Panetta To Allow Women in Combat

[PeZook]

There were about 500 women who served during the Civil War (on both sides) - most of them were never found out, despite having to dress like men and living amongst men for years. One would think if they were unable to pick up the slack, someone would realize what was going on.

It is fact likely that was happening as long as there have been wars. Hell, the Dahomey Amazons are a rather recent example, and they were an all-female unit which routinely fought all-male armies and utterly destroyed them with muskets and machettes...

Yeah, thats not nearly the sheer body endurance that modern day overloaded infantryman have to bear.

Try that same weight, but marching with it, most of the day, for months on end. With maybe a day or two break and then right back to it. Its simply brutal grinding.

You mean months of ardorous physical labor? Oh, yeah, right

Is anybody in this thread actually suggesting no selection? Don't most people actually say "No problem,as long as standards remain high"?

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Yeah, thats not nearly the sheer body endurance that modern day overloaded infantryman have to bear.

Try that same weight, but marching with it, most of the day, for months on end. With maybe a day or two break and then right back to it. Its simply brutal grinding.

But this has nothing to do with women, and all to do with the absurd shit US infantrymen have to carry, which is double the load of medieval plate mail without any of the latter's protection value. And still, refusing women is bad both because of raw manpower issues and because you decline to have the occassional stellar soldier just due to him being a her.

[Block]

Yeah, thats not nearly the sheer body endurance that modern day overloaded infantryman have to bear.

Try that same weight, but marching with it, most of the day, for months on end. With maybe a day or two break and then right back to it. Its simply brutal grinding.

But this has nothing to do with women, and all to do with the absurd shit US infantrymen have to carry, which is double the load of medieval plate mail without any of the latter's protection value. And still, refusing women is bad both because of raw manpower issues and because you decline to have the occassional stellar soldier just due to him being a her.

Having seen a suit of interceptor armor stop a couple of 7.62 rounds to the chest I'm going to disagree that it doesn't provide the needed protection. Also a lot of the extra weight is things like spare batteries, ammo, spare barrels, etc. It's not just the armor. There also haven't been manpower issues in the us military since the recession started in '08.

[Dominarch's Hope]

...Really? 500?


Read my first page responses. They essentially sum up to.

"As long they meet the standards" and "Fewer women will be able to meet those standards due to several issues, and fewer women apply in total in the first place, so women in the Infantry will be significantly outnumbered by the men by orders of magnitude, but more so than generally"

And the Civil War soldier didnt march with quite as much weight as the Infantryman in Afghanistan does. Nowhere am I saying that zero women will be able to qualify. I am saying that the women who do qualify and can hack it will be significantly outnumbered, by an even larger factor than they generally are.

[Raj Ahten]

Yeah, thats not nearly the sheer body endurance that modern day overloaded infantryman have to bear.

Try that same weight, but marching with it, most of the day, for months on end. With maybe a day or two break and then right back to it. Its simply brutal grinding.

Those requirements are considered minimum requirements to keep certified. Also do you really know what wildland firefighting is about? For the elite crews an average day not on the fireline is something like a six to 8 mile run at a 9 minute a mile pace followed by about 100 pullups and sets of core exercises. Then the rest of the day is spent on project work, also known as clearing brush. On fire assignments your normal shift is 16 hours long (Longer on initial attack) with a 13 day on, 1 day off schedule. Once the fire season really starts going the Smokejumpers and hotshot crews travel anywhere they are needed in the US for a six to eight month period. The work itself is basically digging ditches and clearing timber on terrain that is considered too steep for heavy equipment. Smokejumpers have the added benefit of having to hump out all their gear and chutes to the nearest road after they finish the fires they drop on. People have compared fighting a forest fire to fighting a war for god knows how long due to the logistics and work required to get the job done. I'd say there is something to that analogy.

Back in the Seventies people said woman couldn't cut it for the same reasons you keep mentioning and were proved wrong ever since. The toughest fire fighter I've ever seen was a five foot nothing female smokejumper who rivaled a normal crew's squad in work output. Only downside was she also liked RedMan chewing tobacco

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Having seen a suit of interceptor armor stop a couple of 7.62 rounds to the chest I'm going to disagree that it doesn't provide the needed protection. Also a lot of the extra weight is things like spare batteries, ammo, spare barrels, etc. It's not just the armor.

I didn't mean to say the body armor is ineffective. I was talking about the extra weight.

There also haven't been manpower issues in the us military since the recession started in '08.

Shhh. If the Republicans learned of it, they'd never want the recession to stop.

[Block]

There's a theory out there that the recession was created by the Republicans for just that purpose and that it just hit a bit too early for McCain to benefit from the plan. I seriously doubt it obviously.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Please, tell me that people heard it on the Colbert Report.

[Dominarch's Hope]

Yeah, thats not nearly the sheer body endurance that modern day overloaded infantryman have to bear.

Try that same weight, but marching with it, most of the day, for months on end. With maybe a day or two break and then right back to it. Its simply brutal grinding.

Those requirements are considered minimum requirements to keep certified. Also do you really know what wildland firefighting is about? For the elite crews an average day not on the fireline is something like a six to 8 mile run at a 9 minute a mile pace

Did they do that in gear? Hmmm?

There's a theory out there that the recession was created by the Republicans for just that purpose and that it just hit a bit too early for McCain to benefit from the plan. I seriously doubt it obviously.

So the Leftwing has its crazy conspirators too?

Nah, its just a side benefit to the real goal of making Americans even less mobile and having even less spare cash but with a gentle sense of entitlement. Taking away the jobs from those who really desire them and fostering an attitude of "I shouldnt have to have one" for those who dont want one. Then both of those groups become dependent on meager allowances and are unable to purchase things like guns or stock up on supplies. Even if they wanted to.

[Losonti Tokash]

I seriously have to ask what your point even is. You acknowledge women can do it, people have posted numerous examples of women fighting wars (or Raj's examples of incredible physical achievement by firefighters), but you keep harping about "BUT GEAR HEAVY!!" It looks kind of like you're saying most women can't do it, but then again neither can most men. I've personally known female cadets and midshipmen who filled up backpacks with rocks before they went running, and I've also known giant fatasses who claimed to be running miles a day and how women just couldn't match men physically.

[Dominarch's Hope]

Nice anecdotes brah, are they admissable here?

[Losonti Tokash]

So are you just trolling or what?

[Alyeska]

Nice anecdotes brah, are they admissable here?

Alright asswipe. You've been called to task on the subject. Prove your claims that women cannot meet standards.

If even a single example is found that contradicts your claims, you lose this game.

[Raj Ahten]

Yeah, thats not nearly the sheer body endurance that modern day overloaded infantryman have to bear.

Try that same weight, but marching with it, most of the day, for months on end. With maybe a day or two break and then right back to it. Its simply brutal grinding.

Those requirements are considered minimum requirements to keep certified. Also do you really know what wildland firefighting is about? For the elite crews an average day not on the fireline is something like a six to 8 mile run at a 9 minute a mile pace

Did they do that in gear? Hmmm.

No because that would be asinine. There are enough overuse and training injuries as it is without pointless macho bullshit like running in full gear for miles. In the fire community if you are running on an incident its bacause you are trying to escape a burnover. In that case you are trained to ditch anything that can slow you down. People have been killed in the past trying to carry out chainsaws and the like.

Also you are moving the goalposts. First its woman can't do hard labor carrying heavy weight for months. That was refuted. So now unless they do dailly runs in full gear they aren't matching up to some bullshit standard of masculine perfection.

[spaceviking]

How much different is the standard for front line combat soldiers from the rest? Could the average older male solider cut it in a combat role (I mean as a general grunt)?

[Aaron MkII]

How much different is the standard for front line combat soldiers from the rest? Could the average older male solider cut it in a combat role (I mean as a general grunt)?

There's age groups, older guys get a certain amount of extra time on runs and less pushups, etc. But...when I was in a field unit we never did any of that and instead had a 13km march, fireman's carry at the end. For us there is one standard, infantry to whatever shit trade you can think of, MP maybe.

Oh:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dee_Brasseur

One of our first fighter pilots. Woman can cut it just fine.

[spaceviking]

I have seen some disgustingly obese people in Canadian Forces uniforms, so this one standard must not be all that high.

[Block]

How much different is the standard for front line combat soldiers from the rest? Could the average older male solider cut it in a combat role (I mean as a general grunt)?

Typically what happens is that you have your Army-wide standard based on age and sex, and if you meet that they can't put you out, but a lot of units have individual standards where if you don't meet them, no matter what your age is, you're put on remedial PT where they watch your diet, make you work out extra times during the week, take away certain privileges, etc.

[Aaron MkII]

I have seen some disgustingly obese people in Canadian Forces uniforms, so this one standard must not be all that high.

Lol, yeah I've worked with a few. They do tend to be in the support units at least.

[Dominarch's Hope]

[quote="Dominquote="Raj Ahten"]

Yeah, thats not nearly the sheer body endurance that modern day overloaded infantryman have to bear.

Try that same weight, but marching with it, most of the day, for months on end. With maybe a day or two break and then right back to it. Its simply brutal grinding.

Those requirements are considered minimum requirements to keep certified. Also do you really know what wildland firefighting is about? For the elite crews an average day not on the fireline is something like a six to 8 mile run at a 9 minute a mile pace

Did they do that in gear? Hmmm.[/quote]

No because that would be asinine. There are enough overuse and training injuries as it is without pointless macho bullshit like running in full gear for miles. In the fire community if you are running on an incident its bacause you are trying to escape a burnover. In that case you are trained to ditch anything that can slow you down. People have been killed in the past trying to carry out chainsaws and the like.

Also you are moving the goalposts. First its woman can't do hard labor carrying heavy weight for months. That was refuted. So now unless they do dailly runs in full gear they aren't matching up to some bullshit standard of masculine perfection.[/quote]

I havent changed the goalpost, dipshit, you simply refused to aim at them.

It was marching with heavyweight, sometimes days at a time, for months at a go on a tour of duty. As in, patrols with full gear that last for 24 hours up to 72 hours gone from base.


That was the goalpost from the very beginning. YOU are the one who ignored it by comparing doing daily runs in normal clothes and isolated incidents of working with heavy gear with constantly marching with heavy gear with often times less than 48 hours inbetween said marchings.


The two are entirely incompatible comparisons and you damn well know it.


To everybody who pointed out that the soldeirs are overloaded period, thank you. That is not in dispute.


Oh and...to the bolded specifically...i said marched dumbassed. Not run. Marched. As in basically walk. You are the one who brought up fucking running. Also, about those injuries. You wouldnt happen to mean...bodily joint stress injuries and such hmm?

All you have done is proven that a Firefighters physical requirements are entirely different from a Soldier in Afghanistans.


Alyeska, I will have the stats regarding non-gender specific injuries within 24 hours. Hilariously, I can just jack them from sb or get the chans to find them for me. I wil also find that Marines story too.


And never in this thread di I say that women couldnt hack it at all. So unless a mod or two feels like going on an editting spree, stop acting like I said that.

[Losonti Tokash]

Then what the hell is your point? That soldiers carry a lot of shit?

[Stark]

Ironically the historical examples of women in combat suggest the metrics used to assess soldiers (ie, designed to select the most fit men) don't actually measure things that are relevant to success as a soldier.

[slebetman]

If you say:

It was marching with heavyweight, sometimes days at a time, for months at a go on a tour of duty. As in, patrols with full gear that last for 24 hours up to 72 hours gone from base.

That was the goalpost from the very beginning.

And then you say:

And never in this thread di I say that women couldnt hack it at all. So unless a mod or two feels like going on an editting spree, stop acting like I said that.

then logically you're saying that you think women CAN march with heavy weights just like the rest of the infantry.

Hmm. I guess you point is that you saying that women must meet the same standards doesn't mean that you don't want women to become infantry.

And, I think you're quite clear on this but it got mixed up in a lot of arguments, what you're basically saying is that those who insist that the standards are too high don't realize that it's basically what an infantryman needs to do on the front line on a daily basis anyway.

So, yes soldiers are overburdened. But that is completely different problem that does not have anything to do with gender.

And yes, as the others have argued, a female infantryman will pick up the slack and do exactly what her male counterparts do on the battlefield. But this does mean that she will be overburdened in exactly the same way as her male counterparts.

I guess mixing these two issues is the crux of the heated exchange. It's not the standards that's fucked up - it's the amount of equipment that an infantryman is expected to carry that is fucked up. This is in fact a well known and documented issue and the army have been trying to find ways to solve it for a long time now.

[PeZook]

Ironically the historical examples of women in combat suggest the metrics used to assess soldiers (ie, designed to select the most fit men) don't actually measure things that are relevant to success as a soldier.

See my example of special forces selection: You can totally ace the physical tests, and if the outfit has to choose between you and a candidate who's score was way weaker but who's fluent in Arabic and Mandarin...you're not getting in.

[Alyrium Denryle]

It was marching with heavyweight, sometimes days at a time, for months at a go on a tour of duty. As in, patrols with full gear that last for 24 hours up to 72 hours gone from base.


That was the goalpost from the very beginning. YOU are the one who ignored it by comparing doing daily runs in normal clothes and isolated incidents of working with heavy gear with constantly marching with heavy gear with often times less than 48 hours inbetween said marchings.

You wanted to know about endurance. Wildland firefighters have it. They dont do long runs in heavy gear, but they DO fight forest fires and do heavy labor in gear for days on end. 13 days on, 1 day off for several months. The gear for the average smokejumper weights about the same as heavy gear for the average infantryman. The terrain is also much rougher than urban or desert fighting, often a lot warmer on its own... and they are wearing gear that itself acts like an oven (insulation goes both ways you see). That they dont run in that just means they are human beings who dont want to drop from heat exhaustion inside 15 minutes.

You then proceded to counter this by asking if they do their 8 mile run in full gear, thus appearing to shift your goal posts. So either you did shift your goal posts and are now lying about doing so, or you cannot articulate an argument clearly.

Oh and...to the bolded specifically...i said marched dumbassed. Not run. Marched. As in basically walk. You are the one who brought up fucking running. Also, about those injuries. You wouldnt happen to mean...bodily joint stress injuries and such hmm?

What do you think they DO when they are out on a wildfire? They get inserted via plane in full gear, set up a camp, and then hike through a burning forest--not just in full gear, but smothering full gear--and do hard labor on terrain that heavy landmovers cannot access.