MonteZuma Posted August 26, 2004 Report Posted August 26, 2004 There is a logical reason why (most) female athlete's breasts remain small.Because they take steroids?
Trigger Happy Posted August 26, 2004 Report Posted August 26, 2004 There is a logical reason why (most) female athlete's breasts remain small.Ok, first of all it’s not like the military is making porn stars, don't be naive. It is no different from a dismembering nose. At least in some people's eyes at least, and I can understand that. I think people are over critical, but oh well. The point is they can't just raise there hand and volunteer for a boob job. They have to go through a therapist, and at that point, most good insurances would cover it anyway, if it’s affecting your health like that. Considering the mil is its own health care, it is pay for what it would have to pay for anyway. Secondly to the best of my knowledge breasts have a large amount of fat in them. The more you work out the less fat you have. Therefore most athletes do not have the largest breasts. (I would find supporting sites for you but I'm at work, and I don't want to search breast sizes on my Air Force account) Later-Trigg
Aileron Posted August 26, 2004 Report Posted August 26, 2004 Um, women can't keep up with men while doing physical stuff anyways. Mentally and morally, men and women are equal, physically is another matter. Thus, the military likely doesn't care about a female soldier's physical capabilities. The recruit women for their brains; when they want brawn, they get a Swarzenegger type male, and hand him a rocket launcher or 22 mil gun.
Trigger Happy Posted August 26, 2004 Report Posted August 26, 2004 Mentally and morally, men and women are equal, physically is another matter. Agreed, I have seen some BUTCH women though. But if I'm not mistaken, Marines do not put women on any of there front lines. This is so for several reasons including the physical ability of them. Also men tend to want to protect the women, rather than complete the mission if she where to become in evident danger. -triG
MonteZuma Posted August 26, 2004 Report Posted August 26, 2004 Mentally and morally, men and women are equal, physically is another matter. Agreed, I have seen some BUTCH women though. But if I'm not mistaken, Marines do not put women on any of there front lines. This is so for several reasons including the physical ability of them. Also men tend to want to protect the women, rather than complete the mission if she where to become in evident danger. -triG No. Men and women generally have different physical and mental characteristics. Women are different morally too. If you've ever lived with one (aside from your mother or sister!) you'd know this.
Aileron Posted August 27, 2004 Report Posted August 27, 2004 I said equal, not identical. Yeah, I know very well the mental differences, (until Sunday I currently live with my mother and three sisters.) but that leads to a post so long that you would be bored by the time you would reach my point. The point is that women can be combat trained practically as easy as men. They have obvious hormonal problems, but that can be overcome. The real problem is strength. The average healthy man is about 210 lbs. the average healthy woman about 120 lbs and the average infantryman's backpack about 100 lbs. The difference in physical training is the difference between training someone to carry half their body weight and all their body weight. Compared to that overcoming the hormones that dicate the female thought process is fairly simple.
Recommended Posts