Body and Mind

Sometimes reality and illusion are difficult to distinguish. The mind can insist that the body do things that are beyond its capacity, while the body can enforce its will on a mind that should know better not to. The mind can imagine the body doing certain things that it has not done before, and assert that they are fact.
Or the body can act upon capacities that may have had a reality in the past, but they now reside in the part of memory where dreams hold sway. Here are two stories which have led me to muse this muddle:


It is interesting to note that Peyton Manning’s recovery has been shrouded in such secrecy that one cannot help but wonder what is being hidden, and why. I’m actually “glad” that Chris Mortensen used Chris Weinke as an example to inflate the arguments in favor of Manning, because it in fact does the opposite. I’m not referring to Weinke’s Manning-less NFL career stats--62.2 rating, 15-26 TD-to-INT, and 2-18 as a starter—but the fact that his neck injury was differed from Manning’s in that it was an injury, and not what Manning is suffering from: A disease—the degeneration of his cervical spine, or so I have read. His surgeries have merely delayed, not cured, further complications.

One reason why people would be taking a risk on Manning is because he would have to continuously work his arm, because extended “rest” will only lead to a reversal of arm strength. In reality, Manning’s injury has more in common with the degenerative hip disease that ended Bo Jackson’s career prematurely. Also, Weinke only sat out two games at the end of his sophomore year; he didn’t miss an entire season before he was even cleared to move his arm.

********************************************************

I was listening to NPR last concerning the Pentagon’s decision to open up “thousands” of new jobs closer (as opposed to close) to combat lines. According to a AP story, this reflects “the realities of the last decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan,” although the women interviewed by radio commentator and by the BBC chose to put a political spin on it, suggesting that “sexism” and “good old boy” cronyism was keeping down women who were “stronger” than their male counterparts. I suppose that the women in this category are the ones who look more male in appearance and mannerism than female. Female officers are the main element pushing this, because they feel that the lack of combat “cred” stunts their career advancement.

Now, I agree that people regardless of gender (or race) can do a lot more than they think they can if they put their mind to it. As far as women in the military are concerned, I can only go by what I observed in my seven years in the Army. I am on the short side, and being small-boned I barely topped 110 pounds while I was in the service, and I suppose that I would be one of those some egotistical white or (Hispanic) female would claim to be physically more able than. I recall with fondness my time at in basic training at Fort Jackson, but the drill sergeants always seemed to be concerned about whether I could “make it” through. I never stumbled once on any of the requirements, even though I had to go through one last hoop when the head instructor called me into his office and asked me I wanted him to “graduate” me. The “mental” part wasn’t the problem; I was in the 94 percentile on my ASVAB test, but my “slightness” seemed to be a constant issue. Maybe there was an incentive to “prove” myself, but I could do and did everything that was expected physically to do that my colleagues—and certainly more than what officers were expected to do. The curious thing was that female enlisted soldiers also were “expected” to look on when physical labor was required (putting up tents and camouflage nets, loading and unloading trucks, digging trenches and foxholes, etc); apparently they more than willing to accept the idea that were not expected to do any physical labor. Female officers are the ones most pushing the idea, because it “hurts” their advancement—and they damn sure are too "superior" to do any physical labor themselves.

The military does in fact have a separate measurement of the comparative physical skills between male and female soldiers in order to pass the physical training requirement. Of the three components of the PT test regimen, which in my day required a score of 60 on each of the following: The 2-mile run, the push-up and sit-up. Only the sit-up had the same numerical requirement, probably taking into consideration that females has less upper body mass to move. Despite the fact I was small of stature, I achieved the maximum score of 300 on several occasions. For males at my age at the time, this meant 13 minutes or less in the two mile run (11:45 was my personal best), 75 push-ups and 80 sit-ups. For a female soldier in my age group, 80 sit-ups were also required for a score of 100, but for the 2-mile run a time of 15:36 or less was required, and for push-ups, only 46. For male soldiers in my age group, those numbers were just barely above the passing threshold. A female soldier in my age group only had to do a laughable 17 push-ups to pass, and run in 19:36; which considering a brisk walk would cover 2 miles in 30 minutes (at least for me), that is barely a fitful jog.

These numbers didn’t come out of thin air; they are based on years of statistical analysis. Now some people will say big deal, or the PT requirements are “sexist,” that upper body strength is over-rated. But the fact that a more physically imposing female soldier (say, an officer) still has a much lower requirement than I would doesn’t inspire confidence or respect, and I so I was frankly offended by these egotistical gender activists who use the device of denigration to further their aim without the employment of verifiable observation; I saw too many male employees at the sports apparel business I once worked for run into the ground by strokes to heart attacks because the female employees were not expected to be discomfited by physical labor.

The bottom line is that it isn’t “sexism” that has kept women at bay; it is a matter of trust. It is also a matter of whether in the field—that is not going out on patrol during the day and returning to the barracks at night, like a “regular” job—male soldiers can trust female soldiers to carry their fair share of the burden under fire, or must they be constantly mindful of the “sensitivities” of the female soldiers, or have to be worried if female soldiers have their backs. Or do they feel they need to spend too much worrying about their own backs when bullets are flying? As we recall, the media made Jessica Lynch out to be some Rambo character, when in fact she was knocked unconscious almost immediately without ever firing her weapon; at least she had the honesty to express embarrassment about this before a Congressional committee.

Illusion has no place when lives are on the line.