Women in the military

[Consigliere 0]

Was just interested in seeing different people's points of views on this issue. Do you think that women should be able to fulfill any role they choose? Do you think that political correctness is going too far when women are posted on the frontline? Whatever your opinion, let's 'av it  

[Doc. Zaius 0]

Though I've never served in the military, I think that if women are able to meet the set standards, they should be able to serve.

After all the attention Jessica Lynch got, I'm really disappointed Capt. Kim Campbell (An A-10 pilot who brought her serverely damaged Warthog back to base) got very little press.  

[Balschoiw 0]

uhhhh not again. We had a thread on that a year ? ago I guess. It turned into a chauvinistic mudwrestle.

I´m appreciating women in military jobs.

I remember 2 israelian women I worked together at STANAVFORMED who impressed me pretty much.

I also remember a female US MP soldier beating the crap out of a guy who tried to make some special business at camp Moga.

[Consigliere 0]

Well resurrecting that thread would break forum rules, so I started a new one

And also, there are many many new members, including myself who didn't take part in the other discussion

[ran 0]

absolutely NO lowering of the physical standards for women ... if it was up to me ....

for years , feminists have wanted to proove that women are equal to men ..... why not let them proove it ?

I remember of a warrant , squad leader , she was taller than me and could break me in two if ever i did something wrong , she had huge leadership capital and she was well appreciated by her men , she had seen combat in Kosovo and had experienced enemy fire , with an exceptionnally good conduct a really few men are able to achieve under such conditions

now , i also remember when on a tour to Bosnia , a couple of nurses (late teenagers generally) we met (of the army health service , who had the same basic training as male grunts) went totally down the toilets in 2 weeks due to "battle" fatigue (notice the "'s)

i'm not complaining about women in the army , it's a good thing , but we shouldn't let everybody go on a battlefield under the pretext of sexual equality , a good selection process would be that only the most able ones should go in , no matter if they are men or women

[ozanzac 0]

I agree with ran. I have no problems with women in military, so long as they know and fully understand what they're asking for and what they could be subjected too in times of conflict. And know that if they're taking a combat oriented role, that they perform with the same mental and physical expectations as any other soldier. They should recieve no, nor expect special provisions, other than sleeping quaters and [edit] basic [/edit] hygeine requirements.

[denoir 0]

It's a no-brainer IMO. They should have the same opportunities and the same requirements as men.

I don't think however women are the issue, but more men and women working in close quarters together. The military seeks for the soliders to have an emotional detachment. If the soldiers start pairing up, the chain of command would be compromised. So the question is can male and female soldiers in their late teens maintain the required level of professionalism.

From my own experience - in Kosovo I worked with several female officers from various countries. There was no problem whatsoever. They were however older (generally in their late 20's, early 30's) and were mature enough to maintain a professional level.

On the other hand there were a lot of problems with our translators , which were generally 19 year old girls and there was a lot of fratenization with the younger male soldiers which in turn caused a lot of problems.

From my basic service, when I was 19, I can tell you it would have in no way worked to have a mixed unit. We were teenagers full of hormones and the whole world revolved around getting laid while on leave and bragging about it. Had we had girls in the unit, I can guarantee you that there would have been a contest among the guys to score with the female members of the unit. And with that it would be impossible to keep unit discipline.

So, my conclusion is that as long as the soldiers are mature and professional, it's no problem. Most soldiers are however 19 year olds and I don't think that either of the sexes could be trusted to work professionally together.

[sanctuary 19]

I remember of a warrant , squad leader , she was taller than me and could break me in two if ever i did something wrong

I know 2 nurses that can break you in 4 separates parts when doing their job , and all of this without any military trainings .

And i dont think several people will disagree with what they can say too

That said, on the topic i say no to women in the army.

but if you ask me about men , i say no too, as i am not very fan of the military thing too

[Heatseeker 0]

The idea of having women in the frontline wouldnt work and would have very bad consequences, seeing dead men is bad enough now imagine seeing dead women all over the place, would have a very bad psicologic efect on the soldiers.

Personaly i believe there are many things women can do in the military, in the seventies we had nurses sent to airbourne training who later were send to Africa to serve in the colonial war. These were incredibly brave women who risked their own lives to assist and help our man in a loosing war.

Sure if they try to turn you into a blood thursty killing machine having women around wont do much good but it has been proved that women can really acomplish alot in the military, in a more constructive way i mean .

[GoOB 0]

I agree with both denoir and ran. Women should have the same chance to serve their country as men have now, but the standards set shouldn't be lowered for females only.

And I also agree that having women and men in the same unit might get a little trick to say the least

And what would make seeing a dead woman more horrid than seeing a dead man? Personally a lost life is sad no matter what gender the person in question was.

[Jinef 2]

Oh come on, yes they should be allowed but all this bollocks about 'they should know what they are getting into' etc.

You know why women usually don't like war?

BECAUSE THEY ARE FUCKING SMARTER THAN US!

Am i going to have to do the whole war is not nice speech again...

Look at the US soldiers in Iraq now, the US public feel it's bad and generally unfair when a soldier gets killed, however he should realise the risks with the military and dying is part of his job.

When you join the military you are told to read the terms and one of them is do you feel comfortable with killing people, surely only an idiot thinks that he can kill people without any risk that the other soldier is trying to kill him.

I don't understand why people don't really understand what the military is about - killing and getting killed.

[m21man 0]

They should have to meet the same standards and should recieve equal treatment. No more male candidates getting expelled from military academies because they "dared" to hit a female candidate with a pillow.

[GoOB 0]

Oh come on, yes they should be allowed but all this bollocks about 'they should know what they are getting into' etc.

You know why women usually don't like war?

BECAUSE THEY ARE FUCKING SMARTER THAN US!

Am i going to have to do the whole war is not nice speech again...

Look at the US soldiers in Iraq now, the US public feel it's bad and generally unfair when a soldier gets killed, however he should realise the risks with the military and dying is part of his job.

When you join the military you are told to read the terms and one of them is do you feel comfortable with killing people, surely only an idiot thinks that he can kill people without any risk that the other soldier is trying to kill him.

I don't understand why people don't really understand what the military is about - killing and getting killed.

Wise words indeed. I fully agree with you on that. Too many games and movies make war out to be something nice and cozy you just come back from and live like normal after that. But war hurts, not only the people directly affected by it but also the people around the war and the people living after the war.

And most women are fully capable of reading and listening so they should all know what they are getting into, if not then you can blame the recruitment/drafting officer

[ozanzac 0]

We know war is not nice, Jinef, but when push comes to shove, somones gotta do it.

The thread isn't about which sex is smarter, or even if women were in power, that there would be no more wars. Margret Thatcher saw fit to throw the military from one end of the world to the other, she was a politician. An armed force is a politicians tool in international diplomacy. We all know that. But it's also essential for a nation to have, and to have a military, you need soldiers.

Yes, the smart women don't like war, but the stubborn ones want complete sexual equality, even if it means to have the oppurtunity to die fighting for their country. Sure they can have that right, so long as they perform to the standard that has been set by and intergrate with the existing frontline soldier, predominantly men. That's the debate.

[ran 0]

I don't understand why people don't really understand what the military is about - killing and getting killed.

if it's about that then , it has to be done in the best possible conditions ;)

well , more and more women apply for army , here at least

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]it has to be done in the best possible conditions ;)

You got it Ran. Besides there are strict regulations of man <-> women relations during CM´s it is still a pleasure to see a women´s face in the canteen tent after a convoi run

[ran 0]

heh that's sure

well ........ lucky women sleep in different quarters with MP's between ours and theirs .....

[Jinef 2]

My stance was that yes women should be allowed as they are capable etc. But that was not disputed.

My point was this whole idea of shielding them 'making sure they know what they get into' is not really needed.

The SAS in fact are trained to shoot women first in a hostage situation as they are generally more fanatic than men and more commited.

Yes we need a military and for a lot of roles women would be better, flying aircraft is something women are found to be much more adept at, the reception of large amounts of information while multi tasking is a task that they are generally better suited at. I'm not going to chat myself out of a job though so i will shut up. Anyway i'm sure they can understand war as well if not better than males so i really don't think there should be restrictions.

The only doubt in our minds is created by the feminine stereotype of someone small and weak who looks pretty, society that has created this stereotype is at fault here, not women themselves. They can be just as efficient as men physically it's just it is considered abnormal 'butch lesbians' if they are .

I am surrounded by women in the military so my opinion is formed from experience.

[ran 0]

The only doubt in our minds is created by the feminine stereotype of someone small and weak who looks pretty, society that has created this stereotype is at fault here, not women themselves. They can be just as efficient as men physically it's just it is considered abnormal 'butch lesbians' if they are .

heh , i agree with you on this one

[EiZei 0]

Ach, why cant they be glad they dont have to endure 6-12 months of mandatory pain known as conscription, guess they are masochists on some level.

Think about the POW aspect in large-scale war though.. yikes.

[KJAM 0]

i agree with having women on the military but i do NOT thinkthey should be allowed on "front line" posts, one of many reasons (and im not meaning to be sexist here or call anyone sexist) is, if a mixed unit was in combat, even though they are professionaly trained, personal if i saw a woman get hit and go down id rush to try and help (not because im after gettin her into bed) but as a male i generally care a lot about women, its just the psychology of seeing a woman get hit that would possibly take over your training and make you rush over to her, possibly risking your neck and the rest of the units neck too....

like i said not trying to be sexist and think everything SHOULD be equal to EVERYONE no matter of race, religious beliefs of gender.

this is not coming from someone who has served in the military (not yet anyway, about a year or so i will) so this is just my opinion

[InqWiper 0]

I think that everyone should be judged from theire qualifications, not from theire sex or race. I think its so stupid how feminists say that they want a more equal society and then try to throw women in to all kinds of jobs that are dominated by men when there are men who are better. It is equal if everyone has the same chance of getting in, not if there are as many men as women on the job when the women are generally not as good as the men or vice versa.

Quote[/b] ]

You know why women usually don't like war?

BECAUSE THEY ARE FUCKING SMARTER THAN US!

I dont think most men who have been to war like it either. And I think its more about heart than brains.

Quote[/b] ]

Am i going to have to do the whole war is not nice speech again...

Yes please tell us, we dont understand anything. We are a bunch of 13 years old sitting here with our model airplanes hopeing to go bomb some villages when we grow up.

Quote[/b] ]

When you join the military you are told to read the terms and one of them is do you feel comfortable with killing people

This question totally depends on who you would be killing and why. I dont think any soldier who accidentally shot a civilian would think "Hmmm...thats a wasted bullet".

Quote[/b] ]

I don't understand why people don't really understand what the military is about - killing and getting killed.

The military isnt about killing and getting killed. I hope thats one of the dumber things you have said.

[ran 0]

if i saw a woman get hit and go down id rush to try and help but as a male i generally care a lot about women, its just the psychology of seeing a woman get hit that would possibly take over your training and make you rush over to her, possibly risking your neck and the rest of the units neck too....

heh .... no way i risk my neck for somebody else if it's nt really absolutely necessary , gallantry has its limits under fire (i'm one of the really few who thinks that gallantry toward females is a sticky remain of the sexist behavior of the end of the 19th century).

-edit-: i always let the women pass first though ...... you never know if there' are stairs , holes or even tripwire mines

i'm gallant when i need something , otherwise Mrs can open doors as good as me and she can take her coat to the clothes hanger wiythout any problem , if she needs another coat because she's going to catch a cold , it's all her fault for not hinking about it and there's no way i give hermine because i took it with me for a good reason ............. well , this can change under certain circumstances .....

but generally , that's how I do it , my wife agrees because she has the same opinion as me (but she still likes when i'm gallant with her .... but i don't have any hope of seeing her hanging my clothes , giving me a coat , taking me my daily journal , opening me doors ....)

[ran 0]

Quote[/b] ]

When you join the military you are told to read the terms and one of them is do you feel comfortable with killing people

This question totally depends on who you would be killing and why. I dont think any soldier who accidentally shot a civilian would think "Hmmm...thats a wasted bullet".

depends under which circumstances (talking about the extremes there)

[Jinef 2]

InqWiper - i will reply soon. (1 hour)