Why are men always being forced into the front lines of combat when TV clearly shows women are better fighters?

Question

When's the last time you've seen a men totally kick a woman's as# on TV, yet look at all the timesd you see vice versa.

Look at how superhuman Mila Jovovoich is in the Resident Evil movies.
Look at how superhuman Angelina Jolie is in the Tombraider movies.
Look at how superhuman Trinity is in the Matrix movies.
And do you remember that superhuman young woman in "Live Free ort Die Hard"? She was kicking John McClain's as# in that computer lab. When he then ran her down with an SUV at 50 mph, and did this through an elevator shaft, she was still unscathed and superhumanly tough, it look a death down an elevator shaft to kill her, THAT's how superhuman she was, no man could've endured what she endured with John McClain.
In the new cartoon movie "Planet Hulk", one of the female characters would beat Hulk in a one on one fight, if not for his abiltiy to heal himself. She was able to tango with him and take his full force blows, something no man would ever do.


So, with all this evidence that women always have been far superior to men in fighting ability, and let's not forget Lila Jovovoich tangoing with and beating 8 foot tall Nenemis in a fight, something no man could ever do, and since TV shows women can dodge bullets, why the hell aren't WOMEN forced into Selective Service? Why the hell aren't WOMEN forced to be on the front lines or combat? Women's superior fighting ability would saves the lives of many male American soldeirs since women would do all the fighting for them, dodge bullets, and be unscathed like that woman in "Live Free and Die Hard", granted they don't fall down an elevator shaft.


Since TV and movie commercials are always showing women kick men's as#es ALL THE TIME but NEVER see vice versa, and see how superhuman they are in doing it, then it must be true. If TV shows that women can take full grown men down easily all the time, then it must be true. It's a wonder Ike Turner was able to beat up Tina Turner all those years since women have always been superior fighters. Maybe Tina Turner was just hiding it from IKE and letting him get his shots in because she loved him too too much to hurt him back?

Answer 1

You have this entire men vs. women in combat theory based on fictitious characters in movies?

So, you prolly think the Thunderdome was real then too.. right? And Al Bundy was a real life ladies shoe salesman?

Answer 2

You're using imaginery characters from obviously ficticious stories to try and explain why real women should be forced into actual war conflicts. The only argument that you could make with the examples that your bring up is that movies should be more in line with reality, which I do agree with. It should also be noted that in every example except for Lois and Dafne, the character in question has been extenstivly and exhaustingly trained for the combat in which they take place. Should the US ever call a draft (heaven forbid) the kind of combat that people are expected of performing does not sink up with what your examples are. In war, rifles and other guns, as well as tanks and missles fired from ships or planes are used to kill from range. In your examples, the characters fight each other hand to hand, and usually don't even kill their opponent. giving birth is not a "copout". it is a legitimate concern, and the US cannot force women into pregnancy or to have kids. Roe v Wade established that a women has a right to privacy of her own body, including wether she will give kids or not. Raising a child does not stop at childbirth. We are not reptiles or fish that birth a hundred children in hope that one makes it. We (as a species) raise only a few children in our entire lifetimes and spend a great deal of energy to raise them. In order for that to work, SOMEONE has to be left behind in order to take care of the kids. Men historically have "had it good"; far better than women by far greater ammounts since the Neolithic Revolution, hundreds of thousands of years ago. Less than a hundred years ago women couldn't even take part of in the government that says they have God given rights to freedom. In the history of mankind, that's a drop in the bucket.

Answer 3

First of all, that's TV. ITS NOT REAL. Plus its not socially acceptable to show men kicking some woman's *** on tv. Unless its Law and Order.

Second, if you have one gender that's called into war, you can't have the other gender go. A lot of people have children. You can't expect both mother and father to go into war. What happens to the kids then? Plus men do, genetically, have more of the potential to grow muscle mass. So it makes more sense to send the stronger out.

I'm all for feminism. But the fact remains, men will always be physically stronger. Sure there's some females whom are probably quite good at combat, but you have to realize MOST women aren't like that.

Answer 4

You're calling movies and tv shows and commercials "evidence"? Really? Studies have proven that men outperform women in physical challenges far more often than the other way around. Just...wow.

Answer 5

I didn't even finish reading the entire thing you wrote. I am a woman, to my knowledge I don't have any super powers, and I have never beat a 8ft tall Nenemis in a fight, but I did serve my country for 4 years... more than you probably did. Wake up, stop reading comic books and renting dvds... WOMEN DON'T HAVE SUPER POWERS!!! But some can sure kick A$$ in the battle field.

Answer 6

it would be considered a bit sexist if a dude kicked a womans *** on TV, but not visa versa.

btw you know that tv and movies are FICTION and not reality right?

Answer 7

Though these women are superhuman, I'll argue that we fight to protect them. We can't possibly risk these women who are so valued by us. We fight so they may live, even if we are far far inferior.

Answer 8

your special. You watch and care too much about television.

Answer 9

Bacause that's fiction television. Not real life. Duh. Stop trolling