Women at War

[big bad john]

I also hear that "Pip" is not a person to cross.   She was brought up in the Army, her Dad retired as an RSM.  BTW the wall is 12' high.

 

[48Highlander]

Sadly, it is the attitudes of many soldiers who think women don't belong in the combat arms that so many have left, and so few join. I can't think of a single female infanteer who has not been the victim or bullying, harrassment, sexual overtures from fellow soldiers, or various other forms of mistreatment
.........
Women will continue to quit the combat arms in droves, or refuse to join in the first place until the mysoginistic attitudes that have made the CF such a hostile place for women remain.

Now you're going a bit far.  First off, men are also "victims of" bullying and harrassment.  It's the nature of the beast; the military and infantry especially is a very macho, aggressive organization, so you're always going to have that sort of atmosphere.  Male or female, you have to either grow thicker skin and learn to give as good as you get, or get out.  I can tell you of at lest one female Sgt though who never misses an opportunity to "harass" me and any other soldier who crosses her path.  Anyone who takes offense to it shoudn't be in the army.

Also keep in mind that the perception that "women don't belong in combat" is actualy more prevailant amongst women.  I mean, if you ask the average women wether women should be allowed in combat roles, the majority will say "yes", however, you'll also find that the majority of them wouldn't consider doing it themselves because they don't think they could handle it.  THAT is the main reason the number of women joining is so low.  It has little to do with sexism within the system, and a lot more to do with womens perception of military duty and their own capabilities.

Finally, you want to argue different standards? There are not, in fact, only 2; there are 10. Changes for men and women in every age group. This is ageist; as a 50 year-old corporal should be able to compete physically with a 17 year-old corporal, right?

Obviously they can't compete, but they should both be able to meet the same basic standard.  The changes for age groups should be more of a guideline really.  If the standard for a 50 year old female is acceptable for her, than it should be acceptable for everyone and be set as the minimum.  If the standard is too low, others could be encouraged to perform better, and rewarded for being able to maintain a certain level of fitness, but the basic standard should be the same for everyone, and should be based on the requirements of the job.

Also, keep in mind that there isn't very many 50 year old privates in the infantry.  On my QL3 we DID have a 50 year old man who actually exceeded the standard for his age group, but was unable to keep up with the course.  Our PL WO expected one standard from everyone on our course, so the 50 year old private was RTU'd along with anyone else who couldn't cut it.  He remustered to the medics and has been doing a wonderful job with them ever since.  Was it fair to expect him to perform to the same level as 17-18 year old males?  No.  But if he can't meet our standard, would it be fair to let him pass?  Instead of humouring him and pretending he was a good infanteer, the staff got rid of him and told him to remuster.  They did both him and the CF a favour by refusing to allow him to do a job for which he was unqualified, and instead directing him towards a job where he could be valuable.

 

[combat_medic]

Yes, there are women who think that women shouldn't be in the military; just as I've had people tell me that I'm psychologically imbalanced because I don't want to have children. Ignorance comes in all forms and from all types, but that doesn't make it excusable.

As for "bullying" amongst men, I'm not talking about the typical, "hey ugly, how's it goin'?" attaitude amongst soldiers, I'm talking about the systematic harrassment against particular women in order to drive them to quit. Less of a problem in recent memory, but still, unfortunately, present.

And yes, there aren't many 50 year old corporals in the infantry, just as there aren't many female corporals in the infantry. I have to compete at a higher standard than a 50 year old male in many areas, does that mean that he should also be kicked out, or not allowed to compete? People get weaker with age, so does that mean a mandatory retirement age of 35? Also, fitness according to trade wouldn't work either; what about CS/CSS pers attahced to combat arms? Infanteers occupying desk jobs? Fitness requirements aren't dependant on trade.

I would entirely support a single fitness standard, but keep in mind, when you're 55 and nearly retired, you're going to have to be hauling your butt out with the teenagers who just joined and compete at the same standard as they.

 

[big bad john]

As a man in my mid 40's, I'd be happy to have any of you join me on my morning 5K.  I'd love the oppertunity to run you into the ground.  LMAO

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Yes, there are women who think that women shouldn't be in the military; just as I've had people tell me that I'm psychologically imbalanced because I don't want to have children. Ignorance comes in all forms and from all types, but that doesn't make it excusable.

As for "bullying" amongst men, I'm not talking about the typical, "hey ugly, how's it goin'?" attaitude amongst soldiers, I'm talking about the systematic harrassment against particular women in order to drive them to quit. Less of a problem in recent memory, but still, unfortunately, present.

And yes, there aren't many 50 year old corporals in the infantry, just as there aren't many female corporals in the infantry. I have to compete at a higher standard than a 50 year old male in many areas, does that mean that he should also be kicked out, or not allowed to compete? People get weaker with age, so does that mean a mandatory retirement age of 35? Also, fitness according to trade wouldn't work either; what about CS/CSS pers attahced to combat arms? Infanteers occupying desk jobs? Fitness requirements aren't dependant on trade.

I would entirely support a single fitness standard, but keep in mind, when you're 55 and nearly retired, you're going to have to be hauling your butt out with the teenagers who just joined and compete at the same standard as they.

I think I illustrated this with my own post two pages ago - our peacetime army has one major goal among many -  to train the instructors for the next war.  Those 50 year old corporals - anyone, really, male, female, old or young - who have demonstrated leadership, a grasp of the principles of instruction, and at least some practical knowledge of the military will be very useful in training the younger and more able bodied to go fight.

We're the ones who keep the lights on in between periods of crisis.  This is nothing new, and will not change over time.  All those who dream of a military composed entirely of 20 to 30 year old males with commando and parachute training are kidding themselves.  When the next big war comes - God forbid - we will not need, nor be able to afford, 30 year old truck drivers, cooks, and staff clerks in their physical prime.

 

[Britney Spears]

I would entirely support a single fitness standard, but keep in mind, when you're 55 and nearly retired, you're going to have to be hauling your butt out with the teenagers who just joined and compete at the same standard as they.

So what? is this a bad thing?

It bothers me that some of our members are actually worried about the PT "standard". Honestly I don't even know what the standard for my group is, other than being a level that 75% of civies off the street could probably pass. I know of no infantryman below the rank of MWO who takes them seriously, most have goals to the tune of "score 100 points on the Cooper's test". I would seriously question the motives of any youngish soldier who's worried about "passing the PT test to avoid a verbal warning" .  Really, you guys talk about the regular infantry PT standard like it was the bloody assaulter's course.

 

[Strike]

As I mentioned on another thread -- the PT test is for fitness, the BFT is for ability.  That is why the PT is adjusted for sex and age and the BFT is standard no matter who you are.

As for the whole "women aren't meant for combat arms" thing, Try telling that to the CLS who's EA is a female infanteer.  I've spoken with members of her former unit and they have nothing but positive things to say.

As for saying we don't have the mental toughness to cut it, you have obviously never seen me in the ring.  Watch out.  I've bested more than a few guys.

Finally, wrt bullying, it's not enough to say to grow a thicker skin when someone continuously questions your actions, motives, private life, etc and add some type of sexual overtone to it.  It can really wear a person down after awhile.  I saw enough of this throughout my training.  Luckily an "old school" type took me under his wing (and of course people questioned that as well) and things got sorted out pretty damn quick.  The point is a woman has to be 2x better than a man to be considered half as good.  I know I am generalizing but this is from experience and observation.

As for the original point of this thread, the article had nothing to do w/ women's abilities to fight, but wether it was morally appropriate to have them there.  If I was a man I might start wondering why it's okay for me to die in battle, but not a woman.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

...and just to be the equal opportunity poop disturber, don't any of you out there think for a second that when things are reversed SOME women aren't just as bad as SOME men.
Several of my good male friends got sent to a female institution when ours closed and guess what?.......... same things happen......

 

[Strike]

I once new a man who used to be a tech and, when he got out, started working for a volunteer organization that was primarily female.  In fact, when he arrived, he was the only man.  He never suffered any lasting trauma -- exept for being witness to some "questionale"  ;D  conversations.  The first thing he asked when he saw me again was if that was what life was like for me in the military.  Ah, revenge is sweet.

 

[Mad Max]

I find it fascinating that a group of people, some military, some not, some male, some not, and some without ANY KNOWLEDGE OF OR INTEREST IN things Combat Arms are jumping on this bandwagon heading down the road to nowhere! Our artificially low standards of recruitment and training are STILL demonstrating to the vast bulk of people in the know with a vested interest in the ultimate outcome of this ridiculous social engineering experiment (females in the combat arms-specifically Infantry) that females are NOT particularly well- suited for a career as a grunt! This is NOT a revelation- just ask any dedicated Trainer of infantry troops. I f he isn't overtly concerned with pleasing the powers that be with his Stalinist zeal in achieving the politically-correct norm vis-a-vis female infantry training successes under his belt, he will, almost without exeption, call a spade a spade- and tell you that they ARE NOT, in the vast majority of cases, physically or mentally suited for the rigours of normal infantry service. Heck, half the MALE recruits we get these days aren't suitable, and we have a hard enough time training them, or getting rid of them so that the units won't have to deal with their weakness! I'm speaking here of THINGS I KNOW, NOT THINGS I THINK I KNOW! Anyone who has ever instructed pugil fighting, or taken troops on a forced march- NOT some panzy walk down the road- will understand what I'm talking about. And we're not even talking about the REAL nasty stuff! Bring it on!

 

[mo-litia]

CombatMedic,

This was not meant as a personal criticism of any female I have served with...if you read my posts you'll see that I have expressed several positive things about advances in gender equality and the drive of female recruits.

While I freely admit some of my statements were inflammatory, they were intended to stimulate debate on this issue - which I feel strongly about.  My main point-which I stand by- is that the CF has no business recruiting a gender into a trade were the attrition rate for that gender is so high as to make continued enrollment of this gender both fiscally irresponsible, and, given the nature of the job an infantryman has to do, morally wrong.

You know that I have never expressed these views while wearing the green, and were you an infantry soldier, I would serve alongside of you as a professional.  I have learnt that self preservation of one's career demands a low profile on this issue...unless one is in the mess with the boys, where the truth usually comes out about most infantry soldiers' EDUCATED opinions on this issue.

I am not disputing the valuable contributions women make to the military, just that certain limitations are reasonable.

That being said, please don't take a swing at me the next time you see me...

I remember once watching a TV program on a British destroyer, the reporter asked the XO of the ship what he thought of women fighting in the AF. He stated "Any nation that sends it's women into combat is morally bankrupt." I believe that statement to be true.  The feminist agenda touted by some on this forum and the "If they can do it let them." philosophy, is wrong.  Contrary to popular belief the equipment God gave you as one person put it does matter. There are fundamental differences between men and women. These difference are natural. It is the agenda of some to negate these differences in the name of "equality". Some on this forum have claimed to have been in combat with women, if this is true then you know first hand that war is a dirty business where the polite rules of society are thrown out the widow. Would you want you wife/daughter or sister to be placed in a position where she could be killed, raped all in the name of equality? This is mis-guided. Women have no place in the killing fields of combat, this does not mean that they are any less of a person than a man, if our society believes that in order for a woman to achieve equality with a man she has to right to die in combat we truly have lost our way.

Jumper, thanks for speaking up for the silent majority on this issue. I knew when I jumped into this debate there was going to be a loud reaction as 'those who scream the loudest disagree the most'.  I'm glad that political correctness hasn't prevented other brave people from speaking the truth on this matter.  Most armies in the world look upon this kind of social experimentation in the military as completely out of tune with their most important task of being a combat ready force; this is a undeniable fact.

Can we get back to the original theme about the poor female troop who gave up her life for her country?  Thank God there is only 20 females out of the 1500 American dead, or the US would be in a serious domestic crisis. Remember the outrage over Jessica Lynch, Shoshanna Johnson and Laurie Piestewa? Now consider why they were front page news and most of the other 1500 KIA are just a statistic mourned by their families.  The world isn't a fair place, and it never will be. I do not think it is wrong to limit infantry enrollment based on good commen sense.

That's it, I'm done on this issue; you'll hear no more from me. (big bad john is right, this issue is starting go in circles and may require a lock on the forum.)  If I offended you, sorry, but that's they way the world works. I hope I made more people think; my comments were not driven by bias or sexism, they were motivated by concern for a military and a nation-however misguided-that I care deeply about.

Again, I speak for the silent majority.

Cheers

 

[big bad john]

While I freely admit some of my statements were inflammatory, they were intended to stimulate debate on this issue - which I feel strongly about.  My main point-which I stand by- is that the CF has no business recruiting a gender into a trade were the attrition rate for that gender is so high as to make continued enrollment of this gender both fiscally irresponsible, and, given the nature of the job an infantryman has to do, morally wrong.

So if I go with your model, Marines should not recruit men?  You also say that you speak for the "silent majority".  I dispute that strongly.  I think that you are behind the times.

 

[Mad Max]

I love it! Let's all gather together and make a unanimous Marxist-Leninist DECLARATION THAT THE EARTH IS FLAT! All you folks out there, understand- speaking in the manner of a politically-correct commisar MAKES YOU a politically correct commisar- NOT a military type with his head spacing and timing properly adjusted. And if you don't know what I mean by that, you've just made my point. It doesn't matter what you were-or THOUGHT you were- it's what you are! If that means I am a sexist dinosaur, bring me a bronto-burger and I'll eat that sucker hands-free! I also have a ton of training experience in this field (this field-get it?), and I would be extremely interested in hearing your realistic, hard-nosed, practical, common-sense objections to ANYTHING I've said! This ain't rocket science, as the saying goes, this is grunt work. So if you wear a skirt, or maybe SHOULD wear a skirt, then let's have the facts and figures that prove I'm full o' crap. Not the Canadian soft candy crap that I've been reading here! Go rapid! (That last bit means shoot quickly for you non-grunt types)

 

[big bad john]

Please read my posts.  I believe that i have made my point...or rather the thousands of women in combat have.

 

[Mad Max]

Man, why would I WANT to read YOUR posts? This discussion is good fun, and reading your stuff would just about cause me to fall on my bayonet(that's the pointy, knifey thing on the end of your rifle for you non-military types). Anyway, what I've been saying still stands, and I'm still waiting for someone with suitable cred to shoot me down or shut me up.

 

[The Bat]

Mad Max last time i check the world is flat i mean you lay a map down and you look at it and its flat LMAO the way the CF has lowered all standards in the CF is a joke and all for what for the women to come and join us in the trench, don't get me wrong i think women have a place in the Army but being up in the front lines nope not the place. i did my walk in the mountains in Afghani land and i really don't think that the normal lady could carry what i had and take care of herself for more than 3 days. i was a real gut check. so if you cant do it then why???? lets be real here and think about it.

 

[Strike]

Max,

Were you to rant a little less and discuss a little more maybe people would respond to you.  Alas, I am taking the bait.  Let's see, as previously mentioned, the EA to the CLS is a woman (infanteer) who I have been told several times can more than hold her own and then some.  She is the epitome of one who is silent yet carries a big stick.

I do know of another woman (armoured, and first female in the trade) who had several barriers to overcome and also had no training difficulties and excelled when it came to deployments and ops.

As for myself, although not combat arms (I think you're all a little crazy anyway  , kind of like submariners are) I can also hold my own in the field.  I've always been a good shot, have run several marathons, and have distinguished myself in another male-dominated trade.

None of this is PC, unless you consider equality (ie, a female who can do the SAME as her male counterpart and being given the SAME chance as said male) a PC term.  If that is the case I hope you never find yourself trying to give me orders in me helicopter.  

 

[mo-litia]

One final thought....

Mad Max: 

I'd serve with you anyday, bro. You tell it like it is!

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Man, why would I WANT to read YOUR posts? This discussion is good fun, and reading your stuff would just about cause me to fall on my bayonet(that's the pointy, knifey thing on the end of your rifle for you non-military types). Anyway, what I've been saying still stands, and I'm still waiting for someone with suitable cred to shoot me down or shut me up.

Done.  Locked.