Motherhood is the basis of all civilization. Movements determined to dismantle society inevitably target women's femininity, disrupting natural male-female power relations and leaving an androgynous, gender-ambiguous culture that struggles to reproduce. It turns out. In other words, the culture we primarily see today. This is why the far left is so obsessed with promoting a “women in combat” agenda, and why Trump's nomination of Pete Hegseth for secretary of defense infuriated and confused the left. is explained.
The media's predictable criticism of Mr. Hegseth's qualifications, character, and ideology began the moment Mr. Trump selected him to lead the Pentagon. But the most surprising aspect of the backlash was the outrage directed at one of Hegseth's less famous beliefs. NBC News It ran a dramatic headline: “Pete Hegseth's comments about women in combat are drawing disgust and dissent.”
As society debates protecting women's spaces from male intrusion, it may be time to re-evaluate women's intrusion into traditionally male spaces.
The “disgusting” comment came during a podcast Hegseth appeared on last week. During this episode, he clearly made what the left considers the most scandalous claim imaginable. Hegseth said the military “should not have women in combat roles,” arguing that “men are more qualified for such positions.”
Pass the stinky salts.
Of all the “controversial” opinions Hegseth has expressed in his years of cable news appearances, it was his opposition to putting women into the most demanding and physically punishing roles that drew the most outrage. That's surprising. Dozens of blockbusters and angry responses from Democrats have focused on this position.
follow the science
In today's post-truth society, it may come as a shock to some to hear that women's bodies are not designed to withstand the physical demands of jobs that permanently scar even the strongest men. do not have. Discussions about the physical demands of military roles often focus on upper body strength, but the anatomical differences between men and women go far beyond muscle mass and reproductive organs.
Women have wider femur angles that align the leg from the knee to the ankle, making them more vulnerable to stress and injury. This structural difference puts more pressure on women's knees. High rate of ACL tears Comparison of female athletes with male athletes. Additionally, not only is the ACL smaller in women, but the intercondylar notch in the femur through which the ACL passes is also narrower, making the ACL even larger. ease of injury.
Why do national policies automatically treat men and women equally in combat roles? Popular culture strives to prove its point and criticizes those who oppose the “right to serve.” We may praise “Girlboss,” but the reality hasn't changed. Women are at increased risk of injury, which can reduce performance and put combat troops at unnecessary risk. This is established science, not speculation.
In 2015, as the Obama administration pressured military branches to open all combat roles to women, the Marine Corps under the command of Gen. Joseph Dunford conducted a large-scale study to assess the impact of mixed-gender infantry units. conducted research. The multi-month study, which cost $36 million, compared the performance of all-male units to mixed-gender units. Unsurprising to those outside elitist political circles, the study found that mixed-gender forces are not just a net liability, but a significant problem. absolute responsibility.
According to one study, here are some important findings. summary Report:
- All-male teams outperformed mixed-gender teams on 69% of tasks and outperformed on 94 out of 134 tasks.
- In all tactical movements, all-male teams moved faster than mixed-gender teams, especially when carrying heavy weapons used by the crew. This trend was consistent across all specialties of military operations.
- The all-male team, which included male Marines trained as infantry and those who participated in the test from non-infantry MOS roles, demonstrated superior accuracy across all weapon systems.
- Male teams outperformed integrated teams in routine combat missions. For example, male Marines could easily throw loads over eight-foot walls, while female Marines frequently needed help. During simulated casualty evacuations, all-male teams were able to work significantly faster unless they used firefighter carries, where male Marines often carried evacuees.
- This study found significant differences in anaerobic power and performance. The top 25% of female Marines matched the bottom 25% of men in anaerobic fitness, and the top 10% of female Marines matched the bottom 50% of men in anaerobic fitness.
- Female participants had significantly higher injury rates and fatigue levels compared to male participants. In infantry training battalions, women were injured at six times the rate of men.
The Marine Corps report highlighted that even the strongest and most accomplished female Marines, all graduates of infantry training battalions, struggle to match the performance of their male Marines. Combat requires the most resilient and physically capable individuals, which is why having women in infantry units defies logic.
The results revealed that while a few exceptional women may be capable of serving as infantrymen, they are still inferior to men. This difference can slow down the unit or create unnecessary risk to itself and other units.
Unfortunately, military leaders ignored these findings. As efforts to integrate women into combat roles intensify, reality begins to catch up. By 2021, the Army faced significant challenges, including a staggering 65% failure rate for female recruits on the gender-neutral Army Combat Fitness Test.
This is not surprising. as 1992 report The President's Commission on the Placement of Women in the Armed Forces rightly observed that:
Unnecessary distractions and reduced combat effectiveness endanger missions and lives. Risking the lives of military units in combat in order to provide advancement opportunities or to accommodate the personal aspirations and interests of an individual or group of individuals is simply a bad military decision. . It's morally wrong.
Why is the left so obsessed with women in combat?
At first glance, the left's obsession with bringing women into combat seems ominous given the general disdain for military service and criticism of so-called toxic masculinity. Social engineering to promote women over men in professional settings may be consistent with their goals, but brutal war?
The promotion of women in combat makes sense when viewed through the lens of transgender challenges that seek to unravel the natural differences between male masculinity and female femininity. This agenda aims to extinguish the feminine energy of the young female generation and promote a childless and chaotic society where men no longer understand how to approach and treat women. Over the past two generations, the hyper-masculinization of women has suppressed their natural nurturing tendencies.
The left has convinced an entire generation that it is normal to worship women who dress up as warriors. But this is as absurd as men competing in beauty pageants. In both cases, some people may seem to fit in at first glance, but a closer look reveals a divergence. Both scenarios are inconsistent with biological reality and ignore the long-term effects on a society that has lost sight of what it means to be a woman.
This context explains why the loudest criticism of Pete Hegseth is not his broader political views, his position on Ukraine, his military strategy, or even his position on abortion. Instead, critics focused on his belief, formed by his combat experience, that women should be protected and cherished as nurturers of future generations, rather than thrown into the bloody chaos of the battlefield. is guessing. As society debates protecting women's spaces from male intrusion, it may be time to re-evaluate women's intrusion into traditionally male spaces.
