I’m old enough to remember the whole Women In the Navy (WIN) thing, and the BS surrounding that (all run by PHDs). They even refused to have female admin types, making the Navy order in all male admin types to ‘assist’…
And I’ve seen the bodies this crap has caused…
One of my co-workers came in crowing about this again this morning, and how ‘happy’ she was about the equality! However, when I pointed out THIS article, and this set of data (below), she was NOT happy!
About a dozen nations — including Israel, Norway, Canada and Germany — allow women in combat roles.
Of note- ONLY Israeli women have actually seen significant combat, and that was on their own soil…
Sporadic studies about the effects of training and war on women have been conducted.
In the 1990s, the British army, under political pressure to put women in traditional male jobs, adopted a “gender-free” policy with identical fitness requirements for both sexes and abandoned its “gender fair” system of separate standards.
A decade later, Dr. Ian Gemmel conducted a study for the British army’s personnel center. He found that the number of women who could qualify for basic training decreased in the “gender-free” system, as more women dropped out of training because of injury, compared with the “gender fair” system of separate fitness requirements.
“This study confirms and quantifies the excess risk for women when they undertake the same arduous training as male recruits,” Dr. Gemmel reported.
In a second study, the British Defense Ministry conducted an extensive two-year assessment of women and their ability to perform routine ground combat tasks, such as lifting and carrying gear over certain distances.
Its May 2002 findings, in a report titled “Women in the Armed Forces,” were not encouraging for advocates of women in combat.
The study concluded that only 0.1 percent of female applicants and 1 percent of trained female soldiers “would reach the required standards to meet the demands of these roles.”
“The military viewpoint was that under the conditions of a high intensity close-quarter battle, group cohesion becomes of much greater significance to team performance and, in such an environment, the consequences of failure can have far-reaching and grave consequences,” the report stated. “To admit women would, therefore, involve a risk with no gains in terms of combat effectiveness to offset it.”
In 2010, the British government reviewed its policies and opted to retain the ban on women in combat.
That year, a group of U.S. Army physicians studied one brigade combat team deployed to Iraq in 2007.
Their study, published in the journal Military Medicine, examined the number of soldiers who sustained a disease or noncombat injury. Of 4,122 soldiers (325 women in support roles), 1,324 had a disease or injury that forced them to miss time or be evacuated.
“Females, compared with males, had a significantly increased incident-rate ratio for becoming a [disease or noncombat] casualty,” the doctors found.
Of 47 female soldiers evacuated from the brigade, 35 — or 74 percent — were for “pregnancy-related issues.” Women had more than triple the evacuation rate of men.
“I infer from this that women are twice as likely to suffer non-battle injuries in current specialties,” William Gregor, a professor of social sciences at the Army’s Command and Staff College, told The Times. “They will probably have a greater injury rate in heavy physical occupational specialties and the combat arms. The British experience with gender-free or neutral training standards suggests the injury rate will dramatically increase.”
UPDATE- Thanks to Tim for THIS article by a serving USMC female Captain!
Of course her ‘excuse’ was, “Well, the General says without being able to go into combat women can’t succeed.” To which I said sounds like the General did pretty well for herself…
Then I got the diatribe about how it wasn’t FAIR, and women ‘deserved’ the chance to go into combat. When I asked her if she’d go, I got the too old, family, etc (and she’s WAY overweight), so I turned it on her; and said what about your daughter, why don’t you tell HER to volunteer today (her daughter is 18), AND volunteer for combat? She should be able to pass the physical requirements, her being a cheerleader and Lacrosse player on scholarship, she should be willing to forgo that scholarship to serve the country!
She stuttered, spit, turned white and refused to answer my question…
THAT is when I realized as far as the female left is concerned, it’s all academic, BECAUSE THEY KNOW “THEY” WON’T HAVE TO GO!!!
They don’t give a shit about the women that actually DO go in the military, and ‘know’ they and their precious little ones will be safe…
Sigh…
As far as I’m concerned, if they want this crap, then re-institute the draft, put ALL kids between 18-22 in the military and train em ALL for combat. No excuses, no waivers, no outs; if that happened a lot of this social experimentation would stop!!!
Of course I know I’ll be called a male chauvinist pig, but I’m tired of them playing games with the lives of our troops (Male AND Female), just so they can make us more PC…
I’ll add the demoralizing aspect of male soldiers dealing with wounded, or dead, female soldiers.
“Of course I know I’ll be called a male chauvinist pig” . . . .
Nah – You’ve just joined the ranks of the C.O.G.s – Crotchety Old Guy.
I’ve seen women capable of doing the ground-pounding, but they are very few and very far between. I do think you’re on to something about knowing their kids will never serve . . . . kinda like Barney Frank and the draft push – his kids probably won’t server either. Oh – wait . . . . probably not going to be having kids . . .
Simple concept – women and men are different. No matter how fit I get sometimes I’m going to have to give you the jar to open. It just works that way.
Count me in as one of your Choir boys!
Women on Navy ships get sent home pregnant at an alarming rate. Hello, birth control?? The guys need to glove the love, too. But they don’t get sent to shore duty.
I think shared quarters and shared heads would be required in my genderless service. That alone will keep most women out!
I don’t know about women in combat if it’s good or not, but the reason for not, really aren’t to compelling.
The men who have seen combat are highly wounded and highly broken. The number of PTSD cases we have…the anger, drinking, violence…doesn’t seem like they are handeling the realities of war all that well.
I watched a documentary the other day on POW’s…the things they suffered to include sexual abuse was horrific. I don’t think that treatment would be worse for women. That treatment is tough on anyone.
Are women as strong physically, no. Should they serve in combat, I don’t know. But, it seems a little like every argument the military has had against keeping whatever group out that they didn’t want in.
But, I don’t think your a chauvinist pig:)
“Equality” based on a different set of standards is not equality all and only compromises the overall quality of any given organization.
OK, here’s my stock argument: IF, in training, women prove themselves physically capable, IF they are deemed psychologically stable prior TO deployment, IF they can meet all criteria for their jobs {no matter if they have to adjust the means of doing so, IF that does not compromise the mission} – why not?
I would have to ‘adjust’ MY means of “doing the job” when working on helicopters – just to pump up the APP, my co-trainee {male} could do it with ONE finger – I would have to walk it back & forth – difference in location of muscle mass. Some guys would grouse, because, at the time, women were NOT deployed – I told’em, hey, guys, talk to Congress – I’m willing, signed my name & took the Oath same as you – get the laws changed ………………..
I thoroughly agree with your suggestion for the reinstatement of the draft ……………… do a LOT of little wankers a LOT of good ………………. 😉
Semper Fi’
DM
I’ve always been in favor of the draft. Everyone should serve.
For another perspective read this letter from a female Marine captain. She’s done a good job providing data to back up her points.
It’s the same old story. The left is all about PC and emotion – facts be damned.
Concur, Old NFO. What you said.
Chauvinist, my a$$! I’d LOVE to see women treated the same as men! We’d hightail it back to the kitchen so fast, all you’d see is a blur. Feminist bloggers would be trading “sammich” recipes within a week.
Seeing friends killed and wounded in combat is life changing. Seeing the effects modern warfare on the bodies of your enemies is life changing.
My advise: If you can avoid it, do so.
I wholeheartedly agree with Diamond. My aircraft (Huey and Cobra) didn’t have an APP, but replacing a starter-generator was no fun. The Marines tried back in the late 70s to put women in the maintenance shops. We had no problems with some, 2 of them even earned their wings, but most couldn’t hack it physically. The ones that could were good Marines, but I wouldn’t want to go into combat with those that couldn’t.
I don’t like a draft, but under your terms I could get behind it. And let’s make it retroactively apply to anyone under 30.
At the stumps a few months ago, I ran into a female Marine trying to let it up stairs while on crutches and carrying a box. I offered to haul the box, and on the way over to her side of the barracks, asked what happened. She said she was one of the first females in Infantry Training Battalion, and got hurt on a hump from simply carrying a Mk 19 bbl… (and was reclassed to comms, hence ending up @ 29 palms)
I’ve served with some really squared away Marines (females), but absolutely hate doing anything in the field or pt related with them.
I’m singing in the Old NFO choir too.
YES, American women served in the Revolution because the British were here. Most cooked, tended wounded men and washed clothes, but some served cannon and fired muskets.
YES, Israeli women serve to defend their soil from enemies a few kilometers away but it’s a tiny nation surrounded by much larger hostile nations and they have to fill the ranks anyway that they can.
The American situation is completely different and women are not generally suited for combat. They cause more problems than they solve.
Do NOT concur on reinstating the draft. I don’t want to serve (again) with people who are compelled to do so. The problems inherent with many draftees far outweigh any value to them individually or society as a whole. That said if you wish to write or institute military policy and you HAVEN’T served, well your vote counts about .25 against a full vote for those who have.
This is not about “equality” this is a program of subterfuge and sabotage against military values.
Jess- There is that too.
eia- So have I, I served in the first deployed squadron that had females in it, in 1977!
PH- Honest point, and true, but the left will NEVER admit it…
Danny- You can’t do either… The are ‘required’ to provide separate facilities, and you cannot mandate birth control either!
Agirl- Well said, and as I told a lady the other day, if they can meet the physical standards and want it, okay; but if the standards have to be reduced- no go.
Shepard- True, look at the academys today… ALL standards have been lowered.
DM- see my comments above, and agree with you, our women did the job and never complained!
WSF- Agree!
Tim- Thanks, that was the one I couldn’t find last night!
Rev- Thanks
Suz- LOL
Anon- BTDT, NOT fun…
Don- Concur, we HAVE done this before!
Robert- THAT would really upset their applecart! 🙂
Heath- Thanks for the input, YOU are current and know better than I what is happening today!
LL- Yeah…
Boat- Concur on ALL counts…
I have stated again and again, the people pushing this agenda have targeted the U.S. Military since is is the part of the agenda. The same people will make sure that their daughters will not serve, whereas the sons and daughters of “flyover” country will pay the price of their political wrangling.
I’ve always felt like women could do most things men could do, aside from peeing up a rope & I imagine there are a few women that could do that too. I’m all for equal rights, equal pay and the various of equality stuff, but to the day I die I will contend women do NOT belong in combat situations along side men.
Because no matter how “gender neutral” they try to get, some Mama somewhere will have raised her son correctly and it will be instinctive to “protect” females. And the last thing GI Joe needs to be doing is wondering if GI Jane is okay when in a combat situation.
Nope, I don’t know much about the military. Not a psychologist, nor a data analyst, don’t even play such on t.v. I do know human beings.
If that makes me a female chauvinist pig, the feminists may have at kissing each others butts. 😉
When I started with a particular big-city fire department back in the 80s, women recruits had to do everything that males had to, including lifting and carrying the same weight in the same heavy gear. Most could not, but the few that made it turned out to be as least as good or bad as the average guy who made the cut. You could work with them knowing that they could pull you out if need be.
Later I transitioned to police work. Different skill tests for men and women recruits in the name of “fairness”. To be blunt, almost every woman on the job is a hazard to her co-workers because the tests are watered down so as to allow tiny things under 5 feet tall who weigh about a hundred pounds to get on the job, and when they have to go hands-on with some drunk or thug, they can’t do it. And if you’re having a problem fighting someone and they show up…you’re screwed. Our job consists of big, buff guys and tiny little girlies who cannot do the job but got on anyway because of their gender (displacing some big buff guy who could have done the job). And Gd help any man who makes a sexist joke within earshot of one of these girls, because they can and will turn around and claim hostile work environment just to get a compensation check or a preferred assignment, and the guy gets a career kick in the nuts. Warrior culture? Not any more. Women can do many things just great, including answering phones, filing papers, talking on the radio, etc., but physically most don’t have what it takes for the rough jobs, and when you bend or ignore the requirements to get them hired to appease the feminists, often the job itself fails to get done.
MrG- well said!
Snigs- personally I think you are right!
Murph- not the first time I’ve heard that from an LEO!
I have only the myth of the Amazons to call upon. Even the Zulu female impis didn’t defeat any of their enemies, and weren’t sent far from their home.
As a culture and a nation, it is good to discuss many things, certainly the sex of a drone operator doesn’t seem to matter. But if I want to have a nation ready to die on its sword, then I would do just like the godless Communists and put all healthy bodies in uniform and fight like I could with that.
Women, don’t fight like men do, and I know we are smarter than any previous generation, but if you want warriors you want men, with mothers and fathers they don’t want to shame. Women can fight, they can be thrown away just like men, but in close body to body fighting it just isn’t going to be tough to know that the Mongol hordes will cut through them and rape the survivors on the way out. The reason that Israelis don’t do a lot of women in combat, it make Arabs fight harder, really.
Well, most men would fight harder against women just not to be thought of as feminine.
Most of the people that worry about putting more women in combat roles for their possible promotion, haven’t had to worry about winning on the battlefield against an enemy that wants to win at any cost.
Earl- Good points all! Thanks!
I always thought that equal rights SHOULD mean equal responsibilities. So why aren’t 17-year-old girls required to register for selective service? Doesn’t seem very “equal” to me. And I’m saying that as the mother of three daughters.
Christina- The difference is you KNOW that of which you speak… And concur with your comment!
I am a few days behind everyone reading (had been at a seminar), but speaking as a female who went ADAF in ’75, who had a few folks from Basic go into flightline mechanics, etc while most of us went into more “tradional” female job classifications, it was disturbing that we were not given an opportunity to learn how to take care of ourselves (and our fellow service members) if need be.
I was an AF medic. They weren’t too concerned about the male OR female hospital troops knowing how to fight — wasn’t our job. If you have the skills, knowledge and abilities to do the job (whether that is a cook or a pilot), what bits of anatomy you do or don’t have shouldn’t be the issue. I DO remember they didn’t want to teach me how to drive the ambulance but they did want to teach the male who did the EXACT same job I did- and I outranked him by two days. I protested, and the superintendent (top medic) agreed to teach me because everyone else hemmed and hawed. Turned out I was better at driving a crackerbox frontwards AND backwards than even the guys who did it regularly. I didn’t want to do it on a regular basis, but I DID want the same training as everyone else so that push comes to shove I could at least be called on as a back up.
Think MASH. That was our disaster drill situations – humping patients on litters out of 2 ton trucks, etc, just like could happen in war. PTSD can happen to any job classification regardless if they have you at the front or not. You think having to deal with wounded or dead male folks was easier for the nurses back in the days they were all female?
I was grateful for those few male medics in my early days who valued me for my skills and aptitute and were willing to train me to their level and for also sharing their experiences and past tips from Thailand and VietNam – despite the fact I was “a girl”. (I also learned to make noise when I was coming up behind them!!!). The intellectual knowledge and hands on medical care helped me to advance (not just because I was a girl).
And while I do understand not wanting GI Joe to worry about GI Jane, reality is he is going to be worried about the the other Joes too.
Did I ever WANT to be frontlines? Nope, that’s why I was AF. Did I want equal training so I had the opportunity to be as useful as the guys – you bet. We have little guys and some big girls serving — I want the person who can do the job the BEST, anatomy be damned.
I DO NOT want the draft reinstituted – no point in having too many people with a FIGMO attitude from Day One of service (God help us all!). Do I think that 18 yr old girls should have to register as well? Why not? If we ever need that many people again, there will still be a need for non-combat roles. And I’m a mom of one of each.
Old NFO, you are not a male chauvanist and I know that — but you sure did push a button! Love ya anyway!
Joey- Thanks for the perspective, you bring up a number of excellent points! And yes, I DO believe if women want full equality, they should be in the draft too! 🙂
Very well said, my friend. Even though I’ve never been in the military, I agree with you 100% on drafting all 12-22-y-o’s. They’d never let that fly though. The Democrats would go out of business.