Jump to content

Female Warriors


Recommended Posts

Armored recce not infantry recce

They humped normally no more than 5 km from the vehicle hide. But excellent in setting up ambush and surprise attacks

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1. Perhaps "women in the service" would be better?...

 

2. I actually always thought "soldier" could be used as a broader term for any military occupation, but then, ESL here...

 

1. Women are already in the service, but not members of certain combat arms units (armor, field artillery, infantry etc.). This is about them being able to hold positions and function in those type of units, hence there is a distinction between women in service (in general) and being able to serve in any job in any type of unit, including those at the pointy end of the spear.

 

2. Soldier - Army, Sailor - Navy, Marine - Marines etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current inclusion into combat still excludes Infantry, Artillery and Tanks. Everything else is up for grabs......USA. Policy

 

There fixed it for u

 

 

CF. policy is all trades

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nichola_Goddard

 

I haven't had to work with females in real combat (never saw any combat myself) However in training about 75% of the woman pulled their weight plus, they despised the ones that didn't pull their weight. Kirk is correct that the system can prevent CO's from placing them where they are best suited. However it's verboten to discuss that females can't always fulfill a task for physical reasons. So the commander may be forced to place a woman in a task she cannot do or have someone pick up the slack which causes problems on both sides of the fence. Personally I think there are few woman that can carry the loads required of the average infantryman of today, in fact many men won’t be able either. However there are roles they can play such as the sadly deceased lady above. Not every role in the army is about humping 100lbs over the hills. In fact many of the specialist roles which we are always screaming for are likely excellent career paths for woman. For woman becoming officers or NCO’s I would like them to spend sometime under a female officer who can assess them for future postings and roles. This female officer can assess without fear of sexism being raised and act as a role model. They would be free to make recommendations that career officers and CO’s can use with confidence. Of course the selection of these overseeing officers is very important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kirk you really can't read can you?

 

Let me quote myself:

 

Incidentally, the whole strength thing is somewhat bunk, since men and women can exert similar strength after military specific training commiserate with their frames. So really the issue is that you shouldn't allow small/skinny women and small/skinny men (or ones who can't build lots of muscle mass, of which there are plenty) into the military, or really if you just had a sane PT test it wouldn't be a problem for either gender: http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/7469950

 

and again:

 

Let me re-paraphrase just so we're clear: if you have realistic standards for both men and women, you will select only men and women who meet your standards, the gender is unimportant. There are plenty of women who can pass current PTs using male criteria, and there are plenty of males who would fail using female standards. The difference is that you discriminate against the males for sucking while you are trying to discriminate against the females for merely being female. If it means a larger rejection rate of women, so be it.

 

I never once said that "the average woman is as fit as the average man for combat". In fact, given the lack of fitness of the average person in the US, it's a spurious issue either way since the average cannot pass the PT minimum for either gender.

 

You really ought to type less, and actually try reading more. It looks really bad when you get caught out not being able to follow a conversation.

 

Sadly, you're the one who can't keep track of what BS you're spouting--What does your first post in this thread assert? Let me remind you, since you've apparently lost track:

 

"Please support this assertion with actual references. Or even better yet, simply list exactly what these differences are.

 

This should be good, I'll even pre-make the popcorn."

 

This was in response to what I said, which was:

 

 

I think women have a place in the military, and they can do a lot of things very well. It's just that when these idiots implementing things insist on ignoring very real differences in physical capability that things start to go wrong. For that lack of discipline alone, on their parts, I'd ban women from the military entirely. Culturally, we can't seem to cope with the idea that boys and girls are inherently different, and apply common-sense solutions to that problem. And, it's not the men and women in the military who are the problem--It's all the assholes and idiots on the civilian side who are the problem. I've talked to some of the people making these decisions, and they're utterly blind to the problems their idealized visions have in the real world.

 

That paragraph is pretty clearly stating support for what you now say is your own position, along with my contention that the powers-that-be in my own branch of experience lack the clarity of vision and discipline to implement a realistic system of strength testing. So, what was your argument, again? Or, are you just being your usual deliberately obtuse self, and creating an argument where there is no grounds for one?

 

Now, I don't know what your two sentences in your reply parse out to in whatever language you're speaking, since it apparently isn't English, but that is pretty much the diametric opposite of what you're now claiming is your argument. I'd recommend an ESL course, from whatever tongue it is you think you're speaking. I suspect it's the secular equivalent of some snake-handling backwoods religious fanatic speaking in tongues, to be quite honest. You've actually managed to make less sense than some of those folks...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jason L

Whatever Kirk, instead of asking for a clarification of my position you decide to embark on several thousand word rants, a large part of which constituted direct personal attacks.

 

Now, I don't know what semantics rulebook you play by, but in the world I come from saying something to the effect of "Culturally, we can't seem to cope with the idea that boys and girls are inherently different, and apply common-sense solutions", is incredibly vague and can mean one hell of a lot of different things. Which is why I asked for a clarification, ie something as simple as a list.

 

Which you replied with thousands upon thousands of words of insults and droning anecdotes, clearly without even bothering to read anything I wrote.

 

And then you have the audacity to accuse me of being obtuse and unintelligible? You're un-fucking-believable. I'll remember to make sure to dumb down my writing to K12 if I ever bother talking to you again.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Culturally, we can't seem to cope with the idea that boys and girls are inherently different, and apply common-sense solutions",

 

Well, here's something that is definitely different that some are having a problem coping with:

 

http://moms.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/30/11955844-military-mom-proud-of-breast-feeding-in-uniform-despite-criticism?lite

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jason L

"Culturally, we can't seem to cope with the idea that boys and girls are inherently different, and apply common-sense solutions",

 

Well, here's something that is definitely different that some are having a problem coping with:

 

http://moms.today.ms...-criticism?lite

 

Why are Americans so weird when it comes to breasts? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are Americans so weird when it comes to breasts? :D

 

Breast-feeding requires being out of uniform (against regulations). Shirts are always to be buttoned up. Going to the restroom requires temporarily having to be out of uniform, but nobody sees it. Breast-feeding done publicly requires unbuttoning the shirt in the open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Culturally, we can't seem to cope with the idea that boys and girls are inherently different, and apply common-sense solutions",

 

Well, here's something that is definitely different that some are having a problem coping with:

 

http://moms.today.ms...-criticism?lite

 

Why are Americans so weird when it comes to breasts? :D

 

I blame the Puritans. Part of the vast lexicon of taboo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Culturally, we can't seem to cope with the idea that boys and girls are inherently different, and apply common-sense solutions",

 

Well, here's something that is definitely different that some are having a problem coping with:

 

http://moms.today.ms...-criticism?lite

 

"Waaa-waa-waa. . . I just want to be 'accepted'. . . waa-waa-waa. . . and I get to dictate the exact terms on which I'll be accepted by the entire enterprise. . .waaaaaa."

 

You accept all sorts of limits on your personal behavior and even attire when you join the military. Hell, I would liked to have carried an umbrella when it rained, but wasn't done (no matter how ludicrous), so I changed shirts back at the office. Don't even get me started on why we have nursing mothers "defending us". It's preposterous and dysgenic.

 

Another spoiled vocal minority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking the dark-haired one front left, while good to grab and elastic on impact, was probably exceeding military weight ratio requirements ...

 

 

 

I'm sure she has a lovely personality... :lol:

 

TonyE would be IMPRESSED!

 

I like the blue one giving the birdie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I blame the Puritans. Part of the vast lexicon of taboo.

 

Situation, LTC . . . you and your CSM are walking on a base sidewalk to a Brigade Commander's briefing held in a building one block away and you turn and notice a female Marine, sitting on a park bench in the shade 50m away, with her blouse unbuttoned and her T-shirt lifted up and she is nursing a baby.

 

Do you :

 

A. Yell at her to get into uniform and get back to duty yourself or do you . . .

 

B. Tell your Command sergeant Major to take care of the situation pronto while you continue to walk towards the meeting?

 

I remember one time I got jumped by a superior because I did not notice that a soldier that had walked past me was out of uniform and I said nothing. Part of it was because I had been in the field training for two or so weeks with maybe three hours of sleep per night. The other part was that I just did not notice as he walked past. Your situation involves seeing it happen and being cognizant of what is happening.

 

What happens with you, here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First is the baby a Marine? If so tell him to suck it up and get moving!

 

If not, ask the female marine what part of her camouflage course can't she remember. If you can see breast feeding then so can the enemy!

 

third ask the CSM to remind you to submit a proposal for tri-service, multi-cam breast feeding cover asap. Ensure you request 10 million to design and test it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

third ask the CSM to remind you to submit a proposal for tri-service, multi-cam breast feeding cover asap. Ensure you request 10 million to design and test it.

 

Such a cheap and simple-named project would stand no chance.

 

At least the name has to include "Joint" and "Future", maybe even "Kinetic".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting issue. Of course, breast-feeding in public per se should not be a problem. But I would agree doing it in uniform would be a breach of regulations. You can do it in your room, office, maybe even in the mess around people familiar with you, and if necessary in the restroom, but outdoors general rules for wearing of and conduct in uniform should apply.

 

And judging from Ken's tales, an officer's correct answer to a situation where an underling has breached rules and regulations is "Gunny, do something." :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First is the baby a Marine? If so tell him to suck it up and get moving!

 

If not, ask the female marine what part of her camouflage course can't she remember. If you can see breast feeding then so can the enemy!

 

third ask the CSM to remind you to submit a proposal for tri-service, multi-cam breast feeding cover ASAP. Ensure you request 10 million to design and test it.

Here is the deal: If a female in uniform thinks that she can voluntarily become "out of uniform" in order to nurse a baby, then any person in uniform can voluntarily remove shirt etc. and become "out of uniform" because that person thinks it will cool them off. This is mainly true when one is not in the field and in the cantonment area of the post/base.

In the field, things can be somewhat different. I just tried to upload a photo taken at a tank range at Ft. Hood in June 2003. It features an M1A1 under repair in the tank parking area, which is all open and no shade. Temperatures at that time of day (around noon or so) are above 100 degrees Farhenheit. The photo shows four soldiers working on the tank. Of the four, only one has his helmet on (thusly, three are “out of uniform”). Of the four, only one is wearing his BDU blouse. The rest have stripped down to brown t-shirts (thusly, three are “out of uniform”). In situations like those, most people (like me) would turn a blind eye to all of that because they are doing an important and tiring job in the blistering sun with no shade. As long as they all get back into uniform when the tank gets fixed, all will be fine. So, generally, nothing is said. Exception to that: It is announced that the Brigade Commander and CSM are coming to visit the range. In that case, everybody – EVERYBODY, immediately gets back into full uniform and resumes their work.

Compare that situation with the photos in the link, featuring Air Force women breastfeeding in the open (obviously) in the cantonment area and with both being out of uniform in order to accomplish that task.

(BTW - I could not upload the photo because our TN software says the size of that photo is too large to load.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the field, things can be somewhat different. I just tried to upload a photo taken at a tank range at Ft. Hood in June 2003. It features an M1A1 under repair in the tank parking area, which is all open and no shade. Temperatures at that time of day (around noon or so) are above 100 degrees Farhenheit. The photo shows four soldiers working on the tank. Of the four, only one has his helmet on (thusly, three are “out of uniform”). Of the four, only one is wearing his BDU blouse. The rest have stripped down to brown t-shirts (thusly, three are “out of uniform”). In situations like those, most people (like me) would turn a blind eye to all of that because they are doing an important and tiring job in the blistering sun with no shade. As long as they all get back into uniform when the tank gets fixed, all will be fine.

 

Saw a similar situation, went further - had 1SG pass down for everyone to go to soft caps and t-shirts, then make sure our people hydrated. Didn't feel like writing any LODs for heat stroke.

 

Simple solution for the little boob-suckers - since I wouldn't expect a child-in-tow if someone was on-duty, if the troop is on a work-break with her child then any pre-designated eating area ought to fly (as long as decorum is adhered to, like with the towel-over-infant's-head feeding trick).

Edited by X-Files
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Women on subs talk mission, working with men

 

By Sam Fellman - Staff writer

Posted : Wednesday May 30, 2012 11:30:41 EDT

 

After intense training and hitting the fleet, 10 of the Navy’s first female submariners gathered May 24 in Washington, D.C., to share their experiences over the past six months. The head of the submarine force hailed them as examples of the Navy’s best and brightest.

 

“The Navy and the submarine force really garner the best people that the nation has to offer,” said Vice Adm. John Richardson, who added these women were living proof that the once all-male force “is opening up doors to more diversity and more talent.”

 

The transition began in November, when female officers began reporting to their boats. The first to add women were the ballistic-missile subs Wyoming and Maine and guided-missile subs Georgia and Ohio. Women are assigned to both the blue and gold crews for each sub. For the next year or so, the primary focus for the 18 female submarine officers will be earning the gold chest device, known as “dolphins” or “fish,” which demonstrates mastery of submarine operations.

 

“So far, the qualification process has been rigorous, but it’s also been a lot of fun,” said Lt. j.g. Tabitha Strobel, the main propulsion assistant on Georgia’s gold crew, who’s married to a submariner. “At the end of the day, what we want to do is drive the submarine, and the chances that we get to do that are extremely rewarding.”

 

Despite the training and briefings, it took one crew about a week to come to grips with their new shipmates.

 

“At first, the guys were a little more timid, just because they hadn’t worked with females on a day-to-day basis,” said Lt. Britta Christianson, supply officer on Ohio’s gold crew, recalling her November 2011 check-in. “But after a week, they warmed up and we were just like brothers and sisters — fighting for the bathroom.”

 

Men and women take turns using the two available heads; women note their presence with an “occupied by female” sign.

 

Crew members have had to watch their language, beyond avoiding lewd jokes. After years of tacking “sir” onto every report, request and reply, sub sailors have to add “ma’am” to their vocabulary. Still, the occasional slip-ups don’t bother one officer.

 

“If they call me ‘sir,’ then I know that they’ve fully accepted me,” said Lt. j.g. Vanessa Esch, the electrical officer on Ohio’s blue crew. “They see me as an officer, not as a woman. So that’s good.”

 

The historic transition has not been without issues. Two of the original eight supply officers — lieutenants chosen to be role models for the young submariners arriving at their boats straight from training — were pulled from their crews in March and charged two months later for allegedly filing false travel claims for roughly $4,500 each. After an investigation, another female supply officer was exonerated.

 

The next batch of 15 female submariners and five supply lieutenants is slated to begin arriving at boats in January 2013, according to submarine force spokeswoman Cmdr. Monica Rousselow. The next two subs to be integrated are the guided-missile sub Florida and ballistic-missile sub Louisiana, she said.

 

http://www.navytimes...marines-053012/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw a similar situation, went further - had 1SG pass down for everyone to go to soft caps and t-shirts, then make sure our people hydrated. Didn't feel like writing any LODs for heat stroke.

 

Simple solution for the little boob-suckers - since I wouldn't expect a child-in-tow if someone was on-duty, if the troop is on a work-break with her child then any pre-designated eating area ought to fly (as long as decorum is adhered to, like with the towel-over-infant's-head feeding trick).

 

In 2005, our Division SOP was that anybody inside of a tactical vehicle had to have helmet, gas mask and LCE on (excepting inside tanks, of course). However, during our journey from Dallas to New Orleans (Hurricane Katrina), to Camp Swift (TX), to Huntsville (Hurricane Rita) to Hemphill (TX), to Tyler (TX) and then finally back to Dallas, our Battalion Commander authorized wear of patrol cap only saying that the long days on the road would be made easier without wearing our entirre field uniform and that, if anybody said anything negative about it, he would take the full blame and responsibility. We were all grateful to him for that. That policy was in place for Task Force column distance drives between cities/towns. While on-site and patrolling, it was full uniform 24/7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that the Edelweiss badge or was she gebirgs-rated previously?

 

The Edelweiss badge on her hat is the general symbol for mountain troops:

 

 

Patch on her left shoulder is from Gebirgsjägerbrigade 23:

 

 

The badge on her right breast pocket is from Gebirgsjägerbataillon 231 (Bad Reichenhall):

 

 

The actual mountain guide badge is unsurprisingly similar to all of the above:

 

 

I'm not sure about the climbing qualifications for the rank and file of the mountain troops, though candidates for the mountain guide course have to be capable of UIAA grade IV (which Wiki tells me is 5.4 in the US).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I've followed this for a few days. My anecdotal thoughts.

 

1. In 15 plus years on tanks, I can think of at least 10 male Soldiers that could not handle the basic requirements of the job. Including one who could not release the parking brake on an M1. Tried to make him a loader. He couldn't load a sabot training round in under 15 seconds.

 

2. Walking through a motor pool with a fellow tanker. We saw a female Soldier working on a 5 ton tire. We offered to help. We were told to fuck off. She remounted the tire by herself.

 

3. I was smart enough not to join the straight leg infantry, so I don't think I can reasonably speak to what it really takes to be infantry. I'm sure there are women who could do the job, but I have no guess as to what percentage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...