Women in Combat Arms/ SOF Discussion

[Ranger Psych]

I would rather deal with Columbus every day a week and twice on Sunday, than El Paso. Fuck that place. I also doubt you have much experience as to what other facilities and posts the military has....

 

[policemedic]

Ft Bliss is definitely the best installation in the Army when it comes to amenities, training areas, and not having a shit town immediately outside the gate. We may not have chosen El Paso, but she is the Desert Flower as my last BDE CSM was bound to say. And CSM Hendrex is always on point.

Yeah...not so much.

 

[Red Flag 1]

Most IUD's are over 99%. In the shape they will need to be in their fertility will be diminished anyway.

My son was born with an IUD in place. It came out when the placenta was delivered.

 

[DA SWO]

Ft Bliss is definitely the best installation in the Army when it comes to amenities, training areas, and not having a shit town immediately outside the gate. We may not have chosen El Paso, but she is the Desert Flower as my last BDE CSM was bound to say. And CSM Hendrex is always on point.

Juarez isn't a shit hole anymore?

 

[Devildoc]

I ran all of this "women in combat MOSs" past my cousin, a female, who spent close to 30 years in the Air Force between active and reserve. She was "in computers." That's all I know. Her dad, my uncle, retired from the Navy, an EOCS with the SeaBees. I know his take...he is as misogynistic and old-school as anyone here. My cousin said that she just doesn't understand the appeal (to women), said her perspective is that although she supports women serving in the military, some jobs are not for women. She also said that she has talked quite a bit with her old buddies, male and female, and the opinion was pretty universal.

I have seen far more opinion from men than women on this topic, and it seems a lot of women actually feel the same way as most men.

 

[NFB19]

I have seen far more opinion from men than women on this topic, and it seems a lot of women actually feel the same way as most men.

I've decided to chime in.

The younger and rising female generation of the military is not of the opinion overwhelmingly shared here. Most I have talked to have zero doubt that women should be in combat positions and have the ability to do so. Anything against that opinion is bigotry. However, even though most of them hold that opinion, they have no desire to do so themselves. In fact I have met only a select few females here at the Academy with any desire to enter such a profession. We recently opened up our SEAL and EOD screeners up to women. We had one try the SEAL screener a few weeks ago. I'll just say she did not complete it. In her defense, our SEAL screener is extremely tough and I commend her for even trying.

Now, the opinion of myself and fellow males of that same generation? If women want to stand on that wall with us, by all means, go ahead, but do NOT lower the standards to get there. They want to play our game, they have to go by our standards. Nothing less. That, is actually something most of the females agree with, it's just the females capable of doing so do not have the desire to uphold that constant level of physical fitness.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

our SEAL screener is extremely tough

LOL - I would hope so!

 

[Devildoc]

I've decided to chime in.

The younger and rising female generation of the military is not of the opinion overwhelmingly shared here. Most I have talked to have zero doubt that women should be in combat positions and have the ability to do so. Anything against that opinion is bigotry. However, even though most of them hold that opinion, they have no desire to do so themselves. In fact I have met only a select few females here at the Academy with any desire to enter such a profession. We recently opened up our SEAL and EOD screeners up to women. We had one try the SEAL screener a few weeks ago. I'll just say she did not complete it. In her defense, our SEAL screener is extremely tough and I commend her for even trying.

Now, the opinion of myself and fellow males of that same generation? If women want to stand on that wall with us, by all means, go ahead, but do NOT lower the standards to get there. They want to play our game, they have to go by our standards. Nothing less. That, is actually something most of the females agree with, it's just the females capable of doing so do not have the desire to uphold that constant level of physical fitness.

You bring up some good points. The women with whom I have spoken or heard about are more of 'my' generation. I would imagine the Millennial generation females may feel different. That's OK. I see a couple issues; one, of course is that of "standards." I loathe the idea of lowering standards; I think most people do. Then there is that less scientific, more abstract idea of women in combat MOSs in general. Even if women can meet the standard, I am not convinced they can maintain the standard. Of course, right now it's a moot point as it has not been done here (US).

My opinions, and I won't speak for the others here, are based not on abstract theory but having been-there-done-that and have experienced the harshness of life in the field. Subjective, sure, but so far most objective measuring sticks have been poo-poo'ed and ignored. I am not even talking high-speed SOF; just a line infantry unit. That makes me a bigot for thinking they can't do it? I think that a woman or two will slip through the cracks, outliers, I think standards will change to encourage women to enter these MOSs, and I think unit integrity will suffer. Time will tell if I am right.

 

[DA SWO]

I've decided to chime in.

The younger and rising female generation of the military is not of the opinion overwhelmingly shared here. Most I have talked to have zero doubt that women should be in combat positions and have the ability to do so. Anything against that opinion is bigotry. However, even though most of them hold that opinion, they have no desire to do so themselves. In fact I have met only a select few females here at the Academy with any desire to enter such a profession. We recently opened up our SEAL and EOD screeners up to women. We had one try the SEAL screener a few weeks ago. I'll just say she did not complete it. In her defense, our SEAL screener is extremely tough and I commend her for even trying.

Now, the opinion of myself and fellow males of that same generation? If women want to stand on that wall with us, by all means, go ahead, but do NOT lower the standards to get there. They want to play our game, they have to go by our standards. Nothing less. That, is actually something most of the females agree with, it's just the females capable of doing so do not have the desire to uphold that constant level of physical fitness.

Does the Navy a have gender neutral PT Test?
If not, are your female classmates asking to have their standards raised?
How do your classmates feel about women registering for the draft?

 

[NFB19]

Does the Navy a have gender neutral PT Test?
If not, are your female classmates asking to have their standards raised?
How do your classmates feel about women registering for the draft?

No, the Navy does not have a gender neutral PT Test. I cannot personally speak to whether the PST for EOD and SEALs is gender neutral or not. I would hope so considering they have to go through the same screeners to get the appropriate summer training and be eligible for selection.

There is no outcry for my female classmates to have their standards raised as far as our semi-annual PRT goes. However, we do have the highest standards in the Navy (women and men) and the fact that such a select few of graduating men go into combat arms, I doubt there will ever be one. Most of my male classmates and a select few non-PC officers and senior enlisted would agree in private, that if going EOD, SEAL, or Marine Corps combat arms, the women should have the same standard as the men.

I have only spoken about the selective service issue with only a few male classmates and one female Gunny (former member of FET) and they all agree that it should happen, but doubt it will.

 

[ThunderHorse]

I would rather deal with Columbus every day a week and twice on Sunday, than El Paso. Fuck that place. I also doubt you have much experience as to what other facilities and posts the military has....

Columbus was actually pretty decent, Radcliff was not. So that makes three, I'd prefer Colorado Springs than El Paso though. Been to Lewis, NTC, and a bunch of guard places. El Paso being a real city, like Columbus you just have to open your eyes. I go hunting often, Ft Bliss proper has Freedom Crossing which is a small mall. The Commissary is gigantic.

Are you far away from everything in the world, most assuredly, I need a beach with water. Every post is what you make it, and this place is pretty solid. I suppose if duty stations really mattered we'd all be in the Navy.

 

[Brill]

Most I have talked to have zero doubt that women should be in combat positions and have the ability to do so. Anything against that opinion is bigotry.

Why should they be and what is the advantage they bring? Also, how many of those you polled actually participated in close quarters combat?

I believe that those bigots you reference have an educated opinion based on experience.

 

[NFB19]

Why should they be and what is the advantage they bring? Also, how many of those you polled actually participated in close quarters combat?

I believe that those bigots you reference have an educated opinion based on experience.

Their thought process, not mine. I agree with you.

As for the first part of your post, I wrote one of my thesis papers on this topic exactly. The BLUF of it is, think about the injury and deployment turnover rate of our infantry and SOF groups in Afghanistan and Iraq and what that has done to retention. I can expand more if you like.

Now, here's something interesting to consider! I've talked to the Gunny about her time in the FET and her thoughts on the whole ordeal. She believes that it will be years before we see successful female assimilation into infantry roles. She also predicts that these females will not come from those already in the Corps, rather recruiters will have to actively seek out those females that have the potential to succeed in combat arms positions, the powerlifters, field throwers, etc. They should be given extra attention to be prepared physically and educated as to the physical wear and demands that will be required of them. Her reasoning behind this is that those already in know only their job(s), and even if they're physically fit, they simply cannot transition into the grunt role and perform at that level constantly. Rather, the ones who will succeed are those that are carefully picked and physically and mentally prepared before heading straight into the training pipeline and into combat roles. They must be developed into that constant level of physicality and mental stress rather than transitioned.

 

[Florida173]

Here we go.

In Marines' new fitness plan, pullups for women won't be mandatory

In Marines' new fitness plan, pullups for women won't be mandatory

Marine leaders have proposed a new physical fitness test that would still allow women to do the flexed-arm hang — but they're not likely to earn a first-class score without pullups.

 

[Devildoc]

Their thought process, not mine. I agree with you.

As for the first part of your post, I wrote one of my thesis papers on this topic exactly. The BLUF of it is, think about the injury and deployment turnover rate of our infantry and SOF groups in Afghanistan and Iraq and what that has done to retention. I can expand more if you like.

Now, here's something interesting to consider! I've talked to the Gunny about her time in the FET and her thoughts on the whole ordeal. She believes that it will be years before we see successful female assimilation into infantry roles. She also predicts that these females will not come from those already in the Corps, rather recruiters will have to actively seek out those females that have the potential to succeed in combat arms positions, the powerlifters, field throwers, etc. They should be given extra attention to be prepared physically and educated as to the physical wear and demands that will be required of them. Her reasoning behind this is that those already in know only their job(s), and even if they're physically fit, they simply cannot transition into the grunt role and perform at that level constantly. Rather, the ones who will succeed are those that are carefully picked and physically and mentally prepared before heading straight into the training pipeline and into combat roles. They must be developed into that constant level of physicality and mental stress rather than transitioned.

You bring interesting perspective, one that life at Canoe U can only provide.

There have many, may papers written on this and similar topics. I think but certainly can't prove that many are attached to an agenda. Still, getting all sides is good.

Recruiters will fill quotas with whoever qualifies, not the best or most qualified applicant. Off the record, they will tell you as much. So I am not particularly confident that they will push the "powerlifters, et al." and guide the others to non-combat MOSs.

I would agree that those women already engaged in powerlifting, field throwers, hockey, rugby, probably have the more desirable body habitus to allow them to be more successful than, say, Barbie. But to me the issue isn't their qualification for school/training, per se, but the constant, incessant demand placed upon their body over a protracted amount of time. Here's the thing: if it breaks down healthy, strong men with an above-average muscle-to-fat ratio, how much more so women who simply lack the muscoskeletal frame which prevents many of the wear-and-tear injuries? I believe women will make it in. Actually that has been pre-ordained; there is no choice. And because of this standards will "change".

Your position that "the ones who will succeed are those that are carefully picked and physically and mentally prepared before heading straight into the training pipeline and into combat roles. They must be developed into that constant level of physicality and mental stress rather than transitioned" is true of men AND women, regardless of their MOS. No challenge there.

My bigger concern than women getting into MOS school and making the fleet in a FMF line unit is as much regarding what the inclusion will do to unit integrity. I will say carrying all the deuce gear and a med bag and a weapon and radio batteries and several pounds in water sucks, especially when it is over days and days...we split carrying the heavy stuff, trade off, take turns, and being in a position where someone simply cannot carry an extra ounce is deemed as "not a team player" and will be ostracized and a liability to the unit. We dealt with that at FMSS (now FMTB) with FAR less weight and FAR less time and distance with women who were not in 'bad' shape.

 

[Devildoc]

Are you far away from everything in the world, most assuredly, I need a beach with water. Every post is what you make it, and this place is pretty solid. I suppose if duty stations really mattered we'd all be in the Navy.

Yes, the Navy/Marine bases do offer certain advantages. The Coast Guard? Damn, now those are some nice duty stations.

 

[AWP]

Rather, the ones who will succeed are those that are carefully picked and physically and mentally prepared before heading straight into the training pipeline and into combat roles. They must be developed into that constant level of physicality and mental stress rather than transitioned.

And this is a metric ton of garbage. Men aren't given that level of preparation, but for women to succeed they will need to be "groomed" for lack of a better word? That still isn't this "equality" thing everyone preaches.

Same pipeline, same standards, same timelines, the same everything...that's equality.

 

[ThunderHorse]

I've decided to chime in.

The younger and rising female generation of the military is not of the opinion overwhelmingly shared here. Most I have talked to have zero doubt that women should be in combat positions and have the ability to do so. Anything against that opinion is bigotry. .

The moment we have women making up even a significant portion of our ground forces is the moment we are done as a civilization.

 

[DA SWO]

The moment we have women making up even a significant portion of our ground forces is the moment we are done as a civilization.

The last time I looked a lot of women were filling jobs in the Army, unless you don't feel the Army is a ground force?

 

[ThunderHorse]

You know what I'm saying, but to be clear: direct combat.