Some backward minds might find this simple question an interesting question:

Why allow women in combat if we won’t allow them to compete alongside men in sport?


While the U.S. Navy and Air Force are pledged to open all positions to women, and the Army is being coy, the Marines did a major study on hundreds of volunteers in simulated combat. The results, NBC reports, included “Women were injured twice as often as the men (40.5 per cent for women, 18.8 per cent for men); Men were more accurate at shooting on every weapon system except the M4 [rifle]; Women had trouble with combat tasks, including removing casualties.” But this study will be dismissed as outdated thinking rather than welcomed as important new evidence. And in one sense, indeed, it merely confirms what we all know already.

Why are we determined to put women in combat alongside men when we absolutely refuse to do it in sports? We would be horrified by a society where cheering crowds watched male safeties smash into female receivers and leave them writhing on the ground, or female forwards were ground into the boards by male defencemen five inches taller and 70 pounds heavier and given cracked ribs.

We certainly wouldn’t put women in a boxing ring with men or an MMA match.

As to why, the answer (duh!) is because they say so! Unless they say otherwise.

We do not elect leaders, nor do we consent to being governed by these people. We are, simply, ruled.

Believe it or not, I include women in the “we.”

UPDATE: Many thanks to Sarah Hoyt at Instapundit for the link! A warm welcome to all!