The Beating a Woman takes Playing Football with Men won’t be as Bad as Hand-to-Hand Combat

Posted by PITHOCRATES - February 22nd, 2014

Week in Review

The NFL is coming under a lot of pressure because of concussions.  And the brain damage it may lead to later in life.  As players have never been bigger or faster.  And when they hit they hit hard.  The NFL has changed the rules to prevent the most damaging of these collisions.  Head to head contact.  There is even talk of eliminating the kickoff.  To prevent two ‘freight trains’ running into each other at full speed.  And those on the left are calling it a brutal game that we need to get rid of.  For it’s little better than gladiators fighting to the death in the Colosseum.  And we shouldn’t let our children grow up and play football.  Unless they’re gay.  Or women.  Then it’s a beautiful thing.  An openly gay man in the NFL.  Or a woman playing running back in the Indoor Football League (see Running Back Jennifer Welter Makes History By Playing In Pro Football Game by ThePostGame Staff posted 2/17/2014 on Yahoo! Sports).

Welter, who has starred at linebacker for a decade for the Dallas Diamonds of the Women’s Football Alliance, got her first carry midway through the third quarter. She took a handoff from two yards out of the end zone and scampered around the left tackle. But the 5-foot-2, 130 pound Welter was met by 6-4, 245-pound defensive lineman Cedric Hearvey for a one-yard loss.

Somehow, Welter was unfazed by the hit.

“I said, ‘Is that all you got?'” Welter asked Hearvey. “I didn’t want them to think I was intimidated…”

Welter had her number called twice more in goal line situations, but she wasn’t able to score either time.

If you follow the link you can see videos of her plays.  She looked like a child playing with men who towered over her.  And one hit just threw her like a train hitting something.  She got right up.  But with the men having a one foot height advantage and over a 100 pound weight differential these were traumatic hits.  A few more of these and she would be lucky to escape with only a concussion.  And these are the kind of hits the left wants to get out of the NFL.  Though I suppose they’re okay if it’s a woman getting the snot beat out of her.  It kind of reminded me of Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life where the boys played the masters in a rugby match.  As the grown men just beat the snot out of their students.

As tough as she is she is just not as big or strong as the men playing at this level.  And that’s because men and women are different.  Which is why we shouldn’t have women in combat roles.  For the hand-to-hand fighting in combat is worse than any football game.  And just like in football the bigger and stronger combatant usually wins.  But unlike in a football game when you lose your matchup you just don’t score.  Or lose the game.  In combat when you lose you die.  And you weaken your team.  Giving the advantage to the enemy.  Which will probably cause more of your team to die.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Women in Combat Zones have been issued Rape Whistles to Protect themselves from their Fellow Soldiers

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 6th, 2013

Week in Review

Watch a realistic war movie.  Like PlatoonSaving Private Ryan.  Or Band of Brothers.  And study the scenes where the combat is so close that it devolves into brutal hand-to-hand combat.  Where brute strength and dirty fighting kills someone.  Where men are reduced to animals in the wild.  Snorting and grunting and gasping for life.  Until someone can stab another to death.  Snap a neck.  Or choke someone to death.  For when the enemy gets this close you can’t use your rifle.  All you have is your physical strength.  And whoever is stronger typically wins these horrific hand-to-hand encounters.  This is combat at its worse.  Where the killing is close.  You hear the dying breath of the enemy.  And look them in the eyes as they die.

Now there is a drive to put women in combat.  Up to now they have only served in support roles that engaged in periodic combat situations.  Serving valiantly.  And paying a heavy price in the wounds they receive.  But they end their day in a rear area.  In a base with beds to sleep in.  Hot chow.  And showers.  They haven’t ‘rucked up’ and gone on extended patrols with the infantry or Special Forces.  But some say it is now time that women do (see ‘No girls allowed’: Iraq war vet Rep. Tulsi Gabbard on opening combat missions to women by Rick Klein, Richard Coolidge, and Jordyn Phelps posted 7/3/2013 on Yahoo! News).

Ask Rep. Tulsi Gabbard why she supports the military’s new policy to allow women to serve in combat roles, and the Iraq war veteran speaks from experience.

“I can tell you during my deployment, there were missions that I– volunteered for and was not allowed to go on, simply because I’m a woman,” Gabbard, D-Hawaii, tells Top Line. “They said, ‘Sorry, no. No girls allowed…’”

Gabbard also brings a first-hand perspective to the issue of sexual assault in the military, saying she “heard and saw incidents” of sexual assault within her military camp when she was in Iraq.

“We got issued rape whistles so that as we walk out of our tent or walk out of our hooch, we’ve got our body armor, we’ve got our helmet, our weapon, and we’ve got our rape whistle,” Gabbard recalls. “It was an eye-opening experience to have to consider that fact when we’re serving overseas in Iraq and…this is a risk or a danger that exists.”

Women have different physical standards in training.  To help them complete training.  Because they don’t have the same strength of men.  And can’t do what men do.  There are some who can but by and large if they didn’t have these different standards we wouldn’t have as many women in the military today.  Or have to issue rape whistles.  For if a women met the same physical standards as a man she wouldn’t need that rape whistle.  For she would be able to defend herself from a would be rapist.  Just as she would be able to defend herself if the enemy penetrated their defensive line and the combat devolved into brutal hand-to-hand combat.  Where blowing a rape whistle wouldn’t cause the enemy to stop trying to kill her.

Sure, some will say, a woman may be able to protect herself if it was one on one.  But what if she was being gang-raped?  Then she would still need that rape whistle.  If it was that bad in the military then we shouldn’t have women there in the first place.  For it’s an obvious distraction to the mission if we have to focus so much on sexual assault in these rear areas of deployed troops.  And what would happen once these troops left these rear areas and entered combat?  There were a lot of unpopular second lieutenants who were ‘accidentally’ shot by their own troops in Vietnam.  For putting men on report.  Or just being incompetent in leading men into battle.  When the bullets started flying accidents happened.  Grenades get tossed around and accidentally end up in the wrong foxhole.  And if they happen to have an enemy rifle, why, they could say the lieutenant fell gloriously in battle under enemy fire.  Any gang of soldiers who would try to gang-rape a soldier in their unit would have no second thoughts about making their problem go away in the field.  You can’t put them all in the brig.  If you did you wouldn’t have enough to send into the field.  So soldiers will enter the field with some possible bad blood.  And scores to settle.

Is it this bad in the military?  Probably not.  Can it be?  Perhaps.  For you’re always going to have trouble when mixing men and women together.  Officers may be gentlemen.  But soldiers are cold-blooded killers in the field.  Who revert to their animalistic past.  Where it’s kill or be killed.  Thinking that we can flip a switch on them to change them from cold-blooded killers to gentlemen is asking a lot of them.  And distracts from the mission.  For the few women who can meet the men’s physical standards is it worth it to play with these social experiments on the best military in the world?  Will these women make the best military better?  Will they not change it?  Or will they degrade it?  None of these three options make a compelling case to tamper with the best military in the world.  So why do it?

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,