alt Hacker NewsWe already have data on one of those…
Pragmatically, the main reason that has been true throughout all of history is that women are more valuable reproductively. A country can lose half its men in a war and still recover. The same is not true if it loses half its women.
Replies
throw-the-towel • yesterday at 5:23 PM
However, with birth rates plummeting -- is this even true any more?
➕ show 2 replies
Pragmatically, the main weapon in most wars were arrows and swords.
Pragmatically, most of the military is far from the battlefield - or the battlefield is on home territory, in which case everyone is involved anyway, so train 'em all and let the Night Witches fly, as the Soviets did when they needed more fighting forces against the Germans. "Some 400,000 women fought for the Red Army on the front lines"[1], and were not saved for later potential reproductive use.
Pragmatically, women are much more more than a baby gestation machines.
Since you have no problems with sterile women (tubes tied, no uterus, etc.) in the military, there's really no need to jump into a thread about rejecting ALL women from the military based on hand group strength.
[1] https://hilo.hawaii.edu/campuscenter/hohonu/volumes/document... linked from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Raskova .