Sec Mabus and Lady SEALs

Laxmom723

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
123
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/30/women-in-the-military-inc_n_868736.html

that door is inching open.
"As a philosophical thing, there shouldn't be anything that's closed off as a career," said Navy Secretary Ray Mabus. And while he is quick to note there is a ban on moving women into combat and infantry jobs, Mabus said more and more women are working with special operations forces in support roles. And he did not rule out the idea that a qualified woman could eventually become an elite commando.
Still, Mabus cautioned that it would take time. "We're going to have to take some careful, well-thought-out steps in that direction," he said.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates expressed a similar view late last year, telling North Carolina ROTC students that he believes women will eventually be allowed to serve in special operations jobs. At some point, he said, "there will be a careful step in that direction."
 

Manolito

Lewis B. Puller for todays problems!
Verified Military
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
762
Location
Milford CA Pop 72
There are some things in nature denied each sex regarless of how badly we may want them.
1. A male can not carry a child or give birth to a child.
2. A woman can not become a sperm donor.
If we accept these physical differences why can't we accept other limitations and areas of excellence?
If these restrictions did not exist I would have shamed my Mother and had the big white house on the hill.
Together through synergism the two can create a power never possible through individual efforts.
Bill
 

LibraryLady

Verified Military
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
5,074
There are some basic fundamental differences between men and women, mostly as a result of what Mano just stated - the basic physiological differences between the sperm donor and the egg carrier - they manifest in the shape/structure of the physical parts of the body and in the psychological makeup of the attendant roles the genders play in our species. Granted there are the rare individuals who are ideally suited to accomplishing their opposing genders traditional roles, but they are not the norm.

That being said, I think there is a place for women on the front line. But only because the way the front line as viewed today is different than the front line of a hundred years ago, and even 50 years ago. I could, but won't, cite/source tons of real world experiences in the GWOT that have hinged upon the successful interactions with the feminine portion of a society; successful due to distaff/distaff communications. From this outsider and definitely biased viewpoint, I think that's due to the SOF world being willing to try "unconventional" means to accomplish their goals.

LL
 

Johca

Pararescue
Verified SOF
Joined
May 23, 2011
Messages
369
Location
Anchorage Alaska
There are some things in nature denied each sex regarless of how badly we may want them.
1. A male can not carry a child or give birth to a child.
2. A woman can not become a sperm donor.
If we accept these physical differences why can't we accept other limitations and areas of excellence?
A valid point if excellence established a performance standard in an operations environment demarcation.

The medical condition of pregnancy does impact capability more than being a sperm donor. The direct observable capability difference is the must adhere to weight and physical fitness standards during pregnancy. Waiver from requirement to comply with this standard begins moment pregnancy is diagnosed and typically continues for 6 months after child birth.

Indirectly this potentially causes impairment to unit’s combat readiness in that the more pregnant members present in the unit the less trained, qualified and ready to deploy and perform capability the unit has available.

The more specialized small in numbers or leadership unique the duty position such as squad leader in tactical unit , or platoon leader in a tactical unit the greater the lack of capability impairment becomes as a missing for medical reasons leader at the company/squad potentially takes out a squad being led by a trained up and experienced leader. The context being as the numbers of potentially being pregnant leaders when the unplanned for crisis happens the less combat effective and ready the unit is.

There is no shortage of news articles and complaint posted on forums of ladies unable to meet fitness standards after their pregnancy. Thus, getting the trained, qualified and physically fit member back into duty position after a pregnancy has a question mark already pertinent to getting back into fighting level of fitness.

There is also regaining lost trained up and task performance proficiencies as temporary training profile for pregnancy is 15 months. I can’t speak for all special operations career fields but even a 3-level PJ or "J" at first line unit (operational) assignment, the medical condition of being pregnant would effectively remove this individual to be used for any operations for at least 24 months (2-years or half an enlistment).

Bottomline is the smaller in numbers of an all members are highly trained physically demanding career field who are all expected to be available at all times career field, the greater the impairment as the number of females of child bearing age increases in the small tactical unit. The mission impairment has greater unit/team potential impairment consequences as percentages in critical positions such as trainer, squad/team leader/platoon leader increase.

The Coast Guard Helicopter Rescue swimmer is open to females, how many sustain their readiness and qualification to perform such duties for a full enlistment? How many for the duration of two or more consecutive enlistments? The answer to these two questions concern performance reliability and demonstrates excellence is a politically correct hide behind nothing of any substance talking point that uses truths such as sperm donor and child birth as an emotional rather than the being there performance availability and reliability of capability requirement.

BTW front line defines location of an operations environment, not what is being asked to be performed capability requirements. Might as well use stripper bar someplace around any Navy port of call when the fleet-is-in. Stripper bar and fleet-is-in describes an operations environment too, but not necessarily how the capability required to provide and accomplish any skills or tasks proficiently differs from when the fleet is out- at-sea.
 

AWP

Formerly Known as Freefalling
SOF Support
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
15,915
Location
Not Afghanistan
If women in the military truly wanted equality, truly wanted to be in combat arms, truly wanted to be in SOF then they would start with the most basic and visible measure of (in)equality today in the form of their respective PT tests. All of this talk about women in the Infantry, much less SOF, is nonsense given the different physical standards we see today.

At the risk of drawing hate mail, I don't think a woman in uniform should be paid the same as a man. The standards are different, the pay should reflect that.

So, where's the outpouring of mail to senators and congresscritters calling for an end to the dual PT standards? The blogs devoted to ending dissimilar PT standards? I would love to compare those numbers with the number of letters/ posts saying women should go to BUD/S, SFAS, Ranger BN, etc.
 

LibraryLady

Verified Military
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
5,074
Yo, IWP - here's hoping you like the new PT standards IF they ever get implemented... Oh. Wait. That's just Army - not your beloved Chair Force... :-"

LL
 

AWP

Formerly Known as Freefalling
SOF Support
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
15,915
Location
Not Afghanistan
Yo, IWP - here's hoping you like the new PT standards IF they ever get implemented... Oh. Wait. That's just Army - not your beloved Chair Force... :-"

LL

Oh the sarcasm in your post....LOL

I'm serious. Make the standards the same. Until then, the "women in XXXXX" argument is a bunch of garbage. I'm far from a misogynist, but if we're going to talk about equality and preach equality then we need to live the argument. Words are hollow, deeds matter.

What I fear will happen is woman will be allowed into combat arms with a different PT standard than the men and that is setting yourself up for failure on a massive scale.

And I think EVERY service should have their own unisex PT test. Let the Marines do Marine stuff, the Army do their thing, the Navy, AF, etc. One sex, one team, one fight, one standard....I should work in Public Relations. :)
 

AWP

Formerly Known as Freefalling
SOF Support
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
15,915
Location
Not Afghanistan
The fitness standard is the same for both genders in USAF SERE and EOD career fields. Fitness standard for Coast Guard Helicopter rescue swimmers is the same for both genders.

Good info and good to see. Thank you.
 

Seajack

Alpaca Farmer
Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
137
Location
New Orleans
I read something about women doing patrols, standing watch, etc. Why are there such exceptions if the guys up top are so adamant about "no women in combat"?
 

AWP

Formerly Known as Freefalling
SOF Support
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
15,915
Location
Not Afghanistan
I read something about women doing patrols, standing watch, etc. Why are there such exceptions if the guys up top are so adamant about "no women in combat"?

There's a difference between "combat" and "combat arms." Women are excluded from the latter and not the former though they are allowed to be pilots which I'm sure makes sense to someone, somewhere.
 

Pistol_Pete

Verified SOF
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Messages
45
Location
West of Charlotte, NC
It’s likely to happen and the powers that allow it to happen will simply degrade the standards for the protected class. Whether or not one likes to admit it – that is irrelevant to the facts. Women do fall in a “protected class”, in hiring, education, government contracts, quota’s for firms and institutions, the military and discrimination. That’s not misogyny. That’s not hating on women. It’s indisputable FACT.


In fact there is only one gender /race combination singled out in our society that does not get these government mandated extra perks and advantages. In any other society it would be called discrimination and oppression. Here, we simply put our tails between our legs and agree with the forces of Political Correctness. The truth of it is that bending to Political Correctness is a form of cowardice and capitulation.


Given the trend, I foresee women both commanding and being on SEAL teams, ODA’s, Rangers and the like. The first step is likely to be Infantry to get the foot solidly in the door. Again – they will be allowed to perform to their “own” set of standards. Not today, not tomorrow, but slowly over time they keep up the attack. There are already two sets of physical fitness standards so we have already accepted the premise. Standards which BTW, figure significantly into promotions. Eventually when the Left consolidates enough political power and places enough people in positions of power in the military, they’ll make it happen by hook, crook, or other means. None of this stuff happens overnight in one fell swoop. It is incremental and occurs slowly over the decades. Constantly pushing at the boundaries’ and then everyone patting themselves on the back and marveling at how “enlightened”, hip, open-minded and cool they have become.

Over time as a nation we have bent to the will of Political Correctness. Case in point; Illegal immigrants are also in a “special protected class” in light of the fact that if any other American citizen fraudulently produces a federal document – it’s a felony. The politicians on the Left have made it so that it’s not a felony if you are an illegal.


To further demonstrate the mindset of the political left – The DNC chairwoman just declared that Republicans are wrong for thinking that illegal immigration is a “crime”. Yeah, it’s gotten that stupid. And we are collectively that stupid for allowing things to degrade to this point. The silly naiveté of it all. The standards just keep being lowered and lowered both in society and in institutions that are a reflection of society.

Again, the cause is because over the decades we have continually retreated in the face of Political Correctness all the while thinking how enlightened we are for doing so. Study Communism and hard-left ideology in depth. They are laughing up their sleeves and much of what they predicted in their long term strategies are “chicken’s coming home to roost.”

DADT went down in defeat – bending to PC. Not hating on gays, just stating the facts. I do regard gay activism as a predominantly Left political movement, which politically it is. There are countless examples but these demonstrate that over time, as the nation continues to yield to PC and is more concerned with sensitivities than maintaining the standards, our national standards are slowly disintegrating. Now that they have achieved this, it’s the next stepping stone to legitimize gay marriage in all 50 states. Not overnight, but slowly over time as we become more "enlightened". Meanwhile the no-nonsense Chinese are undergoing a MASSIVE military build up that has "government officials alarmed"...


Many of us noted the start of a new push of Political Correctness in the military under Clinton. I find it astounding how much more so it seems to have become since then. Sensitivities never won a single battle. Fighting men always have. Just keep lowering the standards America. Must be why other nations own us in student scores in math and science nowadays - and the trend does not seem to be improving. We lowered the standards on what we will accept from teacher performance and we lowered the standards for students. Beware the lesson of the empires that thought they were invincible and just kept lowering their standards.
 

LibraryLady

Verified Military
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
5,074
... What I fear will happen is woman will be allowed into combat arms with a different PT standard than the men and that is setting yourself up for failure on a massive scale...

This is what I fear also.

Guess I didn't state it earlier... but I'm all for equality in the PT standards - but I also feel like there should be a basic standard for all with more rigorous standards for certain jobs.

LL
 
Top