Leave a comment

Comments 13

omni_videns July 11 2005, 20:27:19 UTC
The thing about that is...after a round of basic, most of them would be closer if not AT the required weight. Why expect a weigh-in beforehand?

Reply


kimtracy July 11 2005, 20:47:59 UTC
"They view soldiers as specialized athletes whose physical condition can be a life-or-death matter."

Unless their weight is directly related to their physical condition, it shouldn't be an issue. Even then, why would they tell them to "lose weight" - which could be crucial muscle mass - as opposed to "get into better physical shape"?

Reply


placezmoilibre July 11 2005, 20:49:07 UTC
What is this article's relationship to feminism? I don't understand why you posted it.

Reply

drunkenatheist July 11 2005, 20:50:07 UTC
I would say that eating disorders have a relationship to feminism.

Reply

odd_duck_out July 11 2005, 20:52:52 UTC
I found the differences in the percentages of men and women considered overweight to be interesting (are the standards harsher for women, or are that many more women "unhealthfully" overfat? are the standards even measuring that?) and especially the seemingly direct pressure people felt to engage in behavior associated with eating disorders, and especially the fact that women were more likely to engage in this behavior when pressured.

Reply

placezmoilibre July 11 2005, 21:04:21 UTC
Oh, okay. I didn't really pick up on that area of discussion to be your intention in posting with just the one quoted paragraph and link to the article.

As far as your question regarding whether the requirements are harsher for women, it doesn't seem to be the case according to Military.com. In fact, it's just the opposite. For joining the Air Force the standard is a maximum body fat of 20% for males and 28% for females, for the Coast Guard it's 23% for males and 33% for females, for the Marine Corps it's 18% for males and 26% for females, and the maximum allowable body fat limits are 23% for men and 34% for women in the Navy.

Reply


savestheworld July 11 2005, 21:04:31 UTC
oh that's just awesome.
"Army standards are based on body fat, using a chart for body-mass index a ratio of weight and height as a screening tool. If soldiers or recruits exceed chart limits, body fat calculations are done using a formula based mostly on waist size."
are they forcing biological women to fit the healthy body standards of men, or are they basing the acceptable body fat on sex?
i don't think the article said :(

Reply


snowowl July 11 2005, 21:08:18 UTC
I don't think this has to do with gender. The military needs to reform its regs for both men and women so that it no longer relies on the outdated height/weight formula and turns to a more accurate muscle index ( ... )

Reply

odd_duck_out July 12 2005, 00:11:02 UTC
Does the fact that women are about one-and-a-half to twice as likely to use methods like purging, laxatives, sweating out water weight, etc have anything to do with gender?

In the culture I grew up in, occasional indulgence in the types of activities associated with eating disorders was socially acceptable for girls. My sister was not bullimic (she didn't have the DSM criteria in terms of degree) but she did purge on a semi-regular basis in late middle school and early high school; many of her friends did too. It seemed to be "normal" for girls to have episodic use of what I would consider extreme behaviors, whereas it wasn't for boys outside of the wrestling team.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up