Female Soldier [Feature request to BIS]

[celery 8]

but isn't that what you're doing by arguing against their inclusion?

That's about as smart as labeling anyone who doesn't want BIS to waste their time on Israeli units as antisemitic.

women are in service, they do participate in combat and some nations have dedicated combat roles for women. they belong in the game as much as medical apcs and convoy trucks. both of which figure heavily into the gameplay as support vehicles. would it be unrealistic to have support vehicles that are randomly populated by either male or female characters? would it be wrong? the answer is no to either.

so yeah, if you can understand why some of us think that maybe some sexism(perhaps unconscious) is at play here. the staunch no women rule doesn't make much sense. the facts simply say that if there are convoys and support vehicles operating in this game, there should be women soldiers. i also don't understand the arguments claiming this would generate too much controversy. as it is, players are able to kill any female characters they want. in one section of the game there is even very overt hints of [use your imagination] committed prior to player intervention.

They belong in the game only if someone makes working female soldier models. The main arguments against their official inclusion have been that USA doesn't utilize women in all the same roles as men and that it's a big job for a very marginal gain, because since both genders are equal it shouldn't matter if a soldier is male or female.

I'll give you anti-sexists (or whatever you strawman tacklers want to call yourselves) one cookie for every sexist argument that you find in this thread.

[An Fiach 10]

but isn't that what you're doing by arguing against their inclusion? women are in service, they do participate in combat and some nations have dedicated combat roles for women. they belong in the game as much as medical apcs and convoy trucks. both of which figure heavily into the gameplay as support vehicles. would it be unrealistic to have support vehicles that are randomly populated by either male or female characters? would it be wrong? the answer is no to either.

so yeah, if you can understand why some of us think that maybe some sexism(perhaps unconscious) is at play here. the staunch no women rule doesn't make much sense. the facts simply say that if there are convoys and support vehicles operating in this game, there should be women soldiers. i also don't understand the arguments claiming this would generate too much controversy. as it is, players are able to kill any female characters they want. in one section of the game there is even very overt hints of [use your imagination] committed prior to player intervention.

women soldiers is something i think a lot of us would like to see in operation arrowhead. with the emphasis on local interaction i wouldn't mind a fun side mission ala character switch in the original ofp(or scenario mission) where you play as a driver who is en route to a bombing site with civilian casualties and gets ambushed on the way.

No, that isn't what I am doing. I want to see them in factions that have them in combat roles, and female civilians having full animations. I would want to see US females limited in what equipment and vehicles they should properly be limited to for the sake of realism. Examples given of US women in combat are a bit dishonest because they ignore the fact that women are not supposed to be in combat. Being in Iraq and Afghanistan where there is an insurgency and no front lines makes it possible for females to see combat while serving in their assigned roles but this is not because they are intentionally sent to fight. In the case of the few that have been it is a failure on the part of their leadership by violating Army policy, either out of sheer stupidity or for political reasons.

If we want to get into real life examples I can tell you that I do have issues with females being in the military but that stems from a multitude of issues that really have no bearing on this discussion and I have to concede that there may be other factors involved that have shaped my opinions beyond the practical matters and having to do with differences between MOS. DO NOT however, mistake this for a lack of respect for those that serve, be they male or female. Their signing the dotted line warrants immediate respect from me. Please note also my opinions extend only to the US because I have no understanding of how other militaries treat the subject.

For my stances to change the US must first eliminate the separate but equal policies. Females aren't required to meet the same standard as males, standards that have been set for grim and practical reasons. Gender fairness has no place on the battlefield, you either make the grade or you do not. This is fine if you are doing clerical work, it is not fine when you are outside the wire. My reasons have nothing to do with questioning the bravery or dedication of females serving in the military, males do not have a monopoly on those things and I've seen plenty of them fall short. The problem is, they don't want to change it, because that would mean far fewer women in the military and that isn't 'fair'. I'd be satisfied if they made the standards MOS dependent, then the females wishing to be in combat units wouldn't feel the need to prove themselves any more than males do and the males wouldn't feel the need to question their ability to do the job.

This doesn't even address the issues of sex, privacy and personal hygiene that can cripple a combat unit and create security issues. The only practical way to address those issues would be to create female only combat units and that would have a morale crushing effect on the males due to the way women are glorified in the media and would cause additional problems because of the way the American public views women. The way the public reacts when a female is injured or killed in combat is extremely negative toward the military in general and those soldiers are treated as if they were something special above everyone else. Much the same way Pat Tillman was treated in the media which has generated a great deal of resentment, particularly amongst the Rangers, as they ask why is this guy such a hero for passing up on a big contract with a sports team when so many others leave behind wives and children, was their sacrifice any less meaningful, their loss any less profound?

In response to your statements about support vehicles and convoys, they really do not factor into this game much at all, the majority of missions out there that have these vehicles only have them in the base and do not really require anyone to use them. They are a matter of convenience and have little to do with reality with the exception that they sit at the base. Not really fun gameplay, even the engineer class is pretty much pointless and is quite inaccurately used as mechanics. There is no one in game building revetments and deploying fences. It's all about combat.

[savedbygrace 2]

DO NOT however, mistake this for a lack of respect for those that serve, be they male or female. Their signing the dotted line warrants immediate respect from me.

My apologies pal, My reply could have no doubt been worded differently. Your points are clear and true enough. Forgive my irrational comment, though it was truly not directed at you personally but to anyone in general who refuses to ackowledge that females do in fact see combat whether by accident or not.

But to restate my earlier opinion, A BIS female soldier model complete with sound, regardless of what faction would allow folks to include various versions of retextured models without increasing the filesize too much. It really has nothing to do with roles, policy, ethics or morals but just convenience to those who would like to expand the variety in game to include scenarios outside of direct combat.

[derk yall 0]

.... The main arguments against their official inclusion have been that USA doesn't utilize women in all the same roles as men and that it's a big job for a very marginal gain, because since both genders are equal it shouldn't matter if a soldier is male or female.

....

Again, the USA is only faction from six included in the game. Chedaki or Napa as guerillas formed by local civilian would surtenly use them. I dont see a problem in having female in Chedaki and Napa.

If the USA dont use womens in the frontline, I have no problems with it. They also dont use AKs or CZ550 as primary rifles, so it would be against the reality if something wich is not true be portrayed as true.

There is no need to have womens in every faction.

[An Fiach 10]

My apologies pal, My reply could have no doubt been worded differently. Your points are clear and true enough. Forgive my irrational comment, though it was truly not directed at you personally but to anyone in general who refuses to ackowledge that females do in fact see combat whether by accident or not.

But to restate my earlier opinion, A BIS female soldier model complete with sound, regardless of what faction would allow folks to include various versions of retextured models without increasing the filesize too much. It really has nothing to do with roles, policy, ethics or morals but just convenience to those who would like to expand the variety in game to include scenarios outside of direct combat.

I appologise to you as well, after the name calling and such I have seen earlier in the thread, I took an immediate defensive stance to your statement.

[DevilBass 0]

anfiach: Just one question, each time somone make opinions on this thread you just make answer after that, What you need to prove? your completly dissagree women soldier to be ingame? i call bis sexist right, because is not posible in 2009, you create a army game (simulation) suposed to represent real life, and dont have any women soldier model, thats completly unbelivable! am 100% sure you dont see me link i put before!

http://www.irandefence.net/showthread.php?t=29

Open your eyes, and tell me! all the picture ist a real fake? you see 65 full page of women soldier around the world and what? me real sister is on the real army actualy in Canada, and trust me, now is on Afganistan for 4 month on the front line, he play same role from the men! your agurments give me a bad feelings...all your reply is a personal opinions but is not the truth truss me, see afgan women soldier to... thats fear! is not just a game.

Army changed a lot past 10 years, and yes women soldier are important, thats the part of the war, and the thread here are, you like to see a female soldier in future, Yes! for sure! and am completly dissagree, have only men soldier on everygame, world! time to change. I dont agree make addons for that, because i repeat, war real war have women soldier, so why is not ingame? lol no more comments.

609 reply on Bis forum since Jun 2009 wow! i no now for what!

Edited December 15, 2009 by DevilBass

[An Fiach 10]

All I can say is, you haven't read my comments or you wouldn't be asking me a nonsense question. As far as why I reply, well, it is because I can and your pictures mean nothing other than you don't understand the subject. You say my replies are opinions and not the truth, well, they do contain some opinions but also many facts or do you wish to tell me that real experience in the military is trumped by you knowing someone that is in the military and not even fully understanding the main points brought up in the discussion? If being shot at makes you a combat soldier then most of the people in Los Angeles would be war heros.

[DevilBass 0]

Np my friend! so sorry! but anyway thread are, need female soldier in arma, i say yes...if have girls in real war why not ingame...:)

[max power 21]

Regardless of what goes on in real world militaries, fictional militaries, factions, and countries can have their own conventions.

[johncage 30]

[ig]http://i43.tinypic.com/71nt6v.jpg[/img]>100kb

direct participation in an attack:

Specialist Alfaro a Bronze Star for valor. She had already received a combat action badge for fending off insurgents as a machine gunner.

“I did everything there,†Ms. Alfaro, 25, said of her time in Iraq. “I gunned. I drove. I ran as a truck commander. And underneath it all, I was a medic.

Women have done nearly as much in battle as their male counterparts: patrolled streets with machine guns, served as gunners on vehicles, disposed of explosives, and driven trucks down bomb-ridden roads. They have proved indispensable in their ability to interact with and search Iraqi and Afghan women for weapons, a job men cannot do for cultural reasons. The Marine Corps has created revolving units — “lionesses†— dedicated to just this task.

A small number of women have even conducted raids, engaging the enemy directly in total disregard of existing policies.

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/us/16women.html?_r=1

summary: there are those that oppose female integration, then there is another camp in the military that is for it. evidence on the battlefield, such as performance in direct combat, flying sorties etc have shown that women do well in combat and have potential to gain official entry into dedicated combat roles.

Edited December 21, 2009 by Placebo

[Evil_Echo 11]

Excellent examples and great photos there!

[W0lle 1042]

Re. the "direct participation in an attack" image:

Yeah sure she's participating in an attack - while the guys in the background have a break or what. :rolleyes:

[An Fiach 10]

Re. the "direct participation in an attack" image:

Yeah sure she's participating in an attack - while the guys in the background have a break or what. :rolleyes:

Haha yeah.

[Evil_Echo 11]

Re. the "direct participation in an attack" image:

Yeah sure she's participating in an attack - while the guys in the background have a break or what. :rolleyes:

That was out of line, W0lle. You, of all people as a moderator, should know better than to comment on something without context. The photo was cropped - no idea what else was going on.

[celery 8]

That was out of line, W0lle. You, of all people as a moderator, should know better than to comment on something without context. The photo was cropped - no idea what else was going on.

Maybe you shouldn't preach about context when the examples you praised are quite clearly exceptions to the rule blown out of proportion by the media.

The picture in question is from this article that belongs to the "Women at Arms" series:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/us/16women.html

The picture text says "Sgt. Theresa Lynn Flannery during an attack in April 2004 near Najaf, Iraq, as other soldiers used a wall for cover."

Sgt. Flannery isn't mentioned in the article itself and the picture looks even weirder with the text. If the picture was taken in an actual attack, why do the other soldiers look like they're taking a break far from action? Or is "during an attack" exactly that, while someone else is attacking somewhere else? To be frank the picture looks set-up or taken out of context even in the article. The situation looks ridiculous.

[max power 21]

Regardless of whether that honourable female soldier was participating in action, that does not mean she is a front line troop. Of course female soldiers are capable of soldiering, that is not in question. Those who feel that female soldiers should not be in the game because it is unrealistic (which I am not one of) are saying that women in action are not common enough to warrant the implementation.

[sic-disaster 311]

Who says that pic was not made after they were in combat?

That she had been in combat just before, but there wasnt a photographer around at the time to take pictures of it, so they set up this one instead later on?

As has been said in the article, women are used on patrols etc especially to interact with the female local population, which you cannot deny requires a certain approach.

During those moments, they can come under attack, and they will fight back.

They do patrols just like any other guy, and run the same risks.

[An Fiach 10]

Who says that pic was not made after they were in combat?

That she had been in combat just before, but there wasnt a photographer around at the time to take pictures of it, so they set up this one instead later on?

As has been said in the article, women are used on patrols etc especially to interact with the female local population, which you cannot deny requires a certain approach.

During those moments, they can come under attack, and they will fight back.

They do patrols just like any other guy, and run the same risks.

Everything regarding females in the military is trumped up, thus any females that really deserve the praise are not going to get it. Staged photos do nothing to further their reputation.

[johncage 30]

i'm loving this. undeniable proof from a credible news source including photos...and still more denial.

about the staged photo comment, that's even more ridiculous than wolle's. so you're saying journalists go around the battlefield looking for woman soldiers and tell them to act like they're in a combat? right...

i think it's pretty obvious the woman could care less if a photographer was shooting her. her body language and facial expression says, "if i stand up, i could get killed", and that's the reason the soldiers behind her are on their asses.

also, i'm sure the shell casings lying on the ground were planted there.

[Deadfast 43]

I don't understand why this sort of talk is still going on. If BIS decides to include woman soldiers they will do so more likely based on the economical outcome rather than what any of us thinks.

The fact is that women move differently than men. That means new animations would be required. There you can see a list of all ArmA 1 anims. You can think of it as a list of what would have to be done again for the female skeleton.

The only reason why BIS added females into ARMA 2 at all is that their absence in A1 hurt the atmosphere. What are the chances that you see at least 1 woman when you go outside of your house? Now what would be the chances of seeing one if you were to walk into a military base? This is not about sexism, it's simply not economically viable.

[max power 21]

i'm loving this. undeniable proof from a credible news source including photos...and still more denial.

about the staged photo comment, that's even more ridiculous than wolle's. so you're saying journalists go around the battlefield looking for woman soldiers and tell them to act like they're in a combat? right...

i think it's pretty obvious the woman could care less if a photographer was shooting her. her body language and facial expression says, "if i stand up, i could get killed", and that's the reason the soldiers behind her are on their asses.

also, i'm sure the shell casings lying on the ground were planted there.

Journalists stage everything, man. I was working in a Youth Centre and some news paper people came in to do a story on the place. They got the kids to act like they were playing pool or fooseball or whatever to get a photo. They even went so far as to say where they wanted which kids. If they lack a compelling visual scene to photograph, they will create one.

[Jex =TE= 0]

After reading this thread no wonder women don't play PC games :(

[celery 8]

After reading this thread no wonder women don't play PC games :(

Your statement is both condescending toward women and false: generalizing a whole gender as unable to immerse to a game without a matching player model reveals much about your own worldview and women do play games, they just don't play fps that much.

[An Fiach 10]

i'm loving this. undeniable proof from a credible news source including photos...and still more denial.

about the staged photo comment, that's even more ridiculous than wolle's. so you're saying journalists go around the battlefield looking for woman soldiers and tell them to act like they're in a combat? right...

i think it's pretty obvious the woman could care less if a photographer was shooting her. her body language and facial expression says, "if i stand up, i could get killed", and that's the reason the soldiers behind her are on their asses.

also, i'm sure the shell casings lying on the ground were planted there.

It is a staged photo, any way you look at it. You will never see soldiers in combat with such a relaxed posture, the soldier on the left has his foot on someone's combat gear, and if that isn't enough for you the clip from the article states that she received a CAB in her role as a machine gunner. This means not only does the photo have nothing to do with her being in combat it also means she wasn't participating in an attack, she was awarded a medal that you get when someone shoots at you and you shoot back, in other words she was tasked to sit in the gun seat while on a convoy and they were shot at.

In so far as being a soldier is concerned, it is not much of a deal, just part of the job. It just proves my point about the glorification of every small thing that women do which, if you think about it, is pretty demeaning. For such meaningless things to be treated as such a big deal, the people shouting about it must not believe women are capable of doing it and so are surprised beyond belief. Sad really. It is like praising a woman for closing a door properly.

[VolvoJocke1337 17]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsW530VQ8VE&feature=response_watch

...