Women in Combat Arms/ SOF Discussion

[TLDR20]

Because command climate surveys are so useful? Lack of appreciation can hardly be seen as valid concern. Everything is focused on them. They are held to lower standards, praised more for meeting them, and allowed special benefits not available to male servicemembers. If you want recognition, do something worthy of it. I think it's ridiculous to criticize me for saying they should focus more on doing their jobs, and less on how often people tell them they're special snowflakes. FWIW, I would say the same thing if it was about males. However, male responses to questions like that are not given the same weight anyways. When was the last time you took a male only survey? Yet I'm the hypocrite.

I feel like all the surveys I took were all male. I was never in a unit that had females.

 

[Il Duce]

I understand what you are saying, but I am challenged in feeling that the command climate surveys have moved from sexual harassment/assault to "do you feel validated?"-types of questions. I do agree re: the hypocrisy of asking the question then being critical of them answering. I am critical of surveys like this to begin with, and have seen it in civilian medicine where the onus has moved from supporting quality care to service with a smile and customer service. Honestly I don't know where the balance lay, but I feel that when you sign up, you know what you are getting into and should be well aware you will likely feel undervalued and underappreciated (and underfed and underslept and overtired...) for a good part of your military career. In short, and maybe it's because I own a Y chromosome, I never, ever, thought what or how I felt ever mattered in achieving the mission.

Yeah, I think that's valid. It's the concern with any kind of anonymous survey - command climate being the one I've had the most experience with. How much do you weigh the comments? Are they valid - representing feelings folks don't feel comfortable addressing directly with the command - or are they a couple of disgruntled folks covering their own failings with anonymous comments.

I've experienced commands reacting I think too far in either direction. However, I think in general you need the ability to hear from corners of your formation you don't hear from regularly for whatever reason. If you don't you have the potential to be blindsided by feelings in your formation you're not tracking. If you're true to 'responsible for everything that happens or fails to happen' as a commander that's always got to be an area of concern.

 

[DA SWO]

Guess women's history month and all the bogus female only missions isn't enough.
You can't be fully integrated into the mission if you constantly call attention to your gender or race.

 

[Il Duce]

Because command climate surveys are so useful? Lack of appreciation can hardly be seen as valid concern. Everything is focused on them. They are held to lower standards, praised more for meeting them, and allowed special benefits not available to male servicemembers. If you want recognition, do something worthy of it. I think it's ridiculous to criticize me for saying they should focus more on doing their jobs, and less on how often people tell them they're special snowflakes. FWIW, I would say the same thing if it was about males. However, male responses to questions like that are not given the same weight anyways. When was the last time you took a male only survey? Yet I'm the hypocrite.

I've taken plenty of male-only surveys - when I was in units with only males. Sounds like you've got most of the complaints you're criticizing women for - you feel like somebody has it easier than you, they get more compliments, nobody listens to you. That's essentially the definition of sexism or racism if the definition of somebody is anybody of a different gender or race than you. And yes, that is hypocritical. But, hypocrisy is something we all suffer from time to time - I don't think it suffices to make you a hypocrite.

 

[CDG]

I've taken plenty of male-only surveys - when I was in units with only males. Sounds like you've got most of the complaints you're criticizing women for - you feel like somebody has it easier than you, they get more compliments, nobody listens to you. That's essentially the definition of sexism or racism if the definition of somebody is anybody of a different gender or race than you. And yes, that is hypocritical. But, hypocrisy is something we all suffer from time to time - I don't think it suffices to make you a hypocrite.

No, my complaint is that they have all that and yet they still want more. Don't go whining about feeling undervalued and underappreciated when you're the most focused on group in the military. I don't want to have it easy, and I could care less about being recognized. I know I'm good at my job, and I know when the people I am working for trust me. People do listen to me by nature of what I do. I don't have to scream and point out that they should listen. I focus on being the best I can be in every aspect of my job, and the rest is irrelevant.

To clarify on male only vs female only surveys. I am well aware there are male only units. That's not what I'm talking about. Tell me a time when a survey was sent out to only men, addressing only issues affecting men. Not by default of the unit being all male.

 

[ThunderHorse]

Task and Purpose is becoming worse the Washington Post...

The Trump Administration Shouldn't Touch New Women-In-Combat Rules

What gives the lady validity is that her brother in the Air Force Reserves...

 

[Jay_Pew]

Task and Purpose is becoming worse the Washington Post...

The Trump Administration Shouldn't Touch New Women-In-Combat Rules

What gives the lady validity is that her brother in the Air Force Reserves...

I think the funnest part of the article was this.

"this would not only set women back decades, but also severely impacts mission effectiveness and national security".

This was literally the arguement to keep women OUT of combat roles in the first place, and now the author is saying this is the reason to keep them in (or let them in I should say).

 

[Etype]

Task and Purpose is becoming worse the Washington Post...

The Trump Administration Shouldn't Touch New Women-In-Combat Rules

What gives the lady validity is that her brother in the Air Force Reserves...

I think the funnest part of the article was this.

"this would not only set women back decades, but also severely impacts mission effectiveness and national security".

This was literally the arguement to keep women OUT of combat roles in the first place, and now the author is saying this is the reason to keep them in (or let them in I should say).

You turds forgot to do your OSINT exploitation. The author, Lydia Turnage, was a 5 month US House of Representatives intern, is now an intern with the US Service Women's Action Network... And... A waitress at Chili's.

Her interests lie with women (and Chili's). Her interests do not lie with what is best for the military or the nation.

ETA-
She was an intern to Rep. Louise Slaughter (D), from NY. She is set to graduate from Georgetown Univ. in 2018. The college girl tells us about women in combat... PAY ATTENTION BOYS!!!

Her boyfriend, Emil Francois Thomas, thinks America has a police brutality problem.

Her boy friend also thinks black people can't be racist.



She's also worried that her boyfriend is going to be killed by a racist cop, just because he is black and is near a nice car. Does she worry about her boyfriend killing a cop? That is a far more likely scenario, statistically speaking-

 

[Totentanz]

You turds forgot to do your OSINT exploitation. The author, Lydia Turnage, was a 5 month US House of Representatives intern, is now an intern with the US Service Women's Action Network... And... A waitress at Chili's.

Her interests lie with women (and Chili's). Her interests do not lie with what is best for the military or the nation.

ETA-
She was an intern to Rep. Louise Slaughter (D), from NY. She is set to graduate from Georgetown Univ. in 2018. The college girl tells us about women in combat... PAY ATTENTION BOYS!!!

But she has a brother in the USAF reserve... CLEARLY she's the leading authority in this field.

 

[R.Caerbannog]

In other words, she has no business writing for "Task and Purpose". Maybe she's just stirring the pot to get fired? Or maybe "Task and Purpose", as an organization needs to vet it's hires more thoroughly.

 

[Marauder06]

In other words, she has no business writing for "Task and Purpose". Maybe she's just stirring the pot to get fired? Or maybe "Task and Purpose", as an organization needs to vet it's hires more thoroughly.

T&P is a great organization, and I've personally met a number of their employees. Their owner, Zach Iscol, is a legit SOF Marine and a genuinely good person. I've met him in person and corresponded with him via email a couple of times. Zach Iscol | Task & Purpose

Politically, Zach is very liberal and I suspect he's deeply disappointed Hillary lost. I think this article reflects one of the multitude of views expressed by T&P authors. I think this article is bullshit, as are the author's politics, but I suspect it represents the view of many veterans and other members of the military community.

 

[Totentanz]

I think this article is bullshit, as are the author's politics, but I suspect it represents the view of many veterans and other members of the military community.

Then it shouldn't be an issue to find a well-spoken veteran to voice an opinion on the topic.

 

[ThunderHorse]

T&P is a great organization, and I've personally met a number of their employees. Their owner, Zach Iscol, is a legit SOF Marine and a genuinely good person. I've met him in person and corresponded with him via email a couple of times. Zach Iscol | Task & Purpose

Politically, Zach is very liberal and I suspect he's deeply disappointed Hillary lost. I think this article reflects one of the multitude of views expressed by T&P authors. I think this article is bullshit, as are the author's politics, but I suspect it represents the view of many veterans and other members of the military community.

This article is off topic, relatively well researched but is further evidence of why I think Task & Purpose is bullshit. Having writers that have zero experience in our line of work doesn't seem to be what I thought it was for. Another rag.

 

[Marauder06]

There are plenty of legit vets who write for T&P, including more than one member of this site. If I didn't have my own, competing blog I'd write for them as well.

 

[R.Caerbannog]

T&P is a great organization, and I've personally met a number of their employees. Their owner, Zach Iscol, is a legit SOF Marine and a genuinely good person. I've met him in person and corresponded with him via email a couple of times. Zach Iscol | Task & Purpose

Politically, Zach is very liberal and I suspect he's deeply disappointed Hillary lost. I think this article reflects one of the multitude of views expressed by T&P authors. I think this article is bullshit, as are the author's politics, but I suspect it represents the view of many veterans and other members of the military community.

That would make sense, as there are a large number of people who are venting their anger with the election. Maybe that article, is one of the ways that these people are voicing their displeasure. When it comes to objectivity though, it doesn't help "T&P" to have those people on board, as they end up tainting the name. A writers political ideology, that bleeds into their work, ruins any credibility that the organization has as a whole.

Although with the history of this thread, and the debate regarding integration of females in Combat Arms. The policy behind gender integration in the military, could described as a political construct that was pushed through for the sake of inclusion, or gain of political and social capital.:-"

Man I suck at grammar.:wall:

 

[Teufel]

T&P is a great organization, and I've personally met a number of their employees. Their owner, Zach Iscol, is a legit SOF Marine and a genuinely good person. I've met him in person and corresponded with him via email a couple of times. Zach Iscol | Task & Purpose

Politically, Zach is very liberal and I suspect he's deeply disappointed Hillary lost. I think this article reflects one of the multitude of views expressed by T&P authors. I think this article is bullshit, as are the author's politics, but I suspect it represents the view of many veterans and other members of the military community.

Zach Iscol was an Foreign Military Training Unit (FMTU) guy who got grandfathered into MARSOC. His parents are huge Clinton supporters ($$$$) and he is a close personal friend of Chelsea Clinton. He was in my company when I served in 1/1 but he was on his way out as I was checking in. I hear he is a good dude and deployed an FMTU team into the Battle of Fallujah.

 

[WasNeverHere]

I have no problem with women being trained to be commandos, if that's what they want. I do believe that they should be trained separately, though, and organized into all female units, and used exclusively for home-guard and forces of last resort -- perhaps even border patrol.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

@82DABN43E1P

The reason for my disagreement in this thread is the same as my reason for disagreement in the General Mattis thread.

 

[WasNeverHere]

@82DABN43E1P

The reason for my disagreement in this thread is the same as my reason for disagreement in the General Mattis thread.

My reasoning in my argument in this thread is the same as in the other, that sexual politics is hardwired, that denying it is as healthy and productive as denying any other reality.

 

[TLDR20]

My reasoning in my argument in this thread is the same as in the other, that sexual politics is hardwired, that denying it is as healthy and productive as denying any other reality.

Clarify your point.