Women in Combat? Why? (Part II)

I didn't, just pointing that out.
The combat talons do most of their ops in hostile territory, it's not your average
trash hauler.

 

This is obviously a touchy subject for a lot of people (including myself). I'm very deliberately trying to keep personal attacks out of it. My hope is that no one will take anything I say here as such.

 

It was not my intention to be demeaning. I know how bad it sucks to be the guy on the ground. They don't call it the "poor bloody infantry" for nothing. I met infantry guys with Masters degrees and Bachelors degrees (now I was National Guard and served in Afghanistan with a National Guard unit) and we even had e-4s with Masters and Bachelor degrees and this is an infantry unit and some of them were very good tactically speaking and did an excellent job as infantrymen. That being said, I appreciate the flyboys and their work as well and I make sure they know that.

I agree. But even an ODA team depends on others outside their own team to help keep them alive.

 

No worries.

 

Cooler heads prevail? On this board? Never thought I'd see the day!

You're right it's a touchy subject. Questioning, intentionally or not, people's courage or commitment can cause a lot of harsh feelings. But I understand where you're coming from. I have a deep respect for those kids and I do what I can for them whenever I can. Extra case of lickey-chewys or RipIts in the kicker, roll of Skoal or two in a LCADS bundle, that sort of thing, whatever I can afford or can lay my hands on at the time. Lots of airlifters do. We are not unaware of the pressure those kids are under.

Just please try to remember, they're not alone in the fight nor have they ever been.

 

Here is some tragic news of one of our comrades who has been recently KIA. He did FOURTEEN DEPLOYMENTS! WOW MAN! This guy was definately one of America's finest. Such a tragedy to lose such a wonderful man who gave so much to our country:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/28/us/afghanistan-ranger-killed/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

RIP brother. You will not be forgotten. We appreciate and will never forget your service and sacrifice for our wonderful country. *salute*

 

Terrible loss to the US.

May he rest in peace. He's earned it.

 

An infantry unit is no place for a woman. Just trust me...

 

Why should a woman, who can perform the same tasks to the same level as her male counterpart, not be permitted into the infantry?

And, while we're at it, why should I trust you?

 

Because the infantry is full of nutty alpha males.

Because I was in the infantry.

 

Brings back so many memories of traditions...like blood wings...throw a woman in an Airborne unit and they will have to forget the blood wing ceremony.

Or when you get in from a "good" time in the field and you wanna get with your guys and let the frustrations go....the pic above is a good indicator how the night was. Most women wouldn't enjoy that...

 

Sorry to sidetrack the thread here, and your point above has NOTHING to do with woman in combat btw, put just to point out the age of consent in Zimbabwe is 16, not 12. If you are going to create a strawman at least try and get some of the facts right!

AH

 

Believe me, it was quite the culture shock when they opened up combat aviation to women. And the Airborne is not the only place you get your blood wings, either. I bear the scars--and the pride--to this day. (And I also know a few--okay, two--women who have them.)

The infantry, BTW, is not the only place 'nutty alpha males' congregate, nor are they immune to social engineering. Times change. And so will the culture of the infantry.

No one here is denying the infantry is an extremely dangerous environment in war nor do I wish to see the strength of the infantry dilluted in the name of political correctness. My primary concernlies in ensuring the capabilities of the infantry do not change. If woman want to serve, fine--but women must meet the same standards as men or they should not be permitted to serve.

 

I had never heard the term "blood wings" before, so it was with some trepidation I Googled it.

I can't tell you the joy at finding out that it has absolutely no relation to the "red wings" term used by the Hells Angels...

 

Regarding the hazing ritual "blood wngs," it's against Armed Forces policy, and you get
caught doing that on someone you're looking at an Article 15 reprimand, possibly a court martial...
there's nothing "official" about it. It may still continue, but it is certainly not authorized by the military itself.

 

Oh yes, we know. It's just a tradition/ritual and seen as a right of passage into the brotherhood. I'll never forget mine....both sides of my chest were blood and bruised.

 

The difference being that in the Infantry you don't get to fly back to your bed on the FOB after fighting. Infantry (as well as armor/arty to a lesser extent) have not only the most physically demanding job on the battlefield, they have the worst living conditions and the least amount of access to privacy or hygiene.

 

I think "red wings" are just as coveted in the Infantry as they are in the Hells Angels.

 

I just posted that clip to add something to the discussion. To be honest, as a civilian who has never been in the military, I'm not sure how much of it I agree with and how much of it I don't. But I can admit that I am naturally drawn to things that are politically incorrect because I have such a tremendous distaste for dilluted standards. Which are extremely prevalent in our society today.

Ultimately, my position is this. In any arena (be it military, the work force, or whatever), there should be a fixed set of standards that is etched in stone. And it should be relatively high. All should be open to trying to meet those standards, but only those that can actually meet them should be granted acceptance. The standards themselves should never be lowered under any circumstances.

 

It wasn't "authorized" when it was common practice. And it was always your right not to accept the offer. Now it's not so common at all . . . but there are a lot of things about the military that aren't the way the were twenty-odd years ago, which simply highlights the fact that times are changing and the infantry had better get use to the idea.

This is very much like the debate on whether or not homosexuals should be permitted to serve: once the issue becomes one of political correctness, sooner or later, it's going to be implemented, whether anyone in the service at the time likes it or not. Better to get a handle on the situation and ensure the quality of the force remains the one constant over the centuries. Keep the standard, if nothing else.

 

As long as the potential female recruit meets the EXACT same physical standards that apply to men for those ground combat jobs,
I think they should be given a chance. It's apparent that those who have served in the infantry, at least those involved in this discussion, don't
agree with that opinion. They view it that even beyond the physical qualifications there are billeting and close quarters living
conditions to consider.

 

That's wrong. I'll use the Boston marathon/Olympics as an example. The women's record is 15 minutes slower than then men's, almost 2 minutes in the 5000 meters, and 20 seconds in the 1500 meters. If you want to go crazy the 100km records have men ahead by 20 minutes.

Finally, combat involves moving a lot more than your body weight. Combat load outs weigh almost the same, irrespective of size. If the above races were 1500/5000/ meters "With 70 pounds on your back" the disparity between men and women would be even larger, due to men's larger size and greater muscle mass.

Even better example of this is the Marine Corp's PFT score. A man must run an 18 minute 3 mile for a perfect score while a woman only has to run 21 minutes. Thats a BIG difference.

 

They also do the flexed arm hang instead of pull-ups.

 

I don't mind women doing anything. What I have a problem with is when standards are lowered for them. It is bad enough when you get a job where being able to lift 80 lbs is mandatory, yet on your 1st day you realize half your crew is women you will have to lift that for. I can only imagine in a warfare/infantry type scenario. But let's face it, the majority of our military is smart weapons at this point and there is no reason women can't participate. The idea of a female fighter pilot is sexy as hell. LOL. I personally would do everything I could to talk my nieces out of joining the military, but that has more to do with the high instances of rape and the military's unwillingness to acknowledge the problem.

 

I am tremendously proud of our women who put on the uniform and risk their lives to protect our country. These ladies should be afforded every opportunity as any man, so long as they are capable of meeting the same standards expected of the unit they are serving in. Denying the opportunities to serve even in combat units is not the way to show our appreciation and gratitude to our women in uniform. They are also fighting for the ideals in our constitution such as equality and one of our principles of equal opportunity enshrined in our laws. If women can meet the standards that is expected of combat troops and carry their own weight in combat, then why not allow them to serve? Seems to me that their could be some misogyny going around. I think women are also under-estimated in combat as well.