Did you ever notice how much of respectable discourse today consists of telling you to stop asking questions and just take the conventional wisdom on faith? For example:
It’s time to stop questioning whether women should be in combat units.
A relevant question I asked way back in my 1997 article “Track & Battlefield” is: what % of women in the military can realistically live up to the strength demands of combat (e.g., carrying enough ammunition) without juicing on steroids and/or Human Growth Hormone? For example, does the petite lady in this photo look like she could hump enough ammo or carry a wounded comrade without some biochemical enhancement?
A lot of of today’s conventional wisdom about women in combat goes back to a mistaken cliche of the 1980s about how the converging Olympic results of that East Germany-dominated era showed that women were going to catch up to men real soon now. But once PED testing was slightly improved after the 1988 Olympic fiasco, the gender gap in running widened.
So, do elites want to encourage women soldiers to take artificial male hormones to help their careers? Or is that just another one of those things we should “stop questioning”?
