Summary: Girls are breaking free from traditional constraints and going their own way. Here are two girls playing varsity football with the guys. I doubt that anybody talks to them about consequences, and the futures made by their choices today.
Women going their own way.
The hot meme on men’s website is “Men Going Their Own Way” (MGTOW). This gets lots of attention, both advocacy and mockery. Since this is America, few notice that the opposite trend is a thousand-fold larger – and growing in importance. “Women Going Their Own Way“, breaking free of the traditional patterns of marriage and family, breaking free of the behaviors and attitudes traditionally consider feminine.
Most people find this too disturbing to see. So the news reports these developments in the narrowest way possible. They call these feminism triumphs – for applause – and ignore the implications. Today’s example: girls joining boys high school football teams. These are small incidents but part of a trend with implications we can not fully imagine.
(1) Madi Martin, kicker on the Southlake Carroll varsity football team
This girl is a kicker, so not in harm’s way. On the video her Dad says
“I …remember Bradley watching her tackle another player she went in and put her head right in his chest and took him to the ground and I thought to myself that’s my girl.”
Fifteen years from now, he’ll wonder why no guys are “man enough” to marry his little girl — while at Thanksgiving dinner she talks about her cats. Consequences. This matches my experience in 15 years as a Scout leader and longer as a Sunday School teacher: dads are never more proud of their children than when their daughters act like boys. The effects of this are massive, and ignored.
(2) Jenna Martz, varsity defensive lineperson for the Newport Knights
“A battle for respect, then in the trenches:
For Newport’s Jenna Martz, football is feminism“
Seattle Times, 26 October 2018.
She is playing against young men a foot taller and at least 100 pounds heavier. Eventually she is going to collide with a guy who doesn’t care that she’s a girl and hits her with full force. The risk of serious injury to women is seldom mentioned amidst the go-grrrl cheering in news articles. As one commenter says:
“She is facing off against young men a full foot taller than herself and at least 100 pounds heavier. …So a lineman Ms. Martz might be reasonably be expected to go up against has 209% over her total body strength, 215 % of her upper body strength, and 149% of her mass. He will also have greater bone density and aerobic capacity.” {See his full analysis here and here.}
Just as with Madi Martin, think of this as a stage in Martz’s life.
“To reach her goal, Martz knew she needed to bulk up. …She’s put on about 20 pounds of muscle,” Richardson said of Martz’s advancement to the 148-pound weight class since her freshman year.”
This is modern America, where a girl is applauded for “bulking up.” At 5′ 3″, she is in the ~25th percentile for an 18-year-old girl’s height. At 148 pounds, she is in the roughly 85th percentile for weight at her age. If she is like most women, she will gain weight during the next ten years. If so, she might have the same odds of marrying a guy as her brother (soon to be “sister” (see below).
This is a something seldom mentioned in the euphoria about many modern girls’ sports teams: they get heavy bodies, much weight. What about their futures? Ten years from now nobody will care about their high school or college sports career. What will this do for their self-esteem and their ability to get married? Did anyone tell her these harsh truths? How many will have cats in their futures?
Martz has a background of family dysfunctionality. Not a surprise.
“It’s given her a family, especially after a tough few years that began with the sudden divorce of Jenna’s parents. …{Her mother} sunk into a deep depression. She stopped eating, caring for the home and nurturing her children. …their middle sibling was also in the process of transitioning from male to female and finding her identity. …’But I found a safe spot in doing {football and power lifting}. …I was so angry. I still struggle to have a good relationship with my father.’”
Feminism is a useful tool in the search for distinction in our crowded and competitive society, where people desperately seek a means for upward mobility in our increasingly class-bound society.
“She also hopes that her football experience will make her application to the United States Naval Academy stand out from the pack. She’s been a trailblazer at Newport for other girls who might want to play football in high school …”
Other women on the gridiron
From the Jackson Free Press, 17 April 2017.
“In 1997, Liz Heaston became the first woman to ever play and score in a college football game when she scored in a game for Willamette University, in Oregon, a then-NAIA-level university, in a 27-0 win over Linfield College, in Oregon. Heaston kicked two extra points, and her jersey hangs in the College Football Hall of Fame.
“Two years later, Katie Hnida became the first woman to suit up for a NCAA Division I (now called the Football Bowl Subdivision) school at the University of Colorado. In 2003, she became the first woman to score in a Division I game at New Mexico State University. She became the first woman to try an extra point in a bowl game the year before, but an opposing player blocked it.
“Before Hnida, Ashley Martin became the first woman to kick an extra point at the NCAA Division I-AA (now the Football Championship Subdivision) level for Jacksonville State University. She made three extra points without a miss in a 71-10 win over Cumberland University.
“Former University of West Alabama kicker Tonya Butler became the first woman to kick a field goal in 2003 when she kicked a 27-yard field goal in a 24-17 win over Stillman College.
“Other women have been kickers at nearly every level of college football. Some did get a chance to kick for their teams, and others were never called upon. …
“In 2014, Shelby Osborne became the first woman to play a position besides kicker when she became the first college defensive back at NAIA school Campbellsville University, in Kentucky. NAIA schools don’t hand out athletic scholarships.”
In 2017, Becca Longo was the first woman to earn a football scholarship in Division II Football at Adams State, as a kicker. She played junior varsity at high school. Roughly a dozen women who have played college football, but none at NCAA-affiliated programs or on football scholarships. See ESPN. and the Arizona Republic.
In 2018, Antoinette “Toni” Harris received an offer from Bethany College, an NAIA school in Kansas. She plays free safety for East Los Angeles College in California, and will become one of the first female non-kickers on a college football roster. See ESPN.
Some history: “Carroll County’s first female high school football player — who was seriously injured in a 1989 practice game — can’t hold the county school board responsible for her injuries, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals said yesterday.” She was a fullback. Details here; court verdict here.
Conclusions
We are making profound changes in gender roles, a foundational aspect of any society, based only on ideology. Without experimentation or testing, even without thought about how these changes will play out over time. We are not even asking the important questions. Our children are lab rats in a social engineering project, despite the horrific results of the Left’s previous large bold project – communism. Why is this rational or ethical?
For More Information
Hat tip on these stories to Dalrock, an essential source of information describing how feminism is reshaping our society. See his articles about these girls here and here.
Ideas! For shopping ideas see my recommended books and films at Amazon.
If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See all posts about women and gender issues, about Women Going Their Own Way, and especially these …
- A look at America’s future after marriage becomes rare.
- Misadventures of a young woman in modern America.
- The disastrous results of trying to “have it all”.
- The coming crash as men and women go their own way.
- Modern women say “follow the rules while we break them.”
- “Celebs Go Dating” shows young women in action.
- A college course teaches students to date. Fun & sad.
Books rich with insights about modern women
Martin van Creveld has a history of successful prediction, perhaps the best record of anyone publishing today. His research and predictions about the relations between men and women are disturbing (as were his predictions about modern war, which we have proven correct in Afghanistan and Iraq).
The Privileged Sex
.
.Pussycats: Why the Rest Keeps Beating the West
.
When I was in HS (years ago) we played a team with a girl linebacker. When they put her in late in the game, we ran some plays where she was my assignment. The first play, she tried to stuff the hole (heh) and I blew her backwards onto her ass. The next play, a sweep, the umpire stepped into my way as I tried to block her while she was scraping.
He looked at me and gave me a ‘no more of that’ head shake. Thankfully, we ran the clock out after a few more plays; he kept trying to obstruct me.
Dark,
I’ve wondered about that – how girls a foot or more and 2/3 the weight of the guys can survive on a football field. Especially in the line! Guys have a high injury rate, and coaches seldom put small guys on the line.
But then I don’t understand how a 37 year old mother, a major in the Army Corps of Engineers reserve, could pass the Ranger course.
It will be interesting to see how these distinctions change as women get them. 5’3″ girls as defensive linebackers, our mothers as Rangers — these are the epitome of masculinity. Hence the energy devoted to getting girls to have them.
How could a 37 years old mother pass the Ranger course? They changed the course, making it female friendly. The same happened here in Italy. There are girls in “Folgore” parachutist brigade. I was in it 35 years ago. No way that a girl could pass the same course we passed in the Middle Age. Maybe Batwoman (maybe).
Here in New Zealand, women’s rugby is big. They are now even playing tests against Australia, sometimes as doubleheaders with the men’s game. This is in addition to those playing rugby league. They play in their own competition but it isn’t for the fainthearted. Especially as they don’t wear padding or helmets. Many do their practices with men’s teams so can tough it out. And some of the women are big and solid – think Valerie Adams, the shotput champion’s size. More than a few get scholarships to US Universities where I believe it is also quite competitive.
No one forces the women to play. Many take it up very early on, sick of being on the sidelines watching their brothers play. The family support is generally what drives them. The women might not be fashion model shape, but invariably are a lot fitter and more into things like teamwork. And which group is better for society? I suspect the latter.
Chris,
(1) “The women might not be fashion model shape, but invariably are a lot fitter and more into things like teamwork.”
So they are better cogs for the corporate work machine. How nice. But if you read the post you would have seen my actual question. Let’s rewind, to give you a second chance:
(2) “And which group is better for society? I suspect the latter.”
Why? Is work everything for you? Money money money? “Fitness for use” (to use the 1930s counterculture phrase) in the corporate machine is what excites you?
Actually Larry, I was not thinking about them being in the paid workforce at all. Many of them are actually “stay at home” mothers and doing the unpaid volunteer work that society needs yet doesn’t reward.
Chris,
“Many of them are actually “stay at home” mothers”
In fact none of the women mentioned in this article are married, let alone “mothers.” Their odds of serious injury and getting married are the subject of this post.
Did you read the post?
Rather than clog it up with links, here is just one example of what I am talking about. “Niall Williams: mother-of-two, inspiration to all“. Though because of the promotion, she is now a professional.
.
.
Editor’s note: She plays Rugby sevens, in which teams have seven players playing seven minute halves, instead of the usual 15 players playing 40 minute halves (see Wikipedia).
Chris,
Could you attempt to reply to anything in the post?
This is an example of the different ways Left and Right avoid replying to material that challenges their thinking. Leftists replies to things not in the post. Those on the Right reply using fake info (faux economics, faux history).
Chris,
Of what relevance is a women playing in a women’s league of Rugby Seven (7 minute halves, not 40 minutes) to this post?
I understand that as a good liberal, throwing chaff into the discussion is your m.o., but why not try something different? Try making stuff up, like a conservative!
How? Just like others – countless recycles. That’s the ugly truth the fems don’t tell ya and those in the know – know.
What’s next cats are gonna bark and pee on fire hydrants. Yes, I just compared females to animals🙄
I respect and love girls, women, my mom, sister, daughter, wife, gma but come on!
Larry
I was responding to your first reply comments – specifically “So they are better cogs for the corporate work machine. How nice.” and “Why? Is work everything for you? Money money money? “Fitness for use” (to use the 1930s counterculture phrase) in the corporate machine is what excites you?”
But responding to your post as you requested.
Gender roles have been changing as a consequence of evolving society. They are not necessarily because of ideology. Many male only jobs or sports were solely tradition. Women jockeys or middle/ long distance running are a good example of that. There may be specific reasons why some current jobs need the strength or fitness that males provide. But they should be framed in those requirements, not on an arbitrary sex definition.
Chris,
“Gender roles have been changing as a consequence of evolving society. ”
I’ve written scores of posts about that, which is pretty much a “sun is rising” observation.
Your comments are quite irrelevant to this post, and show little evidence that you have even read the post. You are just virtue-signally, giving rebuttals to things in your head. The standard liberal schtick.
Also annoying is how you ignore my replies (except a few taken out of context). Again, you’re having a vigorous debate with yourself.
Stay at home moms have unpaid volunteer work without reward?! It’s the most ridiculous statement I’ve heard! First of all who provides that unpaid worker? What share of his salary a father can spend on HIMself? How much housework the modern women really do? There is a machine for every task from washing the dishes to entertaining kids as young as 1 year old. I really doubt that “volunteer” job is anything but spending a man’s money and live like a queen. Heck when I was going to school my father prepared breakfast for me while my mom was asleep till 10 am!
Ehi, that’s nothing: “SAS: Women allowed to join for first time.“
Roberto,
Thanks for flagging that! It will happen here to, eventually.
Larry, I don;t know if you saw it, but Dalrock linked to this same piece, and he had some worthwhile thoughts. You may find him worth linking to. My own view is that women on a football field is that it will work just fine up to the point at which football being a collision sport starts to assert itself. You can always rewrite the rules of the game until you’re playing some other different game. Rewriting the rules on a battlefield is a bit trickier. That’s the thing about feminism. It depends on getting guys to rewrite the rules and accept the new rules as legitimate. It can;t compel the audience to show up for female friendly football, and it can’t compel the enemy Over There to operate by the same rules as us.
Women have been in special operations forces for some time, but basically operating on the borderline between being soldiers and spies. That doesn’t require a rewrite of the rules, since women have been used as spies for a long, long time. But rewriting the rules for frontline special operators poses some interesting problems. Even if you find a woman who can pass the SAS or Special Forces qualification course, can you send her as an adviser to some rebel warlord in Central Boogaboogastan? The equal opportunity desk jockeys in the Pentagon might accept that, How General Abu Alhazred and his merry band of cutthroats reacts is another matter.
The Man,
(1) “but Dalrock linked to this same piece”
Acknowledgements are in the For More Info section. I hat tip to both of Dalrock’s posts about this.
(2) “Women have been in special operations forces for some time,”
Do you have something supporting that? Also, where? Not in the US, except in supporting roles.
(3) “send her as an adviser to some rebel warlord in Central Boogaboogastan?”
In the US, Special Forces are often deployed as advisors. The other Spec Ops units do much less, or no, advising. They’re operators.
“Acknowledgements are in the For More Info section. I hat tip to both of Dalrock’s posts about this.”
My bad. I missed that.
“Do you have something supporting that? Also, where? Not in the US, except in supporting roles”
There been a couple of books that have discussed this, but not in a lot of detail. The last one I saw was Killer Elite by a British author named Michael Smith. It was about the Intelligence Support Activity, and there’s been some others. The reports, and I’ve seen this from more than one source, is that long ago, Delta Force started trying to recruit a few female operators for their reconnaissance platoon (I think it’s also known as the funny platoon) for undercover work. The idea was that there were, for example, situations where a man and a woman, posing as a couple, would be less conspicuous than two men of military age. A few operators (The number, I think is still classified) were selscted and trained, and then let go because there was some resistance to using women on missions where there was an inherent risk of death or capture. Later, that got rescinded, and the women were put back in and have been used on actual operations. Smith recounts a case where a female operator was supposedly used in Lebanon. There was another book I read on the history of US Special Forces. I don’t even recall the title now. It was a casualty of the Great Basement Flood.
I’ve seen this discussed also on Strategypage and a few other places. Basically, a lot of countries have had female operators for undercover work for a long time. Some special operations troops are on the borderline between being soldiers and being spies. The countries that use women in this way include the US, Israel, and the UK.
“In the US, Special Forces are often deployed as advisors. The other Spec Ops units do much less, or no, advising. They’re operators.”
The original story you linked to mentioned SAS specifically, and I believe they have done a certain amount of advising. I think the SEALS have done some advising, although I’m not sure how much. I’ve seena report on Strategypage recently that there are a few female operators who work with the SEALS, again in a an undercover of reconnaissance type role.
Note that I’m not bringing this up as a defense of putting women in A Detachments, SEAL platoons, or what have you. That would be a major , and I in my view dubious departure from how they’ve been reportedly used in the past. The advising thing is a real issue, since working with military or paramilitary forces of other nations is a major part of what special operations forces actually do. Whoever on the org chart draws that mission, I see problems if they assign women to it.
I may have included this reply in the wrong spot. Apologies if this is the case.
The Man,
I don’t understand your point. Women make great spies and other kinds of undercover operators. We don’t know if they can do military spec ops work.
I assumed TMWL was referring to Female Engagement Teams (FETs) which we used in Afghanistan. I recall one of the females literally passing out on a patrol to a nearby village. Her gear was crossloaded to other (male) members of the patrol and she woozily made it back to the FOB.
Dark,
THere is little interest in clarity about the role of women in combat, so these discussion quickly become mush. Women translators, women undercover work, woman advisors — there is nothing problematic about these. Women in combat units is the question.
These little girls are not going their own way they just have penis envy, trying to be something they’re not. Also, none of these women earned their position they just have it handed to them because vagina. 5’3″ 148lbs? Please. A 14 year old boy is more qualified than these little girls. I have zero respect for these harpies and the white knight pussies who support it.
Jim,
(1) “they just have penis envy”
I’m not a fan of Fraud the Fraud’s theories. There is zero evidence such a thing exists. Girls can do what they want, just as you can.
(2) “trying to be something they’re not”
I suggest we wait for God to speak from the Sky about that. It’s not for you to say what others are, or vice versa.
(3) “none of these women earned their position they just have it handed to them because vagina”
I too wonder about that. But I’d like to hear from somebody with more experience – or better yet, first person observations – before drawing certain conclusions. Don’t confuse averages with those out several deviations on the bell curve.
If women abandon traditional concepts of femininity, who knows what they are capable of? They can’t be as strong as the strongest guys, but to what level can the strongest girls push themselves?
Also, there is the detail we’re working hard to ignore: sex is a spectrum. There are girls with high testosterone levels. There are girls with an “X” chromosome. Some of them can become star athletes among women. It’s probable some of them can be decent (if not star) athletes competing with men in some sports (eg, those that emphasise women’s physical strengths).
Interesting times.
But then I don’t understand how a 37 year old mother, a major in the Army Corps of Engineers reserve, could pass the Ranger course.
Roberto stole my thunder, but yes, that’s it. The rules of the training game were changed to accommodate the snowflakes, a charade that has been going on in the U.S. military om some level for 40-plus years. Only now is it being done in those organizations that are considered “elite” combat units, a certain sign that TPTB has decided to utterly destroy what little combat capability remains.
As a purely rhetorical question, one wonders if the snowflakes, should they ever actually be sent forth to the front lines, will attempt to protest their impending slaughter by the enemy and threaten an appeal to some notional international “referee.”
When the Marines announced that women were completing the Infantry Officers Course, I correctly guessed it was because they removed some kind of rucking requirement. Which is exactly what they did, “changing the combat endurance test from pass/fail to an unscored exercise.”
Women can NOT carry heavy loads over long distances.
That’s our (Italian) military advertising, 2018: http://www.ansa.it/sito/notizie/cronaca/2018/10/21/polemiche-su-manifesto-del-4-novembre_a5711bf5-110f-493c-8a31-a672796f1341.html
Soldiers a) give food to a poor old Italian granny b) save a small immigrant child, nursing it as a good nanny c) save an excursionist in peril d) cuddle a child.
All tasks that a woman could accomplish much better than a man.
Yet another example of the extermination of men only spaces, even if it comes at the cost of lowering standards. (Boy Scouts, military special forces, etc, etc) Even my local poker night is now co-ed. Men need to reclaim and reinvent spaces for themselves if they are to find and reclaim their manhood. Yet so many men are quite literally afraid to acknowledge this or do anything about it for risk of offending the “fairer sex.” I know this is an overly simplistic lamentation but it needs to be said.
And yes, you are quite right, it is now increasingly taboo to even talk about female aspirations and suitability for marriage and motherhood. Is it any wonder that western women are becoming progressively unhappier?
Miguel,
“the extermination of men only spaces,”
This is, I suspect, a psychologically important factor. Note that women-only spaces are still OK – because men don’t invade them.
“do anything about it for risk of offending the “fairer sex.” I know this is an overly simplistic lamentation but it needs to be said.”
That nails it. As I and other men have said, how much of feminism is a reaction to weakening of men? Perhaps women are reacting to that by looking to men from the ghettos and supporting opening the borders.
“now increasingly taboo to even talk about female aspirations and suitability for marriage and motherhood.”
I agree. For example, in the context of women bulking up and manning up for sports. In this thread, Chris thinks that this is great for girls – but does not even pretend to consider how this will affect their lives. Ideology R’ US. #NPCs
Defensive lineperson? Having played left tackle, that’s not a defensive lineperson. And I was a little bitty tackle.
By the way; 5’3 148lb defensive _lineperson_, HAHAHAHAHA.
>>>She started at wide receiver, then cornerback.
“With her size, we wanted to put her out on the edge,” said Newport coach Drew Oliver, who had a female kicker earlier in his career at Hazen. “But with Jenna’s powerlifting background, she found her strength and foundation when we had her playing defensive line. It’s good for her because she knows balance and how to use the angles.”
—– Translation: she’s so goddamn slow, they have to hide her on the defensive line, despite her size.
>>>Martz’s first varsity action came during her junior year when she played defensive end in the season-opener against North Creek.
“I got totally wrecked,” Martz said of getting knocked backward by an opponent. “But I hurried and got back up. Even though I was still kind of shaken, I didn’t let it stop me. I assisted on a tackle and it worked.
—– Translation: she got wrecked. Then touched someone who was being tackled. Just a few hits away from a crippling injury or brain damage.
>>>“I put my body out there and realized it doesn’t matter. I’m probably going to get beat half the time and the other half, I’m going to work to get that assisted tackle or tackle.
—– Who the hell proudly announces they are going to get beat half the time, and wants to get ASSISTED tackles? Girls, evidently.
>>>Sandra Martz, Jenna’s mother, was blindsided by her husband’s request for a separation in 2014, and in the aftermath, the three Martz children watched their mother deteriorate.
Sandra sunk into a deep depression. ***She stopped eating, caring for the home and nurturing her children.***
—– I guess it went without saying that Sandra got custody.
>>>A former teammate on her freshman squad often made jokes about Martz within earshot. Opponents would yank her braided pigtails, call her “it” or expletives and target her on tackles, double-teaming Martz and plowing her to the ground.
—– This is called football. Although from the way the author of the article writes, it’s clear she doesn’t understand the game either. As noted, several players were kicked off the team after “anonymous” reports of typical HS boys sports behavior.
>>>They also figured out a different way to spot her in powerlifting
—– Translation: she didn’t like having nutsacks in her face when she was benching.
There is no WGTOW. There is only MGTOW. MGTOW is a way of thinking among men that has been developing for decades. MGTOW is a defensive reaction to our current political world.
WGTOW is ridiculous and will never gain traction. Women will always be unhappy without a man, but they don’t give a damn if the man is unhappy.
jbask,
MGTOW is a movement of a tiny fraction of men.
WGTOW is a massive movement that has been growing for decades. Women never marrying. Women divorcing their husbands and living alone.
Facts.
Football is not a possible mixed gender sport, and probably not an appropriate sport for women at all. One is skeptical about rugby. But other sports that were traditionally men only are now done by women, and perfectly well. The traditional limitations on what could and could not be played by women were quite wrong.
For instance? Well, women’s cricket is doing well, complete with overarm bowling, which is by the standards of the male game not esactly fast, but is certainly good medium pace swing bowling. Women’s soccer is thriving. Women do Olympic lifting and show the classic combination of timing and strength that makes that absorbing to watch or to do. There is pressure to run a women’s Tour de France over the same course as the men, and there is really no reason to keep opposing it.
The problem was that the traditional restrictions to hockey, field and track, tennis and so on were excessive and irrationally limiting. But in rightly abolishing them there seems to have been a denial of the basic physical differences between the sexes, and so we get to the utterly absurd idea that men and women can play football togetherr. Of course they cannot.
They can’t play soccer together either. But women can play soccer. They cannot compete on equal terms in tennis, but mixed doubles work fine. And if you want to see strength and timing elegantly displayed watch Annie Thorisdottir here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwaJL0B2pt8
Some people will feel this is ‘unfeminine’. Its not in the least. All they are showing is an ignorance of real womens’ qualities and how women actually are, as distinct from some cultural fantasy of how they are. Its like saying that some of our great mathematicians and scientists were not ‘real men’ because they had no time for football. The idea that there are two ways of being, a jock or a cute girl in a frilly dress, that’s part of the problem.
But recognizing that doesn’t mean girls and guys playing football together.
henrik,
“football is …probably not an appropriate sport for women at all.”
The increasing number of women playing disagree with you.
“Some people will feel this is ‘unfeminine’”
I suggest concentrating instead on facts. First, watch injury rates for women playing with men in traditionally male sports. Second, watch their future rates of marriage (with dating success, weight levels, and levels of self-esteem being leading indicators). Time will tell how those play out.
An interesting development in the United Kingdom: The British Army is introducing a new, gender-free physical fitness standard for combat roles. “Army details new gender-free physical fitness standards for combat roles.”
Meanwhile in Norway the first all-female special operations force is already operational: Jegertroppen.
On a personal note: Three decades ago my sister was training for the Greek Sports Academy, on track-400 meters, 100 meters, long jump and so on. She was she envious of the girls throwing shot put, and told me later of the exchange with her trainer:
That put an end to her ambitions of training for shotput and hammerthrow.
Taraxippos,
(1) Gender-neutral standards for combat roles is an almost inevitable result of opening those roles to women. The latter is the important step.
(2) Women in military units is not new, irrespective of the fancy names given them. What matters is how they are used. The media depiction of Israel’s mixed-gender infantry units — Caracal Battalion, the Lions of Jordan Battalion, and the Bardelas Battalion (plus commando K9 unit, Oketz) is legendary. But they are deployed to safe zones (they have still lost 535 in combat operations in the 55 years 1962-1916).
The Jegertroppen’s physical requirements are less than that of US marines, and not remotely the usual for special ops units.
(3) Thanks for the story! Your sister is wise.
In addition (and to tie into your comment about women’s injury rates playing contact sports with men:
After at least 15 years of hyping the idea of women in combat units, the IDF is admitting that women suffer injuries at a much higher rate than men during combat training – despite the fact that training requirements for women in combat are considerably less demanding than for men.
According to a report in the IDF’s Bamahane magazine, a large scale study was conducted among female combat soldiers in the Karakal infantry unit, the Artillery Corps and the Field Intelligence Corps, between the years 2012-13.
The study indicated that a full 46% of the female soldiers suffered injuries during their initial period of training, as opposed to 25% among the men. One third of the women in the study were injured more than once.
The injuries included torn ligaments, sprains, knee pain, back pain and stress fractures. The latter were much more common in women, afflicting only 2% of men but 8% of the women. “Most stress fractures appear in weeks 4-6 of the training period, and mainly in the field and warfare weeks,” an officer explained to Bamahane.
“IDF Admits Problems with Women in Combat” at Israeli National News 7, 30 July 2015 — “Surprise, surprise: female combat soldiers suffer injuries during training at twice the rate of males.”
There’s a video of a military trainer explaining this to an Israeli government committee, to the shrieks of feminists across the table from him.
Dark,
Thanks for citing that.
Many have asked about injury rates by sex in Afghanistan and Iraq. It would be easier to get the nuclear bomb GO codes.
This is not just an ethical issue. Disabilities in young soldiers have large costs, as a lifetime of payments on even partial disabilities can add up to fantastic sums.
Thanks for the thought-provoking post. A few questions from someone who is from a younger generation:
“Fifteen years from now, he’ll wonder why no guys are “man enough” to marry his little girl — while at Thanksgiving dinner she talks about her cats.”
“If so, she might have the same odds of marrying a guy as her brother (soon to be “sister” (see below).”
“What will this do for their self-esteem and their ability to get married? Did anyone tell her these harsh truths? How many will have cats in their futures?”
You seem to put a lot of stock in women getting married. Do you feel this is a defining role for women in our society? Would you classify men in the same way?
A quick Google search finds that the number of professional athletes in total is <1% of the North American population. I don't know of any hard statistics, but again, a Google search shows many of them married. Is there anything that suggests athletes have lower marriage or reproduction rates than the general population?
I seem to recall you've written that Japan's population plateauing could be a boon to their economy and infrastructure (I apologize if this is incorrect, I may have read it elsewhere). If this trend of MGTOW and FGTOW continues, do you think America could benefit from a flat population as well?
As a side note, your anti-cat agenda has gone far enough! There's nothing wrong with owning cats, although my dog might disagree ;)
Grizzly,
(1) “You seem to put a lot of stock in women getting married.”
I prefer not to make such big judgements. Most posts here build on low but solid ground, and try to avoid such big speculative questions. I note two things.
(a) The family structure is the core of American society as it is today, providing many benefits not easily available in another fashion.
(b) That most women want to get married. The small dip in marriage rates has already produce loud and frequent complaints by women (but few by men). This is also true of parents.
The decline in marriage rates has produce a genre of complaints by dads (and some moms) about men being reluctant to marry their daughters — “man up”, “grow up”, don’t be a Peter Pan (all mocked by some men as orders to “marry that THOT!”).
(2) “A quick Google search finds that the number of professional athletes in total is <1% of the North American population. …a Google search shows many of them married”
That’s really missing the point of this post. I suggest that you re-read it.
(a) Most of those pro athletes are men, almost all of whom are playing traditional male sports. That probably increases their odds of marriage. I’m sure you know both of these things.
(b) Most of the female pro athletes are competing with other women in sports that long ago proved to work for women. Very few of those require women to “bulk up” or even behave in what a traditionalist calls an “unfeminine manner.” For example, tennis, gymnastics, and golf are big. Even the women in all-women football do not appear to have “bulked up” (see this photo of the Seattle Legends football team). I’m pretty sure you know all this. too.
(c) There is no reason to assume that women in those sports have lower marriage rates. But you already knew that. Try searching for marriage rates of pro female shotputters or weight lifters, if you can find a statistically significant sample.
(d) If you read the post, you would know it discusses women in sports with high injury rates or in which they develop non-traditional physiques. Your Google search is irrelevant to that issue. Think of the time you would have saved for both of us!
(3) “If this trend of MGTOW and FGTOW continues, do you think America could benefit from a flat population as well?”
That’s a good question, but over my pay grade. Doing so by avoiding marriage seems a pretty drastic way to slow population growth, similar to gays advocating homosexuality as a way to save the Earth. Contraceptives and having one or two children seem a less revolutionary path, with lower risk of creating massive human wreckage. Some pioneers will try other paths. We can see how it works for them, and learn.
Editor,
Thank you for your detailed response.
“I’m sure you know both of these things.”
“I’m pretty sure you know all this. too.”
“Think of the time you would have saved for both of us!”
I did not know these things, which is why I asked. I apologize for my ignorance. I am sure you have to deal with comments made in bad faith, and moderating them is understandably difficult. This is not an area in which I have a degree, or have spent a lot of free time researching. I am trying, though, which is how I stumbled upon your site. For a person whose claimed goal is to “reignite the spirit of a nation grown cold,” you seem quite hostile to your audience at times.
“If you read the post, you would know it discusses women in sports with high injury rates or in which they develop non-traditional physiques.”
Again I must apologize. I did not realize the scope of this post was so narrow. I will try to make more informed comments in the future (but don’t hold your breath).
Grizzly,
Thank you for your gracious response. I apologize for my false assumptions!
Odd they are pushing this after the big brouhaha about concussion rates a few years ago.
Anyhow, women in combat roles… the IDF tried this in the 1990s and is so spectacularly unsuccessful they rolled it back. Mixed units lead to love triangles, pregnant and men disobeying direct orders so that they could protect the women. All female units, well they were free of these hassles but obviously much weaker and easy to overcome.
The Soviets used women quite a bit in World War II. This was an extreme event and not meant to supplant the men but rather free up the men so they could serve in infantry and other roles where they were desperately needed. Several successful snipers and pilots were women. They were also good with anti aircraft guns.
The first fighting in Stalingrad was with a group of women anti aircraft guns that the Wehrmacht tanks encountered. Certainly not intentional on the Soviet’s part. They aimed their guns at the tanks and fought until they all died. It was an extraordinary circumstance. All Soviets were expected ( and wanted to) to fight if they came upon the enemy even children and elderly with farm implements.
It seems like women are becoming masculine and men are becoming feminine.
Sven,
That’s my guess, as well. I’ve written a lot about this. It’s evident in our films and TV shows, in which the woman plays the guys role (action, bold, brave, strong) and the guy plays the girls role (shy, frightened, cowardly, passive). Commenters have ignored my guess that the push for more migrants and spread of ghetto culture are women’s reactions to weak men.
More speculative still – this might be a biological effect. It might have a chemical cause.
More speculative still – this might be a biological effect. It might have a chemical cause.
Xenoestrogens: a shockwave – a hidden danger.
We might become a low testosterone America. More research needed, stat!
Falling sperm counts are a danger we shouldn’t ignore.
We live in a soup of chemicals, with unknown effects on us.
Not accidental or unintended, any of this.
feeriker,
That seems a bit over the top, as suspicions go.
If you read the post, you would know it discusses women in sports with high injury rates or in which they develop non-traditional physiques.
Larry, this is what I would take issue with – the concept of ‘non traditional’ physiques. You are quite correct to say that women playing physical contact sports, such as football, with men is absurd and dangerous. I would go further and say that some kinds of contact sports are inappropriate for women at all – though I recognise that you are right to say that there is increasing interest in participating in them.
But I think you’re wrong to think there even is such a thing as a traditional woman’s physique, or that sensible participation in non-traditional but non-contact sports will produce a non-traditional one and that this is a negative thing.
I don’t regard Annie Thorisdottir as an example as having any special sort of physique, and am quite sure she will have no problem finding a man, if she wants one. The range of the normal in therms of the body and strength and fitness among perfectly normal men and women is very wide. It goes all the way in men from the classic sedentary computer progremmer to the NFL linebacker, and similarly in women.
They are all normal.
As to developing the body, the extent to which women are able to modify their physiques is limited by hormones. Look at the female Olympic lifters in the lighter weight classes. They are not visibly particularly muscularly developed. But they are certainly strong. That’s also my experience from gyms. The women get much stronger, but they don’t get huge or cut. Not without steroids, anyway.
Henrik,
“think you’re wrong to think there even is such a thing as a traditional woman’s physique, ”
Wow. Too bizarre to discuss. But very PC. Lots of young women’s lives will be damaged, as lab rats in Leftists’ social experiments.
“I don’t regard Annie Thorisdottir as an example as having any special sort of physique”
Duh. She is age 30, height 5′ 7″, weight 148, and does gymnastics – ballet – crossfit. She is in the average Body Mass Index range, esp for a highly fit person. The woman in this post is age 18, 5′ 3″, and 148 – a defensive linewoman in football. Conflating the two is trolling.
“They are all normal.”
More trolling. This is not a debate about normal or abnormal.
It’s easy to tell when a liberal’s ideas are threatened by facts. They throw chaff into the discussion, give irrelevant examples, and say obviously false things. Defend that ideology!
The woman in this post is age 18, 5′ 3″, and 148 – a defensive linewoman in football. Conflating the two is trolling.
I don’t see anything wrong or unattractive in being of these proportions. Many men will not be attracted to her, but many will. Its a bit unusual of course, but physical proportions are distributed with fairly long tails.
I am not conflating the two in the sense of minimizing the differences. They are indeed different. I am arguing differently: I am arguing that the differences are not grounds for concern or grounds to think that this lady is ruining her life.
I’m also doubting that the proportions are all due to the sport and the training. Women come from birth and heredity in lots of shapes and sizes. As do men. I would expect that a lot of her shape and build is inherited. In my experience even women who want to and work to do it cannot generate extreme changes in muscularity and definition, unless they do steroids. Which is deeply damaging of course, but that is drugs not the training.
Some others seem to bulk up and gain muscle almost without trying. They are usually of her build to start with.
Don’t know what the facts are that I am supposed to be threatened by. I agree with most all of your post. I don’t think men and women have any business doing contact sports together. I don’t think women should be in infantry combat roles or can do them effectively. I am certain that there are real and important differences in physical strength and abilities between men and women. And some intellectual ones too.
The only thing I am arguing about is this concept of the ‘traditional women’s physique’. I don’t think its a valid objective concept. I don’t think it helps us evaluate the sports situation or other situations of female participation. At best it reflects the personal sexual taste of part of the male population. But only part.
henrik,
“I am not conflating the two in the sense of minimizing the differences.”
Stop trolling us. That’s exactly what you did by giving a fit average ballet dancer gymnast as a rebuttal to a women defensive linebacker.
As for your opinion, they’re your own. However odd. Time will tell how many men agree with you.
“Commenters have ignored my guess that the push for more migrants and spread of ghetto culture are women’s reactions to weak men.”
Hello editor!
I’ll step up to the plate here. I think the migrant crises across the west are related to foreign policy and conditions in the third world, not the moods of white women.
As to the spread of ghetto culture, I cant speak to that, other than to say that “authentic ghetto-ness” is fueled by the prison system and neoliberal austerity. As to why rap and hip hop are increasingly commodified and distributed all I can say is state the obvious that the market is the medium of this spread.
Tomorrow: The girl sued one of the guys for assaulting her and that she should be given free way while scoring because she may get hurt. After all she’s a girl. (suddenly feminism disappears when guys try to treat a girl like a guy).
Jake,
We’re told that women are just as strong – or stronger than – men. But they must be protected from even very small things.
Man in an elevator joking asks to be let off at “ladies lingerie.” Feminist files charges which can destroy his career. This is our America. Stasi alumni go green with envy. See “Speaking up in the Age of #MeToo and Persistent Patriarchy or What can we learn from an elevator incident about anti-feminist backlash” by Simona Sharoni at Feminist Review. She is a Professor of Women’s and Gender Studies and Director of the Interdisciplinary Institute at Merrimack College.
The result shows our intellectuals at work, and why they should not be let near the controls of society: “Dispute Over ‘Lingerie’ Comment Persists, as Society Rejects Professor’s Appeal” by Katherine Mangan at the Chronicle of Higher Education, 14 November 2018.
Here is a detailed review of this incident, showing its madness at every level. This is the best our social science intellectuals are capable of, while they criticize American society. See the analysis at the end. “Is ‘Ladies Lingerie’ a Harmless Joke or Harassment?” by Conor Friedersdorf at The Atlantic.