Women in Ground Combat

It is fashionable these days to appear concerned about what is currently interpreted as

inequality.

Inequality can be accurately defined as any diversity in the outcomes of any human endeavor, deemed to be the potential subject of an op-ed

piece in the New York Times, the Washington Post or Yahoo News. As such, what I'm about

to say will be ignored by these outlets, both because it appears to promote inequality,

even though it does absolutely no such thing,

and because it is based on a logical analysis that cannot actually be made the subject of opinion.

And despite the fact that I have been dealing with strength training in a professional capacity since 1977,

and despite the additional fact that my methods have made more people stronger in the past 10 years than anybody else in this business, to wit.

If a particular occupation or physical activity has a quantifiable strength, endurance, or power component

inherent in its successful or even satisfactory performance.

Then the physical requirements of that job or activity can be quantified. And if the physical requirements of the job can be quantified,

then the physical abilities of the potential holders of the job can be specified.

So can their hiring criteria. My article about straight training for women,

neuromuscular efficiency,

details the important difference between the physical performance

potential of men and women

and explains its physiological basis.

It has not been refuted.

Briefly, men and women displayed disparate levels of neuromuscular efficiency

based upon sexual differences in hormonal milieu.

...