Poll: Women In Combat? Yea or Nay?

[GryffinDarkBreed]

I think women should be held to the exact same standards as men. To allow them to skate by with lower standards as they have for decades just makes them a complete liability.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Female fingers squeeze triggers no less effectively than male.

If finger-squeezing was the only criteria for Military Service, then we could also permit people in wheelchairs to be in the Military. Likewise, pulling the trigger on a 30 lb M240B is very different than having to carry that weapon 10 km through hilly terrain along with all your other equipment during the Afghan Summer, set it up, and then pull the trigger.

Unrelated, but awesome screen name.

 

[SsilverR]

I don't mean to sound bad ... but here it is.

Firsly women for spec ops is a NAY (unless they're flat chested and has no sexual interest in men) chested because of the extra space being a hinderence in the wrong situations and it can also chemically imbalance male soldiers to have a potential mate (YES even if they're not conscious of the thought) think about why the FFL never ever recruit women ... not because they're not combat worthy, but because they'll throw all the male soldiers off their game on a genetic level.

also there are certain female traits that make being away in battle for months very difficult, Like i said before, it's not that women aren't combat worthy.... it's that men are more designed for it.

 

[umboo890]

I don't want to sound like a hippy, but can "No one in combat" be an option?

 

[Wedgetail122]

I don't want to sound like a hippy, but can "No one in combat" be an option?

]

That's a valid point (and dont be ashamed of being a little hippy, that's a good thing) but the unfortunate reality is that combat positions are always going to exist. Maybe not on the conventional level, and for the sake of the world I hope conventional warfare is kaput, but armed personnel are always going to be needed to maintain peacekeeping somewhere.

Australia for instance maintains a force for local defence and regional security, we have deployed peacekeeping troops to the Solomon Islands and East Timor several times (I should add with many a women in non-close combat roles)and in that sense we have made a massive difference.

I think everyone wishes that "No-One in combat" would be an option, that's a given, but the reality is that due to human nature it never will be. So for now, we have to think about WHO we want in combat.

 

[Thaluikhain]

You're mixing up your terms. At least in the United States Military, "Special Forces" are an actual branch of the Army (18 series MOS). They wear the crossed arrows insignia and have to actually go through Special Forces training (they are the guys you see with the "long tabs" on their left shoulder). Women are not permitted in Special Forces.

What you're thinking of is "Special Operations" (AKA 'Spec Ops'), which covers all units with generally out of the norm missions, as well as support personnel assigned to those units, and essentially anyone who falls under Special Operations Command ('SOCOM'). Spec Ops can include everything from psychological operations, civil affairs, the 160th SOAR (Special Operations Aviation Regiment) to people who work in a Special Forces group who aren't Special Forces (an SF group needs paper-pushers and supply folks the same as any other unit). To give another example, US Army Ranger Battalions are considered Special Operations, but they are not Special Forces.

Women can, for the most part, be part of Special Operations (I knew several females in Civil Affairs and Psy-ops), but they cannot be 18 Series MOS Special Forces Soldiers, Warrant Officers, and Officers.

Oh sure, I didn't mean US Special Forces in particular, I meant "special forces" as the term is used generally.

Firsly women for spec ops is a NAY (unless they're flat chested and has no sexual interest in men) chested because of the extra space being a hinderence in the wrong situations and it can also chemically imbalance male soldiers to have a potential mate (YES even if they're not conscious of the thought) think about why the FFL never ever recruit women ... not because they're not combat worthy, but because they'll throw all the male soldiers off their game on a genetic level.

So, ban gay soldiers again? Maybe keep the ugly ones?

 

[Evil Smurf]

If the women can handle the tests, why not?

 

[GryffinDarkBreed]

As I said earlier. Women have no place in the military AT ALL if they can't meet the bar set for men. Period. Anything less is a damned liability, a double standard that leaves men to pick up the slack of their female colleagues.

 

[Diddy_Mao]

Absolutely.

If a citizen wants to put themselves into a soldier role/combat situation more power to 'em.

And none of this "Yes but not in mixed squads or in submarines" nonsense. If your male soldiers literally can't not sexually assault a female officer then they shouldn't be wearing the fucking uniform to begin with.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

A (female) friend of mine is actually an officer in the Navy, floating about the briny sea on big ol' warships, and according to her the other female officer she shares a cabin with is basically the ship's bicycle. Apparently nobody really sees a problem with it, the guys just take their turn and the woman in question isn't bothered, but it would certainly bother me if I were the commanding officer.

Why? Fairly sure that as long as everyone remains respectful and it's a safe and consensual affair it's just a way for everyone involved to have fun.

I mean yeah there's the OH NOES SEX IN THE MILITARY angle I'm told the marines have but I'm not sure how that's like on the warships.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

The military does have this "We own your body" thing going on, which might be beneficial if it extended to reproduction though. I mean, if you've made the decision to join the military, choosing to alter your body so you suddenly cannot serve in the middle of your tour is irresponsible.

You know I've always wondered why they don't just have mandatory reversible contraception at the beginning of tour. I mean yeah you SHOULDN'T need it but they can't possible be that naive.

 

[6037084]

I love how some people in this thread think that professionalism and training can overcome humans most primordial urges. It is incredibly naive to think that after some training men will completely disregard their base instincts and treat females exactly the same as they would males, ESPECIALLY in extremely high stress situations like active combat.
No you can't get rid of instincts without lots of drugs and/or tampering with the brain, it's just not going to happen.
And yes the fear that men will treat women differently and even sacrifice themselves for a female is completely legitimate. Just look at how common it is, men fighting over women is an every day occurrence everywhere, ask any father if they were willing to sacrifice themselves so that their wife and child could live and I bet that the large majority would do it in a heartbeat because they are programmed by nature to do so.
Of course that might not always be the case, but if I was a solider ( which one day I very well might be since my country still has the draft and whatnot ) no chance in hell would I ever want two of my brothers fighting over a woman when my life was on the line.
Not to mention all the points in this thread about logistics, women not being as capable etc etc.
So if it wasn't clear I'm completely against mixed squads

Female only squads however, sure why the fuck not, if there are enough women that really want to protect their home country with their lives and are sufficiently capable let them. Heck they wouldn't even have to be as physically capable as their male counterparts (which they kinda aren't as is pointed out multiple times in this thread ) since if everyone is physically less capable no one would be dragging someone else down and no one would expect them to perform to higher standards ( a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link etc )

These are my thoughts on the matter, I apologize for any stupid grammatical or other mistakes as English is not my mother language

 

[Thaluikhain]

I love how some people in this thread think that professionalism and training can overcome humans most primordial urges. It is incredibly naive to think that after some training men will completely disregard their base instincts

It is incredibly naive to assume that the way men treat women is solely due to unchangeable genetics, rather than cultural influences.

Men respond to women in all sorts of different ways, and this varies a lot based on culture.

 

[Raesvelg]

The caveat should be added that the requirements should not be changed for the female recruits. As it stands, they have to do significantly less in the physical category to qualify as "soldier-material" in most countries, largely because without that handicap, most of them wouldn't, and the armed forces are trying to portray themselves as more integrated.

I've got no problem with having a female soldier, firefighter, or other dangerous profession, so long as they can fulfill the requirements of said profession.

I've no use for a female firefighter that can't carry me out of a burning building. Though apparently Gloria Allred does.

 

[Insanely Asinine]

Absolutely.

If a citizen wants to put themselves into a soldier role/combat situation more power to 'em.

And none of this "Yes but not in mixed squads or in submarines" nonsense. If your male soldiers literally can't not sexually assault a female officer then they shouldn't be wearing the fucking uniform to begin with.

There's a zero tolerance policy for that. So if they were to do something like that the one doing it would get deduction of pay, jail time, loss of a rank, extra man hours, an article 15, and going becoming a Mr./Ms. in a few weeks so they can get out processed back home with a dishonorable discharge.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Absolutely.

If a citizen wants to put themselves into a soldier role/combat situation more power to 'em.

And none of this "Yes but not in mixed squads or in submarines" nonsense. If your male soldiers literally can't not sexually assault a female officer then they shouldn't be wearing the fucking uniform to begin with.

There's a zero tolerance policy for that. So if they were to do something like that the one doing it would get deduction of pay, jail time, loss of a rank, extra man hours, an article 15, and going becoming a Mr./Ms. in a few weeks so they can get out processed back home with a dishonorable discharge.

Well, yes, but in a lot of militaries, there's a zero tolerance policy for that the same way many schools have zero tolerance for bullies, they pretend there's no problem, so nothing to not tolerate.

 

[Machine Man 1992]

This article right here -->http://judgybitch.com/tag/women-shouldnt-be-in-combat/

In it, a female gender rights advocate argue that there is a cultural value in having certain spaces reserved for only men, just as there are space only for women. She compares soldiering to child birth; both face down certain death doing something that is often painful and unpleasant, and we praise and commemorate them for their sacrifices.

 

[PFCboom]

I don't know if this has been covered already, but the US Army is working on implementing gender neutral physical fitness tests for certain combat MOSs, with 11B (infantry) and 13B (cannon crewmember) being big focuses because of the physical demands involved.
In the case of infantry, well, you're going to be wearing 60+ pounds of gear, and that's if you're not one of the ones saddled with a box of 7.62 ammo for the M240.
In the case of cannon crewmember, there's a good chance to be assigned to a unit that deals in either paladins or M777 howitzers, which fire 155mm rounds, which weigh an average of 100 pounds apiece, and it's possible to be slinging dozens of said rounds in one go. Also, there's a chance that a 13B platoon can be made into a maneuvers unit, meaning they're basically turned into infantry.

Anyway, to answer the question: Yes, I think females should be allowed to be in whatever combat MOS they want, as long as they're able to meet minimum physical standards.

 

[Yuuki]

I have a curious question. For the more physically demanding roles you are absolutely going to see massive male dominance even if women are allowed into the role, that's just how things will play out. Regarding stuff like sleeping quarters, bathrooms/toilets, etc - if the minority of women make it difficult for the majority of men to get their stuff done due to lacking the facilities (and having to use the male ones), or for whatever reason, do people believe that it's worth building dedicated facilities wherever that minority of women is posted?
I don't know how all this works to be honest, all I know is that different genders have slightly different needs...primarily separation.

This article right here -->http://judgybitch.com/tag/women-shouldnt-be-in-combat/

In it, a female gender rights advocate argue that there is a cultural value in having certain spaces reserved for only men, just as there are space only for women. She compares soldiering to child birth; both face down certain death doing something that is often painful and unpleasant, and we praise and commemorate them for their sacrifices.

That's a pretty awful article considering how much profanity it contains. Whoever wrote that is very much a firm believer in traditional gender roles and all that stuff has been on it's way out over the last few decades.
There is no such thing as "roles for men". This is about giving freedom to do what people dream/aspire to do. If a woman wants to go and get herself killed in battle for her country, AND she can pass the same tests that has been set for the men, there is absolutely no reason why she shouldn't be allowed to.

Look at it this way - if you feel strongly about women being denied a position in combat, you will already have your way (in some aspects). In the more physically demanding roles, you will automatically see massive male dominance even if women are allowed to enter. It's guaranteed to be that way. For e.g. becoming a US Marine, the brutal physical tests will easily be the primary barrier for the overwhelming majority of women who apply, whoever manage to get through will find themselves utterly outnumbered by males (I'm talking at least 50:1 ratios).
Whatever few women who make it will be nothing other than incredibly exceptional and rare women - not only physically, but also mentally because the mental pressure of having to compete against a huge force of determined men as a woman will also be pretty damn exhausting, enough to make some give up.
Some women have even pushed through for a few years before finally saying "fuck it, I can't continue like this" and retiring to support roles or leaving altogether.
One such example: http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/article/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal?page=7

Capt. Katie Petronio could be considered nothing short of an exceptional woman, she wrote this (negative stuff bolded):

I was a motivated, resilient second lieutenant when I deployed to Iraq for 10 months, traveling across the Marine area of operations (AO) and participating in numerous combat operations. Yet, due to the excessive amount of time I spent in full combat load, I was diagnosed with a severe case of restless leg syndrome. My spine had compressed on nerves in my lower back causing neuropathy which compounded the symptoms of restless leg syndrome. While this injury has certainly not been enjoyable, Iraq was a pleasant experience compared to the experiences I endured during my deployment to Afghanistan. At the beginning of my tour in Helmand Province, I was physically capable of conducting combat operations for weeks at a time, remaining in my gear for days if necessary and averaging 16-hour days of engineering operations in the heart of Sangin, one of the most kinetic and challenging AOs in the country. There were numerous occasions where I was sent to a grid coordinate and told to build a PB from the ground up, serving not only as the mission commander but also the base commander until the occupants (infantry units) arrived 5 days later. In most of these situations, I had a sergeant as my assistant commander, and the remainder of my platoon consisted of young, motivated NCOs. I was the senior Marine making the final decisions on construction concerns, along with 24-hour base defense and leading 30 Marines at any given time. The physical strain of enduring combat operations and the stress of being responsible for the lives and well-being of such a young group in an extremely kinetic environment were compounded by lack of sleep, which ultimately took a physical toll on my body that I couldn?t have foreseen.

By the fifth month into the deployment, I had muscle atrophy in my thighs that was causing me to constantly trip and my legs to buckle with the slightest grade change. My agility during firefights and mobility on and off vehicles and perimeter walls was seriously hindering my response time and overall capability. It was evident that stress and muscular deterioration was affecting everyone regardless of gender; however, the rate of my deterioration was noticeably faster than that of male Marines and further compounded by gender-specific medical conditions. At the end of the 7-month deployment, and the construction of 18 PBs later, I had lost 17 pounds and was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome (which personally resulted in infertility, but is not a genetic trend in my family), which was brought on by the chemical and physical changes endured during deployment. Regardless of my deteriorating physical stature, I was extremely successful during both of my combat tours, serving beside my infantry brethren and gaining the respect of every unit I supported. Regardless, I can say with 100 percent assurance that despite my accomplishments, there is no way I could endure the physical demands of the infantrymen whom I worked beside as their combat load and constant deployment cycle would leave me facing medical separation long before the option of retirement. I understand that everyone is affected differently; however, I am confident that should the Marine Corps attempt to fully integrate women into the infantry, we as an institution are going to experience a colossal increase in crippling and career-ending medical conditions for females.

There is a drastic shortage of historical data on female attrition or medical ailments of women who have executed sustained combat operations. This said, we need only to review the statistics from our entry-level schools to realize that there is a significant difference in the physical longevity between male and female Marines. At OCS the attrition rate for female candidates in 2011 was historically low at 40 percent, while the male candidates attrite at a much lower rate of 16 percent. Of candidates who were dropped from training because they were injured or not physically qualified, females were breaking at a much higher rate than males, 14 percent versus 4 percent. The same trends were seen at TBS in 2011; the attrition rate for females was 13 percent versus 5 percent for males, and 5 percent of females were found not physically qualified compared with 1 percent of males. Further, both of these training venues have physical fitness standards that are easier for females; at IOC there is one standard regardless of gender. The attrition rate for males attending IOC in 2011 was 17 percent. Should female Marines ultimately attend IOC, we can expect significantly higher attrition rates and long-term injuries for women.

A lot of people who are actively fighting/campaigning for women to have full access to combat/physical-heavy roles are unfamiliar with the real conditions/outcomes of being a soldier, most of them will be sitting on their keyboard imagining heroic women comfortably keeping up with their male peers in all aspects of battle. Instead of just telling those people "no", they need to be SHOWN more such examples of what kind of toll combat takes on the human body and why it's so much more of a risk for females to take.

But still, that should never stop females from being allowed into combat if they pass the same tests as males - again, it should be their CHOICE. That's what this is about.