Women at War

[S McKee]

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.

 

[48Highlander]

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.

I'm sure that somewhere there's an interview with a member of the Taliban saying "Any nation that allows it's women to show their faces in public is moraly bankrupt".  You agree with that too?  Morality can be used to "jusify" any point of view, so where do you draw the line?  Your concept of "moraity" is your own, you have no right to force it on others, ESPECIALLY when it limits their freedom.

 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.

Thanks Dad, but I found out about those differences years ago.  Do they matter?  In the bedroom, damn straight they do.  On the battlefield though?  Other than making them a little top heavy, how exactly does a set of tits impact someones ability to fill a combat role?

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?

I would't want my son placed in a position where he could be kille or raped either, thanks.  Come to think of it, I really don't want anyone to have to be in that position.  It's a neccesary job though, so why should I stop anyone who's wiling and capable from doing it?

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.

You obviously don't understand the meaning of the word equality.  As long as men insist on seing women as a set of sexual organs which must be protected from harm, they'll never be equal.  First you you have to start tihnking of them as individuals with the right to decide how they want to live their lives.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Quote from: camochick on Yesterday at 22:48:27
Sexism is alive and well, this thread has more than proved it.
Quote from Sig Bloggins,
Yes, sadly it is. Back to the kitchen for me, boys.

...actually I think this thread shows that although sexism is still alive, it is not "alive and well", and to be truthful both of you owe apologies to some members of this forum.

 

[Pte. Bloggins]

I do? Really? What about the people that suggested that I am incompetant at my job simply because I am a woman?

Ok, well sorry if I offended anyone by suggesting that some members of this forum are sexist.

 

[big bad john]

I started this thread to talk about women in combat.  Take notice that does n ot have to mean in Combat Arms.  I remember a nurse in Rhodesia calmly laying rounds into a Terr attacking her clinic.  She was very effective at it, laying more than one Terr out.  That is also combat.  

 

[camochick]

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.

Why is it that a man's life seems to worth less than a wowoman's.If a woman wants to be in a combat position and can do the job then why not let her. Believe me, we are not dumb, any woman who would go to war would know that the potential to be killed or raped is there. Heck, killing and raping of women happens everyday, should i just stay in my house like a good little girl and live in fear. Why is it such an issue for a woman to be in combat? Would you people throw a fit if it was a black man, or an Asian man, what about a Muslim. NO, cause that would be racist. well there is no difference here. Discriminating based on someones gender is like discriminating based on someones race. It's wrong. But the good thing about Canada is that we allow our women to make the choice and join the combat trades, so whether you like it or not, we are going to be there.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Quote,
Ok, well sorry if I offended anyone by suggesting that some members of this forum are sexist.

...if the inclination was that SOME members are sexist I would have been ok with it, that was not the case........OK,girls.[get it?]

I  do? Really? What about the people that suggested that I am incompetant at my job simply because I am a woman?

...and you wish to belittle yourself to thier level?

 

[camochick]

Quote from: camochick on Yesterday at 22:48:27
Sexism is alive and well, this thread has more than proved it.
Quote from Sig Bloggins,
Yes, sadly it is. Back to the kitchen for me, boys.

...actually I think this thread shows that although sexism is still alive, it is not "alive and well", and to be truthful both of you owe apologies to some members of this forum.

  Edit: sorry if i made reference that all people posting on the thread were sexist, not my intention, the people i was refering to know who they are.

If you think i owe an apology to people who tell me I will never be as strong as a man, or that i can't fight in a war like a man, then you are wrong. If you have a problem with me, them pm me but I won't apologize for defending women.

 

[big bad john]

Camo, I think the problem is that you are lumping all men in the same boat.  I agree that it is evident that some people on the forum are sexist, BUT not all of us are. 

 

[camochick]

Yeah, i'm sorry i made it seem like i was refering to all men on the forum, that wasnt my intention. For the most part the men on here are very supportive of women in the forces and I'm glad for that. Again, I apologize.

 

[Gunner]

I have to say there are some questionable comments being made by some young junior NCOs in this link.  

Traditionally, women were not the warriors as they were the primary caregivers to the next generation of warriors.  Moreover, a society could whether the mass extermination of their men, if the majority of their women survived in order to breed another generation.  Both scenarios are no longer valid within our society as we do not have large standing militaries and the chance of a mass extermination would probably effect both men and women equally (nuclear warfare).  Therefore the argument about women in combat roles is moot at this point because it is not relevant to the CF and moreover it is not going to be reversed.

If you want to argue anything, you can argue that standards (for men and women) have gone down in the last 10 years compared to previous standards.  I don't beleive this has anything to do with women being entered into the combat arms and everything to do with a declining recruiting base, increased release rates (reg and res), and a different style of recruit that we have not adapted to (or adapted to much...).

Now, I am going to head off to my daycare centre and nurture some children.   :

Cheers,  

 

[big bad john]

Hey, no problem.  This topic is a button pusher.  

 

[combat_medic]

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. I know several that have quit because they were bullied into doing so. While women have to work harder in order to be successful in the combat arms, the men who are just as weak are given a fair shake right from the start. Despite all our attempts at PC-ness, gender integration and the like, it's the unfortunate lingering sexism that keeps a lot of the women away from such trades.

Fifty years ago, women weren't allowed to serve at all. 100 years ago, only white men could serve. The same tired arguments about group cohesion, and lack of "natural" agression have been used to exclude every minority group imaginable for centuries (Asians, homosexuals, women). It is only when people open their eyes and realize that EVERYONE has something to contribute, no matter what they're packing in their underwear. Some people can stick 200 pounds on their back and run a hundred miles uphill. Others make fantastic shots, while others can sit still in an OP for the better part of 2 days without moving or uttering a sound. I've seen plenty of male infanteers who are such bad shots that they couldn't hit the ground if they fell on it, and others who can't walk quietly, or move tactically at all. So, you make those guys your MG #2s, or your frontline assaulters. No one has said they can't serve, or that men have a genetic disposition to be loud, and could never do reconnaisance because they're too big and awkward. It's a ridiculous argument. People have different strengths and weaknesses, and should be employed with this in mind.

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.

Mo-litia; you watched me walk about a kilometre out of the field on a broken ankle, and you think women aren't tough? Not to mention, if you think women are caring and nurturing, try putting a baby in front of me. The thing would find itself starving and filthy before long. I certainly have no maternal instinct, nor some kind of intrinsic knowledge about child-rearing, just as men aren't born with a C7 in hand and the instinctual knowledge of how to dig a level 6 entrenchment.

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?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Thank you, Combat Medic,...and when Mo-litia is done talking to you he can talk to my sister who retired after 24 years with enough tours that I lost count, and lets see, in my ten years I did,...........oh yea, zero.          Hmmmmmm...

 

[Britney Spears]

I don't understand why female soldiers have not spoken out en masse against the discriminatory PT standards used by the CF. All worthwile female soldiers I know think the minimum standard for females is offensive and condescending, and propogates an artificially negative stereotype of females. Where's the equality?  If the feminist lobby is atually advocating this as a method of gender intergration then it is putting a 40mm HE in its own foot.

BB John you probably know of that time when they let a few females run the RM commando course and none passed? Somehow this was held up as proof that females should not be allowed in the Cbt arms. The fact that the majority of MALE candidates also failed the course doesn't seem to get mentioned much.


and in the same vein....

Thank you, Combat Medic,...and when Mo-litia is done talking to you he can talk to my sister who retired after 24 years with enough tours that I lost count, and lets see, in my ten years I did,...........oh yea, zero.          Hmmmmmm...

I think that says more about you than your sister.  ;D ;D ;D

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

OUCH!!!!!!!!!!!! :-[



..in my piddly defence, :crybaby: I only had a shot at one tour, Cyprus in the waning days,[kiss] but I opted for a French course instead, which turned out to be the best decision I ever made.[long and happy story]

 

[Pte. Bloggins]

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. I know several that have quit because they were bullied into doing so. While women have to work harder in order to be successful in the combat arms, the men who are just as weak are given a fair shake right from the start. Despite all our attempts at PC-ness, gender integration and the like, it's the unfortunate lingering sexism that keeps a lot of the women away from such trades.

Fifty years ago, women weren't allowed to serve at all. 100 years ago, only white men could serve. The same tired arguments about group cohesion, and lack of "natural" agression have been used to exclude every minority group imaginable for centuries (Asians, homosexuals, women). It is only when people open their eyes and realize that EVERYONE has something to contribute, no matter what they're packing in their underwear. Some people can stick 200 pounds on their back and run a hundred miles uphill. Others make fantastic shots, while others can sit still in an OP for the better part of 2 days without moving or uttering a sound. I've seen plenty of male infanteers who are such bad shots that they couldn't hit the ground if they fell on it, and others who can't walk quietly, or move tactically at all. So, you make those guys your MG #2s, or your frontline assaulters. No one has said they can't serve, or that men have a genetic disposition to be loud, and could never do reconnaisance because they're too big and awkward. It's a ridiculous argument. People have different strengths and weaknesses, and should be employed with this in mind.

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.

Mo-litia; you watched me walk about a kilometre out of the field on a broken ankle, and you think women aren't tough? Not to mention, if you think women are caring and nurturing, try putting a baby in front of me. The thing would find itself starving and filthy before long. I certainly have no maternal instinct, nor some kind of intrinsic knowledge about child-rearing, just as men aren't born with a C7 in hand and the instinctual knowledge of how to dig a level 6 entrenchment.

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?

Amen to that combat_medic. You put into words exactly what I was thinking.  

 

[big bad john]

Try and try again, with training and determination.  Please read below, 59% of her class failed.  Oh, and they all were men.



First woman wins Green Beret   06.06.02 11:50
 


A captain in the Army has become the first woman to win a coveted Green Beret.

Capt Pip Tattersall (27), of the Adjutant General's Corps, completed the arduous All Arms Commando Course at the Commando Training Centre Royal Marines (CTCRM) at Lympstone in Devon.

The course is open to trained ranks from all three Services, male and female, who wish to serve with 3 Commando Brigade.

She passed her Commando tests on Friday May 31 and was awarded her Green Beret - although that does not qualify her to join the Royal Marines; qualification for the Green Beret does not automatically make the successful candidates members of the Corps.

Capt Tattersall first attempted the course in March of last year, but was withdrawn in Week 7 of the eight-week course.

Her second attempt in July 2001 ended when a back injury prevented her from continuing the training.

She returned for a final attempt last month, rejoining the course at Week 5.

Her success means Pip is now eligible to work in either combat support or combat service support areas of 3 Commando Brigade.

As is traditional, Capt Tattersall will continue to wear her parent unit's cap badge, but on a green beret.

In order to join the Royal Marines, a candidate would have to join the Corps as a recruit or an officer, and complete a six-month basic training course (recruits) or a year-long course for officers

 

[Britney Spears]

OUCH!!!!!!!!!!!! Embarrassed

Oh come on, like you never saw THAT one coming.

B John:

It was a number of years ago when I read about it, so times have changed I see.  But "Pip Tattersall"?! Are you sure she's female?

 

[big bad john]

Yes! see below.