so women should be included. These posts were moved from there to here.