The sexual dimorphism of the human species means that there are numerous “hacks” of our bodies created when the various signals regarding sex happen during development. Women’s wider pelvises, the way that their hormone system works, all of that is different from the sort of thing that a male goes through during development and growth. Men are optimized for things like hunting and ranging farther afield, and it’s so subtle that there are even sexual differences you can identify in how the two sexes navigate. Men are more “time, distance, direction” oriented, in general, and women are more “landmark and feel”.
So, that there are differences in injury rates for the same sports, most of which started out as male games in the first place…? Yeah, not surprising: Women are trying to operate on a playing field they are simply not adapted to.
If one were honest, you’d see the same thing in the military whenever some gender-weird decides to integrate women into combat arms elements. Women are simply physically unsuited for the way in which our armies fight in direct combat infantry roles, and their prevalence in guerrilla roles and other things fools the general public into thinking that it’s merely male recalcitrance that doesn’t want them on the front lines. Reality is that it’s these little things like greater propensity towards knee injuries and a far less robust frame that militates towards keeping them out of front-line direct combat.
Mentality? I’m not so sure on that one, but I’d be open to persuasion in either direction, were someone to actually do the research. It’s my opinion that the monthly hormone swing leaves a lot of the female population essentially irrational during the swings, and I’m suspicious of the general ability of the broad class of women to cope with direct combat and/or remain in control of themselves. People joke all the time about PMS and combat, but I’m not gonna do that–What are you going to do when your commander loses her bearings in the middle of things, and calls in fire on militarily unjustifiable targets?
Friend of mine related a situation with a female mid-rank leader in an adjacent unit in Afghanistan, who basically razed a village after one of her troops got hit by fire nearby. He wasn’t sure that the choices she was making in that situation were necessarily rational, or that she was on an even keel, emotionally. From having worked with her for some time, his opinion was that had that soldier been wounded on any other day of her cycle, then that village might not have gotten the treatment it did. Which was, in his judgment, more than slightly excessive…
That, from a guy whose attitude towards Afghans and Muslims in general is basically “…can’t kill enough of them to make me happy…” really makes me wonder what the hell happened that he thought it was over-the-top and not really justified…
Isegoria: I had to look up “Ron Perlman Bethesda” to find what you were referring to.
Longarch: [bad Ron Perlman impression] Musk … Musk never changes … [/bad Ron Perlman impression] [non-skippable Bethesda intro sequence precedes character creation screen]
Allen: Old me: “There’s no way real scientists could be as reckless as those in science fiction novels.”
Marty H.: David Foster, self-reliance and the ability to create an independent life in agrarian settings was considered virtuous. The “King” takes its toll and the banks firgured out how to rig the game against the small-holder. Having worked on one some many years ago, had the taxes and financial rents been removed, it would have been an interesting lifestyle option.
McChuck: The ‘AI’ racing drone beat humans, but only over the course it was trained on. When they moved the rings 6″, it lost every time.
Bomag: So, when AI is robust enough to give us self driving cars, and I can finally relax and enjoy life, the FBI will then have complete ability to track and take out badthinkers; so I will have a new set of worries.
Bomag: Ezra’s reference to Kitty Hawk reminds me of the Congressional report’s conclusion, circa 1973. Rather frank. Can’t imagine such being written today. From Wiki: “The subcommittee has been unable to determine any precipitous cause for rampage aboard U.S.S. Kitty Hawk. Not only was there not one case wherein racial discrimination could be pinpointed, but there is no evidence which indicated that the blacks who participated in that incident perceived racial discrimination,...
Bomag: Rinse and repeat for a chunk of fedgov: win a kind of war; need more to do, so they find ways to muck things up. More we give Defense, the more we lose. More State does, more the world hates us. Complying with new EPA regs puts up more pollutants than reduces. Etc. But Wokeness taps into our tribal, internecine hatreds, channeling us into hating the Straight White Man to the maximum; while triggering our instinct to help the halt and the lame: gnash and wail over George Floyd, unappealing as he...
Jim: To update Upton Sinclair’s famous quote, “It is not difficult to get a woman to believe something when her salary depends upon it.” From 1968 to 2021, despite immense improvements in automation, the number of Americans working in Human Resources grew from 140,000 to 1,500,000. After all, Jim Crow with its persnickety caste rules was a drag on economic growth. Mr. Sailer is nothing if not a comedic genius.
Bruce: Big increase in Democratic Party patronage, backed by federal law forcing everyone to pretend to believe the sob stories and increased censorship.
Jim: O, how the reality distortion field cuts both ways.
Jim: Musk will go to HELL for convincing Porsche to ice combustion engines in favor of fucking batteries and electric motors, but it can’t be denied that he lives and breathes the supreme tyranny of Ancient Greece.
Bob Sykes: Why did people work for Steve Jobs? He was a jerk. But he was also a visionary and demanded the absolute best.
Bomag: Sort of maps why people are attracted to a frontier; why they flee communism for capitalism. But society grinds on spreading communism, and erasing frontiers. Hmmm…
Bob Sykes: Epstein et al. do not understand the nature of the Ukraine/Russia war. This is not Somalia or Afghanistan, it is Passchendaele and the Somme. It is a massed artillery war. They have no idea what the field surgeons would experience.
Jim: The number-one thing that the United State could do to prepare for future conflicts with more technologically advanced and economically productive rivals, such as Russia or China, is the decriminalization of marriage for Americans, but to do that would be to permit the Founding Fathers’ progeny to benefit from Federal rule, a completely unacceptable proposition, so unacceptable that evidently not even the prospect of 5TFR Anglo-Germanic teenbodies for the natsec meatgrinder may serve as...
Michael van der Riet: Michael Barnard the author of this very interesting piece has cleverly made his blog comment-free, to avoid the feedback problem from those who find holes in his reasoning. However, he knows the basics of the shipping industry and although his future projections are not worth much, he understands the mathematical model that creates profit or loss for vessel owners and operators.
Gavin Longmuir: One would hope that the situation in the Ukraine would give the US Ruling Clique pause for thought. Maybe it would be better to focus on resolving future disputes through negotiation rather than through bluster & weapons. Anyway, our Rulers future conflict that matters is the one they are trying to gin up with China. That will mainly involve US naval assets near China being sunk and US air assets near China being shot out of the skies. That is the kind of thing which happens if a...
Ed H.: “The American republic has quietly, steadily acquired a military caste…” Or re-acquired. You have to be careful in choosing a baseline. Before the draft it was quite common to have members serve in a branch of the services for generations. In my family’s case it was the Coast Guard, going back into the 1800’s.
McChuck: Blacks are dumb and violent. And if they hear you say this, they’ll beat you senseless.
Women are at higher risk of knee injury in sports because of the way they cut and plant. Seems this is especially endemic in women’s soccer.
The sexual dimorphism of the human species means that there are numerous “hacks” of our bodies created when the various signals regarding sex happen during development. Women’s wider pelvises, the way that their hormone system works, all of that is different from the sort of thing that a male goes through during development and growth. Men are optimized for things like hunting and ranging farther afield, and it’s so subtle that there are even sexual differences you can identify in how the two sexes navigate. Men are more “time, distance, direction” oriented, in general, and women are more “landmark and feel”.
So, that there are differences in injury rates for the same sports, most of which started out as male games in the first place…? Yeah, not surprising: Women are trying to operate on a playing field they are simply not adapted to.
If one were honest, you’d see the same thing in the military whenever some gender-weird decides to integrate women into combat arms elements. Women are simply physically unsuited for the way in which our armies fight in direct combat infantry roles, and their prevalence in guerrilla roles and other things fools the general public into thinking that it’s merely male recalcitrance that doesn’t want them on the front lines. Reality is that it’s these little things like greater propensity towards knee injuries and a far less robust frame that militates towards keeping them out of front-line direct combat.
Mentality? I’m not so sure on that one, but I’d be open to persuasion in either direction, were someone to actually do the research. It’s my opinion that the monthly hormone swing leaves a lot of the female population essentially irrational during the swings, and I’m suspicious of the general ability of the broad class of women to cope with direct combat and/or remain in control of themselves. People joke all the time about PMS and combat, but I’m not gonna do that–What are you going to do when your commander loses her bearings in the middle of things, and calls in fire on militarily unjustifiable targets?
Friend of mine related a situation with a female mid-rank leader in an adjacent unit in Afghanistan, who basically razed a village after one of her troops got hit by fire nearby. He wasn’t sure that the choices she was making in that situation were necessarily rational, or that she was on an even keel, emotionally. From having worked with her for some time, his opinion was that had that soldier been wounded on any other day of her cycle, then that village might not have gotten the treatment it did. Which was, in his judgment, more than slightly excessive…
That, from a guy whose attitude towards Afghans and Muslims in general is basically “…can’t kill enough of them to make me happy…” really makes me wonder what the hell happened that he thought it was over-the-top and not really justified…