comment: >
  
  Yes higher standards in general too
context: I believe this statement because studies prove that men are physically stronger then women on average.
  
  We don't send the abstract concept of averages into combat. We send individuals. We set the bar where it should be set and then we accept any and all individuals who meet that standard. >
  
  Yes but that’s not the case if it was it would not have two different tests so why is there different tests and requirements for each gender >
  
  Your position is that women shouldn't be in combat. It isn't that there shouldn't be two different standards.
  I addressed your position and I ask that you stay on that topic. Do you acknowledge that the abstract concept of an average person has fuck all to do with your argument against women being in combat roles since we don't send the abstract concept of averages into combat? >
  
  Yes that is my position >
  
  Good job abandoning your irrelevant tangent.
  Now, for the rest of the post that you didn't respond to:
  Do you acknowledge that the abstract concept of an average person has fuck all to do with your argument against women being in combat roles since we don't send the abstract concept of averages into combat? >
  
  You want evidence that those who serve in the military are individual humans rather than abstract concepts? >
  
  Sorry, I was trying to ask OP. >
  
  Ah, got it. >
  
  
  They have lowered the standards in the military to accommodate women so that they can join the military.
  
  They haven't lowered the standards for combat roles.
  It makes sense to lower the standards for non-combat roles. The military has those standards because they want all their personnel to be fit and healthy. But my ex-girlfriend flew cargo planes for the Navy. It simply didn't matter, at all, whether she could do 100 push-ups or only 10. She was a glorified FedEx pilot.
  In combat roles, the standards are the standards. And yes, there are some exceptional women who can meet them.
  17% of the U.S. miliary is women. But when it comes to Marines in combat roles... there are 53 women who made the cut. A vanishingly tiny percentage.
  But these women actually made the cut. They are not weaker than their male counterparts. They are some of the strongest women in the world. >
  
  What ur advocating for is a higher standard of physical capabilities in combat roles. Because a lot of cops including male ones don’t fit your standards either. Many men are shorter, weaker, or fatter. At the end of the day, I see combat itself as less of an issue with weapons. When guns, tasers, batons, pepper spray, etc are involved it closes the gap significantly in terms of combat.
  Also for every video you find of a female cop being overpowered by a regular dude, I can probably find just as many if not more male cops being outrun simply because of their weight. Males are more susceptible and more likely to be obese and this is reflected in the police force.
  50% of male police officers are obese  while only 20% of female police officers are obese
  I can confidently say if I had to choose between trying to escape the average male officer vs the average female officer im gonna pick male. Cause there’s a higher chance I’ll be able to outrun him.
  Male police officers generally tend to be much less athletic and more unhealthy than female police officers. And sure an obese or overweight male police officer will probably be able to overpower me in a fight but with the amount of weapons they have available such as guns, tasers, batons, pepper spray, etc I doubt it would matter much anyway. If I resist I’ll get taxed or shot pretty quickly anyway.
  Women also tend to be better at diffusing conflict rather than exasperating it which is one of the most important skills a police officer needs