Tuesday, November 12, 2019

84% Of Women Fail Army Combat Test

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

It isn't politically correct to even think such things, much less say them out loud---However, the Center for Military Readiness reports that 84% of women are failing the new Army combat fitness test---"and," they say, "the military should drop the 'gender diversity' agenda..."

Could it be that God created male and female to be different?

Be informed.

Some thoughts on equality.

In a new report, the Center for Military Readiness says that 84% of women fail the New Army Combat Fitness Test and that "all military officials should drop the 'gender diversity' agenda and put mission readiness and 'combat lethality' first."

The great social experiment.

In December 2015, former Defense Secretary Ashton Carter overturned policy and authorized women to serve in direct ground combat (infantry) units. These are the fighting teams that attack the enemy with deliberate offensive action---missions beyond the experience of being in "harm's way."

The Center for Military Readiness says, "Women are serving with courage as they always have. But in two major categories---unequal physical capabilities and sexual misconduct---signs of a failing social experiment are increasingly obvious."

Obama's administration brought in false promises of a "gender-free" military. They promised men and women would be equally capable, immune to sexual attractions, and interchangeable in physically challenging missions.

CMR says, "Instead of this fantasy, the caisson's wheels are starting to fall off."

At least a dozen different studies warned the Obama people that men and women are not the same physically, but that did not fit their politically correct, New Age narrative about the culture and human sexuality.

The CMR report sources many incidents where women are not men.

One such test. Marine proxy tests with hundreds of volunteers confirmed significant physical differences in weight lifting exercises simulating heavy armor or artillery rounds. Most men could lift progressively heavier barbells above their heads, but 92% of female participants could not accomplish the "clean & press" with a 115-pound weight.

Injury rates for women in infantry training are 2 to 6 times higher than for men.

There are multiple cases where results from physical tests were altered to achieve the desired results. And the threshold for readiness has been lowered in the attempt to make men and women physically the same.

The report has much more detail if you're interested, but since the Obama era, the goal has been to create physical equality between men and women, and it is miserably failing.

The LGBTQ+ activists would have you believe men and women are interchangeable. They are not.

No matter how much you believe in so-called "progressive values," if they violate God's order of Creation, the so-called values fail.

Some thoughts on men and women.

I am fully aware that I will be misunderstood by some who read this article. But stay with me for a moment.

Dr. David Eckman wrote the following article titled, "God Formed The Man and Fashioned The Women."

How are men and women different? Genesis 1 and 2 answers the question. Genesis 1 relates humanity to the earth. God created the Heavens and earth and then formed and filled the planet with life. The next chapter, Genesis 2, relates man and woman to each other. God first formed Adam. While Eve was not there, God gave Adam a series of purposes to fulfill and the goal of not eating from the Tree of Good and Evil. We can say the male was formed to be a purpose fulfiller. Humorously, that very quality is sometimes maddening to women. In the first five days of His creative work, God commented at the end of the day that what He had made was good. But in the making of men and women, in Genesis 1:31, God said that man and woman were very good. Each gender would be very good at what God created them for. The man would be focused on purpose and activity. That would be his glory, but at the same time, it could easily become a weakness. For good or for bad, he would be very good at completing purposes.
Genesis 2 has two different words for the forming and fashioning of the man and the woman. The two words give insight into the differences between the genders. Genesis 2 states that God formed Adam out of the dust of the ground. The Hebrew word is yatser, meaning "to fashion as a potter." A pot is simple and straightforward. It is usually filled with one thing at a time. That nicely illustrates the man as a purpose fulfiller. In a sense, a man is focused upon purposes, and when he is pursuing the purpose, he is filled with that one thing.
The word for the fashioning of the woman is banah, used for making palaces, a temple, or forms of art. It implies that the woman was meant not only to be a companion, but an aesthetic work. Part of the creative work of God is that this aesthetic work would have the capacity to sustain her own beauty. Researchers tell us that one out of ten men are color blind, while one out of two hundred women are color blind. That implies that God built into women the capacity to be aesthetically sensitive.
In Genesis 2, a gap existed between the forming of the man and the fashioning of the woman. The gap has significance. God created a multitude of animals in front of the eyes of Adam and asked him to name them. After naming them, Adam was asked by God if he wanted any one of them as a Helper. Adam answered in the negative. Finally, after Adam developed depth perception as to what he wanted, God placed him in a sleep and fashioned Eve out of his rib. When he came to consciousness, he was in a place where he could appreciate the gift of the great Helper.
In appreciation of the gift, Adam broke out in Hebrew poetry. He rhapsodized, "This is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man." A Hebrew word play is in the text, because the woman is actually described as a female man.
The conclusion is that the woman and the man are intended to be an interdependent team. One partner, the male, would be focused on purposes, and the other, the woman, would be focused on relationships. The woman would be an aesthetic work of art, and the man would be a utilitarian force. Together, under the grand purposes of God, they were to govern the earth.

The takeaway.

Isaiah 55:8-9
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways My ways,” says the Lord.
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are My ways higher than your ways,
And My thoughts than your thoughts.

Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Faithful. Be Prayerful. Be Blessed.