Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 17, 2022 - Louder with Crowder

01:35:31

Women Should NOT be in Combat Roles | Change My Mind

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Before they decreased the standard, there were women who did pass.
	But your question is hitting all women.
	Statistically, almost none.
	Almost none.
	That's not none.
	Okay, great.
	Then why did we lower the standards?
	Oh yeah, I disagree with that.
	That's absolutely horrible.
	That's horrible.
	You're the king of the women's school.
	That's cool.
	Welcome to the latest edition of Change My Mind, where we all hopefully rationalize our positions on
	seemingly controversial topics.
	The latest topic is the idea that women should not be in roles of combat.
	And this topic actually took me to the Texas Women's University.
	Now hold on, I know what you're thinking.
	Going to a women's university to discuss a subject featuring women specifically is asking for trouble.
	And I thought so too.
	After all, sharing your opinions on this topic Could get you into some serious trouble, right?
	Well, you wouldn't be the only one to have those thoughts.
	In fact, a substantial number of people thought the exact same thing.
	Do you think most women on this campus would agree with your position?
	Absolutely not.
	At least rolled your eyes.
	I just saw that.
	Sounds like maybe you're tired of that a little bit.
	A little bit, yeah.
	I'm kidding.
	Lose his scholarship for an opinion.
	So, will the cancel mob be effective, or can people feel free to sit down and actually discuss their positions?
	I'll let you be the judge of that.
	Now, first up we have Olivia, a former high school wrestler and current Texas women's student.
	Now, I bring you Olivia first because you'll see later on a young lady named Ploy, who is also a wrestler.
	With very differing opinions based on her experiences.
	So let's juxtapose that, first, with Olivia here on Change My Mind.
	Do you mind scooching in just so we can kind of reach out and hold this here for you?
	Olivia Steven, nice to meet you.
	I'm willing to bet it's L-O-I-V-I-A.
	O-L-I-V-I-A.
	Did I not say O?
	I don't think you did.
	What did I say, I?
	I think you said L. No, I said O-O, I didn't say L. O-L-I-V-I-A, right?
	Yeah.
	I don't know how familiar you are, if at all, with the Change My Mind kind of format, but it's basically a way for us to rationalize our positions on seemingly controversial topics.
	To clarify my stance today, yeah, I don't believe that women, and I use the term women here because it is exclusively for women that we've lowered PT requirements and standards and barriers to entry in the military and the police force as far as enlisted services, as far as combat roles.
	Infantry, for example, beat cops.
	So that's why I use that example.
	I don't believe that they should be in roles of physical combat where they would encounter violence for a multitude of reasons, largely because of safety issues both for them, but more importantly, their squad mates and the citizens they're sworn to protect.
	If you disagree with me, I'm more than happy to hear why and change my mind.
	Alright, so, um, I know you said, like, your main concern with it is, um, the women joining are lowering the PT requirements, so I don't necessarily... The military has lowered it so they can join.
	Yeah, I don't necessarily think that, um, that should mean that women should not be in combat roles.
	I mean, if your problem with that is that the PT requirements are being lowered, I think... I don't think the PT requirements should be lowered.
	Okay.
	And I know that would mean that, like, technically less women would be able to join.
	Yeah, it does.
	Because, like, testosterone and stuff.
	But I don't feel like that should mean that, like, just women shouldn't be in combat roles in general, because there are those, like, exceptions of women who are just, like, oh, sorry.
	It's fine.
	Women who are just, like, naturally stronger or bigger or, like, stuff like that that would be able to keep up with the natural PT requirements.
	Sure.
	And just like there's men that can't keep up with P2 requirements, that's why there's
	um, that's why like when you're looking at like officers or like military or police,
	they're typically held at the standard because they're um, they're able to keep up with the
	requirements.
	Not women actually.
	That's the problem.
	They're held to a much lower standard.
	But I would agree with you.
	So it sounds like you're suggesting a physical meritocracy.
	Which is, if you pass the tests, then you should be able to... And I understand that would mean that someone would join.
	Yes.
	Well, we went from 2% of women in the 70s to 16%.
	And we've lowered the PT requirements consistently.
	And even just recently in the Army, created a gender neutral test that less than 10% of men failed and 65% of women failed.
	This is still a really low test.
	I mean, that's expected.
	Testosterone.
	Right, but it sounds like you're saying they shouldn't be lowering those tests.
	We should have the rigorous tests that we did.
	We should.
	And if women met those, they could be in those roles.
	Yeah, and like I said, I understand that there'd be a lot of women that wouldn't be able to make it.
	Sure.
	And men.
	And I agree, the men who don't meet those standards shouldn't be in either.
	Men and women who wouldn't be able to make it.
	Right.
	I think I think that my problem with the statement is just it was very broad because like there's always exceptions and There's like there's a lot of woman that I could just think off of the top of my head that could make it well there I would bet you it's not a lot off the top of your head.
	At least five.
	At least five?
	You think these women could do the same amount of pull-ups as men in the Marines?
	Maybe close.
	I'm not sure.
	I wouldn't know them on a personal level.
	Oh, on a personal level.
	I was going to say very, very few.
	No, no, no.
	Oh, OK.
	I was going to say very, very few.
	For example, right now in the Marines, this stat kind of blew my mind.
	A woman in the Marines can do half as many pull-ups as a man and get a perfect score.
	And that's not the only standard I'm using.
	I'm just using it because it's a very clear metric.
	But when we're talking about this, the reason this is broad is because legislatively the only reason that our standards have been lowered, to the point of them being frankly kind of embarrassing for our military, is to accommodate women.
	We haven't changed them.
	You know, the beauty of a physical meritocracy is it's blind.
	Whether it's race, gender, you pass the test or you don't.
	But we have lowered the standards throughout all branches of military and in a lot of police forces to accommodate women.
	They still fail at a much higher rate anyway and get put on the force.
	As a result, they're hurt more, they get injured more.
	If they're female cops, they get violently attacked.
	more, so do their squad mates.
	So if we're talking about, yes, there are individuals, exceptions, sure, but they could
	have made the cut a long time ago.
	Not enough of them could, so we lowered the standards.
	And that's what I have an issue with, is legislatively, it is exclusively for women.
	Well, so, I feel like...
	Does that clarify, though?
	Yeah, no, I agree with you there, because I don't, like you said, lowering the PT standards
	could result in just injuries for themselves and their squad mates and just the people
	they're trying to protect in general.
	Right.
	So my only my only issue with the statement is it just said women like and obviously I knew that's just like a broad statement.
	It's hard to fit it all on the sign and say, because from 1971 to this, you know, we went from less push-ups to no push-ups.
	We went from pull-ups to less pull-ups to no pull-ups, to not even doing a leg tuck.
	Like, that's tough to fit on a sign, but that's the policy of the military is to be more inclusive, and to be more inclusive, you're less ready.
	Yeah, no, I don't think inclusion should matter for things like, like I get, like, people want, like, inclusion here and there, representation, like, stuff like that.
	But, like, when it comes to, like, serious things... You just rolled your eyes.
	I just saw that.
	Inclusion... Sounds like maybe you're tired of that a little bit.
	A little bit, yeah.
	But, um, I'm saying when it comes to, like, things like the military, the PT standards, I don't think they should be dropped because even though that'll mean technically less women will be able to join, I think the ones that would join would be the ones that actually belong and, like, would be able to keep up and, like, actually, like, do their job professionally.
	That was a policy for a long time.
	But because of progressive legislation, it's changed.
	I don't agree that that should have changed.
	I don't think you should lower the limits for other people to be able to join.
	I don't think a man who wouldn't be able to do it shouldn't join.
	I don't think a woman who can't do it shouldn't join.
	And that man should preferably be laughed at.
	Mocked mercilessly.
	Not laughed at, but like, um... Mildly shamed.
	Hey, let me ask you, because it sounds like we agree we found common ground, Olivia.
	You have a USA wrestling shirt.
	Do you wrestle?
	Yeah.
	Oh, okay.
	Do you wrestle here for the school?
	Um, no, not... I tore my leg pretty bad.
	I might do it next year, I'm not sure.
	Do they have a wrestling team here at this school?
	Yeah, there's actually some wrestlers over there.
	Oh wow, fantastic.
	Well, that's a perfect example.
	Take the best female wrestler, who you can picture.
	The coach.
	Okay, the coach.
	How would she fare against a man of her size, average, in high school?
	Like an average high school man?
	I mean, an average man her age size.
	And who would be in her bracket?
	So, can I get a view on what this man's like?
	Is he like a novice?
	Because she was an Olympic bronze medalist, so she pretty much knows what she's doing.
	You ever watch Kayla Harrison roll with hobbyist men?
	She was a judo gold medalist twice.
	Or who was it?
	Sarah McMahon fought Ronda Rousey.
	She was a silver medalist.
	As someone who's done submission, it's not even close.
	It's not even close.
	It's not to take away that they're great for a woman, but the strength differential is so... No, no, no.
	That's actually a topic that I'm like really, like... What's the word?
	Passionate about it?
	Let me hear it because you do have biological men going into women's wrestling.
	I hate that and I know a lot of people want to be like it's inclusion matters but by taking like biological men and allowing them to compete in women's sports you're taking away from The biological woman because you're gonna have all these biological men dominating the categories and then you'll confront someone about that and you'll be like well if it's just a coincidence and if testosterone doesn't play a big role in this then how is it every they'll go from like the like 150th best in the men's category and then instantly to the first in the women's category.
	Like there's a reason we have a men's division and a woman's division.
	I agree.
	And that's why we're here today, because I've done men should not compete in women's sports, biological men should not compete in women's sports, and boy was I met with screeching from the people you were discussing.
	No, because that's a true statement.
	But take that, and instead of wrestling, because most sports are sort of, right, they're analogous to war.
	I mean, football, you look at sort of gaining territory.
	So take the wrestling component, which we both agree on, it's unfair, then apply it to them going out into the front lines.
	And they're fighting other men.
	So it's like taking a woman's wrestling team and putting them against, for example, Syria's men's wrestling team.
	Yeah, that's why I said you need to take, like, not just like an average woman.
	It'd have to be more of like an elite woman to be able to join combat positions, like, without lowering the PT standards.
	Right.
	Yeah, I agree.
	And even then, it would still be few and far between.
	It would be a way smaller amount, but it would be the amount that needs to be there.
	Hey, do you want to hear a stat that might blow your mind?
	This is actually specifically as it relates to grappling.
	So, I was looking at the strength differential.
	Since we found Common Ground and you're very... I hope you feel that we've both been respectful.
	This has actually been enjoyable.
	It's a nice... It's a welcome break from some of the people on this campus.
	So, you know, there are these studies you can find, and they were largely conducted in Japan, that a woman is 60% as strong as a man.
	And I was thinking, I'm like, that doesn't sound right.
	And then when I looked it up, well, these were studies in Japan, and there's a very big difference between, for example, Nordic, you know, males and females, the men are much bigger than the women, than Japanese men are to Japanese women.
	These were very limited instances of, like, a leg press, you know, where they would sort of measure the actual contractile strength of the muscle, but not in a practical fashion.
	So, in that same study, I believe, or in that paper at least, they measured grip strength.
	And you know, this is important in wrestling.
	It's particularly important in judo, because you're grabbing fabric.
	Yeah.
	Most women are weaker in their grip than 95% of men, but they took women from judo, from wrestling, from Olympic weightlifting, the most elite Olympic athletes, female athletes, and their grip strength was still weaker than 75% of men.
	The strongest women.
	That did surprise me.
	I'm not, like, I'm not denying that, like... No, I know, but isn't that kind of surprising?
	Like, wouldn't you think, you know, an Olympic athlete would be, like, less than 75% of men's grip?
	Like, that's crazy.
	I wouldn't even be too shocked, because, like, I think, like, because of, like, TV and, like, all, like, the, um, like, the roles that, like, certain, like, like, women are put in, where they, like, just have, like, Yeah, they have a chick beat up five guys.
	It becomes kind of like a normal thing to think about.
	Oh yeah, a woman beat up five guys.
	But if you really think about it, I don't think a lot of people think about what testosterone can do.
	There is a difference between men and women when it comes to testosterone.
	And not just testosterone, but all kinds of, I mean, you know, luteinizing hormone, right?
	Follicle-stimulating hormone.
	You look at everything with men, like the bone density, fast stretch fibers.
	No, but no, you're absolutely right, and I think, look, I think what you've said is very reasonable.
	I think as a woman with skin in the game, because, you know, you wrestle, what I would, and I've been asking, I've actually met quite a few women here who have really been wonderful to speak with.
	I would ask you, not forcing you, this is not patriarchy, that you present your reasoned viewpoints on a campus where they would be less than popular when women bring up the kind of arguments that I encounter.
	We need women like you who are well-spoken, who understand the differences, to be able to speak out because I do think that a lot of women are afraid if they have a differing opinion from what they're supposed to have.
	A lot of girls have expressed that today.
	And that makes me sad.
	Because men aren't afraid to bust each other's balls.
	Women are generally nicer.
	Yeah, not me.
	Well, hey, you're wrestling.
	Are you getting surgery?
	I already got it.
	I'm in rehab.
	Did it work?
	You know, I don't think it did.
	Is it less mobile because I had to tighten it a little bit?
	Yeah, I'm still working on that.
	Yeah, that happened.
	I don't know if you saw T.J.
	Dillashaw fought recently, and he had a shoulder reconstruction, and it just popped out in a fight in the UFC.
	He was a good wrestler.
	And that's tough to recover from.
	But if it's just your labrum back here, I've seen people that can... Well, yeah.
	It turned into a slap tear, though, so they said the...
	Yeah.
	It might be a little more complicated.
	Yeah.
	Well, alright.
	Well, Godspeed with it, Olivia.
	I appreciate it.
	Thank you for sitting down.
	I really do appreciate it.
	Well, that's always a nice start.
	And take care of that labrum, Olivia.
	Hope you're back on the mat soon.
	That brings us to another female wrestler ploy.
	And let's just say there was a bit more disagreement during this exchange.
	So, Ploy, Stephen, nice to meet you.
	Nice to meet you.
	And how is Ploy spelled?
	P-L-O-Y.
	P-L-O-Y.
	I had a one-in-two shot of getting it right with Y or I. I thought it was I. I didn't want to risk it.
	So, Ploy, I don't know how familiar you are, if at all, with kind of the Change of Mind segments, but it's designed to hopefully allow people to rationalize their positions on seemingly controversial topics.
	Okay.
	It's been largely respectful today.
	Every single conversation has been pretty productive, so I'm happy about that.
	Okay.
	It seems that there's a shift that's been taking place.
	The conversation today.
	I do not believe that women, biological women, should be in combat roles, meaning enlisted services.
	For example, police roles that would involve violent altercations because of the fact that they are not only physically less capable, but it also brings up safety issues as it relates to not only themselves, but their brothers in arms.
	And I say women just because It could be men who don't meet these PT requirements either, but we've only systematically lowered the standards in our military police force for women, and they fail anyway.
	And I think that's a bad thing.
	So, I was talking to the guy over there before about it, and my take was on, so I think it's an issue based on the format, on how we test it between men and women, rather than it being an issue between men and women, because The example I used is, so I'm a wrestler.
	I'm on the wrestling team in my school.
	I'm here.
	I wrestle right there.
	Olivia, was she one of your friends?
	No, I don't.
	I'm from New York.
	I was on a boys team.
	We always start off every year with 60 guys.
	Okay, let's say including me, 60 people.
	End of the year, always 20.
	For me, it was always like, I asked him, I was like, okay, so let's say we raise the standard.
	Let's say, because your issue right now is you're saying that people, the standards are lowering because they're allowing more women in.
	No, they have lowered the standard.
	So just to be clear, let me just be really clear, is they had a standard, right?
	Women didn't pass it.
	So we went from 2% of the enlisted forces.
	Are you saying no woman passed it at all?
	Very, very few.
	Very few.
	So there are women who passed it?
	Right.
	Okay.
	Then we lowered them.
	Okay.
	We created two separate standards, male and female standards.
	For example, like in the Marines, a woman can do half as many pull-ups and get a perfect
	score, which I think is asinine.
	Then we created a gender-neutral test.
	Less than 10% of men fail, still 65% of women fail.
	So no matter how much we continue to lower the test, where we eliminate, for example,
	pull-ups in the Army, we eliminate push-ups entirely.
	We change the times required for both men and women.
	Women still fail at a higher rate.
	So, all of the physical metrics that we've used, we've lowered for women, and it hasn't had good results.
	Okay, but here's the thing.
	You're saying that there are, you're saying very few, but there are women who pass.
	Sure.
	Okay.
	Your question is, right now, is women should not do any combat sports.
	So are you including the women who did pass?
	I didn't say combat sports.
	You said, I'm sorry, combat roles.
	My bad.
	Combat roles.
	Yeah.
	No, if we're saying, for example, if your position is, hey, if we return to the standards of the 70s, for example, the same exact standards that were required of men, and women met those, sure.
	Let's say yes.
	Then you would disagree with this statement?
	I would disagree.
	It would be based on real-world data because we don't, here's the thing, we don't have the data from those women, right?
	We do have the data from the lowered states.
	Two times the bone fracture rates, right?
	65% higher physical disability discharge rates.
	For every percentage point you increase a squad of police with women, every percentage point of women that you add to it, the chances of them being the victim of violence, the entire squad goes up 20%.
	So we don't have the real world data of those elite capable women, but if we did return to those standards and the data would bear out that they were just as capable, I would have no problem.
	But wouldn't it be an argue not on women, then, and based on... You're saying, like, the standards have lowered so much.
	Wouldn't that be the issue on the standards?
	So, that's a very valid point.
	Now, here's the issue.
	Here's why I say women.
	Okay.
	I do believe... I think you're suggesting a physical meritocracy.
	Right?
	If you pass the test, if you hit the requirements, you should be able to join.
	Legislatively, we haven't lowered them based on race.
	We haven't lowered them based on age.
	We've only lowered them for women.
	Okay.
	And so, legislatively, it's that those women shouldn't be in combat.
	There are plenty of women right now in combat roles who are supremely unqualified and they make their squad mates, uh, they put them in danger.
	Not to mention our country.
	I'm not going to argue whether your statement biologically is true or false.
	I do believe women and men have a difference biologically.
	My only problem is that your question is hitting to all women.
	What about the women who do pass?
	What about the women who... I'm not saying... Okay.
	But if they do, then fine.
	I'm not questioning your statistics because I don't know.
	Because I don't know whether your statistics are true or false.
	But I'm saying that Before they decreased the standard, there were women who did pass.
	But your question is hitting all women.
	Statistically, almost none.
	Almost none.
	That's not none.
	Okay, great.
	Then why did we lower the standards?
	I personally don't know.
	I don't think we should have.
	If you're talking to me, I think, I think, personally, when you're talking about police force, when you're talking about the military, I think there is, there should be more money going into, you know, training.
	I know that right now, training with defusing situations isn't very good.
	There's barely any training on that.
	There's barely any training with Guns or barely any training like in the police force.
	I don't know about the military.
	I'm not very like Familiar with that, but I know the training isn't as good as it could be and I feel like for me I Feel like my problem like I came here for this like to talk to you It's more like one my problem is with the question because I feel like the question is way too generalized.
	That's not a question It's a statement the statement is to generalize.
	I'm sorry and I just feel like My issue is more with, you're saying, the standard rather than the biological difference.
	Yes, but hopefully, let me try and clarify again.
	We have only legislatively, because of the modern feminist movement, lowered the standards, which I believe is sexist, because women are weaker and less capable than men.
	So we have only lowered them for women.
	We haven't lowered them for anyone else.
	And that's a bad thing.
	So the reason I'm saying women is because this applies exclusively, the lower standards applies exclusively to women.
	I have a question.
	From the government.
	Does that clarify it?
	That does clarify the little things.
	But my only question that I brought up to him is that... You said a little thing.
	What does it not clarify?
	Oh, no, sorry.
	It clarifies it for me.
	I mean, I have a little thing that's been bothering me that I need to clarify.
	I argued with him.
	I said, could you say that because of the technological advancements we have today in the military and in artillery, that there is a less physical demand in the military?
	Sorry, I can address that question.
	I was going to say, and you're saying combat roles, but there are a lot of combat roles that don't necessarily need as much physical demand.
	Well, that's why I clarified.
	I said physical combat roles where you would encounter violence.
	Well, you could be physical, but not completely physical.
	Well, I have no problem, for example, with women in the police force, for example, being interrogators, forensic evidence, detectives.
	These are very important roles.
	These are pivotal roles.
	In the military, For example, combat roles, aside from the reflexes, where women are not quite as quick as men, they tend to make very proficient pilots.
	I don't have a problem with that.
	I still don't have any problem with intel officer roles.
	Or if it's, for example, drone operation, where these tests can be blind, right?
	The issue is the tests for physical combat readiness are not blind.
	They are inherently, I argue, sexist, in that they are embarrassingly low for women, and the real world, so we might say, Sure, there are technological advancements.
	It doesn't change the fact that the bone fracture rate is astronomical for women the second you put them under load-bearing, which makes sense because of less bone mineral density.
	The fact that they're discharged for physical disability at a rate much higher than men, and also, by the way, several multiples higher, to be discharged with PTSD, to require psychotropic medication.
	So there is a psychological component, where we've also lowered some of those standards exclusively for women.
	I believe that's inherently sexist, but more importantly, it doesn't make us a safer fighting force to lower those standards.
	But we've only done it for women.
	Okay.
	For the... When you're talking about psychologically, I feel like there is... Like, I feel like it is sexist towards men.
	I do feel like men should be taken as seriously when it comes to mental health and military as women are, and I feel like there is both issues with both sides.
	But... That may be true.
	But my thing is now... So, you're saying... You're talking about physical combat roles.
	So, instead of saying the statement, woman should not be doing combat roles, would you say it is
	true to instead say women should not be doing physical combat roles? Because
	the thing is you're saying you agree that they should be... Well that's what I said
	when you sat down. Yeah, when I sat down. But the thing is at the end of the day those combat roles are still combat
	roles. They might not be as physical to many but they are still combat roles. Like I said, were any
	physical combat roles that were encounter physical violence?
	So if we don't want to use the military, go to the police force.
	Women should not be on the beat.
	Women should not be out there where they're going to deal with a guy my size on PCP.
	Absolutely not.
	But even if you are in IT, even if you are, like, when you are in the military, you're at risk for... Well, I'm talking about police force because I think it's more clear here.
	Okay, so you're switching to police force now instead of the military.
	No, but I've said combat roles and I've said both police force when I sat down.
	So if you're talking about drones, that's technically combat.
	I was very clear in saying, and let me restate, I'm not saying that women cannot be in the military.
	I'm not saying that women cannot be in the police force.
	I'm saying that lowering the standards, as we have done decade after decade after decade, to increase female recruitment as part of a diversity agenda has resulted in more violence against women and a less capable military and police force.
	So in the police force, we're not talking about drones.
	We're talking about being out there having to apprehend someone physically.
	Women shouldn't be in those roles.
	Why do you think they want more women in the first place, then?
	Like, if there's this argument, why do you think they want more women in the first place?
	Because we have this asinine obsession with diversity.
	I think it's more like, in today's society, there are less and less men that want to join the military, and they need higher numbers.
	That's what my think is.
	Well, here's what's interesting about that.
	Because I actually went down a rabbit hole on this.
	I've heard this argument there's a recruiting crisis.
	But as we have increased our percentage of recruits in women, 2% to about 16% in enlisted forces.
	Women make up about 13% of the police force.
	It's a little bit harder to measure because municipalities use different numbers, but they've increased.
	Just clarification, are we talking about the police or military?
	I'm giving you both.
	2% to 16%, let me really break it down so we don't do the wordplay.
	2% to 16% enlisted forces.
	Gone to 13%.
	Women, please.
	It's remained stagnant since about 2000, but increased dramatically.
	As that number has gone up of women and we've lowered requirements, that's when we face the recruitment crisis.
	Now, I'm not saying it's because women have been enlisted, but it unequivocally cannot be argued that recruiting more women increases our capacity to recruit.
	The inverse is true.
	Correlation doesn't equal causation.
	But it cannot be argued that including more women increases recruits.
	It decreases them.
	or at least a decrease occurs as we simultaneously increase female recruits.
	Yes.
	I have my theories as to why that's the case, but it's not observable in data.
	I'd be making an inference, but the data is what it is.
	So going back to the police force. Like you said, you wrestle, right?
	And here, is it freestyle wrestling? Yes.
	You wrestled in high school? Yes. So folk style?
	Uh, yeah.
	Well, I did freestyle, too.
	Did you do freestyle?
	Off my school.
	Did you do any Greco-Roman as well?
	I know that's more international, right?
	No, no.
	My club did do it.
	I did a little, but I never competed in it.
	I didn't like it.
	Yeah, I know.
	It's a little bit different when you take away any of the leg attacks.
	It's a totally different sport.
	Not my type of thing.
	A lot of suplexing.
	Oh, I love suplexing.
	Just not Greco-Roman.
	Well, I'm saying it's almost exclusively suplexing in Greco-Roman, right?
	You don't do any... What's your favorite takedown?
	What do you usually use?
	I like going for a high crotch.
	Oh, like going for a high crotch?
	So do you go in for a low single and kind of ride it up to a high crotch?
	Do you chain it or do you just shoot high crotch?
	I don't think you can hit a low single to a high crotch because then you'd go behind for a low single.
	No, a little single where you'd go down, or like an ankle pick where you'd go down right up to the high crotch.
	I don't like that because I'm short anyway.
	I just like going right for the legs.
	Right for the high crotch?
	Yeah.
	A friend of mine actually, a UFC fighter, Daniel Cormier, that's his go-to is a high crotch single.
	And yeah, it's just interesting to me because we have had this, for example, in wrestling.
	You're in college now.
	Yes.
	Do you wrestle any of the men?
	Um, no, but I did last year.
	Only until recently.
	It's my first time ever being on a women's team.
	Oh, okay.
	I've been completely, it was... We had, for the first time ever, we had a girl on my team besides me, but for the most part, I've always been the only girl.
	Okay.
	In club and in school.
	Okay.
	Well, I had two friends in club.
	Yeah, and in college it's a little bit different.
	How do women fare with the men in college wrestling?
	If it's the same weight class, same division of sports.
	We never wrestle.
	I haven't wrestled a guy in college.
	Because there's... We don't even wrestle the same styles.
	We can't wrestle each other.
	Why do you think women don't wrestle the men?
	Because we wrestle freestyle and they wrestle folk style.
	It's a completely different style.
	There are plenty of male freestyle wrestlers in college.
	Certainly at a club level, yeah.
	At a club level, but collegiately we're not allowed to.
	But why at a club level do you think women don't wrestle men?
	I mean, they do.
	My friend, she qualified for Fargo under Greco Roman for men.
	Why do you think that as a rule, when we're creating women's divisions and men's divisions in wrestling, for example NCAA championships and certainly international wrestling, why do women not wrestle men?
	If you do the word play here, why do women not wrestle men?
	It's not a trick question.
	The thing is, I can't really answer that question because I've wrestled men my whole life.
	This is my first time ever not wrestling men.
	So I can't say why I don't, because I do.
	And you're the only woman in the history of wrestling who beat them consistently?
	No, there are... No, there are not.
	I want you to restate your question just one more time.
	I'm sorry.
	Would you be the only woman in history who, in a high level of wrestling, consistently beat men in your age, weight, and skill bracket?
	No, because there are girls better than me who have beaten guys.
	In your age, skill, and weight bracket, on a national level, name me one female who won a national championship in men's wrestling.
	I know Heaven Spich won state in South Carolina.
	I don't remember what year it was.
	I was pretty young at that time.
	That's her full name.
	I know a bunch of girls... In the NCAA, she was All-American?
	You're talking about college wrestling?
	College wrestling or college age club wrestling?
	There aren't any females or males who wrestle together in college age, because that's when you get separated.
	That returns me to my question.
	That's why I asked, why do they not?
	You said they do.
	I said I did in high school.
	No, no, but I said college.
	Club or college.
	You said it was a different style.
	I'm going to frame this again.
	Collegiate level wrestling.
	You said I was wrong.
	I said, why do women not wrestle men?
	You said, they do.
	So now you're saying you go back to high school.
	High school is very different.
	At a high level, why are there no women?
	Take Sarah McMahon.
	Silver medalist, right?
	Fought Ronda Rousey.
	That's not even... I don't even know what that is.
	WWE?
	I don't... She's a silver medalist in the Olympics in wrestling.
	Because you said Ronda Rousey.
	She lost to Ronda Rousey, who was a bronze medalist in judo.
	Kayla Harrison.
	These are people who have been on my program.
	Kayla Harrison, two-time Olympic gold medalist in judo.
	And on the program, I say this because would we both agree that the only American to ever win a gold medal in judo, and she won two, probably qualified to discuss.
	She said it wouldn't even be close with men.
	Low-level hobbyist men.
	Okay.
	Why is that?
	I agree with that one.
	Because I do agree, I said in the beginning, there is a biological difference between male and female, between muscle mass.
	Not just muscle mass, bone density, fast twitch muscle fibers, reflexes.
	So we would agree there's a reason that it's separate.
	But when you said it to me in the beginning, I thought you meant in general and I said I can't say that because in high school I've only wrestled male, I don't have the...
	Sure, anyone can wrestle anybody.
	I mean, you know, you and I could find a mat and wrestle.
	It doesn't mean that it's competitive.
	When you said, why don't I, I thought you meant, like, back then.
	No, I said, why don't women?
	Why do they separate the divisions?
	And I think we've roundabout way to both agree that there are strong biological differences between men and women.
	There's a reason that the divisions are separate and it's not competitive.
	So, let's take wrestling.
	I was talking with one of your friends, I believe, or someone who wrestled here or hasn't wrestled at school yet.
	She has a torn labrum.
	Her name was Olivia.
	We were saying sports are sort of allegorical, analogous for war, right?
	In a lot of ways.
	It's a way of sort of competing without killing each other.
	So take wrestling, where we know it's not even remotely competitive.
	Now apply killing.
	We need the most effective fighting force possible, just like I wouldn't send out a woman, for example, to wrestle Kale Sanderson.
	I wouldn't send a woman who can't do a pull-up, and that's the majority of female recruits in the military.
	I would not send her out to war.
	She doesn't lose a match.
	She loses her life, and so does the guy next to her relying on her.
	I think it's important.
	More important than diversity.
	My, again, I'm gonna bring it back to the standard point.
	I think that's an issue with the standards we have in the military, in the police force.
	I think the standards aren't high enough.
	Again, I... I agree.
	We can argue that there is a biological difference, but again, you're also talking about people have guns, they have a less technological advancement.
	Today's military, technologically, is off the charts.
	Like, it is crazy how much money we put into the military every single day, technologically advancing ourselves.
	Sure.
	So, I actually agree with the statement you just made.
	I think it's very important.
	Where you said, for example, guns, advancement, let's just say in firearms.
	That does equalize the playing field, right?
	In a lot of ways.
	Okay.
	So it's a perfect example.
	For the same reason I support women being able to carry firearms, and I actually support them carrying firearms because it's the only way to be stronger than a man.
	It's a mechanical advantage, right?
	Yes, we have advances in firearms.
	It's still the only way that a woman can overpower a strong man.
	Flip side of that coin, the police force?
	Woman will have to use a firearm.
	She'll have to use a weapon.
	Because she can't physically subdue a man.
	And that, I don't believe, is something where you talk about de-escalation.
	If you have to go to your tool belt...
	Because you cannot physically restrain a 250-pound man on PCP.
	That's not a good thing.
	But do you always have to?
	Because I'm saying between men and women, I'm saying in the police force in general, like, I don't remember the exact, like, number, so I can't really quote on this, but I know for a fact that there is not enough training on de-escalation.
	Like, they barely do any training on it at all.
	I agree with the statement that women are... I agree that they should train that robustly.
	Okay, I agree that you're saying, like, men and women, like, women are physically smaller, we are biologically different, but I'm saying, in general, you can't put the whole argument on just women rather than putting it on a structural problem.
	Right, and I believe the structural problem is because of the matriarchy and the problem with feminism trying to lower standards to accommodate women.
	But can't you say it's also sexism because it's the idea that, like, I was saying before, like, you were talking about in the military how a lot of it is, um, there's a lot of things given to women and it's, like, men should be, um, we're talking about, like, for example, mental health, for example, and we were saying that, like, um... Women are more likely to have PTSD, be discharged... But it's also because men aren't treated as seriously for it because it's, like, That could be true.
	It's an inference, but I think your inference might be correct.
	Yes.
	That could also be, instead of saying because of feminists, it could also be because of sexism.
	Towards men?
	You may be correct on that.
	I think it's probably a little of column A, a little of column B. I think we have quite a lot of data that shows that men tend to perform better under high compression stress scenarios than women in general.
	There are always exceptions to the rule.
	And it tends to be more traumatic for women.
	And then especially when you combine being on the receiving end of a traumatic injury in the military Same thing in the police force.
	But you mentioned de-escalation.
	Now you're, you do, you wrestle.
	So you have some understanding of, I would say, controlling or subduing the human body, right?
	That's what all grappling arts are, whether it's Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, wrestling, Judo.
	I do believe that should be trained in the police force so that you don't have to use a weapon.
	I think that we need higher standards, as a matter of fact.
	I think every member of the police should have basic grappling capabilities so that they don't have to, for example, grab their gun or grab their taser.
	Now de-escalation.
	I agree with you, that's very important.
	Here's what I would argue is the reality of de-escalation.
	You can only de-escalate if you have the nuclear option.
	What do I mean?
	You can't de-escalate with a large, strong, likely inebriated man who doesn't want to go back to prison if he sees a small, weak woman trying to de-escalate.
	He knows that he has a trump card and he can attack you.
	Statistically, it happens a lot.
	De-escalation can only take place with formidable capability.
	Women don't have that, physically.
	As a general rule?
	Not all women.
	And certainly most of the women in our police force today.
	For me, I'm not disagreeing with your statement.
	I actually kind of agree with your statement.
	My only thing is, again, like I said, for de-escalation, when I think of de-escalation, I think of more like...
	You know, like, um, physical therapy, you know how we learn about the cognitive, whatever, like, um... Cognitive behavioral therapy?
	Yeah.
	You've ever heard about, like, you've ever, um, taken a psychology class?
	Sure.
	Okay.
	And they teach us about, like, different things about the human, like, behavior and things like that.
	I feel like, the way I think about it is I feel like cops should be taught that because they should be taught how to behave and be, like, not behave, but you know, how to, like... Oh, I agree with what you're saying.
	Yeah.
	I think it's a very important component of the job, right?
	I think it's a very important component to be able to de-escalate.
	And to be fair, most police-civilian interactions, most of them are not violent.
	But every single police officer, male or female, will have many violent interactions throughout their career.
	And it only takes one.
	And if you're not physically up to the task, and the women in our police force, the vast majority are not, not all of them, but the vast majority are not, that's a problem.
	If I can, let me give you, this is, we've talked about the empirical and anecdotal story.
	Okay.
	And I come from a background, I've done judo, brazilian jiu-jitsu, we don't really have wrestling in Canada.
	Okay.
	Oh, Canadian wrestling, sorry.
	I know, it's not very, yeah.
	There's the Olympic team, and like, and then everyone else, there aren't very, it doesn't happen in high school.
	But now I'm a new father, and I've also coached kids.
	And here's the problem, too.
	You have a lot of moms, for example, who when they have sons, they will tell them, if they're dealing with a bully, and I had this, they say, you walk up to him and you tell him that he better stop.
	You know, he needs to stop or else.
	Or you tell him that he needs to stop, that this is, you know, he's just doing it because he feels bad about himself.
	In other words, whatever techniques that are often told to young boys, it doesn't work if the bully knows he can kick your ass.
	It happened to me when I was young.
	I said, well, you know, stop.
	This is wrong.
	You need to stop doing this.
	Well, he said, what?
	And kicked my ass.
	Only once I was able to physically defend myself could I de-escalate the situation.
	Then at that point I could say, look, do you really want to go this route?
	And that's what we actually teach children.
	We teach children.
	We teach them jujitsu.
	The Gracies actually do this.
	It's important we teach the psychology.
	We say, Avoid it.
	And then if they continue to harass you, ask them, are you challenging me to a fight?
	So psychologically the bully has a choice to make.
	Either yes, in which case you use what you know.
	Or if he says most of the time he'll say no, it's de-escalated.
	But you can only ask that question if you know the answer is yes, then you can handle it.
	Women can't handle it if they're in an inner city and a man is on PCP.
	You can't de-escalate from a position of weakness.
	Does that make sense?
	Kind of.
	If we didn't have nukes and we told Russia, you know, we told Russia to stop it.
	Think they'd care?
	No.
	No, exactly.
	So it does matter.
	You can only have peace through strength, de-escalation, if they know that when push comes to shove, there are consequences.
	And the statistics are really scary.
	Women as far as being on the receiving end of violent attacks from their police officers.
	It's not good.
	And I don't want to see that. I don't want to see women getting hurt because of some diversity quota.
	I don't think that's a good thing for women, and I don't think it's a good thing for the guy next to her.
	My thing is, I was talking to him, I'm not working that guy away, but I was talking to him about something,
	and we were talking about how police need to be retrained.
	They get trained once and then they go for the job.
	Men too.
	I feel like over time, he was giving the example, it wasn't me, he was saying like, police officer gets trained at a job, freshly trained, whatever, physically built, whatever.
	Years go by, he gets fat, he gets slow, you know, he doesn't get retrained.
	The training basically just leaves his head.
	I feel like, if you're talking about like that, it's...
	It's honestly the same.
	It's like, I don't feel like... No, I agree.
	I agree.
	I think that's terrible.
	I just don't think that the solution is a reverse Nirvana fallacy.
	Well, then let's just lower the standards for everyone.
	I think we need to raise it.
	I think we're both agreeing.
	We need to raise the standards.
	Let me put it this way.
	Would you agree with me, and I've talked about this on the show, that not only should officers have to display not only physical capabilities as far as strength, endurance, being fit, they also should have to display physical capabilities, for example, in grappling.
	I think she should also have mental physical capabilities.
	I agree.
	Okay.
	I agree with that.
	I agree it shouldn't be a lower standard for women.
	should be forced to re-pass an exam every year.
	I agree.
	Yes, okay.
	Then I think we're agreeing on the same thing.
	My issue is that exam can't be to a lower standard for women.
	Right now it is.
	Okay, I agree with that.
	I agree it shouldn't be a lower standard for women.
	But the thing is, I'm saying again, if a woman passes that exam, again, that statement,
	you're saying, okay, you're saying there's not as many women passing that exam, but there
	are still women passing that exam.
	Well, right now there are no women passing the exam for men because they don't take it.
	They have a separate exam.
	Yeah.
	But I'm saying, you're saying women shouldn't do it at all, but I'm saying if there is a higher exam, if it's the same as men, and if women pass it, are you saying... If we hold them to the highest standard possible, and the women, you know, probably 1-2% of women who apply pass, and afterwards we would look at the real world data and they're just as effective in the police force or military, I would have no problem with it.
	Then I agree with that statement.
	That's the statement I agree with.
	Okay.
	Well, thank you very much.
	It was, what, Ploy?
	Ploy.
	Ploy.
	I was close.
	It's a tough name for me to remember with an I. It's OK.
	Well, thank you very much.
	I appreciate you sitting down.
	And are you wrestling this year?
	Yeah, we actually have a meet today, tonight.
	Oh, OK.
	Who are you guys wrestling?
	Each other.
	It's our first year team.
	Our coach is Randy Miller.
	She's a bronze Olympian.
	Oh, wow.
	And actually, I'm familiar with Randy Miller.
	I don't know her personally.
	So I hope to make her, you know, she's been training us and she handpicked us.
	So I hope to make her proud.
	Well, I hope so too.
	If you see this coach, sorry coach.
	Hopefully you don't run into a bunch of Dagestanis or Eastern Bloc people because boy, they are monsters on the mats.
	They grow up wrestling bears from when they're three years old.
	But yeah, I have quite a few friends who have gone to international competitions, more so Greco-Roman because that's more practiced internationally.
	And yeah, it is a tough, tough sport.
	So all the respect in the world to you.
	Thank you.
	Thank you so much.
	Well, thank you, Ploy.
	A little bit of disagreement, though I wouldn't say contentious, and I always appreciate someone willing to step out of their comfort zone.
	Hopefully some positions might be reconsidered after the conversation.
	Now, our next guest was really a bright spot in the day because she brought something completely new to this installment.
	Meet Jay.
	Jay, Stephen, nice to meet you.
	Nice to meet you.
	Nice to meet you.
	Do you mind scooting in just a little bit here?
	Of course.
	Okay.
	So, Jay, I know you've been waiting a little while.
	I don't know how familiar you are with kind of these segments, what we do with Change My Mind.
	It's just hopefully an opportunity to rationalize positions on seemingly controversial topics.
	Surprisingly, today it hasn't seemed to be that controversial.
	They've all been respectful thus far.
	Uh, my position, and sometimes you can't fit it all on the sign, I do not believe that women, uh, biological women should be in roles of physical combat, enlisted forces, a police force where they would encounter physical violence, uh, simply because they're more likely to be the victim of violence, uh, they're less safe, and so are their brothers in arms, uh, and that people are sworn to protect.
	And legislatively, we have been systematically lowering the barrier to entry and physical and mental requirements in order to accommodate women in these enlisted forces.
	I think that's a horrible course to be on.
	If you disagree with me, I'm more than glad to hear you change my mind.
	I mean, I'm more here to just learn about the other side.
	I mean, serving our country takes a lot of heart to even begin to think about.
	Sure.
	And I guess...
	My, I have family who served and I really wanted to be ground control for the Air Force a lot.
	Okay.
	And then I flew a teeny plane and I was like, yeah, no, I can't do that.
	What kind of plane did you fly?
	A teeny little Cessna.
	Like a Cessna 182?
	Yeah.
	Oh, okay.
	Little, little, little yellow one.
	Yeah.
	Did you get your pilot's license?
	Oh, uh, no, my dad did though.
	Oh, okay.
	So you did it illegally, I guess.
	Maybe we shouldn't, okay.
	Let's just say it was training courses.
	It was.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Completely on the up and up.
	Wonk, wonk.
	Alright.
	But, I mean, I guess, it's such a difficult water to tread.
	There's a lot of obstacles either way.
	And I really feel like just, gosh.
	I don't think it's very difficult.
	Let me ask you this.
	What's the role of our military?
	To protect and serve.
	Right.
	So, to do that, you need to be the most effective fighting, effective protective service possible.
	That's the goal.
	We're not accomplishing that by lowering the physical standards and the requirements to a point of, frankly, becoming a national embarrassment in order to accommodate women.
	That's the only reason we do it.
	So I don't think it's very complicated.
	At one point we had standards, for example, that involved load-bearing jogging to a significant degree, pull-ups, push-ups, sit-ups.
	They've been eliminated in almost all branches of the military.
	A marine female can do half as many pull-ups to achieve a perfect score.
	And the net result is they incur bone fractures at a very high rate.
	They're discharged for physical disability at a very high rate.
	Squads are the result of victims of violence at a higher rate.
	Police squads are the victims of violence at a much higher rate when women are on the force.
	And that's because we've lowered the requirements specifically to accommodate women in the name of diversity.
	We'd have no problem if the standards were where they always were.
	And a select few women met them.
	Just none of them did, statistically.
	That's all it is.
	Doesn't mean, by the way, that women can't, for example, be ground control.
	Or even pilots.
	Certainly in the police force, investigators.
	Perhaps negotiators.
	Forensic evidence.
	Interrogators.
	Just not on the beat where you have a fellow squad mate who is in physical harm's way if you're not physically capable.
	That's all.
	Yeah.
	Is that unreasonable?
	Well, it's your point of view, and so I take it with as much respect as I'd take mine.
	Well, what's your point of view?
	Forgive me, I don't understand your point of view.
	What's your point of view?
	Because here's the reality, right?
	We've lowered physical requirements to accommodate women.
	They still fail, the vast majority of them anyway.
	We can't really lower them much more.
	But they're getting into the military now with a much lower standard, and the results are bad.
	I think that's bad.
	What's your point of view, just so I understand?
	Gosh, never really thought about it that much.
	Um, well... Well, that's okay.
	If you haven't thought about it, then maybe you don't have your point of view established, and that's okay.
	Well, that's part of why I'm here, is to see how that stands up against something else that I'm not familiar with.
	Well, I mean... Can I ask you something?
	Why do you think you're unfamiliar with my stance?
	Because it's shared by at least half the country.
	Well, I've not really taken a lot of consideration myself in being in the forces, and so I haven't really looked personally.
	I bet that could look good for me or someone like me.
	And I know women who have served and fought and men who have served and fought, so my general consensus is that they served, you know?
	So to me, it's really not that much about it.
	I guess for me it would depend person to person and that would, I guess, it would really create a lot of problems and I do see that with individualizing someone who's serving so much based on all these different things.
	Like I know I'm inqualifiable because I'm tiny.
	You could shoot a bazooka and I'd go flying, you know?
	If you shot a bazooka at me, I'd go flying.
	That's kind of the purpose of a bazooka.
	I don't think any of us would survive a... Oh, you mean if you fired it and I kicked it?
	Yeah.
	Oh, okay.
	But I do believe that with such a difficult task of serving your country in any sense, I mean, it could be taxing even if you're not in a combatant role.
	Sure.
	Physically, mentally, psychologically.
	I agree.
	And so, I guess really, um... That's why we shouldn't individualize it.
	We should standardize it.
	Yeah.
	I can see, to me, I think it should really be, um... I guess, gosh... It's cool to be on the spot like this because now I really get to, like, think about it.
	Yeah.
	Um... I think, well...
	I guess there are a lot of people who can't really serve in a combatant role.
	Sure.
	A lot of men.
	Yeah, there are men who are disabled.
	There are a lot of different people who can't fight for a lot of different reasons.
	But I think instead of, at least for me personally, instead of worrying about the kind of people we put in, we can focus on how we can make them the best, even if that might mean We're not barring them on a personal level, though.
	We know you're interested in this, but this might be a better fit.
	And that doesn't necessarily mean that we can bar them in a combatant sense.
	But if we see...
	We're not barring them on a personal level, though.
	The requirements, if they don't meet them, bar them.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, yeah, that makes sense, because if you can't throw a grenade...
	Or you can't carry a certain load at the same amount of distance and the same amount of
	time without, unfortunately, a little bone fracture.
	Or you can't do a leg tuck, so we go to a plank.
	No one's discriminating against them if the test is standardized.
	That's why they have to be standardized.
	And by the way, it is at the end of training.
	So we do training, we train them, and then you have tests to see if they're fit.
	So, even with training, a lot of women are still not fit, and so we keep lowering those standards.
	So, they're not being disqualified personally.
	The test is disqualifying.
	For the same reason that a man in a wheelchair.
	It doesn't mean that you're being ableist if you say, well, you probably shouldn't be out in the front lines.
	Why?
	Because you'll be killed.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	I don't want him killed.
	I think that to eliminate the possibility of combatant alone, like just as a baseline, I think could take away opportunity for growth.
	Because someone could come in maybe not being able to lift, but over time they could develop that ability.
	You know, obviously if you can't lift... How about once they develop that ability, and they pass the test, they can go in?
	They shouldn't be learning on the job.
	There's nothing stopping any woman right now from training up to meet basic requirements.
	to train in and out of that setting equally, then I believe the test, you know...
	There's nothing stopping any woman right now from training up to meet basic requirements.
	You can do your push-ups, you can do your sit-ups, you can go do your jog with a backpack,
	you could do your pull-ups on a tree in a park.
	There's nothing stopping.
	It's not a lack of resources.
	It's a biological ceiling.
	If they can do it, they can do it.
	If they can do it.
	I agree.
	The vast majority of women can't, so we keep lowering the standards, and that's my issue.
	And certainly with the police force.
	You know, I think that when we're dealing with people complaining about, in some cases, very justified police brutality, And the same reason I support women carrying firearms.
	Because a firearm makes a woman, like you just said, you're small.
	You're as strong as a man if you know how to operate a firearm.
	I believe I'm as strong as a man in a different capacity.
	No, I'm talking about in a physical altercation.
	There's no way that a man will not overpower you, for example.
	It's an average-sized man.
	But you have a firearm, it's called the great equalizer for a reason, right?
	In that same capacity, right?
	In other words, you can use your firearm.
	If a woman is physically less capable, as a cop, she has to use her firearm.
	That will increase the likelihood of police brutality, let alone, of course, the incidents of violent attacks against women in the police force and their brothers in arms, and it's much higher.
	So for the same reason that I like women civilians to be able to carry firearms, the flip side of that coin is I want female police officers to not have to use their firearms.
	Unfortunately, it's a biological reality that they do.
	If they're dealing with a guy my size on PCP, you're going to need to use a gun.
	And I don't want to see women getting killed and getting beaten up out there.
	Yeah.
	So, um, well, I appreciate you sitting down.
	It was, it was, uh... Jay.
	Jay!
	That's right, Jay.
	It was nice talking with you.
	I was like, it's not Joe, Jay.
	Thank you, Jay.
	I really appreciate you taking the time.
	Thank you.
	And, uh, maybe we'll be back here sometime and you can let me know what you...
	I'm happy to learn.
	Get your pilot's license, too.
	There's not a lot of pilots.
	There's a real opening right now.
	Oh, yeah.
	No, there really isn't.
	It's a really good field to go into.
	There's a serious lack of pilots, so private planes.
	They pay well.
	I know a guy, a wealthy guy, who has a plane.
	He's like, yeah, there are not enough pilots out there.
	And actually, women make great pilots.
	I actually had this ready, but we didn't disagree that women in the Air Force actually do incredibly well.
	Because of how they sustain G-forces sometimes.
	Just consider it.
	I'm just saying, it's an option.
	If you like flying, it's a potential career.
	Thank you so much.
	Thank you, Jay.
	Appreciate it.
	Now, I don't want to speak out of turn.
	I think that might have been a change my mind first, in that Jay didn't really seem to have any opinions, at least strong opinions, one way or the other, but was willing to sit down, and I appreciate her willingness to do so, which, by the way, is why we always make all of the references available at loudearthcrider.com.
	You can click the link in the description to peruse at will and learn more on this topic.
	Also, if you enjoy this series and want them to continue, please consider commenting below which topic you'd like to see next on Change My Mind.
	And hit that like button so that YouTube can throttle this anyway.
	Okay, next up we have... Oh, Anaya.
	Anaya or Anai?
	Anaya.
	Anaya, okay.
	I apologize if I get your name wrong because I'm horrible with names.
	You're fine.
	But I'll never forget your face.
	I have a weird facial recognition software.
	I get it.
	I do the same.
	You do it the same way?
	Yeah.
	You remember faces but the name, like, I have to... So in my mind I'll go Anihilator, so that then I'll remember your name, but I might accidentally say Anihilator.
	I get it.
	It's okay.
	Grab some water here.
	And I'm Steven.
	Nice to meet you.
	Nice to meet you.
	I like your shirt, by the way.
	Thank you!
	Are you a big ACDC fan?
	I just like the shirt.
	Oh, no!
	I've heard Back in Black a few times because of movies.
	I'm very much like a Marvel type person.
	But what if you wear that shirt and you find out that they're like a white supremacist metal band, like the Acid Rock band?
	I get it.
	My dad says the same thing.
	I don't know. I mean, this is where you kind of like you do your history.
	Right, but it sounds like you haven't done on the ACDC.
	They're not by the way.
	They seem like decent people. I'm just saying. I get it. It's always a risk. My dad says the same thing.
	He's like, you need to research and I'm like, sometimes okay. I did it once when I was a kid.
	I got a Grateful Dead shirt at a thrift store.
	And I liked it because it had Mr. Senator, the skeleton with the top hat.
	And then someone was like, hey, Grateful Dead.
	I was like, who's Grateful Dead?
	And I went to listen to them, and they sucked.
	And I was like, ugh, I can't believe I wore that shirt out in public.
	So, Anai, I don't know how familiar you are, if at all, with the Change My Mind segment.
	It's basically designed to hopefully rationalize our positions on seemingly controversial topics.
	They've been actually pretty friendly today, which is a good thing.
	I'm really happy about that.
	So today, let me kind of state my position.
	I do not believe that women should be in combat roles, meaning roles where they would encounter physical violence, enlisted forces, infantry, or in the police force where they would have to be subduing violent perpetrators.
	Because it not only is less safe for them, it's less safe for their brothers in arms, and it's less safe for us as a country, the citizens they're sworn to protect.
	I specifically say women because I support a physical meritocracy, but we have only lowered
	the standards to allow more women into the military and police force.
	So that's why I have a problem specifically with women in combat roles who can meet lower
	physical requirements and still get the same job.
	If you disagree with that or you think I missed something, I'd love to hear you.
	I would deal with me.
	I would just hold it just because we've had people try and steal them.
	Oh.
	I would, but I believe that I strongly disagree just based off my family's experience.
	I have multiple cousins, my grandparents were in the military, so I have both men and women
	in my family in the military.
	I don't think that certain regulations or rules that they've changed now are in benefit
	of women or men.
	I don't think that I think it's an impediment of the troops together as a whole because you think of them as Our military is as one that they don't see.
	Oh, you're black.
	You're white or you're a woman or a man when it comes down to combat I Well, one thing that my grandfather has told me when he was in combat was, he's like, I didn't care who it was.
	Right.
	I don't care.
	It'd be like, you're my brother, you're my sister, I'm gonna save you and make sure you're okay.
	Right.
	Regardless of man, woman, black, white, Asian, Hispanic, whatever.
	This was your grandfather?
	Yes.
	Well, I think your grandfather said that because your grandfather sounds like a very decent man.
	Well, unfortunately he has passed away.
	But it sounds like a good man.
	Here's the issue.
	Like you said, it doesn't see color.
	And as a matter of fact, it's true, it's actually kind of a beautiful thing.
	In the military, it's very mixed as far as demographics.
	A lot of black Americans, a lot of Hispanic Americans.
	However, it's not blind when it applies to women.
	They can meet far lower PT requirements.
	Do you think so?
	No, it's absolutely true.
	So they created separate standards for men and women starting in the 70s.
	And then recently the Army tried to create a gender neutral test.
	Less than 10% of men failed.
	65% of women failed.
	For example, in the Marines, a woman can do half as many pull-ups as a man and get a perfect
	score.
	We've eliminated push-ups.
	We've eliminated pull-ups.
	We've eliminated the leg tuck.
	We've now moved to the plank because women were not passive.
	If we're talking about them all as one, my issue is that it's not blind.
	It is creating a separate, lower standard for women to join the same combat roles.
	How does that make those out there in the front lines safer?
	To have someone who's less qualified, less capable, but because they're a woman they get the same spot.
	Well, I mean, I think it also kind of depends on, like, when you come in.
	Like, there's, you have to think about it, like, A, there's a lot of high schools that go straight into the military because that's their one option, or that's the option that they choose.
	So, just as any corporate job would be, like, you have your entry level, No, she absolutely didn't.
	It's the policy.
	now for like my cousin she went in the military she did her training and
	everything like that and she's moved up the ranks. And she had to meet a far lower
	physical requirement than a man? I don't I don't think so I mean I would have to
	call her and ask her but I don't believe so. It's the policy of... is she in the army? No.
	Which branch is she in?
	Air Force.
	Air Force.
	Yeah, it's the policy of Army, Air Force, Marines.
	They have lower physical standards.
	I won't have to ask her, but I don't think so.
	Let's assume that what I'm saying is not untrue.
	Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that, for example, women can meet a much lower physical requirement, and not only physical, but certain mental requirements, reflex requirements, that women can achieve a far lower score, or they even have to meet far lower physical standards.
	Let's say that's the case.
	I'm telling you, I'm giving you my word, it is the case with the Marines, it is the case with the Army, it is the case with municipal police forces.
	So let's assume that's true.
	That, for example, a man has to do, let's just say, ten pull-ups and a woman can do five or none and achieve the same score.
	What are your thoughts?
	Do you think that's right?
	I don't think, as far as you debating the certain requirements, I don't think that, A, that's fair.
	I think that, I feel like, in my mind, I feel like there should be a basis for everybody.
	Same standard?
	Same standard!
	I agree.
	Rather, it's, you do 20 push-ups, if you meet the 20, then hey, you're good.
	I agree.
	But, I don't think that, I don't think it's fair to men or women, yes.
	Now, to put, say, because there are some women who can do 25 push-ups, burpees, and all these types of things, and complete the whole nine yards.
	Very, very few, that's why we lowered the standards for them.
	This is absolutely true.
	I don't think so.
	What you feel on this, it is absolutely true.
	The military requirements are far, far lower for women.
	For me, I would have to see the statistics, the writing, every policy that there is to actually understand and see what you're saying.
	But if it is true, you would disagree with it?
	Yeah!
	I would disagree that there shouldn't be a difference.
	There should be a plain board for everyone to meet the requirements regardless.
	I agree.
	But as far as the whole thing of like mental stability and all this type of stuff, I think that's attacking women as just a gender's character.
	Because, yes.
	I'm not telling you the character.
	I mean, no, but it's just like, when I hear people say, well, I don't believe women should be in the military,
	or I don't believe women should be in combat, I've always heard that, oh, they're emotional,
	or there's certain biological factors, like, oh, well, they get pregnant.
	Well, those are true.
	Those are true, but I'm like, just.
	I mean, but just as men are, like, men are emotional.
	Men have bad days.
	The fact that they can't get pregnant because, like, they can also get injured.
	So, I'm like, for certain things, like... Well, it's interesting that you bring that up because women, the bone fracture rate, far, far higher for women when they're out there in the field.
	Their disability discharge rate is up in the 60-something percent higher than men.
	And I think the percentage of men from the military discharge who get PTSD, it's in the single digits.
	For women, it's over 10.
	It's not an attack on their character.
	These are statistical realities.
	But also it's kind of the fact of not just the combat issue, but it's also the fact of other men in the military taking a stance against that woman.
	I don't think that's what it is.
	I think men are animals and women need to deal with being animals.
	If they're in a foxhole with animals, they've got to be an animal.
	I think that's where it's A, we're humans.
	That's one.
	We're humans.
	Don't compare anybody to an animal.
	I'm saying in wartime, you need to be a beast.
	I get it, but I'm just saying, like, I don't think that's a correct way to describe or build a conversation of, well, this is a... War is war.
	War is a mental game, physiological game of combat strategies, all that.
	So you have to be smart, you have to think quick, and I get it, yes, there's a physical factor.
	Just as some men cannot handle it.
	I agree.
	Just as there are some women who cannot handle it.
	There are women who can handle it and there are men who can handle it.
	There are very few women who can.
	A lot of men can.
	So very few women who can, but a lot of men can.
	What statistic or what percentage of women who cannot handle the military?
	We have such little data on, for example, the standards in the Army where you had to do a certain amount of pull-ups, a certain amount of push-ups, a certain amount of sit-ups.
	You had to do your run, depending on the year, how many miles.
	You had to meet a certain time.
	Single-digit percentage of women who could make it.
	What is that number, though?
	So the number was between 1 and 5.
	Okay.
	But it's a really small sample pool because to get women in combat roles, it only started when they immediately lowered the PT requirements.
	So we lowered them to the point where, okay, no more push-ups.
	For example, in the Army, no more pull-ups at all.
	You could do a leg tuck.
	Too many women failed that.
	So they could do a plank.
	In the Marines, women can do half as many pull-ups, achieve a perfect score.
	And then what happened is a lot of women were complaining because they felt singled out.
	Because they had a standard for men and they had a standard for women, women were still failing.
	So they created a gender-neutral test that was the same test for men and women, kind of between the two standards, which I disagree with.
	I think it should be the higher standard.
	Less than 10% of men failed, 65% of women failed.
	So 55-65% failed a gender neutral test designed to accommodate women.
	There is no way to lower the standards anymore and still have women in physical combat roles.
	We've lowered the standards of physical combat readiness to a degree that frankly is embarrassing to accommodate women and they still, the majority of them still fail.
	And assuming that I'm not lying, Right?
	And I would encourage you to go do the research on the PT requirements.
	Sounds to me like you and I agree.
	Sounds to me like you and I agree there should be one standard.
	It should be a stringent standard.
	Yeah.
	Right?
	Because they're going out to war.
	And if you're a man...
	And you fail, you don't make it.
	And if you're a woman and you fail, you don't make it.
	Would we both agree on that?
	Yeah.
	Okay, that's all I'm saying.
	I mean, yeah.
	I just think that... But that's not the law.
	We have a separate standard for women, and it's much, much lower, which I would argue is sexist.
	So we both agree.
	The only issue is I think you're not fully familiar with the new military policy.
	You disagree with military policy, and so do I. I think we would be in the same boat saying, well, why are we having separate standards?
	I just think it's where you...
	Because it's a different standard for women.
	Lower standards?
	But my thing is like this, it's a someone's dream to serve their country rather, but let's
	not just talk about the military.
	Let's talk about the police force.
	Sure.
	There are women, there are a lot, especially in Dallas, Denton County, there are a lot
	of women in the police force.
	Sure.
	That have made it through, become chief, has made it.
	Lower standards?
	I don't think so.
	Yes.
	Because, just because.
	But if they are assuming, and you can say you don't think so, but respectfully, if it
	is the fact, and you're looking and going, hey there's a male police officer and there's
	a female police officer, but she only has to be half as capable, that's a problem.
	Thank you.
	It's not an accomplishment.
	I don't care if it's her dream.
	She's going to run into a guy my size on PCP.
	But she'll get hurt.
	And statistically, she is more likely to get hurt.
	That's my issue.
	And the guy next door is more likely to be hurt.
	I don't think, this is my thing, I don't think that it should be someone else.
	Now if the government makes a ruling saying whatever, that's fine.
	But I don't think as people in a society where our police force or our military is being questioned, rather they're men or women, I think that you should stand by that person.
	Be like, if a woman in the military or the police force is there and you see something going on, okay, that's their job, for one.
	That's their job.
	They get paid to do that.
	So it's not, I don't think that it's your, you have the right to think whatever you want, but I don't think you should be able to really question, rather that person's doing their job capable, when you haven't put yourself on that line or have not That doesn't matter.
	Objectively, they're not as qualified.
	That's not me calling their character into question.
	I don't think you're right.
	But you just agreed with me that we should have the same standard.
	I believe that with military, yes.
	The police force, we should have a lower standard for women?
	There is no lower standard.
	There is.
	We're not going to have a conversation if you just say reality isn't reality.
	That's reality.
	Then show me the statistics.
	That's my thing.
	I'm not going to believe a single word you're saying until I see the paper or I see the statistics in front of my face.
	Okay.
	Alright.
	And we have them, the third party references, but these are all linking.
	You can see kind of where they're linking to as far as studies.
	Alright, so the Army scrapped the gender neutral test due to women failing at six times higher rate than men.
	You can find this at US News and Committee later, you can find the studies.
	The Army eliminated pull-ups in 1980, sit-ups in 2020, push-ups in 2020.
	Females can do half as many pull-ups to get a perfect score in the military.
	Integrated units.
	All male units demonstrated higher performance levels on 93 of 134 compared to gender integrated units.
	I actually need to correct myself because earlier I think I said four events.
	I was overly generous.
	It's tough with police, unlike the military, with police forces because it's more municipal.
	So they have different databases.
	I get that.
	give me some grace for that. Increasing the number of female officers by one
	percentage point increases the number of assaults on police by 15 to 19 percent.
	So this is what we're coming down to.
	These numbers are irrefutable.
	We have the physical standard numbers.
	We also have the bone mineral density numbers.
	We have the fact that women, unfortunately, suffer bone fractures at a much higher rate in the military.
	And that women, and also their brother in arms, the men near them, are more likely to be the victim of violent attack.
	Okay.
	And a big part of that is because criminals know, unfortunately, they can overpower women because male criminals are often stronger than women.
	Especially when you add to the component illegal stimulants.
	And that leaves everyone less safe.
	So these are the stats and they will be made publicly available.
	Assuming that I am not lying and that we have a double standard and one that is incredibly low for women to meet.
	Assuming that this is true.
	You now have the stats in front of your face.
	We agreed before that it should be one standard, and you either meet it or you don't.
	Do we still both agree on that?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Then that's what I want to see legislatively, because right now it's not.
	Right now there's a double standard, one for men, one for women.
	And I think, I don't know if you've ever competed in athletics at all?
	Yes.
	What sports did you compete in?
	Volleyball and soccer.
	Did you have knee surgeries?
	No.
	Oh, good.
	You're lucky.
	Every girl I know who did volleyball had horrible knee surgeries.
	It's tough on the body.
	It's an incredibly difficult sport.
	When we look, for example, at sports, obviously there's a difference between men and women.
	Would we agree there's a reason that they're separated?
	I mean, I've competed in co-ed and I've competed in just female sports and honestly the co-ed one, for me, A, was more fun.
	B, it was, I feel like with sports it's different because, at least with soccer, for example, women are very more competitive.
	At least from when I played.
	And it's very, very much, just like football for men, soccer is very much a contact sport for females.
	And it's very rough playing out there.
	The women's national team, they lose to high school boys every year.
	Like the U.S.
	national team of soccer?
	Yes.
	To high school boys.
	The one that got a world championship before the men?
	Yes.
	They lose to high school boys.
	I haven't seen it.
	Now take that and add guns and perps on PCP.
	If you show it to me, then I'll see it.
	Oh sure, just search Women's National Soccer Team.
	If you bring it up on your phone.
	I don't have my phone on me.
	Okay, I'm sure I can bring it up.
	Women's National Soccer Team.
	It's just, and I appreciate you asking, I'm glad that you're actually questioning it, but I don't know if I have good reception here.
	So look, you can see me typing this in.
	Yes.
	I'll just type in soccer team.
	Soccer team high school boys.
	Okay?
	If we have reception here.
	FC Dallas under 15 boys squad, this is from CBS Sports, beat the US women's national team.
	And this is not a singular event.
	It occurs all the time.
	Now, they still are impressive for women.
	But they're not men.
	They're not even high school boys.
	Take that, add the consequences of death, or subduing a man here, for example, in an area of Dallas, you know, late at night.
	That's catastrophic for women.
	I don't think that's progress.
	And I think we agree, I just want the policy to reflect that.
	We should have standards that are difficult, right, that are certainly high if we're talking about people in physical roles that require physically extraordinary capabilities, whether you're a man or a woman.
	You pass it.
	Or you don't.
	And then we would look at the real world data and see how it plays out out there in the field.
	That is all I'm asking.
	Right now we are doing the opposite of that as a matter of policy.
	And that leads to, unfortunately, women in compromised situations and victims of violence.
	So, I guess my question is, in this argument, because I've heard, not just you, and I'm not, what I'm trying, I'm not trying to just base your argument off other arguments that I've heard from other people.
	No, no, I understand.
	But, when I hear some of these other arguments, it's, well, it's in the betterment of women, or in a kind of a sexist role of women shouldn't No, I don't feel they do.
	No, we can't disagree.
	Just like we can't disagree that 15-year-old boys beat the women's national team.
	There's no disagreement.
	It's the truth.
	point of this? No, I don't feel they do. We could disagree or agree on that one. No, we
	can't disagree. Just like we can't disagree that 15-year-old boys beat the
	women's national team. There's no disagreement. It's the truth. I don't...
	Anyway. Well, you told me you didn't think it was true.
	Okay. Are you gonna let me finish?
	Well, I know, but I'm saying there's disagreeing and there's truth, right?
	We need to agree on objective truth.
	I'll let you speak.
	You showed me the statistics.
	You showed me the soccer.
	It's on the news.
	It's on public information where I can go look it up and go see.
	I'm not disagreeing that.
	But besides the point of those statistics, is it just the biological Just the biological anatomy of women that you believe that should not be in combat.
	Rather it's, like you said, the bone density.
	They're more, you said something?
	Strength, bone density, endurance, anaerobic capacity, ability to perform reflexively under stress.
	Any physical metric that you can use to apply to the most effective fighting force.
	The vast majority of women fail miserably in comparison to men.
	And what does that compare to other countries?
	I haven't looked up all of the other countries, but if you believe that, for example, a Lithuanian woman is much stronger than an American woman and the men are weaker and that differential is closed, I just, I would be very hard-pressed to believe it.
	No, because I'm saying, like, you have the statistics for our military.
	Have you done your research on our military versus other military, either women or men?
	Well, it's a very large sample size, so why would that change anything?
	And as it relates to our military, I think the stats are enough.
	Reality is enough.
	I'm saying, like, comparative to England's military, where they have women in combat, too.
	I'm guessing what I'm saying is, where does that stand?
	It's the same rule.
	I would say you still need to have the same standards.
	No, I'm not saying different standards.
	I'm saying, like, statistically, where are they at?
	When you do your research and you comparatively compare it to others, that's where I'm questioning.
	That's where my question is.
	Yeah, I would imagine that they also have lower their physical standards.
	They either have a lower standard for women, or they've created a gender-neutral test so women can pass, and I would be willing to bet my life that far fewer women pass than men on standards of physical rigor across the world.
	Well, maybe you should do your research and compare it to the United States.
	That's my only thing is, like, when people give these statistics... Well, because I'm dealing with American policy.
	I know, but I'm... And we agree on the American policy being silly.
	Yes.
	Hmm.
	Having a lower standard for women is wrong.
	I said there should be a one standard.
	Right.
	We agree on that.
	I don't think it's silly.
	Now, yes, I think there should be reform.
	Yes.
	But rather that reform comes in the next five years or so.
	We don't know.
	Statistically, what you've shown me, it looks like, yes, we need to reform sooner than later.
	But that's not up.
	That's not up to us.
	Yes, it is.
	It's exactly up to us.
	It's exactly up to us.
	That's my point.
	It's up to you.
	You don't have to get close.
	It's up to both of us.
	Okay.
	You're an American citizen.
	Yeah.
	You can vote.
	I can vote.
	Right?
	The policy right now is lower standards for women because the government believes that women are so incapable, they need to have such low physical standards applied.
	So if you disagree with that, then I think it is up to us.
	I mean, like, yes, but is it up to enforce it?
	That's up to the top people.
	That's them.
	And rather they see the statistics or not and decide to put that on the ballot, this, whatever.
	They won't unless they have to answer to you.
	And me.
	That's why I'm doing this.
	I don't believe that we should just defer to the elites in power.
	I don't know if you know, but the elites in power have done horrible things.
	They've been racist.
	They actually have been sexist.
	I would argue their military centers now are sexist.
	It only changes from the ground up.
	We have to hold them accountable.
	They're not going to be held accountable until people like you and myself, if we agree on something, make sure that it's heard.
	And they have to listen.
	It is up to us.
	I think that's important because a lot of students here seem to have a disconnect that, no, those are those people in power.
	You also have to think, some of us just came from high school.
	And some of us are just now turned 18 where we can't vote.
	So there is a disconnect.
	And that's where a lot of things also is education-wise.
	There's not a lot of education on policies, political things.
	It's very apparent on campus.
	It's there's a lot of things that just not this one subject that needs to be talked about.
	I think there I think I believe that there's more important things than can women be in combat that we need to focus on like schooling like let's make sure like kids have meals let's make sure that kids are all getting the same education before we start talking about other things.
	Well, I've done many of these, and we have done them on school choice, for example.
	I'm a huge supporter of school choice and school vouchers.
	We have done them on abortion.
	We have done them on gender.
	We've done them on a multitude of topics.
	We have done them on gun rights.
	This is just one today that is relevant.
	I get it.
	It's just one today.
	But I'm just saying, like, I just believe, like, I believe, like, the way that it's phrased, I think it could be phrased better, but I mean, it is what it is.
	But I, like we said, we can disagree on policies need to be across the board.
	I think we agree.
	Yes.
	That's common ground there.
	But yes, I believe that it should be across the board as far as the choice.
	I don't think there's any choice.
	The test is what it is.
	It's blind.
	But I'm saying, if women want to be in combat, that's their choice.
	Not if they don't pass the test.
	You can't maintain both of those positions.
	You can't say there should be a standard, they have to pass it, and then say, or it's their choice, then why have a test?
	You're saying if they pass the test.
	Yes, that's what I meant.
	If they pass the test, that's their choice.
	Then it's their choice.
	I agree.
	If they decide to, you know what, combat's not for me, whatever.
	Because there's so many men who do the same thing.
	Yes.
	So, I'm like... But if they pass the test.
	Yes.
	If they don't, they don't have a choice.
	It's like, you're out.
	But I'm like, there's so many different things in the military, whether you say Army, Marines, whatever.
	There's so many different tests that they have to take.
	And different roles, by the way.
	To be clear, I am not saying that women should not be in the military, or in the police force.
	I don't want them to be in a situation where they will encounter Physical violence if they're not physically capable.
	Women can be detectives, they can be interrogators, they can be negotiators, they can do fantastic work with intel, they can be operating drones, they can be pilots.
	I'm just talking about roles that have physical standards, or did, for a reason.
	So do you think the same way when it comes to operating like a gun or any type of...
	No, no, here's the thing.
	I actually am a huge advocate of women carrying firearms.
	I think that women should, because it's the one thing that actually makes you stronger than a man.
	It's an equalizer.
	If a man is attempting to rape a woman, sexually assault or overpower a woman, her best chance is to carry a firearm.
	The flip side of that is why I want female police officers to have to meet the same standards as men, because if they're not physically capable, they have to go to their gun.
	Right?
	If it's a big, strong man on drugs, her only option is her gun.
	For the same reason, I think it's good for you to have an unfair advantage in day-to-day life if someone breaks into your house.
	Women should have guns.
	Police officers need to be ultra-physically capable so that they don't have to use their guns, so that they can de-escalate, so we have less police brutality.
	I want fewer police having to use their firearms or use their taser as possible.
	But in the same case of when you say that Yes, like when you say police brutality, I see, as a black person, I see more men grabbing, white police officer men, grabbing their guns when it's in defense of a black person, whether it's a woman or a man.
	Yeah, that's a topic for another day, but statistically, yeah, it's actually, when you're talking about armed white men, they're actually more likely to be shot by officers than black men.
	Don't think so.
	But that's a different thing.
	One standard.
	Yes.
	Yes, but either way I think we would both agree it would be one standard. It would be ideal that a police officer is
	Capable in de-escalation psychologically and physically so they can subdue someone without having to use a gun
	I think for me my pain is regardless if it's If it's a police officer regardless of man or woman if I
	see a badge if I see the uniform I'm gonna go to them for help
	That's one thing.
	I don't care if you're a man or a woman.
	That's honestly one thing that I don't care about.
	I don't care, not yet.
	I would hope that their training has been enough to where they are capable, if I am getting attacked, that they can help me.
	Fight off an attacker or whatever, but as far as that, I think right now, until the policies change, until we, like you said, everyone votes and makes their decision on where they stand.
	Sure.
	Until then, I feel like there should be one thing of, okay, just because she's a female does not mean that she cannot help me.
	And I think that's where some... I've never said that.
	No, not you, but I think some, I've heard that from some other guys or some other men who are like, well, she's a female officer.
	I don't think they're saying she's a female and I'll leave you with this.
	I don't think they're saying she's a female officer.
	She can't.
	She can't help me.
	I think what people are saying is she's a female officer.
	She did not have to meet the same fiscal requirements.
	It's a roll of the dice.
	I don't know how much she's going to be able to help me and that's based on a reality and I think that that is horrible because women will forever be held in doubt because of the diversity hire and the double standard.
	For the same reason that affirmative action in college is a problem, because unfortunately people will go, does that person deserve to be here?
	Or is it an affirmative action result?
	And I think that that's the bigotry of low expectations.
	And yeah, unfortunately it harms women and unfortunately in a lot of these situations they harm people of color.
	And I think that the tests need to be blind.
	We need to have a standardized test.
	Regardless of race or gender.
	If you pass, great.
	And of course, I think we should respect everyone who's out there who's serving, who's doing their job honestly.
	If they're a police officer, I wouldn't denigrate or disrespect them.
	I agree with you on that.
	Thank you so much, though.
	I appreciate you sitting down.
	And I do like the sweater.
	Go listen, they have some great albums.
	If you haven't listened to them, I think you might like them.
	I have to do homework, so... Oh, I'm messing right now, but... But thank you very much.
	Anaya.
	Got it!
	So, see, it's always hard to have a discussion when the opposing point of view insists that your research is simply made up, and it's why it's always valuable to have the references and make them available, which, by the way, you can go see for yourselves at loudmouthcrider.com.
	Also, ladies, small bit of advice, take it or leave it, when your loving father suggests that you do something, like research your ACDC sweater, not a bad idea to listen to him.
	Dads tend to know best, especially when it comes to music from their era.
	Okay, let's bring this tugboat to shore and see if we can finish this on a high note.
	Oh yeah, we have two lovely ladies here, Jewel and Caitlin.
	I don't know how familiar you are at all with what we do with these segments.
	These change my mind.
	It's hopefully a way where people can kind of rationalize their positions on sometimes controversial topics.
	Yeah, I don't believe that women Should be in combat roles and like you mentioned police officer roles if it's a role that includes violence or the possibility of being physically overpowered or enlisted forces roles.
	Because of the fact that it makes not only women unsafe who are in the line of fire but also their brothers in arms less safe.
	I think there are a multitude of ways that women can serve in the military and in the police force, but those that require extraordinary physical capabilities are not amongst them.
	And if you disagree with that, I'd be more than happy to hear why and change my mind.
	Well, I'm not really the type of person to be like, what you think is wrong and what I think is right.
	I'm open to hearing other people's perspectives on things.
	I'm not really like, No, you think, we don't think the same, you're wrong, you know?
	Oh, great.
	So, what I'm like hearing from you is like, I'm not necessarily hearing like women are better, or women, men are better and women aren't, it's just like the physical attributes of what's different.
	Yes.
	So, um, okay, you saying by like, they shouldn't be in physical roles, how do you think like that, do you think like, I don't know what I'm trying to say.
	Do you think that women can, um, I don't know, work up to being physically capable?
	Like...
	So, yeah, and that's something I kind of expect people to bring up.
	Statistically, very unlikely.
	And that's the reason for this topic is, you know, we've created different tests since the 70s, you know, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, where we've reduced the physical requirements to try and accommodate women.
	And they still fail at a rate that's significantly higher than men, several multiples higher than men.
	I mean, they even just created a gender neutral test in the army that they now have to scrap
	because less than 10% of men were failing, but 65% of women were failing.
	And these are tests that no longer include pull-ups, push-ups.
	And if you look at the results, once they get out into the field of battle, women get
	hurt a lot more and members of their squad get hurt a lot more.
	I mean, they suffer bone fracture rates at several times, you know, multiple rate.
	They get disability discharges, 65% more than men.
	In the police force, they're far more likely in their whole squad to be violently attacked if there's a woman there, and in large part it's because this is a role that requires physical capabilities.
	So if we're saying, if women could meet those standards, yeah, my position, I would agree with you if it's, we raise it to the highest standards that we've had, keep those, and women who can meet those, sure.
	I had a question and I forgot it.
	I think it's inherently sexist to keep lowering the physical standards to try and accommodate women in combat
	roles Yeah, even though they still keep failing and it ends up
	putting them in harm's way Do you think that
	I cut like what like what are you like? What's your goal like here?
	What are you trying to accomplish here?
	These Change My Minds started out actually just me kind of on the street with a sign.
	And then we had a couple on campus.
	And then it became very apparent that no one on campus was hearing these perspectives.
	For example, we've done them on gender, we've done them on gun rights, we've done them on abortion.
	So it's really just, hopefully, for the student body to no longer be a monolith and hear different perspectives.
	Because this is a pretty important conversation.
	I do agree.
	I do agree that the body, like, was genetically not made for that kind of thing, you know?
	Like, resulting back to, like, very old times, you know?
	Women were never made to do that.
	Like, the men would do that.
	Or the men would go.
	Well, I'm not saying that women have to... Just to be clear, I'm not saying women have to cook or clean.
	There's no reason that a woman, for example, in the police can't be a detective, can't be a forensic investigator.
	There's some data that suggests they might be better interrogators, actually.
	So I have no problem with that.
	I have a problem with putting women, and we are doing this, in combat roles where not only they are more likely to be hurt, but their brothers in arms are more likely to be hurt as a result of someone who's unqualified being put on the force.
	So I'm not saying they should be at home cooking or cleaning.
	There are many, many ways that women can serve in the military and the police force.
	There's not.
	So, like, is this topic coming from you from a place of, I think men are better and women are less inferior, or where is it coming from where you stand?
	No, no.
	Look, men are not superior to women and women are not superior to men.
	We're different.
	I don't know that we're doing any great service to young women by telling them that they can do anything a man can do.
	They can't.
	Just like we're telling young men that men can get pregnant too.
	I don't believe they can.
	Yeah, that's crazy.
	Absolutely not.
	But we've done that topic as well, and we've had people say that I'm transphobic for suggesting that.
	And I think that there are rules in which, you know, women serve valuably, and they have in the military, and in the police force.
	But I think this idea that everyone has to be equal on all fronts is, I really think it's harmful.
	I honestly agree because like like recently like with the whole like like the gender topic and everything like there's been a lot of topic of some like feminist women like um being like like we scientifically don't necessarily need men anymore for what they add to like creating children and everything like that like it can genetically create like children for women and put them in their bellies and everything in a lab you know but then if you think about it and you look at the the bigger picture like Like...
	In the trades field, most of the trades workers are men.
	Yeah.
	If you look at what they're doing in the oil field, welding, all types of construction work, all types of that.
	Like, I'm not saying women can't do it.
	Like, if you want to do it, you just have to work ten times harder.
	But that's something if you want to do, you can do.
	But if you look at it, like, most women wouldn't pick to do that.
	And if you get rid of men, like, who would be doing that?
	Who would make up, you know, 93% of all the workplace deaths?
	Who would build the building behind us?
	Who would fix, you know, like the World Trade Center?
	When that happened, like, most of the firefighters and the police officers and everything were men.
	Right.
	Saving people's lives and everything like that.
	Yeah.
	I just feel like God made a man and a woman for one reason, you know?
	Men are supposed to do this, women are meant to do this, and I do agree that men are more physically capable at the end of the day.
	What do you think about, sounds like we found quite a bit of common ground, most people aren't aware, but what do you think about the fact that we've continually lowered physical requirements for the military
	so that women can meet them?
	I feel like it makes... I feel like putting armed men out there with a lower physical requirement,
	it makes it easier for people to get in who may not be able to fight as well,
	or be physically inclined enough to go out there and fight the war.
	If they lower that standard, it should be set at a standard that all of them should be able to...
	you know, just fit in that same category.
	Whereas if they keep on lowering it, I mean, it just makes our men out there weaker and weaker.
	Yeah.
	I think that, like, changing the whole, like, requirements and everything like that, like, it's given people the mindset of, like, Like, I can do this now because, like, it's changed.
	When, I feel like if they would've just left it alone and they would've left it at the same, like, you have to do this A, B, or C, or you can't get in, you know?
	Yeah.
	Like, if they would've just left it at that, like, like, there are some bad, badass women that could've done it, and they could've gone in, you know?
	Sure.
	Like, I'm not saying, like, it's a large percentage or a small percentage or anything, but I am saying there are some women that could do it, and then that would just make it even more rewarding.
	Yeah.
	I feel like everybody gets the same opportunity nowadays when Necessarily, they don't deserve that.
	They don't work as hard, they can't physically do it, you know?
	Like, I know for a fact if I tried right now to go join the military, I would not get in.
	No, well, no.
	Absolutely not, you know?
	And I don't think it's fair that... You know what, I would correct you and say, it's not that it's not fair, it's that it's not right.
	Because people do this because they say it's fair, but when we go into that, a lot of people don't know this, for example, in the Marines, a woman can do half as many pull-ups as a man and get a perfect score.
	I don't think that's fair.
	I think it needs to be the same standard because it may seem unfair, but it's what's right.
	But it shouldn't be the same standard because that lowers the standard for the man.
	Exactly.
	Well, that's the thing.
	In the Marines, they don't have a gender neutral test.
	In the Marines, a man has to do twice as many pull-ups to get a perfect score.
	So a woman can do half and get a perfect score.
	But they're out there on the same battlefield, fighting the same enemy.
	That's very true.
	And I know that I've been accused, and I will continue to be accused of sexism in maintaining my position, but I just don't want to see a woman who can't do pull-ups out there get her head caved in, you know, because she's not qualified to be there.
	Right.
	It comes with deadly ramifications, but I think that... It does come from also, like, a different, like, mental state as well.
	That's true.
	That plays a big role.
	Women are far more likely actually to experience like PTSD, be discharged for that, and that's not to say that women are mentally weaker, it's to say that women are mentally, I would argue, more adept at other situations that men wouldn't handle very well.
	Exactly.
	Going out there with a gun and fighting terrorists where you're not able to shower and you're not eating for days is one of those where test after test shows that men perform better.
	But not when it comes to making sure that, as you mentioned, children are taken care of.
	I mean, I'm a new dad.
	Basically all I do for the first year is make sure they don't die.
	I'm pretty much useless.
	They don't really need me.
	I think it has a lot to do with the genetic makeup in general.
	It just results all the way back to the genetic makeup.
	That's just how a man is built and how a woman is built.
	I just feel like physically, men are way more inclined than women.
	Do you think most women on this campus would agree with your position?
	Absolutely not.
	Why not?
	It's a women's university.
	Okay.
	They are very... Well, I know what you're saying, but explain what that means.
	People here are very... I would say liberal.
	Was it liberal?
	Maybe not liberal, for a second.
	Maybe?
	I don't know.
	Just because... I don't know.
	I would say more like... Crazy?
	More emotionally in touch with... People who are sensitive.
	Yeah, like more emotionally in touch with like... Who would have expected that at a women's university?
	They're just a lot more... I don't know, I guess just like...
	I'm more emotionally involved with these kind of things, like, oh that's it, they're going to tell you that you're sexist, and they're going to, they're like, oh, you know, people come here, like, women can do anything, you know?
	Like, yeah, sure, women can do anything, but that doesn't mean that we're not genetically made to not be violent.
	Women can't do anything, though.
	Nor can men.
	I don't know why that's, men can't give birth, and statistically, women can't do pull-ups.
	Yeah, I mean, there's just so many things that a man is made for versus a woman, and people here don't see the difference in that, like people in here, a lot.
	It's just because of the generation we're growing up in and the generation we're becoming.
	So you say that your position might be less than popular on a campus like this?
	Yeah.
	Let me ask you this, because women, for the same reason, they're more agreeable, right?
	Women tend to be nicer.
	They don't tend to be as confrontational.
	Do you have these conversations?
	Do you challenge your female classmates when these topics come up?
	Or do you just kind of try to sidestep them?
	I feel like I kind of don't associate myself with I don't know, we already know.
	It's like, you already know how the conversation is gonna go.
	So it's like, on a topic like this, it's like you just, like, again, like, my opinions are my opinions.
	Your opinions are your opinions.
	People are too sensitive nowadays to be like, well, your opinion's wrong.
	No, my opinion isn't wrong.
	We're different people.
	That's just how it goes.
	Can I present something to you, just as a thought?
	Yeah.
	Because, first off, I think that you've presented yourselves well.
	Thank you.
	And you've rationalized your positions well.
	Thank you.
	But I would say this.
	You saying that's your opinion and this is my opinion, that's very respectful, but here's the problem.
	The people with these other opinions we were talking about on campus, they are the ones determining legislation.
	Very true.
	Because often people like you, and I don't mean that in a denigrating way, being respectful, you decide, well, live and let live.
	But these other people don't.
	That's very true.
	That's very true.
	Children are allowed on puberty blockers.
	And so, I'm told, right, no vagina, no opinion, even though women obviously have opinions
	on men's issues all the time, we need women like you having those conversations
	and making sure that you can kind of push back on the legislative process because it is dominated
	by the kinds of people you're mentioning on this campus.
	I feel like I kind of gravitate towards people who think the same as me.
	Like for a summer, I just, I don't do it on purpose.
	Just like, I just kind of feel like the whole confrontation thing is just something
	It's exhausting.
	I'm a very confrontational person, and if someone were to come to me and say... And tell me my opinion's wrong, I'd be like, well... A man can get pregnant, like... Absolutely, no.
	Or like, I can turn into a guy if I want to.
	Like, I just don't think that that is physically...
	Okay.
	All I ask is that you have those conversations here on campus, because unfortunately, you know, women... I say this, there's no group of people, maybe black Americans, who are more overly represented in the media, but whose voice is actually completely unrepresented, than women.
	Because...
	Everyone sees women, they assume, right, that when they talk about women voting, it's pro-Roe v. Wade, pro-LGBTQ in women's sports, you know, pro-progressivism as opposed to any type of traditional gender roles.
	And that doesn't mean that they're fixed, but meaning that recognizing the differences between men and women, it's assumed that women are a monolith.
	And unfortunately, I think a big part of it is because women like you are nice, which is, you'd still be nice, but don't be afraid to speak out.
	Very true.
	Because I'm sure you feel it, right?
	I'm sure you feel a little bit of that tension to speak out and maybe you'll be ostracized, right?
	There is some pressure, I'd imagine.
	There is some pressure.
	Especially here, you know.
	Everybody, I feel like, thinks one way.
	Right.
	And I went to a different university.
	I'm a transfer student, so I went to Howard Payne University in Brownwood, Texas.
	I don't know if you know where that is, but do you know where Tarleton is?
	What, Tarleton?
	Tarleton is?
	No.
	Well, it's in Stephenville.
	Oh, yeah.
	So Brownwood is an hour away and the campus and the campus life and the community, completely different.
	If you were to have this same conversation there, you would get completely different answers and it would honestly be less controversial there.
	But the majority of students are Male students that are white.
	I would say though, having done this, that's actually never been the case because even if, let's say, the student body is more varied in their points of view, it ends up being a few people who dominate the conversation on any campus.
	Oh yeah, because they're the ones that want the conversation that have a different view.
	Yes.
	Yeah, so.
	Well, thank you very much.
	I'm sorry, your names again were?
	My name's Caitlin.
	My name's Jewel.
	Jewel, thank you for being here.
	I hope I clarified that.
	I really appreciate you taking the time.

▲