在古代，为什么士兵主要是男人?这有什么生物学上的原因吗？网友：如果女性各项条件都满足，为什么不能上前线？
正文翻译
图
图
评论翻译
Anthony Caputo
Yes, humans are a sexually dimorphic species. This means that, on average, men are bigger, stronger, more aggressive, have a greater capability to absorb punishment while still maintaining high levels of functionality, and have more stamina in militarily significant areas. Men are also (again, on average) more resilient to combat induced psychological trauma, and are more willing to make decisions with an “us vs. them” mentality (i.e. they have less empathy). All of these traits are desirable in front line soldiers.
是的，人类是一个两性异形的物种。这意味着就平均而言，男性的体型更大、更强壮、更有攻击性，在保持高水平的作战能力的同时，对恶劣的环境具有着更强的承受能力，且在重要的军事领域有着更多的耐力。相对于女性而言，男性也更具抵抗心理创伤的能力，面对残酷的战争行为，男性更容易以“我们vs他们”的心态来做决定(也就是说，男性的共情更少)。而所有这些特点都是前线士兵所需要的。
Yes, humans are a sexually dimorphic species. This means that, on average, men are bigger, stronger, more aggressive, have a greater capability to absorb punishment while still maintaining high levels of functionality, and have more stamina in militarily significant areas. Men are also (again, on average) more resilient to combat induced psychological trauma, and are more willing to make decisions with an “us vs. them” mentality (i.e. they have less empathy). All of these traits are desirable in front line soldiers.
是的，人类是一个两性异形的物种。这意味着就平均而言，男性的体型更大、更强壮、更有攻击性，在保持高水平的作战能力的同时，对恶劣的环境具有着更强的承受能力，且在重要的军事领域有着更多的耐力。相对于女性而言，男性也更具抵抗心理创伤的能力，面对残酷的战争行为，男性更容易以“我们vs他们”的心态来做决定(也就是说，男性的共情更少)。而所有这些特点都是前线士兵所需要的。
Women, on the other hand, are physically smaller and weaker, and their physiological reactions to damage are to start shutting down nonvital systems in favor of preserving long term survival. Due to higher natural levels of empathy, they have a harder time making the snap decision to kill than the average man.
与之相对的，女性在生理上比男性体型更小，体质更弱，为了生存，她们在受到伤害时的生理反应是放弃抵抗。由于女性天生具有更高的同理心，所以当她们面临生死抉择时，比一般男性更难以迅速做出杀人的决定。
与之相对的，女性在生理上比男性体型更小，体质更弱，为了生存，她们在受到伤害时的生理反应是放弃抵抗。由于女性天生具有更高的同理心，所以当她们面临生死抉择时，比一般男性更难以迅速做出杀人的决定。
Now of course, as I said, this is all on average. You can easily find very empathetic males, as well as very big and strong females, but when you are recruiting from a large population pool you don’t want to spend a lot of time measuring the exact capabilities of individuals. You want a simple metric that will get you close enough to what you need without expending all that effort. Choosing from only the males of the population is one of the most expedient filters you can use to that end. It gives you the highest chance of recruiting people who are the most mentally and physically fit to be soldiers. You will spend less time weeding out non-viable candidates, and more time training competent soldiers.
当然，正如我所说的，上述情况都是平均水平。你可以很容易地找到特别有同情心的男性，或者非常高大强壮的女性，但当你从一个庞大的人口库中征兵的时候，你不想花很多时间去检视每一个人的确切能力。你只想要一个简单的指标，简单到你不需要花费太多精力，就能通过该指标得到足够满足你征兵需求的人。因此，只从男性中选择兵员是你可以用来达到这个目的的最便捷的过滤手段之一。它能让你有最大的机会招募到不管从身体上还是精神上都最适合当兵的人。你将会花更少的时间淘汰没有生存能力的候选人，从而可以把更多时间花在合格士兵的训练上。
当然，正如我所说的，上述情况都是平均水平。你可以很容易地找到特别有同情心的男性，或者非常高大强壮的女性，但当你从一个庞大的人口库中征兵的时候，你不想花很多时间去检视每一个人的确切能力。你只想要一个简单的指标，简单到你不需要花费太多精力，就能通过该指标得到足够满足你征兵需求的人。因此，只从男性中选择兵员是你可以用来达到这个目的的最便捷的过滤手段之一。它能让你有最大的机会招募到不管从身体上还是精神上都最适合当兵的人。你将会花更少的时间淘汰没有生存能力的候选人，从而可以把更多时间花在合格士兵的训练上。
Of course in this day this is not a popular observation to make. Acknowledgment that we are indeed a sexually dimorphic species, and this involves both physical and mental traits, is very far from politically correct. A huge amount of ink is spent trying to pawn off the obvious differences between men and women as sociological constructs, rather than something rooted in genetics. The fact that there are massive physical and chemical differences between the sexes seems to be glossed over in these circles.
当然在今天，这并不是一个流行的观点。我们确实是一个两性异形的物种，不论是生理特征，亦或是心理特征，两性均存在差异，然而承认这一点是非常政治不正确的。我们大费周章的试图将男女之间的明显差异解释为一种社会学概念，而非遗传学概念。在这些圈子里，两性之间存在巨大物理和心理上差异的事实，似乎被掩盖了。
当然在今天，这并不是一个流行的观点。我们确实是一个两性异形的物种，不论是生理特征，亦或是心理特征，两性均存在差异，然而承认这一点是非常政治不正确的。我们大费周章的试图将男女之间的明显差异解释为一种社会学概念，而非遗传学概念。在这些圈子里，两性之间存在巨大物理和心理上差异的事实，似乎被掩盖了。
This is why there is such a huge push from various factions to allow women on the front lines. This is a mistake since by and large women are ill-suited to actual combat. They are perfectly capable of serving supporting roles, especially considering advantages given by modern technology, but the fundamental aspects of combat remain relatively consistent with combat from our past. This is an environment that men are simply more adapted to than women.
这就是为什么各派别如此大力推动允许妇女走上前线的原因。这是一个错误，因为总的来说，妇女并不适合参与实际战斗。她们完全可以充当辅助角色，尤其当我们考虑到现代技术所赋予的优势时更是如此，但战斗的基本方面仍然与我们过去的战斗相对一致。男人就是比女人更适应战斗环境，这没有什么好争论的。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
这就是为什么各派别如此大力推动允许妇女走上前线的原因。这是一个错误，因为总的来说，妇女并不适合参与实际战斗。她们完全可以充当辅助角色，尤其当我们考虑到现代技术所赋予的优势时更是如此，但战斗的基本方面仍然与我们过去的战斗相对一致。男人就是比女人更适应战斗环境，这没有什么好争论的。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Quora User
All correct. There’s skill, aptitude. There’s also value.
Fertile women are too valuable to be put at risk. Sperm is cheap. Fertile wombs aren’t.
全部正确。女性有技术，有能力、也有价值。
有生育能力的女人太宝贵了，不能把她们置于危险之中。精子很廉价，而可生育的子宫却很昂贵。
All correct. There’s skill, aptitude. There’s also value.
Fertile women are too valuable to be put at risk. Sperm is cheap. Fertile wombs aren’t.
全部正确。女性有技术，有能力、也有价值。
有生育能力的女人太宝贵了，不能把她们置于危险之中。精子很廉价，而可生育的子宫却很昂贵。
Anthony Caputo
Yep, this is true.
是的，你说的对。
Yep, this is true.
是的，你说的对。
Stephen Ede
No, it’s not.
That’s just macho myths.
Been non-combatant doesn’t reduce your chance of dying in ancient wars.
And most dying in battles occurred running away after defeat.
If you have more combatants, i.e. not having half your women not fighting, then you are more likely to win, and therefore take less casulties.
Indeed having kids was a lot more likely to kill you than been in combat.
对个屁。
那只是大男子主义神话。
成为非战斗人员并不能减少你在古代战争中死亡的机会。
而且战争期间的大多数死亡都是在战败后的逃跑期间发生的。
如果你有更多的战斗人员，也就是说如果女人也可以参战，那么你就有更大机会赢得胜利，从而减少伤亡。
事实上，比起战斗，生孩子更有可能杀死你。
No, it’s not.
That’s just macho myths.
Been non-combatant doesn’t reduce your chance of dying in ancient wars.
And most dying in battles occurred running away after defeat.
If you have more combatants, i.e. not having half your women not fighting, then you are more likely to win, and therefore take less casulties.
Indeed having kids was a lot more likely to kill you than been in combat.
对个屁。
那只是大男子主义神话。
成为非战斗人员并不能减少你在古代战争中死亡的机会。
而且战争期间的大多数死亡都是在战败后的逃跑期间发生的。
如果你有更多的战斗人员，也就是说如果女人也可以参战，那么你就有更大机会赢得胜利，从而减少伤亡。
事实上，比起战斗，生孩子更有可能杀死你。
Anthony Runfola
Uh oh, prepare yourself, I sense hundreds of feminists to come like a stampede ready to tell you that you're wrong.
I wish you luck
哦，你完了，准备好吧，我已经感觉到了，一大波女拳正在赶往战场，然后告诉你，你错了。
祝你好运。
Uh oh, prepare yourself, I sense hundreds of feminists to come like a stampede ready to tell you that you're wrong.
I wish you luck
哦，你完了，准备好吧，我已经感觉到了，一大波女拳正在赶往战场，然后告诉你，你错了。
祝你好运。
Anthony Caputo
Already had one, fortunately it seems to have been down-voted into oblivion, so there may be hope for western culture yet ;-)
已经有了一个，幸好貌似她的评论已经被踩爆了，所以西方文化可能还是有希望的。
（译者注：打拳的口水内容就不翻了）
Already had one, fortunately it seems to have been down-voted into oblivion, so there may be hope for western culture yet ;-)
已经有了一个，幸好貌似她的评论已经被踩爆了，所以西方文化可能还是有希望的。
（译者注：打拳的口水内容就不翻了）
Tomas Murphy
Except that there are feminists who said that if gender equality means sending their daughters to war they want no part of it.
这些女拳师四处打拳，只有当有人说性别平等意味着要把她们的女儿送去打仗的时候，她们才不想参与其中。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Except that there are feminists who said that if gender equality means sending their daughters to war they want no part of it.
这些女拳师四处打拳，只有当有人说性别平等意味着要把她们的女儿送去打仗的时候，她们才不想参与其中。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Aaron Miller
The biggest issue was that women are more valuable. Women can give birth to a child every 9 months, whereas men can reproduce several times a day. If a society lost 1/3 of its women, that would be a lot worse than losing 1/3 of its men.
最关键的问题在于，女性比男性具有更高的价值。女人每9个月才能生一个孩子，而男人一天可以繁殖好几次。如果一个社会失去1/3的妇女，这可比失去1/3的男性要糟糕得多。
The biggest issue was that women are more valuable. Women can give birth to a child every 9 months, whereas men can reproduce several times a day. If a society lost 1/3 of its women, that would be a lot worse than losing 1/3 of its men.
最关键的问题在于，女性比男性具有更高的价值。女人每9个月才能生一个孩子，而男人一天可以繁殖好几次。如果一个社会失去1/3的妇女，这可比失去1/3的男性要糟糕得多。
Anthony Caputo
I’m not sure it was the biggest, but it was definitely significant. I would say coequal with the fact that men were (and are) pretty much better suited for combat in every way that really mattered, especially when virtually every weapons system available was strength-based.
When it comes to warfare, losing 1/3 rd of your breeding force could very well be more desirable than losing the war and facing potential genocide/mass enslavement. Even in such cases, females were rarely conscxted, because even the second and third rate males were typically better suited for combat than the average female.
我不确定这是不是最关键的原因，但它绝对意义重大。我想说的是，男性不管过去还是现在，从任何方面来说都比女性更适合战斗，这一点非常非常重要！更何况，所有可用武器系统的操作都是基于力量的，在这方面，男性具有明显优势。
当涉及到战争时，两害相权取其轻，失去1/3的繁殖能力，明显比因输掉战争而面临潜在的种族灭绝以及大规模奴役，来得更可取。即使在这种情况下，女性也很少被征召，因为即使是二三流的男性通常也比一般女性更适合作战。
I’m not sure it was the biggest, but it was definitely significant. I would say coequal with the fact that men were (and are) pretty much better suited for combat in every way that really mattered, especially when virtually every weapons system available was strength-based.
When it comes to warfare, losing 1/3 rd of your breeding force could very well be more desirable than losing the war and facing potential genocide/mass enslavement. Even in such cases, females were rarely conscxted, because even the second and third rate males were typically better suited for combat than the average female.
我不确定这是不是最关键的原因，但它绝对意义重大。我想说的是，男性不管过去还是现在，从任何方面来说都比女性更适合战斗，这一点非常非常重要！更何况，所有可用武器系统的操作都是基于力量的，在这方面，男性具有明显优势。
当涉及到战争时，两害相权取其轻，失去1/3的繁殖能力，明显比因输掉战争而面临潜在的种族灭绝以及大规模奴役，来得更可取。即使在这种情况下，女性也很少被征召，因为即使是二三流的男性通常也比一般女性更适合作战。
Jason Green
Even though on average, women wouldn't be as suited to frontline combat as men, shouldn't the women “outliers” who can excel be allowed to? I believe that as long as standards are kept the same for both sexes then women should be allowed the same opportunities to serve in combat jobs.
Denying them the opportunity because on average their gender doesn't perform as well makes about as much sense as denying men the opportunity to be kindergarten teachers because they are less empathetic on average, and could potentially harm the development of the children under their care.
是的，从平均水平而言，女性不像男性一样适合前线作战，但是，难道那些在作战方面天赋异禀的女性也不能上前线吗？我认为，只要男女标准保持一致，那么女性就应该被允许有同样的机会在战斗岗位上服务。
仅仅因为就均值而言，女性在战场上的表现差强人意，就剥夺她们上战场的机会，这个说法就像男性被剥夺他们当幼儿园老师的机会一样，只是因为有人认为，相对于女性而言，男性普片缺乏细心和耐心，而且可能会对孩子成长过程中的身心健康造成潜在的伤害。
Even though on average, women wouldn't be as suited to frontline combat as men, shouldn't the women “outliers” who can excel be allowed to? I believe that as long as standards are kept the same for both sexes then women should be allowed the same opportunities to serve in combat jobs.
Denying them the opportunity because on average their gender doesn't perform as well makes about as much sense as denying men the opportunity to be kindergarten teachers because they are less empathetic on average, and could potentially harm the development of the children under their care.
是的，从平均水平而言，女性不像男性一样适合前线作战，但是，难道那些在作战方面天赋异禀的女性也不能上前线吗？我认为，只要男女标准保持一致，那么女性就应该被允许有同样的机会在战斗岗位上服务。
仅仅因为就均值而言，女性在战场上的表现差强人意，就剥夺她们上战场的机会，这个说法就像男性被剥夺他们当幼儿园老师的机会一样，只是因为有人认为，相对于女性而言，男性普片缺乏细心和耐心，而且可能会对孩子成长过程中的身心健康造成潜在的伤害。
Anthony Caputo
This may make some sense in modern volunteer-only armies, but we first need to also take into account the impact this will have on other soldiers.
Studies show that front-line women soldiers, no matter their own personal proficiency, change the behavior of their male comrades and officers for the worse. And while there are procedures for shuffling people around to make more combat-effective units, these rightfully are only used as a last resort. The introduction of female combatants would probably necessitate the application of these procedures far more often than would be desirable.
Over all militaries both historically and contemporarily find that the effort necessary to make this viable is just not worth the effort involved. I find their rational fully justified.
虽然你的设想在现代募兵制的军队中可能具有一定的意义，但我们首先还需要考虑到这将对其他士兵产生的影响。
研究表明，前线女兵无论个人专业能力如何，都会改变其男性战友和指挥官的行为模式，并使他们变得更糟。虽然部队的确可以通过程序将其调离，以确保该战斗单元的战斗力，但这种做法理应被视为不得已而为之的最后的手段。而引进女性战斗人员所导致的该调动程序的使用次数可能会远远超出你的想象。
无论从历史角度亦或从现实角度来看，军事部门都发现，为了增强军队战斗力而引进女兵的努力是得不偿失的。我认为军方所给出的这些理由是完全合理的。
This may make some sense in modern volunteer-only armies, but we first need to also take into account the impact this will have on other soldiers.
Studies show that front-line women soldiers, no matter their own personal proficiency, change the behavior of their male comrades and officers for the worse. And while there are procedures for shuffling people around to make more combat-effective units, these rightfully are only used as a last resort. The introduction of female combatants would probably necessitate the application of these procedures far more often than would be desirable.
Over all militaries both historically and contemporarily find that the effort necessary to make this viable is just not worth the effort involved. I find their rational fully justified.
虽然你的设想在现代募兵制的军队中可能具有一定的意义，但我们首先还需要考虑到这将对其他士兵产生的影响。
研究表明，前线女兵无论个人专业能力如何，都会改变其男性战友和指挥官的行为模式，并使他们变得更糟。虽然部队的确可以通过程序将其调离，以确保该战斗单元的战斗力，但这种做法理应被视为不得已而为之的最后的手段。而引进女性战斗人员所导致的该调动程序的使用次数可能会远远超出你的想象。
无论从历史角度亦或从现实角度来看，军事部门都发现，为了增强军队战斗力而引进女兵的努力是得不偿失的。我认为军方所给出的这些理由是完全合理的。
Jason Green
Is this behavior change because of an inherent biological difference or is this because of society?
It could have been and was argued that allowing the U.S military to desegregate in the ’50s would ruin the unit cohesion and cause bad behavior because of all the racist assholes. Similar arguments were made about allowing gay people to serve. But here we are today, no worse for wear because everyone grew the fuck up.
Do we have a duty to coddle men who can't handle serving alongside a woman or should we demand better of them?
这种行为的变化是由于天生的生理差异还是因为社会性的原因？
直到50年代还有人反对在美国军队中取消种族隔离制度，原因是他们认为取消种族隔制度离会破坏部队的凝聚力，并造成不良行为，这些人都是些种族主义的狗屎！与之相似的，在关于允许同性恋服役这一问题上也有些人以类似的理由在那叽叽歪歪。但今天的我们有变得更糟吗？我们没有！因为我们每个人都TM的长大了！！
我们有义务去照顾那些不能与女人并肩作战的男人吗？还是我们应该要求他们做得更好?
Is this behavior change because of an inherent biological difference or is this because of society?
It could have been and was argued that allowing the U.S military to desegregate in the ’50s would ruin the unit cohesion and cause bad behavior because of all the racist assholes. Similar arguments were made about allowing gay people to serve. But here we are today, no worse for wear because everyone grew the fuck up.
Do we have a duty to coddle men who can't handle serving alongside a woman or should we demand better of them?
这种行为的变化是由于天生的生理差异还是因为社会性的原因？
直到50年代还有人反对在美国军队中取消种族隔离制度，原因是他们认为取消种族隔制度离会破坏部队的凝聚力，并造成不良行为，这些人都是些种族主义的狗屎！与之相似的，在关于允许同性恋服役这一问题上也有些人以类似的理由在那叽叽歪歪。但今天的我们有变得更糟吗？我们没有！因为我们每个人都TM的长大了！！
我们有义务去照顾那些不能与女人并肩作战的男人吗？还是我们应该要求他们做得更好?
Anthony Caputo
Men throughout history have shown a pretty strong preponderance to make incredibly bad judgments in the presence of ovaries and their associated physiology. There is strong evidence that this is based far more in genetics than western culture is willing to admit to.
From a survival perspective, this actually makes a lot of sense. As other answers correctly point out, wombs are valuable, gonads are not. There is a very strong mental bias for us gonad carriers to take incredible, ill-calculated risks to preserve those capable of bearing offspring. Building this into your combat units would not result in increased combat performance, and would likely lead to you having to deal with far more casualties than you would have to otherwise.
Is it conceivable you could turn this behavior to your advantage? Possibly. Staffing a critical defensive position with female combat troops may lead to a significantly more fierce defense of that position by the male soldiers, but that does not necessarily mean a more effective defense. There is also the question of the ethics of this strategy.
I do genuinely think the military has it right on this one. Let the women serve in supporting roles since technology no longer mandates any need to differentiate, but leave the combat to the men.
纵观整个历史，一旦事关卵巢或其相关生理学器官的存续问题，男性在大多数情况下都做出了令人难以置信的错误判断。有强有力的证据表明，造成这种情形的原因更多是基于遗传学因素，而这一点正是西方文化所不愿意承认的。
从物种生存的角度来看，这其实是很有道理的。正如其他答案所指出的那样，同样都是生殖腺，子宫是有价值的，而睾丸不是。我们这些男性性腺携带者有着一种非常强烈的心理偏差，即我们甘愿冒着非理性的、难以置信的巨大风险，去保存那些能够生育后代的性腺。在你的战斗单位中加入女性成员不仅不会提高你的战斗能力，而且很可能会导致与纯男性战斗部队相比更多的伤亡。
你有可能利用男性的上述行为倾向并将其转化为自己的优势吗？有可能。在一个重要的防御阵地上配备女性作战部队，可能会明显导致男性士兵更为强烈的防守意愿，但更为强烈的防守意愿，并不一定意味着更为有效的防守。除此之外，这一策略是否合适还存在一定的伦理问题。
我真心觉得军方在这个问题上的做法是正确的。既然在技术性岗位上男女没有差别，就让女兵担任辅助角色，然后把战斗留给男兵吧。
Men throughout history have shown a pretty strong preponderance to make incredibly bad judgments in the presence of ovaries and their associated physiology. There is strong evidence that this is based far more in genetics than western culture is willing to admit to.
From a survival perspective, this actually makes a lot of sense. As other answers correctly point out, wombs are valuable, gonads are not. There is a very strong mental bias for us gonad carriers to take incredible, ill-calculated risks to preserve those capable of bearing offspring. Building this into your combat units would not result in increased combat performance, and would likely lead to you having to deal with far more casualties than you would have to otherwise.
Is it conceivable you could turn this behavior to your advantage? Possibly. Staffing a critical defensive position with female combat troops may lead to a significantly more fierce defense of that position by the male soldiers, but that does not necessarily mean a more effective defense. There is also the question of the ethics of this strategy.
I do genuinely think the military has it right on this one. Let the women serve in supporting roles since technology no longer mandates any need to differentiate, but leave the combat to the men.
纵观整个历史，一旦事关卵巢或其相关生理学器官的存续问题，男性在大多数情况下都做出了令人难以置信的错误判断。有强有力的证据表明，造成这种情形的原因更多是基于遗传学因素，而这一点正是西方文化所不愿意承认的。
从物种生存的角度来看，这其实是很有道理的。正如其他答案所指出的那样，同样都是生殖腺，子宫是有价值的，而睾丸不是。我们这些男性性腺携带者有着一种非常强烈的心理偏差，即我们甘愿冒着非理性的、难以置信的巨大风险，去保存那些能够生育后代的性腺。在你的战斗单位中加入女性成员不仅不会提高你的战斗能力，而且很可能会导致与纯男性战斗部队相比更多的伤亡。
你有可能利用男性的上述行为倾向并将其转化为自己的优势吗？有可能。在一个重要的防御阵地上配备女性作战部队，可能会明显导致男性士兵更为强烈的防守意愿，但更为强烈的防守意愿，并不一定意味着更为有效的防守。除此之外，这一策略是否合适还存在一定的伦理问题。
我真心觉得军方在这个问题上的做法是正确的。既然在技术性岗位上男女没有差别，就让女兵担任辅助角色，然后把战斗留给男兵吧。
Hakeem Gadi
It is worth noting here, that Arab tribes of pre-Islamic Arabia, at a time, brought “their” women to the battlefield, as a means to elevate the courage of their warrior men and to strike fear into their enemy's hearts. The message being, we are fighting this war to the death. The women did not take part in the battle, however.
值得注意的是，在伊斯兰教统治阿拉伯世界之前，一些阿拉伯部落有时会将他们的眷属带到战场上，以此来提高他们战士的勇气，并使敌人心生恐惧。这样做所传达的信息是，我们将在这场战斗中死战到底。当然，妇女们并没有参加战斗。
It is worth noting here, that Arab tribes of pre-Islamic Arabia, at a time, brought “their” women to the battlefield, as a means to elevate the courage of their warrior men and to strike fear into their enemy's hearts. The message being, we are fighting this war to the death. The women did not take part in the battle, however.
值得注意的是，在伊斯兰教统治阿拉伯世界之前，一些阿拉伯部落有时会将他们的眷属带到战场上，以此来提高他们战士的勇气，并使敌人心生恐惧。这样做所传达的信息是，我们将在这场战斗中死战到底。当然，妇女们并没有参加战斗。
John M Mode
Name one sport that involves speed, quickness, aggression, and strength where women compete against men. There are none. I will give a good example. In 2014 the U.S. women's Olympic hockey team practiced against some northeastern U.S. boy’s high school hockey teams. In these practice games, the boys beat the world’s best female athletes in hockey in about half of the games…and the boy’s were not allowed to body check for fear of hurting the women.
Mr. Caputo makes a good point about how females disrupt unit cohesion even if women were as strong as men. Putting young fertile reproductive age women with young high testosterone men is not a good combination. There will be romantic feelings, love interests, jealousies, men wanting to protect the women, and even pregnancies. Navy medical studies have reported the pregnancy rate on Navy ships is close to 20%.
I know many 60-year-old men at my gym who are fitter and stronger than any woman at that gym. But they are discriminated against by the military, because of their age. The military discriminates all the time based on physical characteristics such as age, strength, height, and weight. If an all-male combat unit is better than a unit mixed with women then why is it wrong to discriminate against women? Of course, I have no problem if, like the sports world, women fight in their own combat units, but no feminist has proposed this. Why? Because they know that an all-female fighting force would be a disaster.
请说出哪怕一项在涉及速度、敏捷、攻击性和力量的运动中，男女可以同场竞技的项目？一个都没有。
我来举一个很好的例子。2014年，美国奥运女子曲棍球队与一些美国东北部的高中男子曲棍球队进行了练习。在这些练习赛中，男孩们在大约一半的比赛中击败了世界上最好的女子曲棍球运动员......而且男孩们不被允许使用身体拦截战术，因为他们害怕会伤害到女运动员。
卡普托先生说得很好，即使女性和男性一样强壮，女性也会破坏战斗单位的凝聚力。把年轻且有生育能力的育龄女性和男性荷尔蒙分泌旺盛的年轻男性放在一起，并不是一个好的组合。他们之间一定会发生这样那样的事情，浪漫的氛围，情人，嫉妒，男人对女人的保护欲，甚至怀孕等等。海军医学研究报告显示，海军舰艇上的怀孕率接近20%。
在我的健身房里，我认识许多60岁的男人，他们比健身房里的任何女人都更健康、更强壮。但他们却被军方歧视，因为他们的年龄。其实军方一直在根据年龄、力量、身高、体重等身体特征进行歧视。如果一支全男性的作战部队比一支有女性混编的部队要好，那为什么歧视女性是错误的呢？
当然，如果像体育界一样，女性在自己的全女性部队中作战，我是没有问题的，但没有一个女权主义者提出这个建议。为什么呢？因为她们知道，一支全女性的战斗部队将是一场灾难。
Name one sport that involves speed, quickness, aggression, and strength where women compete against men. There are none. I will give a good example. In 2014 the U.S. women's Olympic hockey team practiced against some northeastern U.S. boy’s high school hockey teams. In these practice games, the boys beat the world’s best female athletes in hockey in about half of the games…and the boy’s were not allowed to body check for fear of hurting the women.
Mr. Caputo makes a good point about how females disrupt unit cohesion even if women were as strong as men. Putting young fertile reproductive age women with young high testosterone men is not a good combination. There will be romantic feelings, love interests, jealousies, men wanting to protect the women, and even pregnancies. Navy medical studies have reported the pregnancy rate on Navy ships is close to 20%.
I know many 60-year-old men at my gym who are fitter and stronger than any woman at that gym. But they are discriminated against by the military, because of their age. The military discriminates all the time based on physical characteristics such as age, strength, height, and weight. If an all-male combat unit is better than a unit mixed with women then why is it wrong to discriminate against women? Of course, I have no problem if, like the sports world, women fight in their own combat units, but no feminist has proposed this. Why? Because they know that an all-female fighting force would be a disaster.
请说出哪怕一项在涉及速度、敏捷、攻击性和力量的运动中，男女可以同场竞技的项目？一个都没有。
我来举一个很好的例子。2014年，美国奥运女子曲棍球队与一些美国东北部的高中男子曲棍球队进行了练习。在这些练习赛中，男孩们在大约一半的比赛中击败了世界上最好的女子曲棍球运动员......而且男孩们不被允许使用身体拦截战术，因为他们害怕会伤害到女运动员。
卡普托先生说得很好，即使女性和男性一样强壮，女性也会破坏战斗单位的凝聚力。把年轻且有生育能力的育龄女性和男性荷尔蒙分泌旺盛的年轻男性放在一起，并不是一个好的组合。他们之间一定会发生这样那样的事情，浪漫的氛围，情人，嫉妒，男人对女人的保护欲，甚至怀孕等等。海军医学研究报告显示，海军舰艇上的怀孕率接近20%。
在我的健身房里，我认识许多60岁的男人，他们比健身房里的任何女人都更健康、更强壮。但他们却被军方歧视，因为他们的年龄。其实军方一直在根据年龄、力量、身高、体重等身体特征进行歧视。如果一支全男性的作战部队比一支有女性混编的部队要好，那为什么歧视女性是错误的呢？
当然，如果像体育界一样，女性在自己的全女性部队中作战，我是没有问题的，但没有一个女权主义者提出这个建议。为什么呢？因为她们知道，一支全女性的战斗部队将是一场灾难。
Cole Comyn
It's been proven that mixed units preform more poorly than their all male counterparts because of the subconscious desire to protect the weaker sex that is in most men.
事实证明，混编单位的表现比全男同胞更差，因为大多数男性潜意识里都有保护弱者的欲望。
It's been proven that mixed units preform more poorly than their all male counterparts because of the subconscious desire to protect the weaker sex that is in most men.
事实证明，混编单位的表现比全男同胞更差，因为大多数男性潜意识里都有保护弱者的欲望。
Jasper Thomas
Why not explicitly exclude Asians, then? Asians on average are smaller and weaker than other races. Excluding them all would make it more efficient to weed out people not physically suited for combat roles.
那么，为什么不明确地排除亚洲人呢？就平均而言，亚洲人比其他种族体型更小、体质更弱。将他们全部排除在外，可以更有效地剔除身体上不适合战斗的人。
Why not explicitly exclude Asians, then? Asians on average are smaller and weaker than other races. Excluding them all would make it more efficient to weed out people not physically suited for combat roles.
那么，为什么不明确地排除亚洲人呢？就平均而言，亚洲人比其他种族体型更小、体质更弱。将他们全部排除在外，可以更有效地剔除身体上不适合战斗的人。
Anthony Caputo
Because the differences between the races are smaller than the differences between the sexes, especially when you control for cultural issues like a diet. But this type of sextion does happen, it just happens during the weeding out process.
There are physical requirements you must meet for things like weight and height, for example. Once that is taken care of the differences between similarly sized Asian males and Caucasian males, while real and measurable, are far less than what is found between Caucasian males and Caucasian females of roughly the same size. Sexual traits are remarkably similar between the races, so it is not really worth differentiating.
因为种族之间的差异比性别之间的差异要小，尤其是当你排除了由文化等因素造成的差异，比如饮食所带来的影响时，这种差异会来得更小。但这种类型的选择确实发生了，它只是发生在淘汰的过程中。
想要应征入伍，你必须满足一些身体上的标准，比如体重和身高。体型相似的亚洲男性和高加索男性之间的确存在差异，尽管这些差异是真实的，且可以衡量的，但该差异要远远小于体型大致相同的高加索男性和高加索女性之间的差异。对于人类而言，即使种族不同，但相同性别之间的生理特征非常相似，所以不值得加以区分。
Because the differences between the races are smaller than the differences between the sexes, especially when you control for cultural issues like a diet. But this type of sextion does happen, it just happens during the weeding out process.
There are physical requirements you must meet for things like weight and height, for example. Once that is taken care of the differences between similarly sized Asian males and Caucasian males, while real and measurable, are far less than what is found between Caucasian males and Caucasian females of roughly the same size. Sexual traits are remarkably similar between the races, so it is not really worth differentiating.
因为种族之间的差异比性别之间的差异要小，尤其是当你排除了由文化等因素造成的差异，比如饮食所带来的影响时，这种差异会来得更小。但这种类型的选择确实发生了，它只是发生在淘汰的过程中。
想要应征入伍，你必须满足一些身体上的标准，比如体重和身高。体型相似的亚洲男性和高加索男性之间的确存在差异，尽管这些差异是真实的，且可以衡量的，但该差异要远远小于体型大致相同的高加索男性和高加索女性之间的差异。对于人类而言，即使种族不同，但相同性别之间的生理特征非常相似，所以不值得加以区分。
Brandon Wiscombe
I'd say that the increased aggression caused by testosterone is even more of a factor than the above, at least at first - attitude is hugely important in combat between fighters of equal skill, even if they are physically different.
我想说的是，睾丸酮所造成的攻击性增加甚至比上述因素来得更为重要，我们至少要先搞明白一点，对于技术相同的格斗者而言，即便他们各自身体条件存在差异会带来影响，但他们的态度也是决定战斗结果的极其重要的原因。
I'd say that the increased aggression caused by testosterone is even more of a factor than the above, at least at first - attitude is hugely important in combat between fighters of equal skill, even if they are physically different.
我想说的是，睾丸酮所造成的攻击性增加甚至比上述因素来得更为重要，我们至少要先搞明白一点，对于技术相同的格斗者而言，即便他们各自身体条件存在差异会带来影响，但他们的态度也是决定战斗结果的极其重要的原因。
Anthony Caputo
Testosterone is indeed the hormone most likely to contribute the greatest effect to the mental differences seen between men and women. Testosterone is also the hormone largely responsible for the increased muscle bulk found in males as well, so it contributes to both mental and physical traits that favor men in combat.
睾丸酮确实是最有可能对男女之间的心理差异产生最大影响的激素。睾丸酮也是导致男性肌肉体积增加的主要激素，所以不管在心理上还是在生理上，它都有助于男性在战斗中处于有利地位。
Testosterone is indeed the hormone most likely to contribute the greatest effect to the mental differences seen between men and women. Testosterone is also the hormone largely responsible for the increased muscle bulk found in males as well, so it contributes to both mental and physical traits that favor men in combat.
睾丸酮确实是最有可能对男女之间的心理差异产生最大影响的激素。睾丸酮也是导致男性肌肉体积增加的主要激素，所以不管在心理上还是在生理上，它都有助于男性在战斗中处于有利地位。
Lydia Chais
This is a crock of crap. You have ever seen a man try to take a baby away from its mother; she will kill you without any mercy; have you ever seen a woman jealous? You don’t even want to go there. Remember the Francine Hughes (The Burning Case)? And don’t forget about the John and Lorena Bobbit case? Never forget Boudica Queen of the Iceni tribe.
这简直是一派胡言。你见过一个男人想把婴儿从他母亲身边夺走妈？她会毫不留情地杀了你！你知道女人吃醋会有什么后果吗？你连想都不敢想。还记得弗朗辛·休斯案吗？也别忘了约翰和洛雷娜-波比特案？千万别忘了伊塞尼部落的布迪卡女王。
（译者注：前两件是轰动性案件，一个是放火把前夫烧死在床上，一个是老婆说老公强奸了自己，把老公阴茎剪下来带走，开车时扔到路边，后来找到了手术接上去了，男的后来还拍了两部色情片电影用以证明他“恢复了正常”，最后一个是愤怒的凯尔特女王）
This is a crock of crap. You have ever seen a man try to take a baby away from its mother; she will kill you without any mercy; have you ever seen a woman jealous? You don’t even want to go there. Remember the Francine Hughes (The Burning Case)? And don’t forget about the John and Lorena Bobbit case? Never forget Boudica Queen of the Iceni tribe.
这简直是一派胡言。你见过一个男人想把婴儿从他母亲身边夺走妈？她会毫不留情地杀了你！你知道女人吃醋会有什么后果吗？你连想都不敢想。还记得弗朗辛·休斯案吗？也别忘了约翰和洛雷娜-波比特案？千万别忘了伊塞尼部落的布迪卡女王。
（译者注：前两件是轰动性案件，一个是放火把前夫烧死在床上，一个是老婆说老公强奸了自己，把老公阴茎剪下来带走，开车时扔到路边，后来找到了手术接上去了，男的后来还拍了两部色情片电影用以证明他“恢复了正常”，最后一个是愤怒的凯尔特女王）
Anthony Caputo
It is a proven fact that men and women respond to physical trauma in different ways. This is a physiological response rooted in genetics.
One of the best examples is our physiological response to extreme cold. Men’s bodies respond by moving more blood flow and heat to the extremities. This preserves greater functionality at the cost of increased heat loss.
Women’s bodies, on the other hand, respond by pulling circulation back to their core, helping preserve heat at the cost of functionality in the limbs.
What this means is that men will maintain a higher function level, but will not live as long before succumbing to hypothermia. Women are much more susceptible to frostbite but have a longer expected survival window for a given body mass.
There are other comparable physiological responses when facing things like trauma and blood loss. Men just hold up better to this kind of abuse, at the cost of longer-term survival chances. By and large male traits are more desirable in a combat situation.
You tell me how these physiological responses are influenced by sociological constructs, instead of being genetic in nature.
事实证明，男人和女人对身体创伤的反应是不同的。这是一种根植于遗传学的生理反应。
最好的例子之一就是我们对极端寒冷的生理反应。男性的身体通过将更多的血液和热量输送到四肢来做出反应。这以增加人体热量损失为代价，保留了更大的运动能力。
另一方面，女性身体的反应则是将血液循环拉回核心部位，以帮助保持核心热量，但代价是四肢的功能受损。
这就意味着，男性会保持较高的功能水平，但体温降低速度更快，存活时间更短。女性则更容易受冻伤的影响，但她们的预期生存时间会更长。
当面对外伤和失血等情况时，还有其他类似的生理反应。男人只是更能忍受这种虐待，但代价是失去长期的生存机会。总的来说，男性所具有的特质是更有利于战斗的。
然后你告诉我，这些生理反应是受到社会学概念的影响造成的，而非遗传学因素造成的？
It is a proven fact that men and women respond to physical trauma in different ways. This is a physiological response rooted in genetics.
One of the best examples is our physiological response to extreme cold. Men’s bodies respond by moving more blood flow and heat to the extremities. This preserves greater functionality at the cost of increased heat loss.
Women’s bodies, on the other hand, respond by pulling circulation back to their core, helping preserve heat at the cost of functionality in the limbs.
What this means is that men will maintain a higher function level, but will not live as long before succumbing to hypothermia. Women are much more susceptible to frostbite but have a longer expected survival window for a given body mass.
There are other comparable physiological responses when facing things like trauma and blood loss. Men just hold up better to this kind of abuse, at the cost of longer-term survival chances. By and large male traits are more desirable in a combat situation.
You tell me how these physiological responses are influenced by sociological constructs, instead of being genetic in nature.
事实证明，男人和女人对身体创伤的反应是不同的。这是一种根植于遗传学的生理反应。
最好的例子之一就是我们对极端寒冷的生理反应。男性的身体通过将更多的血液和热量输送到四肢来做出反应。这以增加人体热量损失为代价，保留了更大的运动能力。
另一方面，女性身体的反应则是将血液循环拉回核心部位，以帮助保持核心热量，但代价是四肢的功能受损。
这就意味着，男性会保持较高的功能水平，但体温降低速度更快，存活时间更短。女性则更容易受冻伤的影响，但她们的预期生存时间会更长。
当面对外伤和失血等情况时，还有其他类似的生理反应。男人只是更能忍受这种虐待，但代价是失去长期的生存机会。总的来说，男性所具有的特质是更有利于战斗的。
然后你告诉我，这些生理反应是受到社会学概念的影响造成的，而非遗传学因素造成的？
Damon Craig
Yes. An unpopular fact that once gained me reprimand by the Quora thought police.
是的，这是一个不受欢迎的事实，而且曾经让我备受Quora思想警察的斥责。
Yes. An unpopular fact that once gained me reprimand by the Quora thought police.
是的，这是一个不受欢迎的事实，而且曾经让我备受Quora思想警察的斥责。
Vyshnav Shabu Nair
Feminism has suddenly become an idea of female domination.
I am all in for equality for women but I shun those who illogically demand women power in all aspects.
女权主义思想突然变成了一种争取女性统治权的思想。
我完全支持女性平权，但我对那些不合逻辑地要求妇女在各方面要拥有权力的人避而远之。
Feminism has suddenly become an idea of female domination.
I am all in for equality for women but I shun those who illogically demand women power in all aspects.
女权主义思想突然变成了一种争取女性统治权的思想。
我完全支持女性平权，但我对那些不合逻辑地要求妇女在各方面要拥有权力的人避而远之。
很赞 7
收藏