Advice for women on BMQ and other courses [MERGED]

[HItorMiss]

OH for the love of GOD!

I am not arguing PT, we long ago agreed the system is flawed!!!!!! All I stated was that I had seen with my own eyes more woman fail the physical soldiering then I had men. I have seen Men fail absolutely and should they be removed YES they should!

What my main argument is, was based on the sociology of the western psyche of males and how they are raised!

As for the discrepancy in said PT standard I don't care if it's different for a 23 year old male then it is for a 30 year old male. In fact I agree with it. But what I want is for that difference to be across the board so the standard for the 23 year old PERSON is different then that of the 30 year old PERSON!


EDIT: My tirade on PT was after Vern clarified the PT standard stuff. although in terms of the BFT we all agreed the BFT is not nor should it be the standard of fitness as was pointed out if you cannot complete that your are in serious trouble.

 

[armyvern]

OH for the love of GOD!

I am not arguing PT, we long ago agreed the system is flawed!!!!!! All I stated was that I had seen with my own eyes more woman fail the physical soldiering then I had men. I have seen Men fail absolutely and should they be removed YES they should!

What my main argument is, was based on the sociology of the western psyche of males and how they are raised!

As for the discrepancy in said PT standard I don't care if it's different for a 23 year old male then it is for a 30 year old male. In fact I agree with it. But what I want is for that difference to be across the board so the standard for the 23 year old PERSON is different then that of the 30 year old PERSON!

My post says PT test standards. Not PT standards. It makes specific mention of the express test as that is what you brought up.

So, now it's OK to have 23 year olds going combat arms meet a higher PT Test standard than 30 year olds going combat arms?? WTF?? They are all going to be doing the exact same job!! Why a different standard?? Make up your mind please. You either want one standard or you don't.

You have slammed the system for allowing a difference in standard PT test requirements between male and female, but now condone different standards for different ages despite the fact they may be going the exact same trade. That's baffeling me.

 

[HItorMiss]

Vern after this I am done arguing PT standards period.

You made mention of the difference between 23 yr old males and 30 year old males....I pointed out that I wanted the standard to be the same for men and woman of the same age. I never not once said anything about standards in reference to the Cbt Arms and age difference on the express test don't put words in my mouth.

Now again I point out we agreed 4 pages ago that the system is flawed why are we still talking about it?

I said the BFT was not an indicator of trade performance physically for anyone. And then went on to say what I thought was.

Now care to argue the real reason I got involved in this thread?

 

[armyvern]

Vern after this I am done arguing PT standards period.

You made mention of the difference between 23 yr old males and 30 year old males....I pointed out that I wanted the standard to be the same for men and woman of the same age. I never not once said anything about standards in reference to the Cbt Arms and age difference on the express test don't put words in my mouth.

Now again I point out we agreed 4 pages ago that the system is flawed why are we still talking about it?

I said the BFT was not an indicator of trade performance physically for anyone. And then went on to say what I thought was.

Now care to argue the real reason I got involved in this thread?

Really?? I didn't say you made reference to age difference. I brought that up as a direct response to your post about there being a difference in standard on the Express test between men and women... to point out that there was also a difference between men and men in that very same test. Apparently, that's OK though as long as the men are different ages (and you did say that in a later post).

What's this?? :

Geo,

Re read my statement on the BFT.
As I have stated I was not referring to the BFT when I made reference to Physical Soldiering and when I did reference the PT standard was was referring to the very first standard when entering the CF,an no one here can argue that there is a lower standard for woman then men it's in black and white!

That's what I responded to you pointing out that you were correct but that there was also a difference in the test standards between 23 and 30 year old males, not just between males and females. I even quoted your above in that response. Your pointing out that you wanted the same standards for girls and guys, but that different standards for ages were acceptable (and that you agreed with that) came after my response to this post above.

And as to 4 pages ago, no one has yet answered why a female who can and does do her job, shouldn't be allowed to.

Not with anything other than cultural beliefs etc, and comments about how they may they may have been raised. I was raised differently I guess.

I've always thought that you were recognized for what you could do, and earned the respect that is inherant with that, and that you would not be precluded from doing that which you could if you worked hard and earned it; regardless of sex. 

 

[armyvern]

Oh yeah ...

Just to add:

HitorMiss:  :-*
I still loves 'ya bud.

 

[HItorMiss]

I said a sliding scale for both sex's was acceptable so long as it remains the same standard for age an not base on sex ( IE: standrad for 23 yr old men and woman is the same and the standard for men and woman of 30 is the same) and you and I both know why it exist and why it works.

Regardless of this argument one way or the other, you may argue you were raised different but I bet you the vast majority of men in your age group and even in mine were raised to treat woman differently when it comes to physically harmful things. You can say what you will but I tell you men can and have reacted different to women being in jeopardy then a man in the same circumstance. And therein lies the main issue with Woman in Cbt Arms. Can they do the Job most assuredly some can (just like only some men can do the job of Cbt Arms) But until western culture changes how it is we raise our children and its view of the sex's (which is slowly slowly changing) then this policy will in fact come back to bite us in the rear when something bad happens because of ow it is we are raised.

 

[HItorMiss]

Aren't you just swell yourself Ver  :-*

 

[Greymatters]

    Incidentally I read a report about the Israel Defence Forces experience with women in combat situations and one of the things that I remember is the biggest problem lay not with the women themselves but with the men they were fighting along side.

Time Expired, I know which report you are refering to and have read it myself.  That report was available to the leadership when the decision was made to allow women to join the infantry, and as far as I know it was taken into consideration, but it doesnt change the fact that there was no reason to bar women from combat positions.  In the end, if a female did not want to risk the probable consequences of capture by the enemy, it was their decision not to join up. 

 

[Shinigami02]

I always found independent capable women very attractive and not at all threatening. However I
also feel that in the case of the military the operational efficiency
should be paramount and not be hampered by sociological factors
and given most men's cultural mind sets, women in combat roles are not
adding to this efficiency.Another thing Vern is most of us were given
our cultural values by women, our mothers.
                                                 Regards 

Thanks, we truely do it all for your attraction and enjoyment. : Being independant and capable as women has nothing to do with whatever sociological factors men seem to believe (or just you) that they impede our sucess in the combat arms. It's your problem that your mother raised you wrong in this respect, and it is also your problem that you believe we do not add to the efficiency of the combat arms. Take out every woman in the military and see that the nation would probably have to resort to conscription in this day and age. Seeing as how a large population of the country fit for service would never volunteer for it, and would rather spend time on their PSP's and Wii's. I don't even see how this topic is still going, because women make good soldiers, it is proven every day, and aren't going anywhere. This forum does show how many male soldiers don't have respect for their fellow soldiers that happen to be female. The most contradictory thing that keeps being repeated is that they know women who can do their jobs in an efficient manner, but they believe that women should not be in combat arms roles. Please, this is such a bad contradiction.

Also in relation to this : "However I also feel that in the case of the military the operational efficiency should be paramount and not be hampered by sociological factors and given most men's cultural mind sets, women in combat roles are not adding to this efficiency." Female soldiers will now sit down and let you do your job...unhindered by the cultural weakness you were taught as a child.  :

 

[Strike]

You had me until you called the BFT as a PT standard. That's the first thing wrong with the Forces right there, the BFT is no more a measure of fitness than I am His Holiness the Pope! If anyone in the Forces fails a 13 km walk with a little bit of weight and does not have a precluding medical condition (Like an amputated leg) they should be released immediately. It's a f*cking walk, how does a person fail a walk?

By the way, I am also a little old fashioned and don't believe women should be in the combat arms. I'm sure some (very few) can do it, but I don't like it. No amount of discussion will change my mind, it's my opinion, but I will accept it as nobody important really cares what I think about it anyway! ;D

Hey, I know of someone who lost her leg to cancer.  Didn't stop her from doing it!  And doing it well at that! (Not combat arms though.)

 

[HItorMiss]

Strike I think 2 Cdo was making a bold statement on injuries and not really setting a specific example. I myself know an amputee who fully intends to pass the BFT (And trust me he will).

 

[2 Cdo]

The generalization I made was made with the intention to point out how ludicrous it was to consider the BFT a measure of physical fitness. I realize that an amputee could possibly do it (good prosthesis and all) and that myself have completed it with no problems shortly after having knee surgery once and days after having a vasectomy!

I still think HitorMiss makes a good point in reference to western upbringing. I never argued that women can't do the job, just that my upbringing was such that protection of women and children was foremost. That is not a failing of leadership, as some have alluded to, more a failure of society. Look at the extra uproar in the press when Capt Nicola Goodard(spelling?) was killed. The first reports focused more on her gender than her ability to do her job.

 

[HItorMiss]

Being in dependant and capable as women has nothing to do with whatever sociological factors men seem to believe (or just you) that they impede our success in the combat arms

True but it does bring up a dynamic your choose to ignore.

It's your problem that your mother raised you wrong in this respect

You know that's funny because I'm pretty sure that's they way 99.99% of Parents raise their children, you can climb on whatever equality band wagon you want but that isn't going to change how it is the vast majority people  are raised. As an added side comment I some how doubt you would like the outcome of parents teaching their children true equality the first time some guy smacks the crap out of you because he has a beef with you and does what it is he would to do a guy. No I do not condone this event but it highlights a very real issue you ignored.

and it is also your problem that you believe we do not add to the efficiency of the combat arms.

Actually it's a CF wide problem and one not yet addressed adequately by any level of the chain of command, other then to tell the rank and file to shut their mouths and not discuss the problem openly.

Take out every woman in the military and see that the nation would probably have to resort to conscription in this day and age.Seeing as how a large population of the country fit for service would never volunteer for it, and would rather spend time on their PSP's and Wii's.

Actually  CF wide it's just over 10% or so my research into the topic suggest. And that percentage is significantly lower in the Cbt Arms (which this thread deals with in the specific) SO really no we wouldn't and Yes we could very happily continue our existence without woman at all. But we should not. The CF should be as diverse as the country it represents however that still does not address the main issue of where the CF is failing to properly intergrate the or mitigate how that diversity should work or how far it should really go.

1998 paper on the percentage of woman in the CF, I do not think the number has increased that much.
http://www.mdn.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=877

I don't even see how this topic  is still going, because women make good soldiers, it is proven every day, and aren't going anywhere.

It's still going because it's a very real issue within the CF. Make good soldiers? Yes woman sure do and yes the prove it everyday. But in the Cbt Arms environment where do we say and how do we say Sorry you just don't make the cut without said women being hoisted up by feminist groups catching wind of the very likely high percentage of women who will not pass the grade and using it as soap box to hurt the CF?

This forum does show how many male soldiers don't have respect for their fellow soldiers that happen to be female. The most contradictory thing that keeps being repeated is that they know women who can do their jobs in an efficient manner, but they believe that women should not be in combat arms roles. Please, this is such a bad contradiction.

No I think it shows how a very real issue is ignored and just how much it needs to be addressed. And the argument is not contradictory it's an observation based on personal experience. I believe Woman make excellent soldiers, however in terms of Cbt Arms the vast majority do not. A small minority do very well but the avg woman even in the CF would not cut it in the Cbt Arms or in my trade specifically.

Also in relation to this : "However I also feel that in the case of the military the operational efficiency should be paramount and not be hampered by sociological factors and given most men's cultural mind sets, women in combat roles are not adding to this efficiency." Female soldiers will now sit down and let you do your job...unhindered by the cultural weakness you were taught as a child.  :

Be snide about the sociological factors involved all you like but that will not change the fact that they are very real and have a huge effect in terms of how it is we operate as a military and as a society. You could come up with answers though as that would likely be a better use of your time then to come and waste it by blowing hot air in righteous indignation, but like the rest of us you don't have any but unlike many people here you don't want to take the time to think of and so it's easier to be snide and sarcastic and roll your eyes then it is to truly debate the topic.


EDIT: Spelling, Gammar etc etc (poorly), hey I'm a grunt you gotta cut me some slack.....

 

[RCR Grunt]

I've watched this thread closely for a while now ... how many female COMBAT ARMS soldiers do we have on the board right now?  It seems to me, unless I am mistaken and I very well could be, that alot of the comments are aboslutley baseless, off topic, and irrelevent.  Pt standards ... whatever, some females can do more pushups, sure.  That is not the topic.  The topic is Gender & the CF; Women in COMBAT ARMS, INFANTRY, SPECIAL FORCES & BATTLE.  The argument has been made that our upbringing, as males, has been to respect and protect women, be chivalrous.  Anyone who says different was either raised by wolves or should immediately go to the UMS to have their head removed from their arse.  THAT BEING SAID ... it makes it difficult for males in a male dominated trade to interact with females the same as they would other males.  THIS MAY LEAD to undue friction, conflict and controversey within the ranks.  Perhaps, and god of war forbid, it may lead to soldiers acting innappropriately in a combat scenario.  Have we done studies to prove this?  No, but the Israelis did.  Should we ignore what they have learned?  To answer that I ask another queston, can we afford to?  Do I think women should be in the CF?  Definitely.  Do I think they belong in the Combat Arms?  Not until we change the way we train, eliminating the gender barrier during Battle school by showing ABSOLUTELY ZERO TOLERANCE for any type of double standard and removing any type of ingrained cultural standards soldiers may hold with regards to the opposite sex.  Are we as a nation prepared to create soldiers like this?  The unspeaking, unfeeling "soldier of the future?"  The CF has long been held in regard by foreign governments for our ability to empathize with the people we are helping, would we remove this trait so that a handful of individuals can live the dream of being in the comabt arms?  Why should the majority, and I mean the country, its foreign affairs, and therefore its citizens, suffer to please the few?  If females belong in the comabt arms, we should have made drastic changes before allowing that to occur.  This thread is spiralling downwards rapidly, and I thought I would just put my 2 cents in before it dissapears into the crapper forever.

 

[armyvern]

Apparently I have been raised by wolves and am a wolf then. You see, my brother and I were both raised, and my son and daughter as well, to respect and be chivalrous of both sexes. Not just the female sex. No one has denied that being chivalrous or respectful is a good thing.  :

Get over it already.

 

[HItorMiss]

And you and I personaly agreed you were not raised in the norm and or majority way of thinking. I am not saying you were raised wrongly just differently then the majority.

 

[armyvern]

And you and I personaly agreed you were not raised in the norm and or majority way of thinking. I am not saying you were raised wrongly just differently then the majority.

If you want to believe that being taught to be respectful of each other, no matter the sex is not normal ... well, what can I say.

I'd also believe that this is exactly how most people were raised. My kids have been taught that they need to stand on their own two feet, based upon thier own efforts and merits. And if they do so, nothing can hold them back.

I see ZERO problems with raising my children to believe that, and in themselves and their abilities, regardless of sex.

And he is exactly right, now that parenting skills are being questionned ...

this topic has indeed become way off topic....

and it's bullshit, quite frankly.

Vern out.

 

[RCR Grunt]

I've watched this thread closely for a while now ... how many female COMBAT ARMS soldiers do we have on the board right now?  It seems to me, unless I am mistaken and I very well could be, that alot of the comments are aboslutley baseless, off topic, and irrelevent.  Pt standards ... whatever, some females can do more pushups, sure.  That is not the topic.  The topic is Gender & the CF; Women in COMBAT ARMS, INFANTRY, SPECIAL FORCES & BATTLE.  The argument has been made that our upbringing, AS MALES, has been to respect and protect women, be chivalrous.  Anyone who says different was either raised by wolves or should immediately go to the UMS to have their head removed from their arse.  THAT BEING SAID ... it makes it difficult for males in a male dominated trade to interact with females the same as they would other males.  THIS MAY LEAD to undue friction, conflict and controversey within the ranks.  Perhaps, and god of war forbid, it may lead to soldiers acting innappropriately in a combat scenario.  Have we done studies to prove this?  No, but the Israelis did.  Should we ignore what they have learned?  To answer that I ask another queston, can we afford to?  Do I think women should be in the CF?  Definitely.  Do I think they belong in the Combat Arms?  Not until we change the way we train, eliminating the gender barrier during Battle school by showing ABSOLUTELY ZERO TOLERANCE for any type of double standard and removing any type of ingrained cultural standards soldiers may hold with regards to the opposite sex.  Are we as a nation prepared to create soldiers like this?  The unspeaking, unfeeling "soldier of the future?"  The CF has long been held in regard by foreign governments for our ability to empathize with the people we are helping, would we remove this trait so that a handful of individuals can live the dream of being in the comabt arms?  Why should the majority, and I mean the country, its foreign affairs, and therefore its citizens, suffer to please the few?  If females belong in the comabt arms, we should have made drastic changes before allowing that to occur.  This thread is spiralling downwards rapidly, and I thought I would just put my 2 cents in before it dissapears into the crapper forever.

Army Vern, you missed the highlightede portion, therefore I was not speaking of you, therefore the sarcastic comment was not required.  Do you agree or disagree that in order for females to succeed in the comabt arms drastic changes must be made to the way we train our soldiers?  I'm not questioning anyones parenting skills here, especially yours.  I've read alot of your posts and you appear to be very intelligent, level headed and a great asset to the CF.  However, your failing to see what point these references made to the IDF report are saying.

 

[mudrecceman]

The argument has been made that our upbringing, as males, has been to respect and protect women, be chivalrous.  Anyone who says different was either raised by wolves or should immediately go to the UMS to have their head removed from their arse.

agreed

THAT BEING SAID ... it makes it difficult for males in a male dominated trade to interact with females the same as they would other males.  THIS MAY LEAD to undue friction, conflict and controversey within the ranks. 

Disagree.  I never had that problem, with superiors,subordinates, candidates, course mates,peple in my Tp/Sqn...etc.  Not saying it doesn't exist...just that I haven't seen it "en masse".  So conversely, should males not be admitted or belong to the female dominated MOCs for the same reasons?

  Not until we change the way we train, eliminating the gender barrier during Battle school by showing ABSOLUTELY ZERO TOLERANCE for any type of double standard and removing any type of ingrained cultural standards soldiers may hold with regards to the opposite sex.  Are we as a nation prepared to create soldiers like this?

I thought the CF DID change the way they trained?  First of many examples that comes to my head...CLC 1993.  My fire team partner was a Fin Clerk, female.  She had to pass the same course, to the same (minimum) standard, that I did.  And she did.  Didn't make her a Superninjasniper.  That was...14 years ago?

Why should the majority, and I mean the country, its foreign affairs, and therefore its citizens, suffer to please the few?  If females belong in the comabt arms, we should have made drastic changes before allowing that to occur.

Suffer?  In what way?  (serious question, I missed that somewhere along the line...)

You are one of those "guy" and "girl" measuring stick carryin' guys I was referring to earlier.  ;D 

"We" are the ones that need to drop the 2 measuring sticks and get on with trng the RIGHT people for the job.  The ones that pack the gear, want to be there, can meet the standard and DO meet the standard...regardless of if they stand or sit in the bathroom. 

There should be one question (Can person X do the job?) and one standard for ALL who do or try to do the job.  Regardless of...and before...anything else. 

My opinion on the idea that "we are raised to protect our females" is that this is true.  Is that a one way street though?  Mothers don't defend their young son's with tenacity and conviction?  Just a thought.

My experience  WRT this comes from being on courses, teaching on courses, working in garrison, on the field on ex (no operational or combat stuff), well pretty much any scenario possible in the army except operational / tour stuff from 1989 - Feb 2007 when I left the Army.  I have seen the old way and new way of thinking.  I have seen the "can" and "can'ts" from the boys and girls side of the house.  I was Armoured Corps, not Inf, which the issue seems to be REALLY centered around but have worked with female infanteers, herbies and sappers.  So thats where my perspective spans from.

Who belongs in the Combats Arms, SF and battle?  Those who can hack it.  That should be the only measuring stick.  And we all know there are men and women who can't. 

There seems to be two "cultures" being explored, WRT to this issue now.  The "average Canadian/society" culture and what we perceive their thoughts are, and the CF culture on the issue.

I wonder though...if I were to ask the troops, Snr NCO, WOs that served under Capt Goddard if they thought she was fit for the combat arms.



 

 

[neko]

I probably shouldn't have read this thread as alot of the comments really irked me. Enough that I've decided to wade in here.
The carreer choices available to a women shouldn't depend on whether a man feels comfortable with her doing it. Why should we cater to you guys that way?  What makes you so bloody special that we should be denied our dreams, our choices because you feel uncomfortable? So some of you have been raised to protect women, trying to stop us from joining the combat arms because of your feelings about it is oppressive not protective.
I want to serve my country, I want to do my part in making this world a better, safer place for my children, joining the military as a combat engineer is my way of doing that. If I can't perform well in my chosen field, wether its do to not being strong enough or something else, then I agree I shouldn't be there and hopefully I would be able to chose a different trade, however I have every intention of succeeding.
Why can't you guys just learn to function as a team with the women who can do their jobs well?

Just wanted to add that there are alot of men who are not raised to respect and protect women, I've had the misfortune of meeting a few myself. And we hear of plenty in the news. Get over yourselves guys, your not exactly seen as our saviours and protectors, just because your male.