We’ve given up on Canada’s military, so let’s abandon it altogether

[pbi]

Just an observation, in line with Ballz thoughts.

Back in the day, when the EXPRES test was still the standard, it recognized the difference in upper body strength and VO2 Max, with different requirements for pushups for men and women (interesting, even older men like myself were still required to do more pushups than 19 year old female recruits).

While this might have been very scientifically designed, it failed to address the real operational point that equipment does not magically change its characteristics based on if a man or woman is carrying it. A C-6 still weighs 11Kg, and it still comes with an SF kit, a teaser belt and (between the gun team) 440 rounds of 7.62mm link. In my own persona experience, most of the female infantry solders who passed the  EXPRES test fell down in the field because they could not be loaded down with the extra ammo and equipment for the platoon support weapons. This meant that there were always a few soldiers in the platoon who simply never carried the kit, and the burden shifted onto the remainder of the platoon, with the obvious risks of exhaustion, ankle and joint injuries and people falling out because they were no longer able to carry the extra load without relief.

In that regard, the FORCES test is much, much better, since there are no exemptions based on sex or age.

Agreed. Stuff weighs what it weighs. Stuff doesn't care who is carrying it. I never understood the idea behind  the old BFT that required you to carry a casualty your own body weight.: what do you do, pick out a casualty who looks like they might weigh as much as you do? Much better to use an " average weight" dummy, like firefigher training normally does.

 

[armyvern]

Tells us we are making baseless claims only to make an equally baseless claim "that many women would join who may be interested in joining the infantry if only there weren't so many telling them they couldn't do it".

Women can serve in the infantry right now, the question is, should they?

...

Don't twist her words; I've corrected it for you.

That particular question was answered by the CAF and Canada back when I joined as part of the CREW Trials.  30 years.  The point is, a  bunch of so-called "peers" need to stop living in the past.  If a woman can do the job - she's allowed to and should be respected for doing such without the groundless and negative commentary based only upon her sex by those who should know better. Move on already.

 

[ballz]

If a woman can do the job - she's allowed to and should be respected for doing such without the groundless and negative commentary

I haven't read anyone saying they shouldn't be allowed to? And what are you referring to by "groundless and negative commentary?"

I tell every inquiring female I've spoken to the same thing I tell the inquiring males who are asking about the arduous training. It will be physically and mentally tough, you will likely fail multiple times along the way. You may find yourself awake for 5 days, without enough food, carrying a 100lb pack up to 20km throughout a 24 hr period, and when you get to where you're going you'll get to dig a hole until the sun comes up... then you'll find out it's your turn to lead the next 5-6km withdraw because you guys are no longer where you're supposed to be.

I don't tell them two different things based on their gender, and I encourage them all to give a try because succeed or not, they'll probably be better off for the experience.

 

[armyvern]

I haven't read anyone saying they shouldn't be allowed to? ...

Then you didn't read the post I quoted whereby I even included his statement, "Women can serve in the infantry right now, the question is, should they?"?

That was easy no?

Groundless and negative commentary?  Still questionning whether "they should be allowed to" 30 years after we've decided they can, they will, and they do.  Imagine putting up with that crap attitude from your peers or a supervisor, or - an Officer - just based upon your sex and not your performance and ability to do the job.  And, believe you me, they don't need to state it out loud for that attitude to be recognized by most of those who they feel to be unworthy.

Some fun, isn't it?  Some welcoming isn't it?  Amazing way to retain a female who can actually do the job.  Inspirational leadership that is!  [/end sarcasm]  :

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Then you didn't read the post I quoted whereby I even included his statement, "Women can serve in the infantry right now, the question is, should they?"?

That was easy no?

Groundless and negative commentary?  Still questionning whether "they should be allowed to" 30 years after we've decided they can, they will, and they do.  Imagine putting up with that crap attitude from your peers or a supervisor, or - an Officer - just based upon your sex and not your performance and ability to do the job.  And, believe you me, they don't need to state it out loud for that attitude to be recognized by most of those who they feel to be unworthy.

Some fun, isn't it?  Some welcoming isn't it?  Amazing way to retain a female who can actually do the job.  Inspirational leadership that is!  [/end sarcasm]  :

This is clearly an emotional issue for you so I'm going to cease and desist because at this point, I'm not going to throw any more gas on the fire. 

I would literally be interested in objectively discussing whether women can make better infanteers or combat engineers than men. Perhaps they are 15x smarter and 15x more efficient, and their transformational leadership leads to reorganizing into ways that make the fighting force so effective it overcomes all of the physical advantages that males have. But this discussion can't happen if we can't even get past the most glaringly obvious difference between the two genders that already has mountains of empirical evidence behind it.

Personally, I've been trying to find some studies on men vs women in chess but it's hard to find anything useful to compare especially since men outnumber women in chess 16 to 1. Maybe women are more intellectually suited to war-gaming than men are and we are failing to leverage that? I find these are all interesting rabbit holes to go down.

There is no data in Canada as far as the military is concerned.  As I said before, doing any sort of study like what you would propose would violate a number of Acts and Human Rights. 

 

[armyvern]

Actually not an emotional issue for me in any way, shape or form.

Just an issue that the CAF decided upon 30 years ago.

Apparently, some have yet to get over it and move on (the girls didn't bring it up in here). 

 

[ballz]

Actually not an emotional issue for me in any way, shape or form.

Just an issue that the CAF decided upon 30 years ago.

Apparently, some have yet to get over it and move on (the girls didn't bring it up in here).

No topic, decision, or policy is above questioning / criticism / objective analysis. Don't care if it's uncomfortable for you or anyone else.

 

[armyvern]

No topic, decision, or policy is above questioning / criticism / objective analysis. Don't care if it's uncomfortable for you or anyone else.

I think it may actually be you who is uncomfortable with REALITY.

Fill 'yer boots then; I don't see us going back 31+ years in time, but you go guy!!  I'll better spend my time moving ahead with the CAF instead of insisting on living in the past.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

On that note, I’m shutting this down for a while. I requested that things get back on course in my earlier post, but that didn’t happen. This thread has certainly somewhat drifted off from the original article contents which were posted.
Let’s take a breather.

Staff