Should Women be Held to the Same Standards as Men in the Military?

[CaféAuLait]

I don't believe women should be near the combat zone, so I am the wrong person to ask.

I happen to agree with you. But if they push for it and that is what they want, do you think they should be held to the exact same standards?

Yes - but what happens when they can't deliver?

If they can't pass the SAME tests their male counterpart can then they should not be allowed to go into combat, period. I don't know if you saw but I posted a few articles on this thread. One was from a female Marine who stated that she was able to keep up for a short time and she deteriorated far quicker than her male counterparts. She also was rendered sterile in one 7th month deployment. She makes a case against females in combat-- very well written. Sure there will be a few women out there that can do it all and if that is what they want I suppose they should go I guess, and even then I have reservations. But this should not be opened up to every female in the military. And if it is not then there will be lawsuits and pressure to allow all women to be in combat.

 

[Againsheila]

I don't believe women should be near the combat zone, so I am the wrong person to ask.

I happen to agree with you. But if they push for it and that is what they want, do you think they should be held to the exact same standards?

Yes - but what happens when they can't deliver?

Then they wash out, the same as the men who can't deliver.

 

[bayoubill]

With Respect to Combat Jobs, Should Women be Held to the Same Standards as Men in the Military?

Since the topic of military equality has shot into the mainstream I have a few questions. Should Women be Held to the Same Standards as Men in the Military?

Should they be held to the same physical fitness scale? (Both the physical fitness test and the MOS specific test)
Should they be subject to 20 mile ruck marches?
Should they be required to fight males in martial arts training?
Should they be required to carry male soldiers (gear and all) to safety in combat training?
Should they be required to register for selective service?

If so then I say let em try. If not then we are risking lives for a feminist form of political gain.

I 'spect that, given the opportunity to compete, one-on-one, in a combat situation, physically fit females would embarrass males... and I 'spect the higher-ups know this... and is why they don't want females in combat...

 

[Jarlaxle]

Should they be held to the same physical fitness scale? (Both the physical fitness test and the MOS specific test)

No. A woman can be in excellent physical shape without the same raw performance as a male in comparable shape. Honestly, the standards for males are not exceptionally challenging anyway. I do feel that the women's standards are already too low as it is, though.



Male and female soldiers alreaedy have to go through the same marches in basic training, and it should stay that way.



They already do, and it should stay that way.

Should they be required to carry male soldiers (gear and all) to safety in combat training?

This is really only important maybe for specific MOS training. The reality is that you're not very likely to ever have to carry another soldier by yourself anyway. If a soldier goes down, he's most likely going to be carried off on a litter.

Were not talking about physical shape. Combat requires raw performance.

They go through the same marches? Basic training marches do not exceede 12 miles. A line company will not only do 20 miles, but they will complete an obstacle course or complete a simulated movement to contact at the end of it. And all this with more gear than that which was carried in "basic."

Women combat men in martial arts in the military? Having served 8 years in the Marines (where blows [both open hand and fist] are allowed) I have never seen it.

A litter? Forget the litter. I'm speaking of those precious seconds/minutes that you have to get a soldier from the street to the casualty collection point. If you can't pick up or drag a man in full combat gear then you have no business serving with him in combat.

There are plenty of men serving who cannot carry a wounded soldier in full gear. Offhand, my brother comes to mind. He's a Marine NCO and in superb shape...but he's also 5'3" and about 130lbs. Though eight years younger, he cannot BEGIN to keep up with my wife, to his unending frustration.

 

[Jarlaxle]

If a woman wants to serve in combat fine, the final test should be having to fireman carry a 200+ lb male 100+ yards while under simulated fire.

News flash: plenty of MEN can't do that! (Note: my wife can. My Marine NCO brother cannot.)

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

but women will never be like men.


Men are stronger!

On average.....I was a Tom Boy growing up and I could beat up the boys my same size, I even beat up the neighborhood bully. I remember feeling sorry for one of the guys I'd just beat up (because he stole my little brothers hot wheels car, you don't mess with my family) and his mom called him in, she'd seen the fight and gave him a scolding for hitting a girl. Guess she didn't notice I was on top of him for most of the fight and came away with my brother's toy car. BTW, I am not now, nor have I ever been a Lesbian.

The only problem with your amazing record of "kicking guys ass's" is that most men wont fight back against a women.
And you're comparing a six year old to a grown man...... ?

Women are protected in our society. This seems to give them a sense of false power.
You see it all the time. Little bitty chick slapping the hell out of some guy knowing full well he wont hit her back.
If the gloves were to come off I highly doubt you'd be left standing.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

January 24, 2013

Staff Sgt. Stacy Pearsall​

"As Sergeant Pearsall tells the story, her vehicle came under intense fire that day in 2007, near the city of Baquba. The male soldiers in her carrier had already dashed out to join the fight, so she jumped onto the machine gun and began returning fire.

Outside a soldier lay unconscious. Sergeant Pearsall opened the rear door and crawled to the man, who was 6-foot-2 and more than 200 pounds, twice her weight. From behind him, she clasped him in a bear hug and dragged him toward the vehicle. She fell once, then again. Somehow, she hauled him into the armored safety of the carrier.

After tearing off his protective vest, she realized his carotid artery had been torn by shrapnel. As blood spurted all over, she closed her eyes, stuck her fingers into his neck and squeezed. He screamed, and she thanked the heavens. He was still kicking.

What happened next seemed almost cinematic. Emerging from a purplish haze outside, a medic jumped into the carrier and set his kit beside her. “Are you a medic?” he asked.

Heck no, Sergeant Pearsall replied. “I’m the photographer.”

Lol
Valor awards for Jessica D. Lynch | Military Times Hall of Valor

.....When BU$HCO needed a fairy-tale to keep the public distracted.

​

April 24, 2007

Government Challenged on Lynch and Tillman

“I am still confused as to why they chose to lie and tried to make me a legend when the real heroics of my fellow soldiers that day were, in fact, legendary.” said Ms. Lynch."​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

With Respect to Combat Jobs, Should Women be Held to the Same Standards as Men in the Military?

Since the topic of military equality has shot into the mainstream I have a few questions. Should Women be Held to the Same Standards as Men in the Military?

Should they be held to the same physical fitness scale? (Both the physical fitness test and the MOS specific test)
Should they be subject to 20 mile ruck marches?
Should they be required to fight males in martial arts training?
Should they be required to carry male soldiers (gear and all) to safety in combat training?
Should they be required to register for selective service?

If so then I say let em try. If not then we are risking lives for a feminist form of political gain.

I 'spect that, given the opportunity to compete, one-on-one, in a combat situation, physically fit females would embarrass males... and I 'spect the higher-ups know this... and is why they don't want females in combat...

....Specifically, the CHICKENHAWKS!!


​

 

[Pheonixops]

With Respect to Combat Jobs, Should Women be Held to the Same Standards as Men in the Military?

Since the topic of military equality has shot into the mainstream I have a few questions. Should Women be Held to the Same Standards as Men in the Military?

Should they be held to the same physical fitness scale? (Both the physical fitness test and the MOS specific test)
Should they be subject to 20 mile ruck marches?
Should they be required to fight males in martial arts training?
Should they be required to carry male soldiers (gear and all) to safety in combat training?
Should they be required to register for selective service?

If so then I say let em try. If not then we are risking lives for a feminist form of political gain.

Yes, when it's the Combat Arms and Spec Ops pipeline. No when it's for support and logistical related MOS's

So they get their combat arms check in the box for the sake of promotion and then conduct a lateral move into a less demanding MOS? No, do it across the board or don't do it at all. If the liberal notion that "sense women are getting attacked in support roles they should be able to serve in combat roles" holds true, then so should it the other way around. By your method women will only need to hold them selves to standard for a short time for promotion purposes and when they figure out that they are falling behind their male infantry peers they can just deploy once and enjoy the lax standards of other MOS's.

You do know that physical fitness standards and requirements for combat arms and spec ops is a lot more demanding than say a clerk typist or other non combat arms MOS's, right? In short you can ask that same question about a male soldier who switches to a CA MOS to get that 'check in the box' as you put it and then change MOS's to a non CA MOS.

 

[Pheonixops]

Why should they be treated any different if they want a combat position? Why should they be held to different standards if it will put them at risk or other soldiers.

Men and women are paid the same in the Military. If they are in a Combat Zone they are paid combat pay. If they are a WO4 they are paid the same as their male counterpart WO4.

I don't believe women should be near the combat zone, so I am the wrong person to ask.

And why should women not be "near" a combat zone?

We're talking about front line units here....We're talking about infantry roles.....Personally, I don't see it happening, as far front line infranty units are concerned, based solely on the physical limitations, and nature of the beast....And that's not being sexist, it's about dealing with reality.

And expectations. A lot of men try out for 11B and can't make the cut for it, some do make the cut and then try to be Airborne and many can't make the cut for it, those that do make the cut try to get the tab on your avatar and many of them can't make the cut..............
Let the women try, as long as they are made to qualify under the SAME exact standards that the men have to qualify by. The cream will rise to the top. The overwhelming majority (male or female) won't make the cut.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Here's (at least to me) the bottom line in any discussion like this: it's a done deal. I have spoken with people that are knowledgeable on the subject, my brothers in arms, vets, like myself, who have actually fought in combat and the consensus is overwhelming.

There will be a number (pick one) of women who will "test the waters". These women will be slid along, standards be damned, and will join a field unit. They will engage the enemy with minimal success and they will be heralded as "pioneers" in putting forth Obama's position. They will be awarded a chest full of medals (most unearned), and will then leave their respective units.

They will be paraded before Congress to prove what a "success" they are and how great Obama is and, for the most part, the hubbub will eventually die down.

Most will enjoy unearned prominence (much like the idiot Sandra Fluke) and their speaking services will be demanded at every "women's rights" rally in the United States. At some point, one or two of them will run for political office as a "war hero" and many, many years down the line (or, as in the case of Barry Obama) one or two years from now, may very well become president.

Meanwhile, the majority of American women, just like the once "silent majority" will shake their collective heads and go on about their business. White, liberals will pat each other on their smug backs, thanking their bi-racial supreme leader, that THEY are farther away from ever having to put THEIR lives on the line for America.

 

[candycorn]

With Respect to Combat Jobs, Should Women be Held to the Same Standards as Men in the Military?

Since the topic of military equality has shot into the mainstream I have a few questions. Should Women be Held to the Same Standards as Men in the Military?

Should they be held to the same physical fitness scale? (Both the physical fitness test and the MOS specific test)
Should they be subject to 20 mile ruck marches?
Should they be required to fight males in martial arts training?
Should they be required to carry male soldiers (gear and all) to safety in combat training?
Should they be required to register for selective service?

If so then I say let em try. If not then we are risking lives for a feminist form of political gain.

The short question is that it depends on the MOS. It would be like saying the Goalkeeper should be able to run as fast as the strikers in a 40 meter dash. They seldom have to run 14 meters much less 40.

Still, I see your point. However it should be pointed out that physical ability is not the be-all/end-all of combat effectiveness.

 

[candycorn]

Here's (at least to me) the bottom line in any discussion like this: it's a done deal. I have spoken with people that are knowledgeable on the subject, my brothers in arms, vets, like myself, who have actually fought in combat and the consensus is overwhelming.

There will be a number (pick one) of women who will "test the waters". These women will be slid along, standards be damned, and will join a field unit. They will engage the enemy with minimal success and they will be heralded as "pioneers" in putting forth Obama's position. They will be awarded a chest full of medals (most unearned), and will then leave their respective units.

They will be paraded before Congress to prove what a "success" they are and how great Obama is and, for the most part, the hubbub will eventually die down.

Most will enjoy unearned prominence (much like the idiot Sandra Fluke) and their speaking services will be demanded at every "women's rights" rally in the United States. At some point, one or two of them will run for political office as a "war hero" and many, many years down the line (or, as in the case of Barry Obama) one or two years from now, may very well become president.

Meanwhile, the majority of American women, just like the once "silent majority" will shake their collective heads and go on about their business. White, liberals will pat each other on their smug backs, thanking their bi-racial supreme leader, that THEY are farther away from ever having to put THEIR lives on the line for America.

he he he...you're simple.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Exactly. A man and a woman can both possess equal endurance, even if measured somewhat differently on their physical fitness tests.



They can do it on a 15K, why should we expect it to be different at longer distances? In any event, what does it matter? If you were paying attention, I already said that women should be expected to do the same marches as men. So why are you crying?



Why would I? If you're dumb enough to fondle a woman with whom you're engaged in combatives, than you deserve the death she's going to be inflicting upon you while you were busy copping a feel.



As yes, the typical USMC snob. Oh yeah, you're just SOOOOOOO cool. Enough of you. If you can't respect your fellow brothers and sisters in arms, then get the fuck out. Our military does not need prima donnas like you.



Now I know you're full of shit. No, the first thing to do is to return fire and gain fire superiority. Sorry bub, you've run into a combat medic here. I happen to know just a thing or two. You return fire and attempt to gain fire superiority. If the casualty is conscious you try to get him to return fire also and/or tell him to move to cover.



Which is why moving a casualty just for the sake of moving him is pointless. Assuming that he's still breathing in the first place, the first thing to do is to stop the bleeding. By the time you've finished moving him, he could have bled out already.

Obviously a combat medic who allows soldiers to bleed to death so as long as he feels threatened by the combat environment. Then again, if the Army was worth it's wight in combat effectiveness then it would be they, and not the Marines, who are given the most dangerous areas of operations. Face it, your country doesent trust your service to take on the most challenging tasks of combat operations and adding women to the mix will only deteriorate Army combat effectiveness even further as they are more likely to serve among the low standards of the Army infantry as opposed the more competent and higher standards of the Marine Corps riflemen. Of course, I do respect the Army; they played a pivotal role in guarding our bases so that we can run legitamet combat operations. Thank you 1st and 2nd ID!

Lets kill the anti-Army BS.........

Different uniforms
Different missions
Same flag.....

LOL....You know, Ollie, there is a reason why the MARINES send select personnel to US ARMY RANGER school.

RLTW!

 

[osa519]

If a woman wants a combat position, and she can qualify, let her have the damn job. Its really not complicated.

Since women want equal rights and the ability to fight in combat and Gay marriages want same benifits in military like regular marriages, I think it is time to remove gender regulations on physical tests. In the USMC females can get better composite scores and promotions faster due to lower PFT standards, i believe that is highly unfair for their Male counterparts. 2013 is the year that females and male in the militarty are really doing the same jobs so let us do the same pft together.

petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/remove-gender-specifications-all-military-fitness-programs/Px1S3Mby

Please help and get this sign for the future of the Military and all things alike

 

[skye]

Sure they should.

But only... please don't whimper or complain ... don't cry... don't sue

take it like a man.

then it's all good ...no problem... go ahead.

 

[skye]

Women who want to be like men should shut up and take it like men do

Can they?

I don't think so..... but let them hey? let them try.

 

[Claudette]

With Respect to Combat Jobs, Should Women be Held to the Same Standards as Men in the Military?

Since the topic of military equality has shot into the mainstream I have a few questions. Should Women be Held to the Same Standards as Men in the Military?

Should they be held to the same physical fitness scale? (Both the physical fitness test and the MOS specific test)
Should they be subject to 20 mile ruck marches?
Should they be required to fight males in martial arts training?
Should they be required to carry male soldiers (gear and all) to safety in combat training?
Should they be required to register for selective service?

If so then I say let em try. If not then we are risking lives for a feminist form of political gain.

Yup. If a woman knowing the risks wants to go into combat beside the guys then she should be held to the same standard.

Most guys are protective of women and those in combat will be as well. Its up to the women to discourage this. Their involvment in combat should be just as one of the guys. Watch each others backs but pull your own weight.

Just my thoughts.