Women in Combat Arms/ SOF Discussion

[Brill]

Being totally honest, my jury is still out. Awaiting further data. So far the 'n' has been very small.

I think the data isn’t consistent and that skews the hell out of arguments.

Very specialized units that answer to NCA have excellent selection programs (psychological as well as physical) and are known to use all available resources very effectively. General Purpose Forces do not have similar standards and leaders of GPF are much more susceptible to political pressure or virtual signaling.

While both have leaders come and go, elite SOF units typically have leaders “mature” within the unit and have very strong loyalty to same both in/out of the unit. This isn’t the same in GPF.

Additionally, there is no way an O-6 would authorize a group of 12 soldiers from the 101st to insert into a foreign country, link up with local forces, execute a mission, and have an O-3 represent American foreign policy. Going further, when have GPFs operated in anything less than Squad level?

 

[Deleted member 2517]

93 pages and redundancy abounds. When your ass is in the sling and your bleeding and the contact is still hot and in doubt, you're not going to care who comes through running react. You won't care if the motherfucker has a dick and wears a dress.

I've seen women Vietcong dead beside their male comrades. And of our women athlete-warriors today, I would've been very reassured to have one of them fighting alongside me.

I've changed my attitude over the duration of this thread. I still think sexual tension can cause disruption and favoritism in certain units and under certain circumstances. But there are dedicated, professional female warriors who pack the gear.

I had a buddy of mine essentially start dating a female we were recycles with during the BRC hold. All consensual, no issues arose and they kept things on the down low. Overall just a funny situation but it does illustrate that the urge to reproduce tops everything in the human mind.

 

[policemedic]

They're even banning old fashioned pinup tattoos.

Canadian military bans sexually explicit, discriminatory tattoos

Well, I’d be fucked.

 

[RackMaster]

Well, I’d be fucked.

I know a lot of men and women that are fucked. I think they're going to lose a lot of talent, instead of people paying for cover-ups.

 

[Devildoc]

Just saw this today (looks like publish date of 8/28/19). As I am not "in the know" I won't comment to the veracity of the article.

The Inside Story Of How The Army Reduced Standards To Get Women Through Ranger Training

 

[Gunz]

Just saw this today (looks like publish date of 8/28/19). As I am not "in the know" I won't comment to the veracity of the article.

The Inside Story Of How The Army Reduced Standards To Get Women Through Ranger Training

Griest went through the course when Obama was POTUS, openly gay Eric Fanning was Secretary of the Army and SECDEF Ash Carter opened the services to transgender individuals. Considering the circumstances, I'd be very surprised if there hadn't been top-down political pressure at the time. I would hope standards have tightened up since then.

 

[Gunz]

I know a lot of men and women that are fucked. I think they're going to lose a lot of talent, instead of people paying for cover-ups.

You mean this would violate policy?

 

[RackMaster]

You mean this would violate policy?

View attachment 29192

It would look better on it's cheek. lol

 

[Diamondback 2/2]

Just saw this today (looks like publish date of 8/28/19). As I am not "in the know" I won't comment to the veracity of the article.

The Inside Story Of How The Army Reduced Standards To Get Women Through Ranger Training

I'm not surprised...

 

[bvvanes]

Just read the Ranger article in the 'Daily Caller' by Hassan. While it's not unanticipated that standards will 'change' for those deemed historically depressed/maligned/derided/victims/etc etc etc. What is though, is that those that will alter standards still hide behind their activities with a passionate denial. Standards exist because prior to them, bad events and/or outcomes occurred. Hence some one, somewhere tried to mitigate that by placing 'standards'. In my profession, if standards are removed, people are severely injured or die. If you look at the 'standard' and see it for what it is based on, it's easy to say it should remain or 'let's try to make good, better'. Unfortunately, better is the enemy of good! I would say, those in the 'good-better' paradigm, are usually not subjected to the edicts of their changes, that is, they don't have to deal with the real world consequences of their changes. Some would call those 'changers', hypocrites. But since they aren't on the front lines with those they helped circumvent the system, they really aren't hypocrits anymore than hollywood actors calling for the rest of us to get rid of our arms are hypocrites, even though they have their own armed security service! Once while on a visit to Beverley Hills, Calif, I went for a long run thru the hills and when I returned, I was asked if I had run by this very famous and now deceased film producers home. I said yes and was asked if I ran on the sidewalks near his home. My response was, there weren't any sidewalks around his home. I was told that's right, he also had massive bushes obstructing a view of the house and signs stating 'armed response to intruders' around his property. The reason; this very liberal etc etc did't want others peering in on his life style and he had the $ to make it happen. I would imagine, when a bad outcome directly and personally effects those changing standards, they will whine like all hell and use the Bart Simpson defense: you didn't see nothing, you can't prove nothing and I didn't do anything wrong!

 

[Devildoc]

Part of the problem is, few people (in charge, or who matter) can articulate what "standards" are and why they exist. So if they don't know, they can change them arbitrarily. Units and organizations with standards need to do a better job of explaining why they exist and why they should not be changed. I see this very problem and health care, just as I saw in the military. You want me to be able to run 2 miles and 16 minutes? Why? What does it matter? You want me to start an IV in under 30 seconds? Why?

 

[bvvanes]

While I agree that standards should be instituted if necessary, the problem is their interpretation. A small study showed the range of correct interpretation of warnings on medicines was from 0-78%. If you took out the standard / warning, that the med should 'be taken with food', then less than half got the warnings correct. I guess some warnings should be explained but some need not. On the firing line, I knew not to shoot outside the left and right limits. I also knew not to have my head between the static line and the anchor line cable in the aircraft. But I suspect the young lady that recently put her cell phone on vibrate, placed it in her vagina, which required surgery to retrieve it, didn't know you shouldn't do that. In fact, she found a lawyer to take her case and she's suing the phone manufacturer for not warning her. I probably needed some explanation as to why when I was first scuba diving, don't do a rapid ascent. The beauty of what happens when you micromanage or 'nibble' on the edges of standards is that you will always have plausible denial ie, 'ok, so we changed the standard for land nav and now we pass those who previously wouldn't make it' but no one can prove that that was the cause of 'x,y,z' happening. So if I missed a class in the 18D course but did well otherwise in the course, is the cause of x,y,z happening because I missed that one class? In all likelihood, no, since there is some overlap in those classes and that class material probably will be revisited again somewhere. On a mountain top in OEF, a couple of guys on our team were discussing our location based on the historical map they had, a third guy pulled out a GPS and said "I'll show you where we're at!". So should we do away with knowing and passing land nav since Garmin isn't leaving anytime soon and hell, why not just pull out a GPS, if you have it, if it has a charge etc etc Should pilots still know how to land / fly a commercial aircraft since they mostly land / fly by computer anyway. As we tire of the steady drip, drip, drip of the optempo, the few that can 'make the grade', the temptation to adjust the 'quantity/quality' ratio should be avoided. I'm reminded that while we tire of fighting the enemy, the enemy doesn't isn't tired of fighting us.

 

[bvvanes]

As a parting shot for this discussion, I recall a recently reported New Hampshire judge releasing an 'elderly' prisoner from prison early since he was felt to have 'aged out' whereby he was no longer prone to committing his murderous crimes (serving 'life' in prison for stabbing his wife to death in front on her daughter). To quote him: " At some point, Mr. Flick is going to age out of his capacity to engage in this conduct, and incarcerating him beyond the time that he ages out doesn’t seem to me to make good sense from a criminological or fiscal perspective". Well, the recent report was that the elderly, aged-out Mr. Flick again stabbed to death a women in front of her child. Oh, he is 76 years old! He is yet to be sentenced for this crime. What about the 'standards' that he should have done his time? As a heart surgeon used to say: No good deed, goes unpunished. While starting selection, we were told: look to your left and your right, chances are good that guy won't be there at graduation. That should be changed to: look to your left and your right, chances are good he or she, shouldn't be there, but unfortunately, they will be, so watch yourself. How sad.

 

[Florida173]

Army document reveals 86% of female soldiers failed new physical fitness test

Oops..

Leaked ACFT numbers obtained by Clearance Jobs writer David Brown show around 36% of Soldiers fail the new fitness test, with around 30% of men failing while 84% of women failed to meet the mark. On the passing side, around 70% of men pass, while a mere 16% of women can clear the pass/fail hurdle.

 

[ThunderHorse]

Color me not surprised.

 

[Grunt]

I think it's sad that the information had to be learned through a "leaked" document instead of simply provided. Release the information and let the chips fall where they may. The numbers only reinforce what most people knew would happen once this project was started.

 

[GOTWA]

Army document reveals 86% of female soldiers failed new physical fitness test

Oops..

There's no juice to the article. It should state why they failed. I can tell you, as someone in a testing battalion, most of the female failures are due to the dead hang leg tuck. If everyone could do a leg tuck it would reduce the failure rate by some 80% or some crazy ass number I don't remember.

The whole point of having testing battalions was to identify the weak points in PT and overall physical preparation. This shouldn't be a "surprise surprise/gotcha" evaluation. It should be looked upon as a metric for improvement.

Sex aside, how the fuck people fail this thing is beyond me, that includes the men.

Off the top of my head, the minimum is:
140lb deadlift x 3
10# medicine ball throw for 5m distance
10 pushups
Spring drag carry under 3:20 - we have a 98# female that passes this
1 leg tuck
2 mile run in under 21 minutes

 

[Ooh-Rah]

- post -

Thank you for perspective!

 

[Marauder06]

There's no juice to the article. It should state why they failed. I can tell you, as someone in a testing battalion, most of the female failures are due to the dead hang leg tuck. If everyone could do a leg tuck it would reduce the failure rate by some 80% or some crazy ass number I don't remember.

The whole point of having testing battalions was to identify the weak points in PT and overall physical preparation. This shouldn't be a "surprise surprise/gotcha" evaluation. It should be looked upon as a metric for improvement.

Sex aside, how the fuck people fail this thing is beyond me, that includes the men.

Off the top of my head, the minimum is:
140lb deadlift x 3
10# medicine ball throw for 5m distance
10 pushups
Spring drag carry under 3:20 - we have a 98# female that passes this
1 leg tuck
2 mile run in under 21 minutes

I did a practice PT test under the new standards a couple of weeks ago. I found most of the events to be very easy. And very silly. The first time I ever threw a 10# ball backwards over my head in my entire military career was that PT test. Nailed it. Dead lift? What-evs. Shuttle runs? OK I was out of breath but it wasn't much of a drama. Hand release pushups? "this is really stupid, but OK." Last event before the run: leg raises.

Number of reps I completed: 0.

I never attempted leg raises before this practice PT test. I always more-than-max the situps on the APFT so I thought this was going to be easy. But it's a totally different technique. I tried to kip with my legs to get them up to the bar and my sweaty hands slipped off. Event terminated.

It's technique. Once people (including me) get a couple of reps in, I think we'll see a dramatic decline in failures, particularly of the leg raises.

 

[GOTWA]

I did a practice PT test under the new standards a couple of weeks ago. I found most of the events to be very easy. And very silly. The first time I ever threw a 10# ball backwards over my head in my entire military career was that PT test. Nailed it. Dead lift? What-evs. Shuttle runs? OK I was out of breath but it wasn't much of a drama. Hand release pushups? "this is really stupid, but OK." Last event before the run: leg raises.

Number of reps I completed: 0.

I never attempted leg raises before this practice PT test. I always more-than-max the situps on the APFT so I thought this was going to be easy. But it's a totally different technique. I tried to kip with my legs to get them up to the bar and my sweaty hands slipped off. Event terminated.

It's technique. Once people (including me) get a couple of reps in, I think we'll see a dramatic decline in failures, particularly of the leg raises.

Precisely, which is why the article is a bunch of hoopla with no substance. Out of the two companies that took it during my second iteration, we had 15+ still fail the run. People were still crossing the finish after 23 minutes. Leg tuck technique is fixable. If one can't make the run in the allotted time, the Army probably isn't the place to work.

Now, you want to talk passing with a high score...it's no longer very easy. Unless they change the max standards, very few people will ever score a 600.

I feel the new PT test met the goal of identifying standards commensurate of physical job requirements. To roll this back into the thread topic, it's now a very equal test. It'll be up to the units to set the standard and then up to everyone to meet it. But of course, standards aren't the goal, exceeding them is.