Women into combat roles.....
 

I guess they must be referring to Infantry and other currently designated Combat Arms roles as women already serve in a variety of positions that are exposed to combat.

LINK

I get the "equality" thing, but I wonder who is actually pushing for this. Womens groups who will never even be in a combat situation, just to push their agenda, or is actually driven by women who are serving.....and it would actually be their butts on the line???

SecDef allows women in combat jobs
 

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/panet...at-roles-women


this will be good.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2535954.html

It looks like the real deal.

We should now be able to double our selective service numbers and make one streamlined physical fitness test that ensures troops will be able to carry their buddies to a casualty collection point in full kit.

Standards
 

If the Standards remain the same then no problem.

If the Standards are normed into male & female standards then the bottom level standards for doing the job were lowered.

If they are lowered to allow females in then why would males have to meet a higher standard?

Allowing females on ODA's would be a detriment to the teams ability to conduct its mission. It creates an extremely weak member of the team and that weak link is all it takes to put everyone in jeopardy.

If I got shot on a remote mountaintop this female better be able to climb up that mountain in full kit, pick my ass up, and carry me down the mountain. This is not an extreme example, I know men who have done it. Bottom line is that it cannot be done. No woman can pick up 220 pounds and carry it for extended distance. This isn't limited to SF, it occurs in all of the combat arms and you cannot allow them in any of them if this situation exists.

KILL THIS IDEA NOW!

Pete

I agree. Do not change the standards. If they can make it just like you and me then go for it.

FWIW
 

How many threads we gonna start on this same topic and how many times we gonna rehash the same opinions?

Sounds like a monthly SFA breakfast gathering. ;)

Just sayin'...

Richard :munchin

Not such a bad idea, after all.
 

After seeing Julie Golob shoot, I say, "Welcome aboard!"

(As long as the standards aren't modified.)

Like most things it will depend upon the implementation....lets see what develops...then we can start pissing in someones cornflakes.

Until one files a complaint saying the standards are prejudiced against women. Remember how SF was prejudiced against minorities because of the swim test......

Understood, but the point I was trying to make is that, as long as it's understood that women have to meet the same standards as men-going in-with no grey areas-they should be allowed to join the club.

Now, I personally don't know, nor have I heard of, a female who can meet the same standards as a male BASED ON WHEN I WENT THRU THE Q COURSE.

I don't know how it is, now-been out of it for too long, and I suffer from Partzheimer's, anyway. (As well as clinical aggravation complex stemming from the actions of libdemons.)

I want to see one poop in an ORP.:D

Absolutely amazing.

Next Executive Order of Business, Women can pee standing up.

Equality for all!!!

Now that this has happened should women have to register for selective service at 18 as men have to do.

My wife is now humming that tune " Its the end of the world as we know it." I guess if the JCS wanted it. Who says the dems do not listen to our military leaders. It is social engineering at its finest and we better prepare ourselves for at least 4 more years of it.

Great point! :lifter

3 whole posts and this is your contribution to the discussion?

If this doesn't happen, everyone should be screaming bloody murder.

Swiming is a skill, it was stupid to kick guys out of the pipeline if they couldn't swim...if you make it thru SFAS we can teach you to swim.
Sometimes we're not as smart as we think we are.

I did not intend for the post to offer much more than it did, just simply a sarcastic response to this announcement.

I believe that we all have our opinions on the matter, though this is little more than political folly for our "elected" Leaders to chew on while completing the agenda of "Equality for All'.

This includes the now possible talk of woman being able to serve in Special Operations, unless those Commands can have a Waiver approved to bar women from joining their ranks.

I do not mean any disrespect by saying this (or repeating what I have read on here before), but I do not believe that a woman can simply match a Man physically speaking. Yes, there are the exceptions, but they are not the norm.

Richard Sir,

Having read many, many threads over the years here on PS discussing this issue, I have finally arrived at a thought on the issue...(but it is of no importance because I am non military.):o

I am however curious what the female Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines think of this new proposal???:munchin


Holly

As a woman, I'm going to have to agree with you. Just about all of you, actually.

In terms of the standards being "prejudiced" against women - anyone who has common sense would agree that the arguement is absurd. I hope it never comes to that and would be embarrassed if it did. I do believe that men and women were created equal, but different. Our brains and bodies are made/wired differently and because of this, what women are able to accomplish physically is different than men. That's science. That's not disrespectful or sexist, that's just the reality of our biology.

With regard to women in specops/sf - I am lucky enough to have the opportunity to watch JFKSWCS students on a daily basis and witness frequently what they go through in terms of rucking and some of the physical requirements of some of their training. I am tallish, athletic, a farm girl by former profession and "strong" (for a woman) - but there is no way, even if I completed the same workouts and trained at the same intensity, that I could buddy carry some of those guys (period) or stand up to the same physical requirements that they are held to. And that's just training - not even combat. And, to be quite frank, I can't imagine how many women would be up for deficating in a slit trench/patrol base. I only know a little about infantry training from a few friends who are 11b's in the 82nd, but from what I hear from them - my oppinion of women in the infantry is the same. Things would have to change for their accomodation, and I don't see that as a plausable solution to the "equality" issue or a way of improving combat operation overseas (from a civilian standpoint). Hopefully, waivers will be involved when all of this is implemented.

The only plausible solution I can imagine is if they instituted all-female infantry/combat mos units. Pardon my lack of propriety when I say - God help the enemy (and any sorry soul on the fob) when they all begin to cycle at the same time. :D

Just my $0.02 as a woman and concerned citizen.

Ma'am,

Thank you for posting your opinion. Which branch did you Serve in?:)

Holly

well you did, and among others you pissed off a seriously, hard charging AF LTC. We pink up for sarcasm. We also make a distinction between sarcasm and meanness and stupidity.
You need not worry yourself about SF ( for one thing you know nothing of it) we can take care of ourselves.
But, you might make an interesting contribution to the discussion. Share your experience with females on the flight deck as a B-52 crew chief. I'm interested in that.

1,000 posts is a long time, pace yourself.

Echos,
As stated, I am a civlian but am also interested in hearing the thoughts and oppinions of those who are female and currently serving or have served. Just stating my thoughts as an woman and concerned civilian - if they were unwarrented and are unappreciated, I apologize.

Speaking of the aged, if there is a 'standard' that needs to be met in combat units, why is the APFT age-normed? Shouldn't an 'older fart' have to meet the same standard as that 'young stud'?:munchin

By norming for age, don't we weaken our position as it regards females? Just askin', not advocating.:confused:

Personally, I always judged myself by the 'young stud' standard, and figured that the day I couldn't 'pass' using that was the time to hang it up.:lifter

(4 smiley icons...in a nod to Big Teddy, whom I miss...:(

Ma'am,

Not at all by me, no way, I am just a guest here, and my question was sincere.

There are current service members here who are female, and in situtions like these, I bow out and listen to their opinion as they are the ones currently affected by decisions like these. (As well as All QP's);)

JMHO,

Holly

YOU are a "young stud," ZD! I know, 'cause I have met you in person!:D:lifter

Miss Big Teddy too...:(

He would definately have had something to say about all this I think...

Holly

He would have said, "Females on a A-Team? :eek::confused::(:mad:

Beware the Siren's call to sarcasm, young grasshopper. It is a double edged sword.
Read more, post less.

Everything is a skill and given time, it can be taught. There is only a finite amount of time for the course so what will you drop? Perhaps non-swimmers should just be assigned to 5th Group since most of their AO has no water in it.....

The point being is that it was a known standard and anyone motivated enough to volunteer for SF would go out and try to learn how to do it. So what is the next thing we change? Plenty of man-based standards to attack.

shut your mouth, retired guy!
11 yr AD, 14 yr break in service, 8 yrs with the Guard, 8 months to my retirement letter and 4 yrs to MRA. I'll take all the help I can get! BTW there is a great deal of satisfaction to be had from finishing the 2 mi run 5 yards ahead of a 20 YO. I nail my PT patch and he fails the run.

Old age and treachery blah, blah, blah:p:D

Understood Sir.

And Ma'am, I apologize for the comment being out of line. Sometimes experiences are learned the hard way, and this was clearly one of them.

You are correct sir in that I am not familiar with SF, I spoke in regards to opinions of others(which was another hard learned experience). Will not happen again.

In reference to women involving maintenance on the B-52, there were many awesome women that i did work with while I turned a wrench on the BUFFs. As far as general job skills and the ability to identify/ rectify problems on the Plane, they were dead on accurate. But there were occasions, whether it be moving a 1000 lb. Power Cart or Air Cart to clear the plane for taxi, removing a ~200 lb. piece of engine cowling or even walking a ~250 lb. Drag Chute up a B-5 Stand, that the women could not complete the task. Of course there were some men also that were in the same boat.

And of course, I could never forget changing an 800 lb. tire. At least my back doesn't forget..

Boat? I thought you were USAF, not USN!:D

Enough of this blather! On to important stuff... how close to reality was "Dr. Strangelove..." to real happenings on a B-52?????:D