RE: Women In the Infantry

RE: Women In the Infantry (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

Fred98 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 12:15:15 AM)
People will recall the Titanic and the “women and children first”. I recently did a short cruise. We had a life boat drill and the “women and children first” thing officially does not exist. However, on a sinking ship, no man would take the place of a woman or child in a life boat. It is built into us. Men in combat will look after each other but given that one of your team mates is a female would that affect the thinking of a squad leader? .

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 12:16:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: parusski Titanwarrior89 intoned: quote: I love you guys, but some of you....don't have a clue. The insane group who think women should be used as cannon fodder [&o] and may I had to your quote=those that want to be policitally correct no matter what the cost.

goodwoodrw -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 12:18:05 AM)
I agree with Mr Smith personal Hygiene is a very private thing for some, maybe not for others. A perfect example is my wife, we have been together for over twenty years both ex reservist, certainly not prudish and nakedness is not an issue. Now she hasn't a problem sharing the bathroom when it comes to urinating, but periods and pooing is another thing she still locks the door 20 years on. Some things a very private to some individuals, and all training in the world ain't gunna change it. I spent thirty years in the reserve and I have seen many grown men going troppo when it come to communal ablutions. And there a lot of men and women out there that struggle with nakedness of the same sex as well the opposite. It just takes one individual man or women in a team to become uncomfortable to screw the morale of it. The issue is not just about strength the implications are far greater than that.

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 12:18:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89 quote: ORIGINAL: parusski Titanwarrior89 intoned: quote: I love you guys, but some of you....don't have a clue. The insane group who think women should be used as cannon fodder [&o] and may I had to your quote=those that want to be policitally correct no matter what the cost. quote: The insane group who think women should be used as cannon fodder and may I had to your quote=those that want to be policitally correct no matter what the cost. That is what I thunked.

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 12:19:10 AM)
Interesting....read e'm and weep guys. quote: ORIGINAL: parusski Well, according to the Washington Post: "To graduate from boot camp, soldiers must perform 35 pushups and 47 situps and run two miles in at least 16 minutes and 36 seconds — but that’s only for male soldiers. Female troops are required to do 13 pushups and 43 situps and run two miles in 19 minutes and 42 seconds." And: "In the 1990s, the British army, under political pressure to put women in traditional male jobs, adopted a “gender-free” policy with identical fitness requirements for both sexes and abandoned its “gender fair” system of separate standards. A decade later, Dr. Ian Gemmel conducted a study for the British army’s personnel center. He found that the number of women who could qualify for basic training decreased in the “gender-free” system, as more women dropped out of training because of injury, compared with the “gender fair” system of separate fitness requirements. This study confirms and quantifies the excess risk for women when they undertake the same arduous training as male recruits,” Dr. Gemmel reported." Why is there a difference? I think it is self explanatory. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/30/army-may-train-women-for-rigor-of-front-lines/?page=all

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 12:20:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BASB I agree with Mr Smith personal Hygiene is a very private thing for some, maybe not for others. A perfect example is my wife, we have been together for over twenty years both ex reservist, certainly not prudish and nakedness is not an issue. Now she hasn't a problem sharing the bathroom when it comes to urinating, but periods and pooing is another thing she still locks the door 20 years on. Some things a very private to some individuals, and all training in the world ain't gunna change it. I spent thirty years in the reserve and I have seen many grown men going troppo when it come to communal ablutions. And there a lot of men and women out there that struggle with nakedness of the same sex as well the opposite. It just takes one individual man or women in a team to become uncomfortable to screw the morale of it. The issue is not just about strength the implications are far greater than that. LOL. I have been married 27 years, and I have never seen my wife poop(or even smelled it). My wife and daughter always have the answer to on the issue of chicks in combat--"WHY?" Why indeed? Political correctness, the bane of modern society.

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 12:30:03 AM)
Something for thought also.....in combat situations, long term combat when people are really, really tired and just do not want anymore of it....what ever it is....will do what it takes some times to get out of that situation. Such as shooting their selfs in the foot, the hand. But lets say all you have to do is get pregnate...probley get chaptered but your not in that situation any longer...no gun shot wound in the leg or hand or else where. Now before you get your dander up....Who are dishonest the most, or lie the most men or women. Well neither, but their both capable of it in extreme situations-So how many would want to get out of the "Situation their in" without refusing a order, self inflicted wound. Probley not much great than it would be for men...but at the time alot less pain.

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 12:33:00 AM)
I went into the Army when there was wooden barracks with a line of 10 toilets and guys lined up pooping with no privacy dividers.....just pass roll. I still like too Poop in private and so does my wife. quote: ORIGINAL: parusski quote: ORIGINAL: BASB I agree with Mr Smith personal Hygiene is a very private thing for some, maybe not for others. A perfect example is my wife, we have been together for over twenty years both ex reservist, certainly not prudish and nakedness is not an issue. Now she hasn't a problem sharing the bathroom when it comes to urinating, but periods and pooing is another thing she still locks the door 20 years on. Some things a very private to some individuals, and all training in the world ain't gunna change it. I spent thirty years in the reserve and I have seen many grown men going troppo when it come to communal ablutions. And there a lot of men and women out there that struggle with nakedness of the same sex as well the opposite. It just takes one individual man or women in a team to become uncomfortable to screw the morale of it. The issue is not just about strength the implications are far greater than that. LOL. I have been married 27 years, and I have never seen my wife poop(or even smelled it). My wife and daughter always have the answer to on the issue of chicks in combat--"WHY?" Why indeed? Political correctness, the bane of modern society.

Qwixt -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 12:33:59 AM)
I don't have a problem with a "“gender fair” system of separate fitness requirements" for combat roles because I don't think many women will pass it, and it shows they have physical fitness level. I remember I had the M60 in the last company I served in (a reward for having a short-timer attitude [;)]), and it took a bit of strength to pull the cocking handle back, not sure many women could do it. Perhaps the M60s are in better shape these days, but when I was in, it seemed like 50% of them jammed easy and were crap to use.

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 12:36:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: parusski Yes,Yes....Parusski you should have started this thread....the man goes ahead of the line.[&o] Why indeed? Political correctness, the bane of modern society.

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 12:42:00 AM)
I don't know if their standard issue any longer for a line unit. Maybe one of new soldiers can answer that. They did have a tendency to lock up occassionaly but not like the 50Cal. You lock that baby up and it will have to be sent too depot sometimes to get it unjammed.[&:] I still have a Head space and a timing gage in my tool box. Just couldn't throw it away. quote: ORIGINAL: Qwixt I don't have a problem with a "“gender fair” system of separate fitness requirements" for combat roles because I don't think many women will pass it, and it shows they have physical fitness level. I remember I had the M60 in the last company I served in (a reward for having a short-timer attitude [;)]), and it took a bit of strength to pull the cocking handle back, not sure many women could do it. Perhaps the M60s are in better shape these days, but when I was in, it seemed like 50% of them jammed easy and were crap to use.

Joe D. -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 1:05:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89 Something for thought also.....in combat situations, long term combat when people are really, really tired and just do not want anymore of it....what ever it is....will do what it takes some times to get out of that situation. Such as shooting their selfs in the foot, the hand. But lets say all you have to do is get pregnate... ... which happened to some deployed females, including officers, during my SFOR VII Bosnia rotation despite the fact that Med Eagle maintained a punch bowl filled with condoms in its waiting room. In fact, now that gays and females have become fully integrated into the US armed forces, losses in military personnel from fraternization may even excede casualty losses.

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 1:08:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Joe D. quote: ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89 Something for thought also.....in combat situations, long term combat when people are really, really tired and just do not want anymore of it....what ever it is....will do what it takes some times to get out of that situation. Such as shooting their selfs in the foot, the hand. But lets say all you have to do is get pregnate... ... which happened to some deployed females, including officers, during my SFOR VII Bosnia rotation despite the fact that Med Eagle maintained a punch bowl filled with condoms in its waiting room. In fact, now that gays and females have become fully integrated into the US armed forces, losses in military personnel from fraternization may even excede casualty losses. Didn't think about that.....lets hope most of our service members are better than that. We will see what happens. I do have the highest regards for young soldiers that have deployed and lost limbs or their lifes. It doesn't matter if they were male or female. I have deep respect for them. But sometimes new is Not better!

jwarrenw13 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 1:54:55 AM)
A society that believes that men and women are not merely equal under the law but are interchangeable in all situations and for all purposes is a sick society. Next up, btw, will be 'gender-norming' of elite forces training to allow women to pass the courses. That will take a little time but will happen. Gender-norming has already happened in many areas of military training in America. and then there is this factor. I experienced this problem first hand when I commanded a company (back in the 1980s) with both male and female soldiers. online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323539804578260132111473150.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop "Just over ten percent of women in the military said in 2008 they'd had an unintended pregnancy in the last year - a figure significantly higher than rates in the general public, according to a new study." Edit - I didn't intend to be replying to anyone in particular but just posting on the topic, so parusski, I wasn't specifically replying to you.

goodwoodrw -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 2:37:57 AM)
Blokes and sheilas may be equal under law, that fair enough, but there is lots of thing that we'll never equal in..... blokes piss standing up and sheilas do it sitting down, sheilas have babies and blokes don't and no law in the world can change that!

Sarge -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 3:12:29 AM)
lol, the leaders of the free world are just crapping themselves , not only will not be able to afford their defense in the very near future we are also undermining our own ability to do so brick by brick . honestly you can’t even spin this , this decision is in contradiction to all experiences ,There is centuries of practical knowledge that went into limiting females roll in combat, this isn’t some “strategic” decision over our enemies (which last time I checked is the only roll our military plays ?) . Remember that “War On Woman”………….well, $hit just got real

Sarge -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 3:29:01 AM)
PS: wonder what kind of modifier US “gender “and “life choice” integrated troops will get in the next Matrix modern warfare release ?

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 4:03:14 AM)
2 shifts to the left on the CBT.[;)] quote: ORIGINAL: Sarge PS: wonder what kind of modifier US “gender “and “life choice” integrated troops will get in the next Matrix modern warfare release ?

GrognardThomas -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 4:12:26 AM)
What will a modern army look like with women in combat roles, only time will tell. But women have served in combat roles already but weren't recognized as such. They should be treated no different than others, for ultimately they are soldiers who have taken the oath "to protect and defend". Warfare has changed over time, today incorporating automation and robotics (think drones). Taking the human out of the equation opens the door to a number of possibilities. None the less, I perceive warfare in the future to use less combat troops and more automation and small teams of special forces thereby minimizing the need for frontline troops.

Jim D Burns -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 5:22:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy As long as the physical requirements are the same with everyone I don't mind. They are supposed to be, but the reality is that it simply doesn't work out that way in practice. Case in point, women on the police force. Call me sexist or whatever you want to, but in my opinion it was the stupidest decision ever made to assume women could handle any job men could and women in the military will be just as stupid and just as tragic. Oakland PD is one of the toughest departments to work at due to all the violence officers have to contend with on a daily basis. Without fail every single female officer that I ever met in Oakland ended up working in the building within a year or so of being out on the streets of Oakland. Simply put none of them, not one, could handle the streets, yet they took up a slot on the force and needed to be tucked away somewhere safe. Male officers almost without exception avoided going on calls with female officers due to their inability to handle whatever was thrown at them. I was once in a really knock down drag out fight with a large parolee on one call and was getting pretty tired after a few minutes of rolling around on the ground with the man. My "cover" officer was a female and had just been standing there watching, so I yelled up at her to do her job and help. She attached a handcuff to one of his wrists and then proceeded to get flung around by him while she held onto the other end of the cuffs, eventually he flung her into a wall and she then ran back to her car and got in under the premise of calling for more help (she had a portable radio), but she never came back to help. Because of her ineptness I had to use some serious force on the parolee and sent him to the hospital. With decent backup that wouldn't have been necessary. I'll never forget a radio transmission by one female officer who was in pursuit of a just stolen car. When the car crashed and the suspect bailed out, radio asked after a minute or two if the female officer was in foot pursuit as she hadn't made any more transmissions. She came on the radio and said, and I quote, "no way... he's supposed to have a gun right?". I'm sure the future victims that suspect robbed are really appreciative that women are on the force. I can remember three different females who where beat to bloody pulps by male suspects because they tried to arrest them without backup and were simply over-powered by the men. All three were working in the building when they came back off sick duty and never went back to the streets. My medical file is about four feet tall if you stack all the folders on top of each other from all the injuries and surgeries I underwent, but I never once worked in the building because I got hurt and I can't remember a single male officer that did. I can just imagine how bad this will be with women in combat now. Once the violence of war slaps them in the face they'll be crying loud and clear for desk jobs. It'll be just as pathetic I imagine, but in peace time they'll berate the men as sexist if they aren't allowed to do anything and everything the men are. Jim

Laz -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 6:15:07 AM)
1st let me state that I am very much anti-military- but I can have a lot of respect for a number of individual in the service. I don't really see what the fuss is about how many push-ups or capacity to march with a loaded pack; not when a child can take out a highly trained seal. You join to serve to die for your country- but deny women the same right? What freedom are you fighting for? Whos ? Women are not persons ? they are not equal as citizens ? Who has the right to deny women the same privilege men share under the flag ? The thing that makes western society work is rule of law- the rule has to be applied fairly across the board. For example: maybe black men can outrun white men, so lets apply a new standard of service for soldiers, as running capacity below a normal average for blacks, and use that rule to exlude 90% of the white men from joining.I don't see how, legally speaking a rule can be similarly made to exclude 90% of female "service-men" from combat roles. If women want to join and serve- how can they be denied ?

Terminus -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 7:37:06 AM)
Because it would be soooo terrible for "unit cohesion"... I wonder what happened to "unit cohesion" in the Red Army during WW2, with tens of thousands of women serving on the front lines? Or in any of the other militaries around the world where women ALREADY serve in the front lines. 70 years ago, it was against "social norm" for white and black soldiers to serve together. Times change. Get over yourselves.

DOCUP -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 7:54:27 AM)
Laszlozoltan: I served 10 yrs in the US Army. Infantry and Combat medic were my jobs. The phyiscal challenges are immense in not only combat but field training. Push ups, sit up, runs are meant to not only gauge a persons fitness but increase their strenght to perform their jobs. I agree that women should be in the military, but combat NO. Push ups, sit ups come into play when decideing if a person can pull a fellow soldier out of a tank that has been disabled. It's not easy trust me. Small hatchs (doors) that you have to have good upper, core and lower body strenght to lift up thru the hatch and then safely get them to the ground. Marching with a loaded pack its not easy, but when you have to meet a timeline or have to haul A$$ to your destination, stamina and strenght does matter or people may die. I've experienced this in real life. A unit is only as strong as its weakest link. A unit will only move as fast as the slowest person, that person can get others killed. The double standard does hurt soldiers we won't trust someone who gets treated differently. The standards better be equal for both when they go thru with this. Yes, a child with an AK can kill. I am one who thought twice about pointing a weapon at a child in a combat situation. Thank god I didn't have to do anything. A woman can kill, they have done it in combat for a long time. Now ask why SEALs, SAS and other highly trained units get out of tough missions with less causalties than opponents. They have better trainning, experience, physical prowness and more. My major problem with this is: I was raised to protect women. My family men and women taught me that I should give my life to protect any woman in danger. If I was on the front lines tomorrow and a female soldier was captured and being paraded infront of me, I would be going in after her. No matter what my orders are. Who would I treat first in combat, who would I go out and pull back first in a fire fight. HMMM. Also what happens when one is captured? Fair treatment no such thing. I would come home beaten and broken, a woman would come home beaten, broken, raped and maybe pregnant. This is what bothers me.

Sarge -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 1:12:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laszlozoltan 1st let me state that I am very much anti-military- but I can have a lot of respect for a number of individual in the service. I don't really see what the fuss is about how many push-ups or capacity to march with a loaded pack; not when a child can take out a highly trained seal. You join to serve to die for your country- but deny women the same right? What freedom are you fighting for? Whos ? Women are not persons ? they are not equal as citizens ? (snip) outstanding example of the thought process that went into this decision............

Sarge -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 1:18:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus 70 years ago, it was against "social norm" for white and black soldiers to serve together. Times change. Get over yourselves. [>:] ..............nice try termite

Joe D. -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 1:49:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JW "Just over ten percent of women in the military said in 2008 they'd had an unintended pregnancy in the last year - a figure significantly higher than rates in the general public, according to a new study." That reminds me of what was already happening when I attended the Defense Information School -- where some females were referred to to as "Dinfos Nymphos" -- more than a decade ago. Imagine what it was like for their NCOs to receive replacements who could only perform light duty and who immediately needed prenatal care and other concerns before they were even processed into the unit.

Dixie -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 3:24:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89 What if you had a 18 year old daughter.....if they go ahead with this, what comes next, the draft if ever needed. That would have to include women...young women. quote: ORIGINAL: Dixie I'm all for it, I may be in a minority but I don't see any reason why not. If my hypothetical daughter wants to join the Army then I'm fine with that. There may be a difference between the UK and the US on the second part, but if things ever got to the point where they need to use conscription to man (or woman) the military then we're in a world of trouble. In that case why would she be any better off sitting at home waiting for the bad guys to pitch up at her home?

Dixie -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 3:49:10 PM)
Women are already in roles that take them outside the wire and potentially bring them under fire, in the UK forces at least. They might not be in the infantry but that doesn't mean that they're in less danger each time they go out. Assuming that things are broadly the same across both nations, why is it OK for them to be in danger as an intelligence officer or medic but not as a soldier? They're no more or less of a target out on patrol than any other member of their team, unless Johnny Taliban has some sort of X-Ray glasses that can see through body armour, helmets and goggles. Medical helicopters were a major target, should females be removed from the MERT crews as well? Does the risk of an attack on their base mean that they should only serve in areas that are totally safe and well away from the dangerous areas? We've got female aircrews, should they only be allowed to fly in non war zones to make sure they don't get shot down? The danger of being killed, wounded or captured seems to be a major point in the resistance. Is it deemed acceptable that they are at risk in so called second line roles but not in the infantry? If people are dead set against female casualties then why let them into the military?

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 5:03:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JW A society that believes that men and women are not merely equal under the law but are interchangeable in all situations and for all purposes is a sick society. Next up, btw, will be 'gender-norming' of elite forces training to allow women to pass the courses. That will take a little time but will happen. Gender-norming has already happened in many areas of military training in America. and then there is this factor. I experienced this problem first hand when I commanded a company (back in the 1980s) with both male and female soldiers. online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323539804578260132111473150.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop "Just over ten percent of women in the military said in 2008 they'd had an unintended pregnancy in the last year - a figure significantly higher than rates in the general public, according to a new study." Edit - I didn't intend to be replying to anyone in particular but just posting on the topic, so parusski, I wasn't specifically replying to you. Good points JW. Despite my traditional beliefs I don't oppose women rising to great heights in the business world. My wife became VP of her company because she was qualified. But she could not, and would not, be a successful soldier(hell, neither would I)! Gender-norming in any branch of the military is just plain stupid.

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/25/2013 5:05:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sarge quote: ORIGINAL: laszlozoltan 1st let me state that I am very much anti-military- but I can have a lot of respect for a number of individual in the service. I don't really see what the fuss is about how many push-ups or capacity to march with a loaded pack; not when a child can take out a highly trained seal. You join to serve to die for your country- but deny women the same right? What freedom are you fighting for? Whos ? Women are not persons ? they are not equal as citizens ? (snip) outstanding example of the thought process that went into this decision............ Yep. Folks with this mindset are always wanting to tinker with the nature of things.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.875