Women and Combat

[PRB]

Women have acquited themselves as true American in all of the Services. I appreciate both their voluneerism and patriotism.
Below is some 'stuff' as it relates to women/men and our differences.
I'm afraid that our recent combat and its nuances will push for further expansion of females into units that require more muscle and may weaken our forces if we find ourselves in a close combat environment with a professional army and not G's or terr's.
I've removed the Generals name and address etc from the email.

Facts From A Closet
Women In Combat

Date


Occasionally I have written that placing women in physically demanding jobs in the military, as for example combat, is stupid and unworkable. Predictably I've gotten responses asserting that I hate women, abuse children, cannibalize orphans, and can't get a date. A few, with truculence sometimes amplified by misspelling, have demanded supporting data.

OK. The following are from documents I found in a closet, left over from my days as a syndicated military columnist ("Soldiering," Universal Press Syndicate). Note the dates: All of this has been known for a long time.

From the report of the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces (report date November 15, 1992, published in book form by Brassey's in 1993): "The average female Army recruit is 4.8 inches shorter, 31.7 pounds lighter, has 37.4 fewer pounds of muscle, and 5.7 more pounds of fat than the average male recruit. She has only 55 percent of the upper-body strength and 72 percent of the lower-body strength… An Army study of 124 men and 186 women done in 1988 found that women are more than twice as likely to suffer leg injuries and nearly five times as likely to suffer [stress] fractures as men."

Further: "The Commission heard an abundance of expert testimony about the physical differences between men and women that can be summarized as follows:

"Women's aerobic capacity is significantly lower, meaning they cannot carry as much as far as fast as men, and they are more susceptible to fatigue.

"In terms of physical capability, the upper five percent of women are at the level of the male median. The average 20-to-30 year-old woman has the same aerobic capacity as a 50 year-old man."

From the same report: "Lt Col. William Gregor, United States Army, testified before the Commission regarding a survey he conducted at an Army ROTC Advanced Summer Camp on 623 women and 3540 men. …Evidence Gregor presented to the Commission includes:

"(a) Using the standard Army Physical Fitness Test, he found that the upper quintile of women at West point achieved scores on the test equivalent to the bottom quintile of men.

"(c) Only 21 women out of the initial 623 (3.4%) achieved a score equal to the male mean score of 260.

"(d) On the push-up test, only seven percent of women can meet a score of 60, while 78 percent of men exceed it.

"(e) Adopting a male standard of fitness at West Point would mean 70 percent of the women he studied would be separated as failures at the end of their junior year, only three percent would be eligible for the Recondo badge, and not one would receive the Army Physical Fitness badge…."

The following, quoted by Brian Mitchell in his book Women in the Military: Flirting With Disaster (Regnery, 1998) and widely known to students of the military, are results of a test the Navy did to see how well women could perform in damage control -- i.e., tasks necessary to save a ship that had been hit.

Test % Women Failing % Men Failing
Before Training After Training Before Training After Training
Stretcher carry, level 63 38 0 0
Stretcher carry/up, down ladder 94 88 0 0
Fire hose 19 6 0 0
P250 pump, carry down 99 99 9 4
P250 pump, carry up 73 52 0 0
P250, start pump 90 75 0 0
Remove SSTO pump 99 99 0 0
Torque engine bolt 78 47 0 0


Our ships can be hit. I know what supersonic stealthed cruise missiles are. So do the Iraqis.

Also from the Commission's report: "Non-deployability briefings before the Commission showed that women were three times more non-deployable than men, primarily due to pregnancy, during Operations Desert Shield and Storm. According to Navy Captain Martha Whitehead's testimony before the Commission, 'the primary reason for the women being unable to deploy was pregnancy, that representing 47 percent of the women who could not deploy.'"

Maybe we need armored strollers.

My friend Catherine Aspy graduated from Harvard in 1992 and (no, I'm not on drugs) enlisted in the Army in 1995. Her account was published in Reader's Digest, February, 1999, and is online in the Digest's archives.

She told me the following about her experiences: "I was stunned. The Army was a vast day-care center, full of unmarried teen-age mothers using it as a welfare home. I took training seriously and really tried to keep up with the men. I found I couldn't. It wasn't even close. I had no idea the difference in physical ability was so huge. There were always crowds of women sitting out exercises or on crutches from training injuries.

"They [the Army] were so scared of sexual harassment that women weren't allowed to go anywhere without another woman along. They called them 'Battle Buddies.' It was crazy. I was twenty-six years old but I couldn't go to the bathroom by myself."

Women are going to take on the North Korean infantry, but need protection in the ladies' room. Military policy is endlessly fascinating.

When I was writing the military column, I looked into the experience of Canada, which tried the experiment of feminization. I got the report from Ottawa, as did the Commission. Said the Commission:

"After extensive research, Canada has found little evidence to support the integration of women into ground units. Of 103 Canadian women who volunteered to joint infantry units, only one graduated the initial training course. The Canadian experience corroborates the testimony of LTC Gregor, who said the odds of selecting a woman matching the physical size and strength of the average male are more than 130-to-1.

From Military Medicine, October 1997, which I got from the Pentagon's library:

(p. 690): "One-third of 450 female soldiers surveyed indicated that they experienced problematic urinary incontinence during exercise and field training activities. The other crucial finding of the survey was probably that 13.3% of the respondents restricted fluids significantly while participating in field exercises." Because peeing was embarrassing.

Or, (p. 661): " Kessler et al found that the lifetime prevalence of PTSD in the United States was twice as high among women…" Depression, says MilMed, is far commoner among women, as are training injuries. Et cetera.

The military is perfectly aware of all of this. Their own magazine has told them. They see it every day. But protecting careers, and rears, is more important than protecting the country.

Anyway, for those who wanted supporting evidence, there it is.





CD.

Maj Gen (Ret)
"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest America become bankrupt. People must again learn to work,instead of living on public assistance." Author unknown but I like it

[Richard]

Ever read Fred On Everything?

http://www.fredoneverything.net/MilMed.shtml

Or Tom Ricks?

Now that the gay thing is resolved, can we let soldiers be openly female in combat?

http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts...male_in_combat

Wanted: Strategic leader, females need not apply—even though they’re better at it

http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts...e_better_at_it

Richard

[afchic]

Originally Posted by Brush Okie

If I remember correctly so many women were sent home from the first gulf war from pregnancy that it equaled over a Bn. of troops. That was before a shot was fired.

Saying that I read where one female soldier covered her pregnancy so she could stay in the combat zone.

Yep and all those women concieved via immaculate conception.

[PRB]

Originally Posted by afchic

Yep and all those women concieved via immaculate conception.

Yeah, takes 2. Extremely naive to say that healthy young soldiers will abstain because we have a gen order saying so.
Regardless of the situation the soldier is exfilled on 'sick leave' and therefore not replaced as a loss so the unit goes without.
A few maint companies were downgraded to 'combat ineffective' due to pregnancy issues and had to be replaced by other units(1st Gulf war).
It is not an issue of 'blame' it is simply a fact to be dealt with.

[PRB]

As an aside I have no issue with women in combat as long as it makes sense. Women pilots are an example. No problem.
I'm just concerned the PC crowd will just declare everyone physically 'equal' regardless of the facts.

[afchic]

Originally Posted by PRB

As an aside I have no issue with women in combat as long as it makes sense. Women pilots are an example. No problem.
I'm just concerned the PC crowd will just declare everyone physically 'equal' regardless of the facts.

I agree. I think it is silly to assume all women are capable or want to go into a combat MOS. I do believe women should have to sign up for selective service, just like the guys.

[longrange1947]

afchic - I was on a C130 with one of the first female loadmasters. We were to jump into Flintlock in the mid 70s and she could not open the jump door while in flight. Does this mean that all females are useless, no, does it mean that all females are qual'ed NO.

The problem I have is that there are fools out there that will push for a "waiver" so that someone not qualified will be sent into harms way for a political statement. This will get others killed or injured to make a point for women's lib.

I would not want to see a woman on a team for several reasons. One is not enough strength and stamina UNLESS they can do the SAME PT test as the man. That leaves the "it takes two to tango" and from my years I can tell you that someone will fall in love and win and someone will lose and that will be friction.

And yes that goes with the dam don't ask shot as well!!!!

As far as pilots, on certain ships etc. fine, NOT in a mountain area with 100 pound rucks and long humps.

[afchic]

Originally Posted by PRB

Yeah, takes 2. Extremely naive to say that healthy young soldiers will abstain because we have a gen order saying so.
Regardless of the situation the soldier is exfilled on 'sick leave' and therefore not replaced as a loss so the unit goes without.
A few maint companies were downgraded to 'combat ineffective' due to pregnancy issues and had to be replaced by other units(1st Gulf war).
It is not an issue of 'blame' it is simply a fact to be dealt with.

I don't think you are wrong but I think it is pathetic that only one of the two concenting are held culpable for violating a lawful order.

I am a little sensitive to the issue. I became pregnant when I was a Lt. The guy wanted nothing to do with me after he found out. We were both in the same squadron but I am the one who walked around with the stigma of being a slut. He got off scott free because no one knew it was him.

Although not in combat, the similarities are still there.

[Richard]

An interesting 1993 GAO study on the matter:

WOMEN IN THE MILITARY: Deployment in the Persian Gulf War

http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat5/149552.pdf

Chapter 5 (Unavailability for Deployment) - perception vs reality - is interesting.

And so it goes...

Richard

[afchic]

Originally Posted by Brush Okie

I'm not pointing fingers as to blame or am I calling anyone a slut or implying it. What I AM saying is that you mix boys and girls together and things will happen. Sometimes she gets pregnant and therefore is out of the fight ie needs to be replaced. Less people in the fight means combat effectiveness is decreased. Last I heard it is not illegal for adults to have consensual sex and any idiot that puts out an order that they cant is not facing reality. It is another dynamic we need to look at in modern warfare.

Everytime I have been deloyed it was under GO #1 which includes no drinking and no sex amongst other things.

I spent 3 of the first 7 months of my marriage deployed to a seperate location from my husband. The other 4 were living in a tent next to his. We were told by our leadership that sex was a no go and if they found out we were having it, LORs at the minimum were in our future. It sucked but we got through.

Is it realistic for kids to abstain while deployed? Probsbly not, but an order is an order last time I checked.

My main point is there is repurcussions for only one of the consenting adults, and that is wrong.

[bailaviborita]

Originally Posted by afchic

My main point is there is repurcussions for only one of the consenting adults, and that is wrong.

Maybe- if your priority is equal rights/treatment. If, however, your priority is mission over rights, then you might feel differently. If you are pregnant you effect mission. If you get someone pregnant, you don't effect mission. Is it fair? No- but, military service isn't fair to lots of people. If mission is the priority, then fairness takes a back seat. If BOTH people should get punished in your mind, then that just compounds the effect on mission... What's your priority?

[1stindoor]

Originally Posted by afchic

My main point is there is repurcussions for only one of the consenting adults, and that is wrong.

I think that's an over generalization. The repurcussions are felt by the entire unit. Nobody's "secret" romance stays that way...and someone always ends up covering for someone else, both male and female. While I can appreciate your point of view based on your past experience...why did he get off "scott-free?" Who's decision was it to keep it a secret...and why?

[frostfire]

Originally Posted by afchic

Everytime I have been deloyed it was under GO #1 which includes no drinking and no sex amongst other things.

I spent 3 of the first 7 months of my marriage deployed to a seperate location from my husband. The other 4 were living in a tent next to his. We were told by our leadership that sex was a no go and if they found out we were having it, LORs at the minimum were in our future. It sucked but we got through.

Is it realistic for kids to abstain while deployed? Probsbly not, but an order is an order last time I checked.

My main point is there is repurcussions for only one of the consenting adults, and that is wrong.

Your pulling through is laudable.

Whether it's wrong, vexing, unfair, or inconvenient, that one-sided repercusion is FACT. Females get pregnant. One side has physical manifestation of the deed (both get the gifts that keep on giving though). All this PC effort is trying to circumvent basic gender differences

Originally Posted by Billy L-bach

Eliminate gender norming, then we can talk. Until then, a woman can max her PT test while a man of the EXACT same age fails to even score 70 points in each event on his with the EXACT same raw score. Such a woman 'maxing' her PT test does not stand out in my mind as a 'studette'. In fact... we are cheating her if we send her into combat under the false assumption that she is a studette. She is going drag everyone down when the 14:30 two-mile 'weak runners' have to slow down so she can keep up.

Until then, it is about politics; its not about women OR combat. Its about scummy politicians and special interest groups pandering to a subsection of society with an entitlement complex.

Yep, we "need" female generals. Lots of them. You know, to have politically correct, gender distribution in the O-9 levels.

I've come across two groups of female who believe that women are asset in combat effectiveness. One group takes much offense to many of the posts in this thread. They argue less lung capacity etc to justify the different PT standard and extra accomodation just need to be made to ensure successful performance in combat. The me-me-me mentality. The other group take all this in stride, move out smartly and prove their points in action. One CST Major in partifular has no qualms about all the objections. Sheacknowledges the solution-looking-for-problem perception, and treats it as part of the mission obstacle. I hope she is successfully working on revamping the physical, cultural, language, and markmanship among others standards with the CST.

I have full respect and admiration to my sisters in service. I've seen them being great, irreplaceable assets, especially in medical. I don't care what's between the legs, but what's betweeen the ears, not what hanging off the chest, but what's beneath it. Heart and mind. Intellect and character.

[wmaousley]

I had the honor of serving with Leigh-Ann Hester in the KYARNG and also in Iraq in 2005. First female to be awarded the silver star for valor in combat and the first to receive the award since WWII.

Granted not all women have a place in a combat MOS, however there are a few who can make the cut.

[PRB]

Originally Posted by wmaousley

I had the honor of serving with Leigh-Ann Hester in the KYARNG and also in Iraq in 2005. First female to be awarded the silver star for valor in combat and the first to receive the award since WWII.

Granted not all women have a place in a combat MOS, however there are a few who can make the cut.

Women can be brave. Certainly. She rose to the occasion in a firefight that she 'drove' too.
I'm talking about humping those mountains day in, day out and then fighting. Like ya'll do in Astan. I doubt she'd have been an asset in that situation.