Women Warriors

in the interests of making this thread something useful, i shall proceed to dump my female warriors folder

Attached: assassin chick.jpg (1183x1920, 328K)

Attached: Dark Lady.jpg (600x878, 54K)

>The Soviets might have a different opinion on this
Their studies show the same thing.

>Women do excel in combat whenever they are fully integrated into armies
The opposite is actually true, although women will always perform worse than men on average in combat, segregated units perform somewhat better than unsegregated units.

Attached: 1520875157761.jpg (897x1280, 231K)

Attached: dark warrior lady.jpg (800x1091, 89K)

What's with all manga bullshit? You're falling into the same tone of every fantasy debate here.

Attached: Inquisitor.jpg (1875x3000, 618K)

>soviets

listen dude, pressing females into service because all the men in the area are dead and then parading the ones that live as being glorious warriors sprung from the bosom of the motherland so that MEN will volunteer or at least not run away from the draft officer, does not mean that they conscripted women because women make good soldiers. sure, i guess some of them were supposedly good snipers if you believe literal soviet propaganda (all kill counts on all sides, UK US GER Sov whatever, were grossly inflated)

if you really believe that women make equal soldiers to men, at least concerning ground forces you're a fucking idiot. there are places for women in the military, and I'm not talking secretary bullshit, things like pilots, strategic forces, medical corps, where the actual areas that females excel even over men (men are better at focusing on one task, women are better at multitasking) mean their skills can best be made use of.

Attached: Lady Knight 2.jpg (1455x2000, 256K)

As if /k/ has anything to do with warfare?

I have never once seen a right wing gun enthusiast that was military officer material. Not fucking once.

Just cause women make bad soldiers doesn't mean they don't look good in a uniform.

Attached: 1520920579544.jpg (1024x1629, 213K)

Attached: lady knight 3.jpg (1008x1600, 421K)

The fact that it isn't coming out right now speaks to our dinosaur mentality in the West. Holy shit is the West always fighting the last war.

Attached: Lady Knight 3 pt 2.jpg (1184x1600, 555K)

>What we do know for sure is that women are just as smart as men
Despite having far less neurons, far lower synapse density and brain mass?
>are just as good warriors
Despite all studies showing they cause more harm than good and are a waste of even the cheapest equipment?

Attached: lady knight 4.jpg (680x1080, 187K)

The soviets literally faked each and every study they did to justify whatever retarded disastrous bullshit they were doing at the time, be it drafting women, killing all farmers, expecting barley to change into wheat, nuking the aral sea to grow cotton and the list goes on

>marching and carrying heavy shit, where endurance, strength, and toughness matter.
Have you ever heard of this new concept called mechanized warfare?

In World War 2, very few women in the Soviet military actually served in combat roles. The vast majority of them were in medical or logistics roles.

Have you ever heard of this concept called light infantry?

Attached: 1520998335720.jpg (1500x2000, 1.08M)

>After this the only argument left to misogynistic men desperately in search of identity is to argue for protecting breeding stock.

Attached: 1487193692547.jpg (800x1335, 152K)

I imagine /hwg/ would suggest AK-47 Republic, but its an old and clunky system really. I bet chain of command with a few tweaks could handle it

RE Dinosaurs; its an old argument, but I don't think its that fair. Its just that until you get to the modern war, you don't know if what you've been working on holds true. Falklands is a good example; both sides had new and fancy weapon systems, new tactics... found only half of them worked, weird bugs in software, fire control that wasn't up to spec. I guess the winner is frequently the one who adjusts the fastest

>what does a board with the highest % of veterans both combat and otherwise, who's sole area of focus is weapons and their practical application have to do with war

>all gun enthusiasts are right wing
nigga, how the fuck do you expect to overthrow the bourgeois capitalist scum and establish a workers paradise without firearms? your ignorance and bias is showing man, something fierce.

Women are fighting now in full combat rolls and have done so progressively since WWII. The argument against warrior women (especially as technology progressives )will progressively occupy less and less ground until it is not a valid argument.

The display of warrior women imagery will continue to be as fantastical as all imagery of warriors is in support of the warrior ethos.

this picture arouses me

as former military I laugh at this statement. the average weight of gear we would carry was around 30kg and a backpack somewhere around 30-50kg, the average guy in my squad was 90kg. so adding all of this brings us to a low total of 150kg and a high total of 170kgs. we would march for 6-8 hours a day to reach an Observation Post. Vehicles are very situational. Roads and deserts are fine, but try bringing that shit into a forest or boggy area m8. Vehicles are also very expensive mind you. it's much better to have someone walk in low profile than to have a 100k$ vehicle blown up.

yeah, we don't really do it as much as you think

>t. salty 19D

Ah yes, the daily -4 STR thread.

It's good to see Veeky Forums still remembers the classics, even in this dark time of nofun.

nigga, how the fuck do you expect to overthrow the bourgeois capitalist scum and establish a workers paradise without firearms?
I'm not going to do it with right wing gun enthusiasts. You people funking love guns untill black people get ahold of them. Then you start acting all feels and victimy.

I see you are a man of taste.

>>as former military I laugh at this statement. the average weight of gear we would carry was around 30kg and a backpack somewhere around 30-50kg, the average guy in my squad was 90kg. so adding all of this brings us to a low total of 150kg and a high total of 170kgs. we would march for 6-8 hours a day to reach an Observation Post. Vehicles are very situational. Roads and deserts are fine, but try bringing that shit into a forest or boggy area m8. Vehicles are also very expensive mind you. it's much better to have someone walk in low profile than to have a 100k$ vehicle blown up.

More fucking dinosaurs.

People like you think its political, its not. Biologically men on average just have more upper body strength and lung capacity, you should go debate this on /k/ and actually read what they say because this is embarrassing. Standards have had to be lowered dramatically to allow women to serve in combat roles. The military should not be a social experiement to make progressives feel good when they're huffing each others farts around the table.

Attached: 1442454336279[1].jpg (376x400, 99K)

You've chosen to out yourself as a troll rather than debate his point. Why?

Attached: sunabouzu.png (954x706, 739K)

>i'm fucking right wing
>me
>an actual literal dyed-red-in-the-wool militant marxist
>a fucking right winger

I dont have a reaction image strong enough to convey the rage I'm feeling right now.

kurds are employing women fighters against the terrorists, and they are doing pretty well
and historically there have been many, real or propagndized or otherwise, female warriors who acquitted themeselves in battle

while, in a blank white space between two equally trained combatants, the man will win
reality tends to be messy without such a clear victory every time, and the difference isnt so large that all-women groups couldnt at the very least hold their own

Look, user, the actual chaos of battle, how it has changed in the last 200 years, and what the individual can offer doesn't matter, only biological facts do, and women can not nor will ever offer anything other than a wet hole that produces more soldiers occasionally.

No one is saying that women are incapable of fighting with any decency at all, but they certainly perform worse than men in the vast majority of cases. Therefore, sending women to battle is something you only do when you are desperate for manpower, similar to child soldiers.

Attached: 1469676948746.jpg (560x819, 523K)

The one than is spouting a debunked time and time again political shit is you user.
Also why can't you fuckers put your friggin shitty ideologies and politics out of my hobby, go to /pol/ to fight your retarded fights posting bbc porn or whatever the flavour of the month shit you guys do.

>Therefore, sending women to battle is something you only do when you are desperate for manpower, similar to child soldiers.
while less women will be proportionately allowed in the military, the gap between a man and a woman isnt quite the same gap between a 14 year old and a 21 year old

> only biological facts do
solid snake is disappointed in you

>solid snake
user, if you can't pick up that I am lampooning a position, you need to take a step back and reflect on your personal involvement in this nonsense.

>Despite having far less neurons, far lower synapse density and brain mass?
I require proof that quantity of neurons, synapse density and brain mass are correlated in any way with smarts. Or with anything, really.
For instance, Einstein's brain was smaller than the average brain. Was he less smart than most?

Historically women fighters have always been an anomaly and/or a sign of a desperation on part of a war-torn culture driven to it's hind legs so to speak.

>the gap between a man and a woman isnt quite the same gap between a 14 year old and a 21 year old
It's probably worse, I could physically overtake my mother at 14.

Attached: 1475799866647.png (863x1165, 243K)

The fact he used the word "funking" instead of "fucking" on Veeky Forums of all places and is being a ltieral strawman of the average anti-gunner should be proof enough you got baited my stupid communist friend. but there's no need to be redundant :^)

user a 14 years old team of soccer beat the female national team of england, you see, when a kid get in puberty an hormone called testosterone...

>female national team of england
that has more to do with the them being english than anything like gender

and i know a 25 year old girl who would tear anyone i know limb from limb

I think he should have said "before puberty" rather than "14 years old".

Last I recall you can't scale up tight ridges using a MRAP.

>and i know a 25 year old girl who would tear anyone i know limb from limb
I find that highly unlikely, but I'll take your word for it, even though I don't know any female MMA fighters that could tear anyone I know limb from limb.

Attached: 1520183074953.jpg (1200x1030, 1.29M)

>that has more to do with the them being english than anything like gender
Not him but another under 16s side beat the austrailian women's team as well.

I can't even imagine being as retarded as you

blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/why-are-white-men-stockpiling-guns/
Gun owners
> Couldn't pass or get into any college
> think there's an impending black revolution
> Are right wing
> are poor af (and thus spend their income on fucking guns)
> are militia retards

That looks like a precarious place for the Marine Corps to be in. On the one hand, they have to accept women in combat roles for political reasons, but their own study showed that even allowing 1 woman into a combat team brought down the overall effectiveness of the team when compared to all-male teams suggesting that including women would be a net negative. You could make all female combat teams, but that might just lead to combat teams that consistently still perform worse then their all male counterpart.

So accept women, more people die to account for the weakest link, don't accept women get called sexist. There is no way to win.

>I can't even imagine being as retarded as you
Not an argument.

Attached: 1520208984549.jpg (1024x972, 307K)

I don't argue with people too stupid to change their mind.

>you argue with facts and statistics, you're a retard for not buying feel good bullshit

also, ((scientific american))
top fucking kek dude

A team will have lower efficiency when a large portion of the team has issue with one of it's members and fails to work with them on several levels.

You never stated anything in the first place, I simply posted studies and then you rejected them because they were inconvenient for your worldview.

Attached: 1047496691.jpg (705x375, 76K)

Better to be called a sexist by idiots than throw peoples lives away to please progressives that are fresh out of university.

Attached: latest[2].png (940x843, 318K)

What? No, that's not true at all! The Kurds are employing women fighters because they need everyone they can get. The Kurds don't have the luxury of being picky.

And yes, the women do face more risks on the battlefield. Recently, one of them was raped and sexually mutilated to death when she was caught.

> theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/02/syrian-kurds-outraged-over-mutilation-of-female-fighter

That's not really an argument in favor of female fighters. It's necessity, more than anything else.

When that happens the fault lies with the soldier who fails to fit in, in this case that soldier being the female soldier.

Attached: 1519613840901.jpg (885x899, 146K)

>men because ever since the invention of the rifle we have slowly come to realize that light infantry tactics are based more on quick thinking initiative than strength.
Also relies on maneuverability and endurance, which men excel at better. Much better actually.

>What we do know for sure is that women are just as smart as men and because of this are just as good warriors.

Neurotic personalities, less endurance, less maneuverability, and a myriad of other factors hold them back.

>women have gone beyond proving themselves in modern warfare. In this a female warrior is quintessentially no joke.
As the exception not the rule. Generally used in short burst combat situations or heavily stationary. Other cases are where they are operating vehicles, and I'm cool with that since their smaller frame isn't an obstruction.

>After this the only argument left to misogynistic men desperately in search of identity is to argue for protecting breeding stock.
And basic biology which still demonstrates that men are almost always superior for the job. Look, I wish women were just as physically capable as a men as a standard, but that just ain't true.

>Arguing that images of warrior women are simply propaganda is moot
Maybe not because to an extent it is true?

Attached: damaged-a10.jpg (621x414, 36K)

you used double brackets. You can't even get your fucking racist memes correct!

Attached: come on in.jpg (1000x1502, 246K)

What if I told you that not all gun owners were anti-government hicks, you fucking bigot.

All science is fake news cultural marxism apparently. Only trust retards from incels.me and reddit, for they are the only ones capable of knowing the truth.

>racial fears

ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/expanded_homicide_data_table_3_murder_offenders_by_age_sex_and_race_2015.xls

What if I told you the lefties are coming to take your guns away. Every. Single. Gun.

Attached: 1445442617372.jpg (329x324, 75K)

Not him but I already knew that. They've more or less stated exactly that many, many times.

>99% of battlefield operations for the infantryman are composed of marching and carrying heavy shit, where endurance, strength, and toughness matter

Aaaaand this is why the burgerarmy lost Afghanistan.

If you don't want me to exercise my second amendment rights with my nineteen and counting firearms you've got another thing friendo.

Can't wait for the hickopalypse. First step to a true mayocide, then all Yacubs devils will be slain forever.

Generally that goes without saying.

Attached: 1423962244838.jpg (554x527, 40K)

I don't know why the other user isn't understand that simple concept, if the whole damn platoon is having issue with 1 soldier then that 1 soldier is almost always the cause of their troubles, not the platoon. You have femanons like in who cry the second women stop getting special treatment in the military yet they constantly insist women perform equally.

Attached: 1518655597534.jpg (468x1083, 75K)

Do you even try to pretend you're not fishing for (you)s?

>stop visiting this board for a few months
>come back
>/pol/ bait threads are still a thing

Why do I expect anything better?

> I'm gonna shoot americans if you say mean things!

I fucking hate americans anyway so you'd be doing me a favour. There was this american kid that moved in from ohio in my highschool and I made his bitch ass cry every fucking day.

The modern soldier carries the heaviest kit of any soldier ever. A man can carry a bigger gun longer, carry more ammo, fire longer, run faster, wear more ammo, withstand more trauma, and more easily carry objects and people than a woman. A very high percentage of women who enlist end up suffering physical injury from the training alone, their fucking bones can't handle jogging with their pack.

We're still in Afghanistan dumbfuck.

Attached: 7e9e8f7c-3ff4-4b9e-a6d0-348641de7d0b.jpg (650x366, 42K)

but here's the thing dude, people who are objectively correct have to reason to change their mind. i was in the army man, 4 years. my back my knees my faith in this nation's political leadership, gone. but you want to know what i learned?

after ~6 weeks on top of a mountain surrounded by sweaty men, you will understand why hajji fucks the goat

jalapeno cheese spread is worth it's weight in cigarettes

fresh fruits and vegetables are worth their weight in jally cheese

when they say "friendly fire, isn't" they're not fucking joking

a woman can't march as far without rest as a man, carry the same weight as a man, keep their cool under fire as well as a man, they can't even pack their kit without jingle-jangling loud enough to wake up every pashtun in a 20-mile radius, they make supremely awful ground-pounders, God help the tankers if they ever make armor co-ed (track links are heavy as fuck)

they are shitty ground troops, there is no way around it. you're arguing with someone that has seen it first hand my man, your shit just doesn't hold water. pilots technicians and service personnel? sure, all day. believe it or not the best armorer I knew was a woman, her shop was immaculate and not once did she bitch when we brought her our broken shit, not even to the dude who used a hammer to shut the tray on a 249. you calling me a "dinosaur" doesn't change the fact that I have seen it, lived it, and suffered the fucking consequences and you haven't. you have no idea what you're talking about, you have no leg to stand on, no relevant experience in the field you claim to be more knowledgeable about than "dinosaurs" zero zilch nada.

but we, the people who have actual evidence and experience to back up our point rather than grrl power and speculation, are the ones too stupid to change our minds....yeah fucking right my man, sure.

Because thanks to more recent years the world has become more politically charged than ever. Every body wants to stick a snowflake label on themselves, whether it's "Fag", "Trannie", "Right" or "Leftist" and it infects every fucking board with it's cancer.

>And in this women are fighting just as well as men

I'll take "things infantry have never said" for 100. Physical inferiority is only the tip of the iceberg.

Attached: gender_and_combat.jpg (640x683, 61K)

And I suppose the neo-marxist legislators will the ones going door-to-door?

> Eurofag serf can't handle the concept of men having the capacity for selt-defense

>light infantry tactics are based more on quick thinking initiative than strength.
You misunderstand what light infantry is, light infantry isn't "light" in the sense that they only have a rifle and their clothes on, light infantry are infantry units that do not have vehicles carrying their equipment. They carry all their anti tank weapons, their mortars and all their shells/rockets/bullets themselves without the use of a vehicle.

Light infantry essentially mean "walking infantry" and mechanized infantry means "driving infantry".

>What we do know for sure is that women are just as smart as men
Men have higher intelligence than women
>Scientists concluded that men’s average intelligence quotient (IQ) is four points above women’s
independent.co.uk/life-style/erasmus-university-men-more-intelligent-women-gender-sexist-science-journalists-misogyny-a7820531.html

And studies have shown that women have smaller brains. Around 8-13% smaller on average.
independent.co.uk/news/science/men-have-bigger-brains-than-women-research-reveals-9124103.html

Overall, men just have a bigger brain, but brain power really isn't important for a soldier on the battlefield so I find it kinda pointless to bring up.

>After this the only argument left to misogynistic men desperately in search of identity is to argue for protecting breeding stock.
But if the men where misogynistic wouldn't they argue for MORE women in combat roles? That way women (who they hate) die and men (who they are) would survive.

But isn't all of this just a fantasy? Do we need realism?

Attached: anime girl knight.png (1303x1351, 853K)

Go back to eating Infowars Soy pills and then saying it has too much estrogen.

Attached: down here plz.jpg (1200x675, 128K)

I know more gays than straights who own guns, for the full spectrum of reasons. I'd love to see that particular cognitive dissonance kick in.

And apart of losing millions of dollars everyday, for what purpose?

Honstly there was also an uptic in black men owning guns after trump, but /pol/tard and /r9k/ salt is too good to pass up.

>ITT this thread has become old school /k/

Not all, no.
But you can't deny the basic logic that people with martial, reactionary worldviews would almost all as one buy a gun the moment they're able to.
That means that while not all gun owners are racist anti-government hicks, next to all racist anti-government hicks are gun owners.
And considering there are far more retards in the world compared to normal people than there should be by any rights, it doesn't come as a surprise that the reasonable gun owners and proponents are outnumbered.
It's not that the idea is inherently negative, it's that it's almost universally attractive to a group of people who have the IQ of a Tootsie Roll.
As long as that group still exists, gun ownership is a negative influence on the crime rate, public safety and the political landscape.
The issue pro-gun people should be working on is making sure guns are used responsibly - as long as Alex Jones, certain parts of the NRA and other people of that stripe are still out there screaming their heads off, even many people who have nothing against gun ownership in theory will be against it because, guess what, they don't want them in the hands of lunatics.

You know, there's a reason you call politics like that "reactionary", and you can see that from your post.
Not everyone has to be against you. Deep breath, Occam's Razor, and then you can start thinking.
I'm saying this as a far-right conspiranoid myself. If you don't have a clear reason for assuming people are bigoted and not just relying on general trends to create their worldview (which you with your assumptions do even more), calm down and think before biting.
No one will listen to someone who sounds like a loony. The most important thing needed to make an actual change is that you say sane things to sane people in a sane way, and from there on you can start drawing the attention to other issues.
But you have to kill your darlings at first, or people will just laugh at you like I'm doing right now.

It's not losing if someone is profiting.

Attached: Steven_Armstrong.jpg (865x760, 48K)

Yeah and the Taliban is taking back Kabul.

I dunno but I have pretty good experience with women on the field. Tho my unit wasn't the average burger shooting commando either.