comment: >
  
  
  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.
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.