# Female Canadian infantry soldier in Afghanistan



## Armymedic (13 Mar 2006)

I put this article up here to answer several questions:

1. yes, there are women in cbt arms,
2. they can advance at the same rate as the men,
3. physical demands of the job regardless of trade are equal to both sexes,
4. both sexes do have to meet the same physical standards in cbt arms,
5. with extra effort you can be good at your job and,
6. regardless of sex, if you are good at your job, you good in my books.

Kudos to the MCpl in the article, that enviroment may be the most diificult for a Candian woman to adapt to, but the best place for a Canadian woman to be.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060312/afghanistan_female_soldier_060312/20060312?hub=TopStories

Female Canadian soldier turns Afghan heads
CTV.ca News Staff 
  
Updated: Sun. Mar. 12 2006 11:58 PM ET 

Afghans first greet Master Cpl. Lissette LeBlanc like any other soldier. But, when they get a closer look, she gets a much different reaction.

LeBlanc says it is hard for many Afghans to see a female out on patrol because their tradition doesn't allow females to be as in the out and open. In a society where women are forced to wear burkas and stay mostly indoors, female soldiers do not get much respect.

But, insurgents should be careful because LeBlanc is one of her platoon's best marksmen and a natural leader.

As a master corporal, LeBlanc commands her own patrol. And, as one of the few women in a combat role in the Canadian military, she's used to fighting stereotypes.

"Women just haven't taken to it well, it's just something I don't know if its mental condition, or physical conditioning or rather they're smart enough to find something else I don't know, but she took well to it actually," says her commanding officer Sgt. Parnell Pachal says. 

"Taking to it well" has meant a lot of hard work for LeBlanc. She runs and lifts weights in the gym for two hours every morning before going out on patrol in the rough and hostile terrain of Afghanistan.

LeBlanc admits that meeting the physical demands of an infantry soldier has not been easy.

"It was very tough," she says. 

"There were no standards dropped, there was no, 'O.K girls only have to do 15 push-ups and the guys have to do 25. There was none of that because if you're in this trade and this job you do exactly the same thing."

While her gender may be different, her goals for serving in Afghanistan are the same.

"The more you see people who never used to smile, smile, and the more you see little kids who never have clothes, have clothes, the more you see people being schooled and taught, it's a really good feeling."

With a report from CTV's Steve Chao

© Copyright 2002-2006 Bell Globemedia Inc.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (13 Mar 2006)

Thanks for that.  She and I are quite close.


----------



## 043 (13 Mar 2006)

:cheers:


----------



## Armymedic (13 Mar 2006)

CFL said:
			
		

> Thanks for that.  She and I are quite close.



Can't be that close......unless you consider 10,000 kms close.  ;D


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (13 Mar 2006)

GRRRRRRRRRR


----------



## Armymedic (13 Mar 2006)

CFL said:
			
		

> GRRRRRRRRRR


 :rofl:


----------



## Springroll (13 Mar 2006)

Awesome article!!

Thanks for posting it


----------



## Infantry_wannabe (14 Mar 2006)

Master Corporal LeBlanc.  

I know you don't salute Master Corporals but you get the idea.


----------



## 043 (14 Mar 2006)

Good on her but really, it's just another days work in the life of any soldier.  When is International Mens Day?


----------



## Mortar guy (14 Mar 2006)

If I'm not mistaken, the 364 days on either side of March 8th are International Mens Days.

 ;D

(Joke! I kid, I kid!)

MG


----------



## NavyGirl280 (14 Mar 2006)

First off, sending all our support to the troops in Afganistan right now (We miss you Dale)

2nd, She is doing what she knows has to be done (and leaving her mark as she does it) ... Keep it up!   

G.I. Jane will FOREVER be my ultimate favorite movie:  

Lt. Jordan O'Neil: Master Chief... 
Master Chief John Urgayle: Lieutenant, seek life elsewhere. 
Lt. Jordan O'Neil: Suck my ****!     ;D

(God, he was such an a** towards her  :'()

S.Bradbury


----------



## GO!!! (14 Mar 2006)

Armymedic said:
			
		

> I put this article up here to answer several questions:
> 
> 1. yes, there are women in cbt arms, yes, maybe one per infantry Bn
> 2. they can advance at the same rate as the men, if they stick around
> ...



To echo 2023, there seems to be an inordinately large amount of attention paid to this soldier - perhaps if we were really "equal" she would be left to do her job in peace...


----------



## Gunner (15 Mar 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> To echo 2023, there seems to be an inordinately large amount of attention paid to this soldier - perhaps if we were really "equal" she would be left to do her job in peace...



In a broad sense, I agree with you GO!!!   Unfortunately there are members of the CF who continue to be obtuse and ignorant when it comes to things they don't agree with.


----------



## Springroll (15 Mar 2006)

We all know why she is receiving the attention she is.
The CF wants to recruit more women, and when women read about another woman being able to "do it", it makes them want to try and it gives them hope...


----------



## Mortar guy (15 Mar 2006)

I read about women "doing it" all the time and it never seems to make me want to join up.

Oh, wait. 

Nevermind.

MG


----------



## jc5778 (15 Mar 2006)

Four years ago another female infanteer was thrust into the spotlight, much to her dismay.  I had the pleasure of serving with her.  She was a *hard worker*, no better no worse then most.  The Macleans crew was suppose to do a story on the platoon in general if I recall.  Sure enough, they made it a "Look at her" piece.  She was pissed.  This time though is different, I have served with Leblanc, I,  like many many others who have served with her are left to scratch our head at all this attention given to her.  I am really biting my tongue here.  blood is actually starting to pool.  I have no problems with women in the combat arms, though it should be same standard across the board, but she is no super soldier that is for sure far from it really.  Like I said, I am not trying to bash, but with all this praise she'll be "The first Female SGT Blah Blah Blah", something they have been trying for a long time now".  CFL I love ya and I know your close with her, but this is just my opinion.  To all that know what I am talking about, remember the Crew commander course.........."TARGET FIRING NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"  my ears still hurt.

Cheers


----------



## vonGarvin (15 Mar 2006)

Mortar guy said:
			
		

> I read about women "doing it" all the time and it never seems to make me want to join up.
> 
> Oh, wait.
> 
> ...


Too late: we're minding


----------



## Springroll (15 Mar 2006)

Mortar guy said:
			
		

> I read about women "doing it" all the time and it never seems to make me want to join up.
> 
> Oh, wait.
> 
> ...



smarty pants!

I did like reading the story, but for myself, I have a brain of my own and don't depend on news articles to give me a kick in the butt....but some girls(and women) need it...they really do. They need to be constantly reassured that they will do alright at it. Those are the women we don't want in the CF. You end up having to coddle them the rest of their career, and that is something that the CF doesn't need.


----------



## Journeyman (15 Mar 2006)

Springroll said:
			
		

> The CF wants to recruit more women, and when women read about another woman being able to "do it", it makes them want to try and it gives them hope...





			
				Springroll said:
			
		

> a kick in the butt....but some girls(and women) need it...they really do. They need to be constantly reassured that they will do alright at it. Those are the women we don't want in the CF. You end up having to coddle them the rest of their career, and that is something that the CF doesn't need.



You seem to be arguing both sides of the coin. Should the CF be specifically targeting women, to "give them hope" [not a particularly well thought-of military method], or should the CF not be encouraging those [male or female!] that will likely have to be coddled? [I'm still blown away by a comment another thread about an infantry soldier with a "grass-allergy" chit - - WTF?! ]


----------



## 043 (15 Mar 2006)

7 - 10 days said:
			
		

> Four years ago another female infanteer was thrust into the spotlight, much to her dismay.  I had the pleasure of serving with her.  She was a *hard worker*, no better no worse then most.  The Macleans crew was suppose to do a story on the platoon in general if I recall.  Sure enough, they made it a "Look at her" piece.  She was pissed.  This time though is different, I have served with Leblanc, I,  like many many others who have served with her are left to scratch our head at all this attention given to her.  I am really biting my tongue here.  blood is actually starting to pool.  I have no problems with women in the combat arms, though it should be same standard across the board, but she is no super soldier that is for sure far from it really.  Like I said, I am not trying to bash, but with all this praise she'll be "The first Female SGT Blah Blah Blah", something they have been trying for a long time now".  CFL I love ya and I know your close with her, but this is just my opinion.  To all that know what I am talking about, remember the Crew commander course.........."TARGET FIRING NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"  my ears still hurt.
> 
> Cheers



Thank you!!!!


----------



## Springroll (15 Mar 2006)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> You seem to be arguing both sides of the coin. Should the CF be specifically targeting women, to "give them hope" [not a particularly well thought-of military method], or should the CF not be encouraging those [male or female!] that will likely have to be coddled? [I'm still blown away by a comment another thread about an infantry soldier with a "grass-allergy" chit - - WTF?! ]



I feel that they should be targetting women in their recruiting commercials and all, but not encouraging the high maintenance women.
Yes, it is great that they are writing about women in the field, but I would sooner like to read about those first females that joined the infantry back when it was still taboo....those are the women I want to read about.


----------



## Pea (15 Mar 2006)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> You seem to be arguing both sides of the coin. Should the CF be specifically targeting women, to "give them hope" [not a particularly well thought-of military method], or should the CF not be encouraging those [male or female!] that will likely have to be coddled? [I'm still blown away by a comment another thread about an infantry soldier with a "grass-allergy" chit - - WTF?! ]



I could care less if there is a man or a woman on the recruiting commercial. It's not going to make me want to join if I see a bunch of females in the forces, and it's not going to deter me if I don't see them. It's a matter of if *I * want a career in the forces or not. I have never based if I should do something on whether or not other women are doing it. If I believe I can do it, then I am going to do it. I don't care what is or isn't between my legs. There will be men and women who join who can't "hack" it. The decision to join needs to be based on yourself as an individual, not what "all the other ladies are doing". Is this an extension to the whole going to the bathroom together thing?   I never understood that either.

And the spotlight on the female MCpl, well it didn’t inspire me any. It was another women in the forces, why is her role any more important than say, a female supply tech? They are both doing the job they want. (Next, let’s showcase Armyvern..  just because I think she’s cool.)


----------



## Pea (15 Mar 2006)

Springroll said:
			
		

> I feel that they should be targetting women in their recruiting commercials and all, *but not encouraging the high maintenance women*.
> Yes, it is great that they are writing about women in the field, but I would sooner like to read about those first females that joined the infantry back when it was still taboo....those are the women I want to read about.



How would that work? "Sorry you look like you require too much maintenance with your manicure and all". If a recruiter ever said "I'm sorry you look too high maintenance, this probably isn't a career for you", I would be offended. It's not anyone's place to say whether or not someone can do something based on how they look. This is why one should research a career, instead of blindly jumping into it. If you've spent time learning about a career in the CF, then you will have a general idea of whether or not it will "suit" you.


----------



## scoutfinch (15 Mar 2006)

Please... kindly define a "high maintenance woman". :

With respect to the different recruiting standards for physical fitness men and women, I trust you are all aware that there are different standards for both AGE and GENDER such that older recruits have a less onerous standard than young recruits for both men and women?  Or does the different age standard not count as preferential treatment when applied to older men?

Instead of bitching about her getting a bit of spotlight, why don't we celebrate the fact that the CAF is getting positive attention?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (15 Mar 2006)

7 - 10 days  
I can appreciate what you have to say.  Some like her some don't.  Just remember she didn't ask for the attention.


----------



## scoutfinch (15 Mar 2006)

CFL said:
			
		

> I can appreciate what you have to say.  Some like her some don't.



That doesn't make her specifically male or female.  That makes her human.  

(I don't know her.  I hear and agree with what you are saying.)


----------



## GO!!! (15 Mar 2006)

scoutfinch said:
			
		

> With respect to the different recruiting standards for physical fitness men and women, I trust you are all aware that there are *different standards  * for both AGE and GENDER such that older recruits have a less onerous standard than young recruits for both men and women?  Or does the different age standard not count as preferential treatment when applied to older men?



And herein lies the problem. 

If we were really serious about recruiting women, we would not have a different standard for them. I've spoken to my mother and wife about this, and they both said that this "turns them off" about the CF because it is an official admission that they (if they were to join) would be _expected_ to perform to a lower standard right from the get-go.


----------



## Armymedic (15 Mar 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> this "turns them off" about the CF because it is an official admission that they (if they were to join) would be _expected_ to perform to a lower standard right from the get-go.



Now there is an intersting thought....one standard for all. Not a bad idea.

Although who, I wonder, would whine about it first?


----------



## HItorMiss (15 Mar 2006)

My bet would be the Feminist lobby groups when the more rotund woman were unable to make the grade, followed by the Fat person group when we started to kick out those person's in uniform that can't walk 3 feet with out wheezing, let alone do the BFT or make 6.5 on the express test


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Mar 2006)

I think the whole "targeting women in the CF!" stuff is garbage.

I see the posters or articles on the internet/DND home page and I just shake my head.

BFT and 6.0 on the shuttle run.
Pass it and welcome to the CF.
Fail it and thanks for comming out.


----------



## Haggis (15 Mar 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> And herein lies the problem.
> 
> If we were really serious about recruiting women, we would not have a different standard for them. I've spoken to my mother and wife about this, and they both said that this "turns them off" about the CF because it is an official admission that they (if they were to join) *would be expected to perform to a lower standard right from the get-go.*



So would a 36 year old male.
(http://www.rmc.ca/athletics/pe/EXPRES/standards_e.html)


----------



## TCBF (15 Mar 2006)

"I feel that they should be targetting women in their recruiting commercials and all, but not encouraging the high maintenance women."

- That's rather contradictory, what?

 ;D

Tom


----------



## Pea (15 Mar 2006)

TCBF said:
			
		

> "I feel that they should be targetting women in their recruiting commercials and all, but not encouraging the high maintenance women."
> 
> - That's rather contradictory, what?
> 
> ...



Exactly what I was trying to get at in my post too. Glad I am not the only one who thought that..


----------



## QV (15 Mar 2006)

Haggis said:
			
		

> So would a 36 year old male.
> (http://www.rmc.ca/athletics/pe/EXPRES/standards_e.html)



Ah dude,  a 36 year old female has even lower standards.  3 on the MSR?  Are you kidding me?  7 push ups?  They must be done their PT test in about 5 minutes.  Or 19 pushups for that matter?  My 30 year old wife (civvy) can do 30 and she isn't even that fit.  Everyone should have to pass the same standard if you are doing the same job, period.  

I can understand that there are lower standards with age but a soldier is a soldier.  With the stupid Expres standards theoretically a 36 yr old male who can run to level 5 MSR and only do 13 pushups could be on his way out for not making the 14 pushup standard, but a 36 yr old female who can only run to level fricken 3 but can do all 7 pushups is good to go.  The male is more fit then the female (not by much however...) but the female is allowed to soldier on and the male is undergoing administrative action.  Something wrong there, especially so if both the male and the female have the exact same job.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (15 Mar 2006)

Remember this isn't a military thing but also has/had roots in the police and fire dept


----------



## armyvern (16 Mar 2006)

Card_11 said:
			
		

> And the spotlight on the female MCpl, well it didn’t inspire me any. It was another women in the forces, why is her role any more important than say, a female supply tech? They are both doing the job they want. (Next, let’s showcase Armyvern..  just because I think she’s cool.)



Aww shucks Card. I have been "interviewed" before....NO THANKS...not interested!! And I'd argue most of us serving females feel the same way. Problem is, when there's only one or 2 females involved in something or 'the first female' in something, the media gravitates towards that as "the story." It's not what the female or her fellow soldiers want, they just want to do their jobs the best they can. 

They tend not to step into the spotlight but rather it is a case of having the spotlight thrust upon them.

I'd argue that if we actually had some huge Army of Amazon women out there in the world today with one lonely (?) male amongst them...he'd be the one the media would be interviewing too. "So hey whats it like to have to 'prove' yourself amongst this bevy of women?"


----------



## QV (16 Mar 2006)

armyvern said:
			
		

> ..... if we actually had some huge Army of Amazon women out there in the world today with one lonely (?) male amongst them.......



uh... you know that is not a bad notion after all.  Who gets to be the "lonely male"?   8)


----------



## monika (16 Mar 2006)

armyvern said:
			
		

> I'd argue that if we actually had some huge Army of Amazon women out there in the world today with one lonely (?) male amongst them...he'd be the one the media would be interviewing too. "So hey whats it like to have to 'prove' yourself amongst this bevy of women?"



You do know you'll have volunteers lined up round the block, right? ;D


----------



## TCBF (16 Mar 2006)

"You do know you'll have volunteers lined up round the block, right?"

- Yeah, of guys who've never been MARRIED.  Just wait until a FULL MOON...

Tom


----------



## Springroll (16 Mar 2006)

Card_11 said:
			
		

> How would that work? "Sorry you look like you require too much maintenance with your manicure and all".



lol...I should've elaborated more on what I meant by a high maintenance woman...sorry
Definitely was not referring to women who look like they could be, because when I scrub up I can look just the same...lol

What I was trying to describe was those women who seem to require someone to hold their hand all the way through their career. Constantly needing to be praised, rewarded etc. I have met many people like that from both sexes, but the majority are women. Almost like they aren't to sure if they should even be in the CF in the first place. Now I am not generalizing all women are like that, because I know that not all are.


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Mar 2006)

> Constantly needing to be praised, rewarded etc. I have met many people like that from both sexes, but the majority are women.



I've found that men are VERY bad for this.
They go out of their way to try and make female soldiers feel good about themselves like they need to or something.
A girl completes the same course as a male and the staff take the girl aside and say 
"You did VERY well master corporal, don't let anything you did poorly on the course make you feel like your not as good as a man because your just as good! if not better because you need to try so much harder to prove yourself!"

Same thing with PT. If a male struggles to keep up and does then whatever. If a female struggles to keep up (and does or doesn't) out comes the praise. Your doing VERY very good keep it up! your just as good as the men! 

I don't know, if that was me and I was just trying to do my job and people constantly singled me out and felt like they needed to pat me on the back for EVERYTHING I did I'd be pretty pissed off.

Another big problem females in the military are faced with, Ive heard and found, is that society  teaches them to be nice to each others faces yet try to subvert and undermine them privately/secretly.

It's accepted for males to compete against each other publically, not so for females.  Like you find in businesses, women are taught/brought up to compete against each other behind their backs. Nice to their face but don't go out of your way to help them if they can get away with it. Obviously this kind of subtle competition leads to bigger problems.


----------



## Springroll (16 Mar 2006)

Exactly Ghost778!!


----------



## scoutfinch (16 Mar 2006)

Springroll said:
			
		

> lol...I should've elaborated more on what I meant by a high maintenance woman...sorry
> Definitely was not referring to women who look like they could be, because when I scrub up I can look just the same...lol
> 
> What I was trying to describe was those women who seem to require someone to hold their hand all the way through their career. Constantly needing to be praised, rewarded etc. I have met many people like that from both sexes, but the majority are women. Almost like they aren't to sure if they should even be in the CF in the first place. Now I am not generalizing all women are like that, because I know that not all are.



Personally, I don't think ANYONE with these character traits or personality requirements are well suited to the military... and I have seen TONS of them in my civilian life, male and female alike.


----------



## Pea (16 Mar 2006)

Springroll said:
			
		

> lol...I should've elaborated more on what I meant by a high maintenance woman...sorry
> Definitely was not referring to women who look like they could be, because when I scrub up I can look just the same...lol
> 
> What I was trying to describe was those women who seem to require someone to hold their hand all the way through their career. Constantly needing to be praised, rewarded etc. I have met many people like that from both sexes, but the majority are women. Almost like they aren't to sure if they should even be in the CF in the first place. Now I am not generalizing all women are like that, because I know that not all are.



Thank you for clearing that up. You had me completely lost. I still don't see how the CF can "target females" for recruitment, but not the kind that you mention above. In a 30 minute interview it's not like you can tell the person is going to be like that. Most people who have taken any sort of classes for career skills know pretty much exactly what the interviewer wants to hear in order to get the job. So really, I think the CF just needs to keep looking for people who will be good soldiers, regardless of sex. Why do we feel the need to fill some "female quota?"


----------



## Springroll (16 Mar 2006)

Card_11 said:
			
		

> Why do we feel the need to fill some "female quota?"



I have no clue, but would love to hear an answer...lol


----------



## camochick (16 Mar 2006)

As lame as it is, I think a quote from GI jane fits in here "She isnt the problem, we are". If men feel the need to hold a womans hand through their military career, or praise them for every little thing then that is their issue. I just wish people who get over the whole male/female thing. It's great women are making it in the forces but the more people make a big deal out of it the more it becomes an issue. Just let people be, to do their jobs, men, women, in between, who the heck cares.


----------



## TCBF (16 Mar 2006)

"It's accepted for males to compete against each other publically, not so for females.  Like you find in businesses, women are taught/brought up to compete against each other behind their backs."

- I think that's why some female instructers were glad that D Coy (12 Pl to 18 Pl) CFRS Cornwallis was eventually made 'co-ed.'  The interpersonality conflicts behind the scenes were brutal, especially along the lines of sexual orientation.  One improvement with todays climate - where lesbian relationships no longer violate the National Defence Act as they once did - is that these relationships are now mostly visible, so there are far fewer hidden sexual 'cliques' looking out for each other come PER time.


----------



## 043 (16 Mar 2006)

TCBF said:
			
		

> One improvement with todays climate - where lesbian relationships no longer violate the National Defence Act as they once did - is that these relationships are now mostly visible, so there are far fewer hidden sexual 'cliques' looking out for each other come PER time.



I would tend to disagree with depending on the location you are at. While they no longer violate the NDA, you have probably not been to Gagetown lately. The "cliques" are out in the open for everyone to see and nothing is being done about it.


----------



## TCBF (17 Mar 2006)

"I would tend to disagree with depending on the location you are at. While they no longer violate the NDA, you have probably not been to Gagetown lately. The "cliques" are out in the open for everyone to see and nothing is being done about it."

- Well, check out this link, and go hunting...

http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/daod/5019/1_e.asp

'Above is the link to the DAOD on Personal Relationships and Fraternization, which replaced CFAO 19-38 in 2004.  In it we have(etc)'


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Mar 2006)

Too bad that DAODs weren't like wikipedia and we could edit the pages..


----------



## TCBF (17 Mar 2006)

Not as potent as the one in 2000, but still there to officially make people uncomfotable if their relationship is creating 'issues.'

We had a situation in Zgon in 2000, that was solved when me and another Tp WO put a photocopy of the old DAOD, with the posting parts highlighted - on the bunks of two soldiers who were flaunting it.

Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered.

It worked.

Perhaps a few 'thousand milers' with the DAOD  (highlighted in a few spots) inside, discretely delivered to a few people...


----------



## jc5778 (17 Mar 2006)

TCBF said:
			
		

> Not as potent as the one in 2000, but still there to officially make people uncomfotable if their relationship is creating 'issues.'
> 
> We had a situation in Zgon in 2000, that was solved when me and another Tp WO put a photocopy of the old DAOD, with the posting parts highlighted - on the bunks of two soldiers who were flaunting it.
> 
> ...



Where they the ones who had to go home and explain to their spouses why they were sent home?  Tell me that wasn't a difficult "talk"


----------



## Armymedic (17 Mar 2006)

So this thread went from being an information post about a woman who is a MCpl infanteer,

to talking recruiting,

to talking about pt standards,

to talking about DAOD IRT fraternization...

Talk about evolution.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (17 Mar 2006)

Its the infamous Army.ca tangent.


----------



## Michael OLeary (7 Apr 2006)

Wait out, see new thread in "Canadian Army" forum for the Scipio tangent. - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/41949.0.html

This thread will be unlocked later for further posts on the orginal topic(s).


----------



## Michael OLeary (8 Apr 2006)

LOCKED.

This topic does not exist to continue the Scipio tangent just because it was locked.


----------

