Should women be allowed to serve in front-line military combat roles?

[Paleocon]

wtf????

Yes, only a pusillanimous coward would want women to fight for him.

 

[Henrin]

Fairly common. Most, if not all, state weightlifting leagues have a high school division.

Again she's probably not going to be as strong. But is that the criteria? Or is it - can this person carry this 50 pound weight for 10 miles or can they carry a 150 pound body for 200 yards.

Do most schools have these leagues and how many girls sign up for them? Again, you're still talking about a small group of people that had to train absurd amounts of time. Why do you think a small number of women that can pass somehow merits rule changes?

 

[Henrin]

Because the fellow I was discussing the NBA with made a statement that if women were good enough to be in the NBA they'd be there already. I'm looking for reasons other than ability for why they aren't and your point about the WNBA would be one possible reason why.

How many women do you think could compete against Lebron in his prime? There is a only small group of men that can do it and somehow you think there is a woman that can? Come on man, you know that isn't true.

 

[Gaius46]

Because it clearly shows she was never equal in the first place. You're essentially arguing they can reach men if they have no lives whatsoever, so therefore they are equal to men that probably spent not even a quarter of the time reaching the same level.

Oh and btw, how much time exactly do you think 15-18 year olds have to work out? Hint: They can't spend twelve hours at the gym.

12 hours a week works out to an average of 90 minutes a day. That isn't a lot. Kids playing high school football probably do that much. The average non athletic person is supposed to do at least 30 minutes of exercise - even just walking - a day.

 

[Gaius46]

Do most schools have these leagues and how many girls sign up for them? Again, you're still talking about a small group of people that had to train absurd amounts of time. Why do you think a small number of women that can pass somehow merits rule changes?

Don't know to be honest. When I competed there was probably 3 women for every 4 guys competing. That's just a rough guess based on my memory. Admittedly there weren't a lot of guys either - powerlifting and (even moreso) Olympic weightlifting are tiny sports compared to recreational basketball and softball leagues. Don't recall how many were kids, opens or masters.

As to why do I think the rules should change - because if there are women who can meet the standard and want to do the job they should be allowed to. Especially since the highest ranks are foreclosed to people who haven't served in the combat arms.

 

[Gaius46]

How many women do you think could compete against Lebron in his prime? There is a only small group of men that can do it and somehow you think there is a woman that can? Come on man, you know that isn't true.

Few if any. Same with men. But that is my argument. Lebron is the wrong yardstick.

 

[DA60]

As long as they have the strength required to pull their comrades off the battlefield, there would be nothing to speak against it. But they don't do the 100 meter dash or box against men. Maybe there is a reason for this too?

With respect, are you saying that every woman in the world is not capable of pulling 'their comrades off of the battlefield'?

Are you saying that none of these women could do it?

Or that this woman could not do it?

And I am not even showing massive female bodybuilders who clearly could do it.

Because unless you can prove that, then there should not be a law/rule against it.

If there is a standard set that a particular person (male or female) cannot meet...fine.

But to arbitrarily disallow every female on the planet when clearly at least some would qualify is wrong.

 

[Henrin]

With respect, are you saying that every woman in the world is not capable of pulling 'their comrades off of the battlefield'?

Are you saying that none of these women could do it?

I wonder how many of those women cheated to get there. Hint: They all did. Btw, when I say cheated I don't mean break the rules of their league. Btw, how many of those women are eighteen and how many women would I have to go through to get to them?

 

[Henrin]

But to arbitrarily disallow every female on the planet when clearly at least some would qualify is wrong.

I see, so we are to have a policy affecting all women because of freaks like the women you listed. lol.

We are not talking about extremes, but at a level that makes the policy change worth it.

Anyone can get really strong if they work at really hard, but of course that is a stupid standard to pick for anything.

 

[Henrin]

Few if any. Same with men. But that is my argument. Lebron is the wrong yardstick.

The best against the best is the right yardstick. If these women are equal like you claim then the best should be able to stand a chance against the best man. Trying the best to just get in the middle somewhere is a bit bull****ty.

Hey, I'm not the one promoting women as fighters and then giving them these stupid ideas they stand a chance, so come on, can the best woman in the world beat Lebron when he was say 26?

 

[Gaius46]

The best against the best is the right yardstick. If these women are equal like you claim then the best should be able to stand a chance against the best man. Trying the best to just get in the middle somewhere is a bit bull****ty.

Hey, I'm not the one promoting women as fighters and then giving them these stupid ideas they stand a chance, so come on, can the best woman in the world beat Lebron when he was say 26?

If the best against the best is right yardstick what do you do with all those men who aren't the best? Can 99% of the NBA beat Lebron when he was 26? Do they deserve to continue to play in the NBA despite not being the best?

 

[soot]

That changes nothing, if a woman can make it through these advanced boot camps and training schools, there should be no question as to their abilities to perform when needed.

I'm curious if you ever attended Infantry OSUT and then experienced the absolute shock of going from a training environment to an active Infantry line Company.

Everything gets harder and faster immediately.

To graduate OSUT you carry a ~20 lb. ruck and an ~8 lb. M16/M4 a couple of maybe 12 miles and then essentially camp out in pup tents in the Georgia woods for a weekend.

I did that and successfully graduated and a few weeks later found myself in the field with a line Company in Germany in January.

A few weeks later I spent a week in the field carrying a ~50 lb. ruck and a ~20 lb. M249 up and down the German hills in about 2 1/2 feet of snow. Rather than building a nice neat little camp out of shelter half tents we used picks and shovels to chip flimsy fighting positions out of the frozen ground and then spent the night laying in the bottom of a frozen hole trying, and failing miserably, to get a few hours sleep before we picked up and started walking up and down hills again.

I wasn't anything special when I was in the Army, not a Ranger or Delta Force or anything like that, just your average run-of-the-mill Infantryman, I didn't even serve in what might be considered a "prestigious" Division.

And I can tell you that "these advanced boot camps and training schools" you're talking about do not, in any way, prepare you at anything more than the most basic level for what you'll encounter in the real Infantry.

And also understand that I served in the peacetime Army in Germany.

There was a time not so long ago that guys were going from a training environment, to a couple couple months in the type of garrison environment I was discussing above, to a 15 month deployment in the mountains of Afghanistan where even the stuff I was doing in Germany would have been considered a walk in the park.

Please don't confuse successful completion of Basic and Advanced Individual Training with an ability to perform at an acceptable, to say nothing of a fully-contributing, level in an Infantry line Company.

I have met very, very few women in my life, either D1 collegiate athletes, women at my Crossfit gym, or in any other capacity, would would have been able to stand up to the daily grind of a couple of weeks in the field as an Infantryman.

It isn't something that being able to squat 300 lbs. in a sterile gym environment, or even through hike the Appalachian Trail at a leisurely backpacker's pace can really be compared to.

It's a cold, hard, dirty, hungry, wet, miserable grind that breaks you down day, after day, after day.

20 years later, as a 40 year old man, I've got arthritis in my knees, a chronically painful back, and am losing my hearing more and more each year to the point where I'll soon need hearing aids. I still suffer hypersensitivity to the cold because a couple of those nights in Germany I had frost forming inside my boots.

Understand, I believe that there are a small, small number of women who could probably do it, but I think that finding women who are capable of serving as basic Infantrymen is probably comparable to finding men who are capable of serving as Navy SEALs.

If you start with 100 men in an Infantry OSUT class, and I mean just run-of-the-mill, average recruits, you'll probably lose maybe 10% of them in training and then another 10% after training once they get to their line Company, and that last 10% will become the HMMWV and 5 Ton truck drivers, the orderly room clerks, or get sent to Headquarters Company to serve in some comparable REMFish role.

If you start with 100 un-of-the-mill, average female recruits I doubt you'd get even 10% through basic training and of those you'd only get 10% more more capable of serving effectively in any Infantry Company.

I don't know that it's really cost effective to train 100 women when there's a good chance that at the end of the day only one, or two, or five of them are going to show any return on that investment.

I have no problem with women being allowed to serve in Armor or Artillery units because, lets face it, that's women's work anyhow.

But I don't really see any place for women in the infantry even though there are almost certainly some of them would could do it.

 

[Henrin]

If the best against the best is right yardstick what do you do with all those men who aren't the best? Can 99% of the NBA beat Lebron when he was 26? Do they deserve to continue to play in the NBA despite not being the best?

They are not the best. People like you claim that women are just as good and then turn around and use extreme examples to make your point. The argument is completely invalid nonsense as it is by default treating men as superior, but then turning around and claiming they're not. There is a huge difference between the average man and the average woman, just like there is a considerable difference between the best man and the best woman. Your argument is trash and you know it.

We are talking about standard set for the military that should return a good amount of results, but nothing you guys have said would give good returns. It's just, well, there is this woman over here and that one over there. So what? What kind of returns can I expect?

 

[Cephus]

Not only should they be allowed to, they should be required to. Equality is a bitch. They should also be required to sign up for the draft, even though it is highly unlikely we will ever draft anyone ever again.

 

[countryboy]

No, you most certainly are not. All kind of people make it through boot-camp, from 100 lb females, to fat 50 year olds.

That's precisely why front-line soldiers have their own, separate, boot camp, and training schools. That boot camp is far harder than what everyone else does (or, at least, it was supposed to be - not sure if they've made it easy as well, to accommodate females).



We don't want "minimums." We want the best, because the best are what it takes to win wars. :roll:

Good grief, what is it with these stupid mother ****ers who want to get people killed in the name of "fairness". I am so sick of retarded libs. Yeah, this kind of stupid **** pisses me off.

There was a time when we revered our women. Feminazi morons are the true mysoginists.

 

[Henrin]

Don't know to be honest. When I competed there was probably 3 women for every 4 guys competing. That's just a rough guess based on my memory. Admittedly there weren't a lot of guys either - powerlifting and (even moreso) Olympic weightlifting are tiny sports compared to recreational basketball and softball leagues. Don't recall how many were kids, opens or masters.

As to why do I think the rules should change - because if there are women who can meet the standard and want to do the job they should be allowed to. Especially since the highest ranks are foreclosed to people who haven't served in the combat arms.

The majority of both groups are not expected to sign up, so what numbers are really talking about here? You can't just look at the extremes, but what can be expected from those that actually show up. If the vast majority of women that show up can't do it then I'm pretty much wasting my time.

 

[Gaius46]

They are not the best. People like you claim that women are just as good and then turn around and use extreme examples to make your point. The argument is completely invalid nonsense as it is by default treating men as superior, but then turning around and claiming they're not. There is a huge difference between the average man and the average woman, just like there is a considerable difference between the best man and the best woman. Your argument is trash and you know it.

We are talking about standard set for the military that should return a good amount of results, but nothing you guys have said would give good returns. It's just, well, there is this woman over here and that one over there. So what? What kind of returns can I expect?

You are incorrectly characterizing my argument.

I am not taking extreme examples. I am saying that the typical woman can be trained to a level where she performs as well as the typical man who does the job. I am saying there is nothing in the typical female physiology that precludes women as a class from consideration. Are there boatloads of women who can do the job without training? Probably not. So what. It's no different from the typical 98 pound weakling male who trains hard to pass a physical exam.

 

[Henrin]

Good grief, what is it with these stupid mother ****ers who want to get people killed in the name of "fairness". I am so sick of retarded libs. Yeah, this kind of stupid **** pisses me off.

There was a time when we revered our women. Feminazi morons are the true mysoginists.

Indeed. They quite literally hate what it means to be a woman. Instead they want women to be more like men and do everything men are doing, because you know, that's equality. Of course they have no answers for why the change in culture is causing women to be depressed. I could help them figure it out, but that would make me a sexist, so..

 

[shagg]

I'm curious if you ever attended Infantry OSUT and then experienced the absolute shock of going from a training environment to an active Infantry line Company.

Everything gets harder and faster immediately.

To graduate OSUT you carry a ~20 lb. ruck and an ~8 lb. M16/M4 a couple of maybe 12 miles and then essentially camp out in pup tents in the Georgia woods for a weekend.

I did that and successfully graduated and a few weeks later found myself in the field with a line Company in Germany in January.

A few weeks later I spent a week in the field carrying a ~50 lb. ruck and a ~20 lb. M249 up and down the German hills in about 2 1/2 feet of snow. Rather than building a nice neat little camp out of shelter half tents we used picks and shovels to chip flimsy fighting positions out of the frozen ground and then spent the night laying in the bottom of a frozen hole trying, and failing miserably, to get a few hours sleep before we picked up and started walking up and down hills again.

I wasn't anything special when I was in the Army, not a Ranger or Delta Force or anything like that, just your average run-of-the-mill Infantryman, I didn't even serve in what might be considered a "prestigious" Division.

And I can tell you that "these advanced boot camps and training schools" you're talking about do not, in any way, prepare you at anything more than the most basic level for what you'll encounter in the real Infantry.

And also understand that I served in the peacetime Army in Germany.

There was a time not so long ago that guys were going from a training environment, to a couple couple months in the type of garrison environment I was discussing above, to a 15 month deployment in the mountains of Afghanistan where even the stuff I was doing in Germany would have been considered a walk in the park.

Please don't confuse successful completion of Basic and Advanced Individual Training with an ability to perform at an acceptable, to say nothing of a fully-contributing, level in an Infantry line Company.

Where ever you choose to set the minimum, even if no women currently meets it, ones who might in the future shouldn't be barred from these roles because of their gender average. It should be based on ability.

If these advanced training programs don't accurately reflect what is needed to be successful in actual combat scenarios, then they should be redesigned or revamped to do so. But at the moment, that is the standard that the US military has set, and as such any person, regardless of gender, who is able to meet that standard and is willing, should be allowed into those roles.

 

[countryboy]

With respect, are you saying that every woman in the world is not capable of pulling 'their comrades off of the battlefield'?

Are you saying that none of these women could do it?

Or that this woman could not do it?

And I am not even showing massive female bodybuilders who clearly could do it.

Because unless you can prove that, then there should not be a law/rule against it.

If there is a standard set that a particular person (male or female) cannot meet...fine.

But to arbitrarily disallow every female on the planet when clearly at least some would qualify is wrong.

Oh yeah, because of a few dykes on steroids, we should have policies in place that get people killed. Brilliant ****ing plan.

 

[Gaius46]

I'm curious if you ever attended Infantry OSUT and then experienced the absolute shock of going from a training environment to an active Infantry line Company.

Everything gets harder and faster immediately.

To graduate OSUT you carry a ~20 lb. ruck and an ~8 lb. M16/M4 a couple of maybe 12 miles and then essentially camp out in pup tents in the Georgia woods for a weekend.

I did that and successfully graduated and a few weeks later found myself in the field with a line Company in Germany in January.

A few weeks later I spent a week in the field carrying a ~50 lb. ruck and a ~20 lb. M249 up and down the German hills in about 2 1/2 feet of snow. Rather than building a nice neat little camp out of shelter half tents we used picks and shovels to chip flimsy fighting positions out of the frozen ground and then spent the night laying in the bottom of a frozen hole trying, and failing miserably, to get a few hours sleep before we picked up and started walking up and down hills again.

I wasn't anything special when I was in the Army, not a Ranger or Delta Force or anything like that, just your average run-of-the-mill Infantryman, I didn't even serve in what might be considered a "prestigious" Division.

And I can tell you that "these advanced boot camps and training schools" you're talking about do not, in any way, prepare you at anything more than the most basic level for what you'll encounter in the real Infantry.

And also understand that I served in the peacetime Army in Germany.

There was a time not so long ago that guys were going from a training environment, to a couple couple months in the type of garrison environment I was discussing above, to a 15 month deployment in the mountains of Afghanistan where even the stuff I was doing in Germany would have been considered a walk in the park.

Please don't confuse successful completion of Basic and Advanced Individual Training with an ability to perform at an acceptable, to say nothing of a fully-contributing, level in an Infantry line Company.

I have met very, very few women in my life, either D1 collegiate athletes, women at my Crossfit gym, or in any other capacity, would would have been able to stand up to the daily grind of a couple of weeks in the field as an Infantryman.

It isn't something that being able to squat 300 lbs. in a sterile gym environment, or even through hike the Appalachian Trail at a leisurely backpacker's pace can really be compared to.

It's a cold, hard, dirty, hungry, wet, miserable grind that breaks you down day, after day, after day.

20 years later, as a 40 year old man, I've got arthritis in my knees, a chronically painful back, and am losing my hearing more and more each year to the point where I'll soon need hearing aids. I still suffer hypersensitivity to the cold because a couple of those nights in Germany I had frost forming inside my boots.

Understand, I believe that there are a small, small number of women who could probably do it, but I think that finding women who are capable of serving as basic Infantrymen is probably comparable to finding men who are capable of serving as Navy SEALs.

If you start with 100 men in an Infantry OSUT class, and I mean just run-of-the-mill, average recruits, you'll probably lose maybe 10% of them in training and then another 10% after training once they get to their line Company, and that last 10% will become the HMMWV and 5 Ton truck drivers, the orderly room clerks, or get sent to Headquarters Company to serve in some comparable REMFish role.

If you start with 100 un-of-the-mill, average female recruits I doubt you'd get even 10% through basic training and of those you'd only get 10% more more capable of serving effectively in any Infantry Company.

I don't know that it's really cost effective to train 100 women when there's a good chance that at the end of the day only one, or two, or five of them are going to show any return on that investment.

I have no problem with women being allowed to serve in Armor or Artillery units because, lets face it, that's women's work anyhow.

But I don't really see any place for women in the infantry even though there are almost certainly some of them would could do it.

Thanks for at least allowing that there are probably woman who can do the job - even if only a few.

 

[Henrin]

You are incorrectly characterizing my argument.

I am not taking extreme examples. I am saying that the typical woman can be trained to a level where she performs as well as the typical man who does the job. I am saying there is nothing in the typical female physiology that precludes women as a class from consideration. Are there boatloads of women who can do the job without training? Probably not. So what. It's no different from the typical 98 pound weakling male who trains hard to pass a physical exam.

Umm..again, that argument is ****. How many eighteen year old men are 98 pounds? Now, how many women are 98 pounds at eighteen? See the difference? Furthermore, you're still doing that weird training difference crap. Those men she signs up with aren't likely going to go without training, so she won't just jump to the middle of the pack and stay there.

 

[Henrin]

Oh yeah, because of a few dykes on steroids, we should have policies in place that get people killed. Brilliant ****ing plan.

Seriously, if that last woman isn't on something I will eat my shoe. That woman is quite clearly cheating her ass off.

 

[Gaius46]

The majority of both groups are not expected to sign up, so what numbers are really talking about here? You can't just look at the extremes, but what can be expected from those that actually show up. If the vast majority of women that show up can't do it then I'm pretty much wasting my time.

Fair enough. I disagree. I think those that can meet the standard and want to do the job should be given the opportunity.

 

[Henrin]

Fair enough. I disagree. I think those that can meet the standard and want to do the job should be given the opportunity.

Most of these kids will just be the average kid, which means that the average woman that shows up will just be the average girl. Sure, there are exceptional people that sign up for the military, but there is a reason the military is getting upset about the quality of the recruits. It seems to me to be wasting a whole lot of time to just get a small amount of return, but hey, I'm not in charge.