Women soldiers?

[brgnorway 0]

Right, this may seem to be a bit strange, but the fact is a swedish girl was denied the possibility of joining the swedish navy. She was told she was far to pretty and thus should think about modeling instead.

What do you think about this?

I for one believe the story has two sides.

I believe a girl can be just as good soldier as a man in most conditions. However, being a former soldier myself I also believe potential female soldiers in my own troop could cause a few but serious problems. What if the girl falls in love with a fellow soldier and engage in sexual activities. That could cause serious problems like jealousy and rivalry - definately not good!

http://www.aftonbladet.se/vss/kvinna/story/0,2789,229012,00.html

Oh, maybe I should inform you (Denoir made aware of this) that in order to become an officer you have to serve (a year?) as a private. The girl wanted to become an officer!

[Tex -USMC- 0]

wow, she is very pretty

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (brgnorway @ Nov. 21 2002,00:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Right, this may seem to be a bit strange, but the fact is a swedish girl was denied the possibility of joining the swedish navy. She was told she was far to pretty and thus should think about modeling instead.<span id='postcolor'>

According to the article it was the recruiting officer who was responsible for that and the military has apologized.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

What do you think about this?

I for one believe the story has two sides.

I believe a girl can be just as good soldier as a man in most conditions. However, being a former soldier myself I also believe potential female soldiers in my own troop could cause a few but serious problems. What if the girl falls in love with a fellow soldier and engage in sexual activities. That could cause serious problems like jealousy and rivalry - definately not good!

<span id='postcolor'>

They have been taking in women in the Swedish military in combat unit for more then 20 years now. If they choose to join the service they have to however serve under the same conditions as the men (everything from physical training to sharing the same showers). There is still a relatively small number of women that choose to join the military.

In our regiment there was an extremely good looking female lieutenant who was in charge of an amphibious infantry company. As I understand everybody was making her life hard - even her superior officers were hitting on her. Or at least people were saying so.

Unfortunately women are not allowed in Kustjägarna so I don't have any direct experience of serving with women in a combat unit.

We had a woman on our team in Kosovo. She was an Irish junior officer and a very nice person. She was also very ugly, so there were no problems there

[brgnorway 0]

2--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 21 2002,012)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">According to the article it was the recruiting officer who was responsible for that and the military has apologized.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, they did apologize - but that was after the story got media's attention.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

I'd do her

*cough*

Anyway, there were studies by the UK government and UK forces, and they concluded that women are not fit to serve

a) in tanks

b) submarines

c) spec ops infantry units

and they were very reserved about women serving as front line combat troops, as they arent up for the job basically.

[Balschoiw 0]

I have no probs with women in arms. Sometimes they do good to guys that are 6 months in a camp. Whenever they show up solidiers behave

I made a strange experience once. It was on a 3 months mission and we had 3 women with us. All of them were medics and moved along with regular troops. When I first met them at the airport I thought : "OMG They chose the ugliest "

After 3 months of no sex and without white females they got prettier every day. No joke. This shows how important a regular sex life is , even during combat missions

I think I got some pics of them... Will have to check and scan.

Furthermore I met a female black MP soldier in Moga. She talked like a real toughy but I made it to get her into my barrack

I cant tell how it would be to fight with one of these ladies side by side as I think male are somehow taught to defend women. So in real combat it could be hard. I´ve been on a combined naval forces maneuver "STANAFORMED" where several israelite women took part in also. Two of them were assigned to my squad and we had a rather good time. They fought like tigers and there was no measurable difference in skill or endurance. At the end of the maneuver I ´didnt even think of them as women although they were both really pretty.

[FSPilot 0]

Personally, I don't think she's that pretty. I mean, what did she do, dip her face in a vat of makeup?

Anyway, I wouldn't want to see women in combat. Yes, I think they can fight as good as anybody else can, yes I think they're entitled to serve their country, no, I'm not sexist. The last thing I want to see is a woman being shot at, much less dying of the horrible things that happen in combat.

Women and men don't get it equally in the military at all. It's much easier for women to pass the physical tests than it is for a man. And don't get me started about drafting, which really is a different subject alltogether.

Anyway, when you look at it, women and men are different. Men don't get pregnant, men don't have a monthly cycle (which some women call in sick for), you don't have to worry about affairs between men (well, usually), and you don't have to worry about sexual harassment problems either.

I'm not saying that any of these exclude women from anything, I'm just illustrating how men and women are different when it comes to the workplace, or the battlefield.

[Assault (CAN) 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If they choose to join the service they have to however serve under the same conditions as the men (everything from physical training to sharing the same showers). <span id='postcolor'>

At the same time? If so: Sign me up!

We shared quarters with females during my training, but whenever there is space available, males and females are segregated.

As for female soldiers,.... I have met two of them during my time in the military that I thought were amazing at what they did. The rest have been utter shite performance wise. One girl (who is a wrestler) is 5' 6 but she could easily lift me up on her shoulders, no small task, since I was about 240 pounds at the time. She even broke some ribs during an ex, but she carried on anyway.

The other was a petite little blonde (one of my instructors) who taught me one thing: size doesn't matter. Even though she was 5' 4 and about 120 pounds, she could easily lift a 190 pound man and run with him over her shoulders for 100m, something I had a hard time doing. Her looks were very misleading, she swore and yelled alot, and was quite a bitch. Eventhough that was her job.

As for the rest I have seen: They fall out of marches early, don't know what they are doing, and have no confidence in themselves. A big reason for this is probably the double standard for males and females in the CF. Fitness requirements are lowered for females. I think that there should be one standard that all CF Army personell must meet.

Other than that I have no problems with females in the service.

Tyler

[cpl_BOB 0]

Dear lord shes ugly *Take off beer goggles* oops my mistake shes a source of motivation for the troops!

[Major Fubar 0]

She's good enough.  

Remember, 5 or more out of 10 means you'd do her.  

----------------------

But seriously...

[cam0flage 0]

I was still in Guard's Jaeger Regiment in Helsinki, Finland when the first women ever in our regiment started military service. It's voluntary for women in Finland.

Anyway, we had been there for six months before the girls arrived, so everybody was anxious to see what they would look like, especially because they were going to be staying in the garrison opposite to ours.

Well, as the day of the new conscript's arrival was getting closer, we saw in tv that this girl was going to come too. She had been posing in covers of some magazines before, and somehow the tv wanted to interview her too. So, before she even arrived, everyone knew who she was.

She said in tv that she was not sure if her physical side would be strong enough for military service, but she was absolutely sure that she could cope with it on the mental side. Guess it was a bad move to be on tv, because now all the conscripts, older jaegers, officers and civilians in the military area knew who she was, and therefore paid extra attention on her. She was there for a week, and quit then saying that it was getting on her nerves and she couldn't take it anymore.

Some of the girls were maybe more motivated than her. My friend who served with them told me that they passed all tests with high points, were in good physical condition and often surpassed the boys.

[Badgerboy 0]

I have no problem with women serving in the military, but I am sceptical of them serving as front line troops. Not because they can't do the job, but has any wondered what would happen if they were captured?

Rape, and lots of it.... When the law can't be inforced in war, or when people can avoid it, people degenerate. History is full of examples. The most recent being in the Gulf...

A SAR chopper went in to rescue some downed airmen, and a female medic was on board, (Which is completely okay). This chopper was forced down by AAA, and the crew captured. The men got a good kicking, and were dragged off. The female medic was then subjected to a rather nasty gang rape session.

This wasn't just because 'The Iraqi's were evil', its because men WILL act like bastards in times of combat, as they can get away with it. The US did it in Vietnam, the Allies did it in Korea, and the Russians went on a rape campaign of sickening proportions in WWII.

[Oligo 1]

I have no doubt that women have what it takes to serve in combat. However, I am pretty sure that combat units made solely of members of a single sex are the most efficient, since there are no fuck-interests to screw up the chain of command and so on. It also keeps the rape statistics down.

Hell, some women in an otherwise all-male unit is like a few women intruding on a male beer-drinking night out. Likewise a few males in an otherwise all-female unit would be like boys intruding on a girl's night out.

So unisex units, thank you.

[Necromancer- 0]

I think women in an army regiment increases the crew morale.

Just my 2 cents.

[cam0flage 0]

I agree with Necromancer, you don't see that many young females in the army, so it actually cheers you up a bit

[advocatexxx 0]

And what happens if WW3 erupts and armies find themselves in combat.  Will 4 years in enemy territory not cause problems if there are pretty females amongst the units?  Don't tell me no.

In the history of mankind wars were fought just fine with all-man army.  Let the guys focus on combat instead on the legs or ass of the chick next to them.  They need clear heads and as many of you know women lead to feelings which always cloud the mind.

I'm not sexist but it's men who should bear arms and protect their country/family and women should do the best to make sure we have a warm meal when we return.

It's the way nature is, so don't give me that women's rights bullshit.

It may not be ethical to make such statements or rules, but it's who we-humans are.

[Die Alive 0]

Isn't it a basic requirement of any combat soldier to be able to throw a hand grenade further than it's burst radius?

I guess if women can do this then they're ok to fight along side men.

-=Die Alive=-

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (advocatexxx @ Nov. 21 2002,17:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And what happens if WW3 erupts and armies find themselves in combat.  Will 4 years in enemy territory not cause problems if there are pretty females amongst the units?  Don't tell me no.

In the history of mankind wars were fought just fine with all-man army.  Let the guys focus on combat instead on the legs or ass of the chick next to them.  They need clear heads and as many of you know women lead to feelings which always cloud the mind.

I'm not sexist but it's men who should bear arms and protect their country/family and women should do the best to make sure we have a warm meal when we return.

It's the way nature is, so don't give me that women's rights bullshit.

It may not be ethical to make such statements or rules, but it's who we-humans are.<span id='postcolor'>

you generally don't see much difference between male and female soldiers when they are fully equiped

[Jinef 2]

1--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Nov. 21 2002,041)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">you don't have to worry about affairs between men <span id='postcolor'>

So you are saying there are more gay women than men? i think you'll find that's wrong if you research it.

[Jinef 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (advocatexxx @ Nov. 21 2002,16:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It's the way nature is, so don't give me that women's rights bullshit.<span id='postcolor'>

It's common sociological knowledge now that gender roles has nowt to do with nature or biological differences. In some cultures in Papa New Guinea tribes the women would be the hunters and the men would stay in the settlement and do 'domestic tasks'. Gender roles are dependent on society and culture, not biology. If it was based on biology then men and women should be equal, their only difference being the capability to give birth.

Womens rights is usually bollocks so i agree with you there, they turn perfectly innocent situations into 'male domination' catastrophes, if they backed up their argument with evidence they would be a bit more successful. But nowadays the woman is becoming more influential on society and more powerful and you have the 'new man' and other new things which this power shifting has caused.

In my opinion women should be allowed to be infantry in the British army, maybe it would cause a bit of disturbance at first but everyone would get used to it and life would go on. In combat situations only a complete twit is going to be rating the girl next door instead of aiming his SA80.

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (brgnorway @ Nov. 20 2002,18:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I for one believe the story has two sides.

I believe a girl can be just as good soldier as a man in most conditions. However, being a former soldier myself I also believe potential female soldiers in my own troop could cause a few but serious problems. What if the girl falls in love with a fellow soldier and engage in sexual activities. That could cause serious problems like jealousy and rivalry - definately not good!<span id='postcolor'>

I agree.  I've seen it firsthand! I don't think they should be straight infantry though. not unless they want to field an all female unit so that there are no "love-psychological-issues" going on.

BTW, I've seen far better looking women in the U.S Army.

[BaronVonRed 0]

Women do not make good COMBAT soldiers for several reasons:

1) They are physically inferior,

2) They have monthly hormone impacting cycles that affect their readiness,

3) They (in general) do not posses the natural instinct to kill as a male does,

4) They can be physically impregnated by the enemy,

5) They can cause inter-personal issues within a group (not really their fault),

6) It is the male instinct to protect them, which could cause judgement issues.

[Longinius 1]

"4) They can be physically impregnated by the enemy,"

So? Its not like a baby pops out 24 hours after the act or that the woman becomes KO'd during the pregnancy.

"5) They can cause inter-personal issues within a group (not really their fault),"

So can men.

"6) It is the male instinct to protect them, which could cause judgement issues."

Is this really a male problem, or a female problem? At any rate, it is only valid in units with mixed sexes. In unisex units, this doesnt matter at all.

[BaronVonRed 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

"4) They can be physically impregnated by the enemy,"

So? Its not like a baby pops out 24 hours after the act or that the woman becomes KO'd during the pregnancy.

<span id='postcolor'>

In addition to the political issues surrounding this, there is also the fact that:

A) Women can demonstrate physical changes within two-three weeks after becoming pregnant - these changes impact their physical readiness (reflexes, energy levels, appetite, etc)

B) Some wars aren't fought in 24hrs. In fact, there are previous examples where soldiers have been in captivity for several years, even longer. Personally, I don't like the idea of them capturing my soldiers and using them to produce more of the people I am trying to kill.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

"5) They can cause inter-personal issues within a group (not really their fault),"

So can men.

<span id='postcolor'>

Duh? We already have those issues. Adding women to the group will INCREASE the problem.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

"6) It is the male instinct to protect them, which could cause judgement issues."

Is this really a male problem, or a female problem? At any rate, it is only valid in units with mixed sexes. In unisex units, this doesnt matter at all.

<span id='postcolor'>

What idealistic bubble do you hail from? Do you think that a unit going into battle:

A) Never has contact with other units,

B) Always returns from the battle with the same composition?

[iNeo 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ Nov. 21 2002,18:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Nov. 21 2002,04<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">you don't have to worry about affairs between men <span id='postcolor'>

So you are saying there are more gay women than men? i think you'll find that's wrong if you research it.<span id='postcolor'>

I think he means that you'd have to worry about affairs between men and women, but you don't have to worry about affairs between men.