Woman Millitary Combat Ban Lifeted (U.S.A)

[Amberly Vale]

So a year ago my boat got three of the first female submariners. There were mixed feelings, and one of the questions asked was "how can a woman don an SCBA and push through a watertight door into a huge fire?

One chief thought it was funny that the guy asking the question was five feet tall and a meager 120 pounds. If you can pass bootcamp, you can do whatever job you physically qualify for. There's a few guys really riding the line on being a fatass and a few guys who barely pass the pushups requirement who still do the same jobs as the guys in peak physical shape.

The three woman who showed up were all officers, two butterbar ensigns and a previously qualified surface fleet officer. All three are more than capable of being submariners, and all three have since qualified submarine warfare and earned their fish (well, one's kinda dumb... but that's not cuz she's a she, it's cuz she's dumb. There are dumb guys too.) They've integrated themselves into the crew and lo and behold, they're human too. Hell, they even make as many dirty jokes as the rest of us

I never got a straight answer on a real reason why women are only now in the sub fleet. I've seen zero problems, even when there' a physical requirement, like carrying a huge piece of equipment up several ladders with one hand. It's a huge pain in the a**. The one reason I've heard is it's considered a "hazardous duty" like being in a combat environment. I didn't buy it. I don't see how it makes a difference to what plumbing you're wearing. The training is the same, the pay is the same, the expectations are the same.

Bottom line, the real thing keeping woman from being in the military is the dotted line in the recruiter's office.

[Dostya]

Ursarkar Creed

HMS Thunder Child

Touching Hair

HMS Thunder Child

...

I wasn't talking about sexual assault within certain sectors of the armed forces, I was commenting on it being used as a propaganda tool to influence decision making.

Rape is universal it happens to both males and females.

[Annoyed]

Even if it did happen that way, it would still happen less often than it does in the ranks.

Rape in the military is almost invariably done by males, and from some of the more recent stats I read, 25% of the time by a superior. UCMJ needs to nail their asses to the wall. Strip them of all rank, dishonorably discharge them, and permanently blacklist them from holding any government job. Medically discharging victims and letting the perpetrators get off with a reprimand is bullshit.

Real military here. Petty Officer Second Class, US Navy.

The description you just provided of what you'd like to see is a near-mirror of the truth. Stripped in rank? yeah, for your few remaining months in the military waiting in some rake-leaves polish-windows duty until you're administratively discharged. The military's way of making sure you don't get out as the shiny high rank you held when you were charged.

The military takes this VERY seriously.

Sexual assault in the military is only ignored when nobody speaks out. If your superior doesn't make a big deal about it, personnel are told regularly to go higher. Knock on the CO's door if you have to. Personnel who commit sexual assault are discharged, regularly without so much as a courts-martial. They get NJP (Non-judicial punishment, in the Navy we call it Captain's Mast.) if they plead innocence, then it goes to a regular Courts-Martial. There are several ways to make both open and confidential reports of sexual abuse, and every command has a few people who's job is to be the sexual assault advocate. You can't walk through a hallway in a US military facility without seeing a poster with information about sexual assault prevention. They're as common as the security, DUI, and Drug abuse posters.

"Sheesh you, you raped someone? Well no more gravy train for you, go rake some leaves and get paid a dollar less. And I will write in my personal diary about it."

[Amberly Vale]

Dostya

Ursarkar Creed

HMS Thunder Child

Touching Hair

HMS Thunder Child

...

I wasn't talking about sexual assault within certain sectors of the armed forces, I was commenting on it being used as a propaganda tool to influence decision making.

Rape is universal it happens to both males and females.

[Annoyed]

Even if it did happen that way, it would still happen less often than it does in the ranks.

Rape in the military is almost invariably done by males, and from some of the more recent stats I read, 25% of the time by a superior. UCMJ needs to nail their asses to the wall. Strip them of all rank, dishonorably discharge them, and permanently blacklist them from holding any government job. Medically discharging victims and letting the perpetrators get off with a reprimand is bullshit.

Real military here. Petty Officer Second Class, US Navy.

The description you just provided of what you'd like to see is a near-mirror of the truth. Stripped in rank? yeah, for your few remaining months in the military waiting in some rake-leaves polish-windows duty until you're administratively discharged. The military's way of making sure you don't get out as the shiny high rank you held when you were charged.

The military takes this VERY seriously.

Sexual assault in the military is only ignored when nobody speaks out. If your superior doesn't make a big deal about it, personnel are told regularly to go higher. Knock on the CO's door if you have to. Personnel who commit sexual assault are discharged, regularly without so much as a courts-martial. They get NJP (Non-judicial punishment, in the Navy we call it Captain's Mast.) if they plead innocence, then it goes to a regular Courts-Martial. There are several ways to make both open and confidential reports of sexual abuse, and every command has a few people who's job is to be the sexual assault advocate. You can't walk through a hallway in a US military facility without seeing a poster with information about sexual assault prevention. They're as common as the security, DUI, and Drug abuse posters.

"Sheesh you, you raped someone? Well no more gravy train for you, go rake some leaves and get paid a dollar less. And I will write in my personal diary about it."

Funny. Forget to mention they're also handed over to the civilian authorities. Most people don't know that when you commit a crime in the military, you still face civil justice the way private citizens do. For example, friend of mine who was charged with a DUI on base, also had to go to federal AND state court after his NJP. State, for the state DUI law. Federal, as the base is federal property. He got the book thrown at him, not once, not twice, but three times for the same crime. Well, technically the charges were different in nomenclature in each level of jurisdiction, but still, he had three sentencings from three authorities. (the whole thing in the bill of rights about not getting charged twice for the same crime? ways around that.)

[Less Than Liz]

Ursarkar Creed

So a year ago my boat got three of the first female submariners. There were mixed feelings, and one of the questions asked was "how can a woman don an SCBA and push through a watertight door into a huge fire?

One chief thought it was funny that the guy asking the question was five feet tall and a meager 120 pounds. If you can pass bootcamp, you can do whatever job you physically qualify for. There's a few guys really riding the line on being a fatass and a few guys who barely pass the pushups requirement who still do the same jobs as the guys in peak physical shape.

The three woman who showed up were all officers, two butterbar ensigns and a previously qualified surface fleet officer. All three are more than capable of being submariners, and all three have since qualified submarine warfare and earned their fish (well, one's kinda dumb... but that's not cuz she's a she, it's cuz she's dumb. There are dumb guys too.) They've integrated themselves into the crew and lo and behold, they're human too. Hell, they even make as many dirty jokes as the rest of us

I never got a straight answer on a real reason why women are only now in the sub fleet. I've seen zero problems, even when there' a physical requirement, like carrying a huge piece of equipment up several ladders with one hand. It's a huge pain in the a**. The one reason I've heard is it's considered a "hazardous duty" like being in a combat environment. I didn't buy it. I don't see how it makes a difference to what plumbing you're wearing. The training is the same, the pay is the same, the expectations are the same.

Bottom line, the real thing keeping woman from being in the military is the dotted line in the recruiter's office.

Friend of mine is a Marine officer, went to the Naval Academy. Before she left, she joked that they had done some test submarine deployments and like, half the women came back pregnant. I lol'd.

[Amberly Vale]

Less Than Liz

Ursarkar Creed

So a year ago my boat got three of the first female submariners. There were mixed feelings, and one of the questions asked was "how can a woman don an SCBA and push through a watertight door into a huge fire?

One chief thought it was funny that the guy asking the question was five feet tall and a meager 120 pounds. If you can pass bootcamp, you can do whatever job you physically qualify for. There's a few guys really riding the line on being a fatass and a few guys who barely pass the pushups requirement who still do the same jobs as the guys in peak physical shape.

The three woman who showed up were all officers, two butterbar ensigns and a previously qualified surface fleet officer. All three are more than capable of being submariners, and all three have since qualified submarine warfare and earned their fish (well, one's kinda dumb... but that's not cuz she's a she, it's cuz she's dumb. There are dumb guys too.) They've integrated themselves into the crew and lo and behold, they're human too. Hell, they even make as many dirty jokes as the rest of us

I never got a straight answer on a real reason why women are only now in the sub fleet. I've seen zero problems, even when there' a physical requirement, like carrying a huge piece of equipment up several ladders with one hand. It's a huge pain in the a**. The one reason I've heard is it's considered a "hazardous duty" like being in a combat environment. I didn't buy it. I don't see how it makes a difference to what plumbing you're wearing. The training is the same, the pay is the same, the expectations are the same.

Bottom line, the real thing keeping woman from being in the military is the dotted line in the recruiter's office.

Friend of mine is a Marine officer, went to the Naval Academy. Before she left, she joked that they had done some test submarine deployments and like, half the women came back pregnant. I lol'd.

Ask her what boat she rode. We did Middy Ops two years back, and I probably taught her how to wear an EAB and fight an electrical fire. That was actually the first extended period (as in more than a day) of woman on board subs. Some of them were cute, but from the sound of it, either she's full of it or I need to go to THAT boat. Not like the surface fleet... From what I hear, skimmers nail each other all the time. Regardless of gender. But that's probably exaggerated too.

Also, Midshipmen are retarded. Future officer or not, most don't know how to tie their own boots.

[Less Than Liz]

Ursarkar Creed

Less Than Liz

Ursarkar Creed

So a year ago my boat got three of the first female submariners. There were mixed feelings, and one of the questions asked was "how can a woman don an SCBA and push through a watertight door into a huge fire?

One chief thought it was funny that the guy asking the question was five feet tall and a meager 120 pounds. If you can pass bootcamp, you can do whatever job you physically qualify for. There's a few guys really riding the line on being a fatass and a few guys who barely pass the pushups requirement who still do the same jobs as the guys in peak physical shape.

The three woman who showed up were all officers, two butterbar ensigns and a previously qualified surface fleet officer. All three are more than capable of being submariners, and all three have since qualified submarine warfare and earned their fish (well, one's kinda dumb... but that's not cuz she's a she, it's cuz she's dumb. There are dumb guys too.) They've integrated themselves into the crew and lo and behold, they're human too. Hell, they even make as many dirty jokes as the rest of us

I never got a straight answer on a real reason why women are only now in the sub fleet. I've seen zero problems, even when there' a physical requirement, like carrying a huge piece of equipment up several ladders with one hand. It's a huge pain in the a**. The one reason I've heard is it's considered a "hazardous duty" like being in a combat environment. I didn't buy it. I don't see how it makes a difference to what plumbing you're wearing. The training is the same, the pay is the same, the expectations are the same.

Bottom line, the real thing keeping woman from being in the military is the dotted line in the recruiter's office.

Friend of mine is a Marine officer, went to the Naval Academy. Before she left, she joked that they had done some test submarine deployments and like, half the women came back pregnant. I lol'd.

Ask her what boat she rode. We did Middy Ops two years back, and I probably taught her how to wear an EAB and fight an electrical fire. That was actually the first extended period (as in more than a day) of woman on board subs. Some of them were cute, but from the sound of it, either she's full of it or I need to go to THAT boat. Not like the surface fleet... From what I hear, skimmers nail each other all the time. Regardless of gender. But that's probably exaggerated too.

Also, Midshipmen are retarded. Future officer or not, most don't know how to tie their own boots.

She wasn't part of that test. We were seniors in HS but she had done some summer thing before the USNA where they discussed a bunch of issues with incoming students. So it was some time ago (must have been, at least, pre-2005, if not pre-2004, since that was when we started senior year.)

[Amberly Vale]

...Aaaaand she's in the corps. I should expect such allegations coming from a jarhead. That's branch rivalry for you. It's okay, I accuse them of sleeping on watch and smoking meth behind their backs, but only the sleeping on watch thing is true... ninja

So I gotta ask, as a woman in the Marines, how do you suppose SHE feels on the subject of women in combat units?

[Less Than Liz]

Ursarkar Creed

...Aaaaand she's in the corps. I should expect such allegations coming from a jarhead. That's branch rivalry for you. It's okay, I accuse them of sleeping on watch and smoking meth behind their backs, but only the sleeping on watch thing is true... ninja

So I gotta ask, as a woman in the Marines, how do you suppose SHE feels on the subject of women in combat units?

Pretty OK with it, I'd imagine.

[Amberly Vale]

Less Than Liz

Ursarkar Creed

...Aaaaand she's in the corps. I should expect such allegations coming from a jarhead. That's branch rivalry for you. It's okay, I accuse them of sleeping on watch and smoking meth behind their backs, but only the sleeping on watch thing is true... ninja

So I gotta ask, as a woman in the Marines, how do you suppose SHE feels on the subject of women in combat units?

Pretty OK with it, I'd imagine.

....
I never get to be in the news. Maybe that's a good thing.
So that's cool.

[Less Than Liz]

Ursarkar Creed

Less Than Liz

Ursarkar Creed

...Aaaaand she's in the corps. I should expect such allegations coming from a jarhead. That's branch rivalry for you. It's okay, I accuse them of sleeping on watch and smoking meth behind their backs, but only the sleeping on watch thing is true... ninja

So I gotta ask, as a woman in the Marines, how do you suppose SHE feels on the subject of women in combat units?

Pretty OK with it, I'd imagine.

....
I never get to be in the news. Maybe that's a good thing.
So that's cool.

I guess I kinda set you up for that one. Thanks for being a good sport =P

[Amberly Vale]

Less Than Liz

Ursarkar Creed

Less Than Liz

Ursarkar Creed

...Aaaaand she's in the corps. I should expect such allegations coming from a jarhead. That's branch rivalry for you. It's okay, I accuse them of sleeping on watch and smoking meth behind their backs, but only the sleeping on watch thing is true... ninja

So I gotta ask, as a woman in the Marines, how do you suppose SHE feels on the subject of women in combat units?

Pretty OK with it, I'd imagine.

....
I never get to be in the news. Maybe that's a good thing.
So that's cool.

I guess I kinda set you up for that one. Thanks for being a good sport =P

no problemo

[Spierred]

Lord Cameron

God yes, hell yes, hell ******** yes.

First off emotion_dowant

Secondly,

Women have advantages in combat, small stature and frame makes them ideal snipers, scouts, pilots, tank commanders, gunners etc. America is like the only country seriously fighting in the middle east that doesn't use women combatants.

Sure they have massive disadvantages in hand to hand and the handling of large weapons, whatever. Big guns are just phalic symbols anyways.

There were some very deadly and feared women in the soviet and vietcong militaries.

Never underestimate women (unless they don't have a weapon lol)

The only thing that scares me about this is, why does the Army need to bolster it's ranks so badly...?

Wrong, wrong, wrong wrong wrong...

What are you talking about? How could you so gleefully accept women into combat arms while listing every false generalization about female soldiers?

Women have no advantage over men in combat. Your size has nothing to do with your abilities as a soldier. Modern armor, vehicles, and aircraft can accommodate people of any size. This isn't WW2, you don't need people to be 5ft. to fit into a ball turret. The cockpit of a helicopter, and compartment of a tank are plenty cozy for anyone.

Also, women have no trouble handling large weapons.. At least no more trouble than a man would.. And I've met many a female soldier who could kick my a** in combatives.

Women are at a physical, biological disadvantage because of sexual dimorphism. The way they are built, they are naturally smaller, weaker, and less prone to physical work than men... However, it is entirely too easy to overcome this. If a woman and a man both started at 120lbs and wanted to gain 20lbs muscle mass, they could both do it. The woman would have to work a lot harder than the man towards it, but in the end they would still both be entirely, physically equal. A woman is just as capable of a soldier as a man is. The ability is there.

Women only have two major disadvantages to men in combat. Spending weeks at a time out in the field is unhygenic. Again, this is biology, and I'm sorry, but life isn't fair. Women have a hole between their legs, a hole that doesn't close. You can stick a tampon in it, douche it, and it's full of all kinds of acids and s**t to keep you safe, but a woman's v****a is still susceptible to infection. This isn't a huge deal for most of the Army. Modern times, it's too easy to keep clean on a FOB, or even OP... But there are some front line units that have been caught in situations where there was no returning to the OP. Where they've had to spend weeks out living in ranger graves they dug in the middle of the desert. It's a risk, and when lives are at stake, you should take as few risks as possible.

Second, estrogen does have an effect on the human female's physiology and psychology that many soldiers would consider adverse... Women get hysterical. Hysterical actually originated as a word to describe a woman on her period. Now, this is case by case. Some women handle their periods just fine... But we are not going to go to each soldier and find out individually how each handles stress, especially that during that time of month. As well, estrogen doesn't have as big of a physical effect on adrenaline, a hormone that saves lives in war, as it does on men. Same with the vaginal hygiene problem, this is biology, and I'm sorry that life isn't fair.

I am entirely supportive of women in the military. My philosophy is that any US citizen that wishes to serve, should be able to serve. Initially I was all for it.. But the initial optimism has passed, and with it, I realized something.

General Dempsey did not say he was allowing women to be front line soldiers. He said he was opening up thousands of combat arms positions. Combat Arms is any MOS that engages in direct combat as part of their job. There are not thousands of Combat Arms MOS's in the Army. There are not thousands of any type of MOS in the Army. I think, in total, there are only about four hundred jobs in the Army. General Dempsey is intentionally withholding information because he has not lifted the ban, and it is not for what we think it is. I believe what the general is actually doing is opening up positions within Combat Arms MOS's which aren't actually direct combat jobs. So you have medics, which are actually called Health Care Specialists. A medic can be assigned to a hospital, an aid station, as ambulance drivers, or they can be assigned to maneuver elements, where they're traditionally called 'combat medics'. Women could be medics before, but not combat medics. They were still Health Care Specialists, the exact same as every other medic, but they could not be assigned to an infantry platoon because that would require them regularly engaging in combat. I believe, with what Dempsey is trying to implement, they will do the same with Combat MOS's which were previously entirely off limits. So a woman can join infantry, but not as a line infantryman. She will be an 11B and be a part of an infantry unit, but she'll be in charge of something that doesn't involve direct combat, such as CQ duty. From the vibe I get from Dempsey's wording, I think this is what's actually happening.

As well, this is a probationary test run. The measure is not in effect Army wide. They're simple testing to waters to see if it will work and they can proceed.

At the end of the day, this job deals in lives. The most important thing is the mission, and you never want to take any unnecessary risks when carrying out the mission. ******** equality, politics, pride, everything else. If it means accomplishing the mission, nothing else matters. If it turns out that it is easier to accomplish the mission without women in your unit - if a man in that same slot could do the job more effectively - this will not fly. It will not even make it off the ground. A squad is a set number of people. Adding a woman doesn't make the squad bigger, or increase it's combat ability. She's simply replacing the spot of a man who had once been there. Equality is not worth human lives in this situation.

I'm not against the move, not yet. We do not know yet whether this will have an actual, decisive impact on combat capability... It's too soon to make a conclusion one way or the other. I am supportive of the possibility. I will support General Dempsey's decision and stand behind it. Looking into it is worth it, and if it fails, it'd be even easier to step back and say we made a mistake, women can't actually be combat arms.

[Spierred]

HMS Thunder Child

Lord Cameron

Tactical Leg Sweep

Why a disadvantage in hand to hand? Raw strength helps, but can be circumvented by skill and ferocity. Ask Pacman.

weight is like the only thing that matters in a fight, you can't be serious

[Informative]

Pressure points and dirty fighting isn't exclusive to size ranges.

Unless they've trained to ignore the pain, repeated testicle, kidney, and solar plexus shots will generally down someone. Once they're writhing, anyone with any sort of leg strength can collapse the trachea.

In combat, you'll be fighting in full battle rattle. You'll have your helmet, body armor, and rifleman's kit. It would be damn near impossible to hit a pressure point, or effectively fight at all, when both of you are wearing that much s**t. The best tactic is to scream really loud, run full speed, and attempt to tackle the other person to the ground, at which point you would beat the s**t out of them or find something to kill them with. This is combat. It's not karate or ninjitsu. Those won't help you here. Even if you get into a situation where neither you nor your enemy have a firearm for some reason and you're both forced to fight hand to hand, chances are you'll both have a knife, or a sidearm, or even your helmet will do just fine. Jam the NOD mount into someone's skull, they'll die. There's no technique, no style, it's raw power. Being bigger is the only advantage you can have.

[HMS Thunder Child]

Spierred

HMS Thunder Child

Lord Cameron

Tactical Leg Sweep

Why a disadvantage in hand to hand? Raw strength helps, but can be circumvented by skill and ferocity. Ask Pacman.

weight is like the only thing that matters in a fight, you can't be serious

[Informative]

Pressure points and dirty fighting isn't exclusive to size ranges.

Unless they've trained to ignore the pain, repeated testicle, kidney, and solar plexus shots will generally down someone. Once they're writhing, anyone with any sort of leg strength can collapse the trachea.

In combat, you'll be fighting in full battle rattle. You'll have your helmet, body armor, and rifleman's kit. It would be damn near impossible to hit a pressure point, or effectively fight at all, when both of you are wearing that much s**t. The best tactic is to scream really loud, run full speed, and attempt to tackle the other person to the ground, at which point you would beat the s**t out of them or find something to kill them with. This is combat. It's not karate or ninjitsu. Those won't help you here. Even if you get into a situation where neither you nor your enemy have a firearm for some reason and you're both forced to fight hand to hand, chances are you'll both have a knife, or a sidearm, or even your helmet will do just fine. Jam the NOD mount into someone's skull, they'll die. There's no technique, no style, it's raw power. Being bigger is the only advantage you can have.

[Earnest]

Understood. I was speaking more generally, though, since I'm not qualified to speak about military stuff.

[Spierred]

HMS Thunder Child

Spierred

HMS Thunder Child

Lord Cameron

Tactical Leg Sweep

Why a disadvantage in hand to hand? Raw strength helps, but can be circumvented by skill and ferocity. Ask Pacman.

weight is like the only thing that matters in a fight, you can't be serious

[Informative]

Pressure points and dirty fighting isn't exclusive to size ranges.

Unless they've trained to ignore the pain, repeated testicle, kidney, and solar plexus shots will generally down someone. Once they're writhing, anyone with any sort of leg strength can collapse the trachea.

In combat, you'll be fighting in full battle rattle. You'll have your helmet, body armor, and rifleman's kit. It would be damn near impossible to hit a pressure point, or effectively fight at all, when both of you are wearing that much s**t. The best tactic is to scream really loud, run full speed, and attempt to tackle the other person to the ground, at which point you would beat the s**t out of them or find something to kill them with. This is combat. It's not karate or ninjitsu. Those won't help you here. Even if you get into a situation where neither you nor your enemy have a firearm for some reason and you're both forced to fight hand to hand, chances are you'll both have a knife, or a sidearm, or even your helmet will do just fine. Jam the NOD mount into someone's skull, they'll die. There's no technique, no style, it's raw power. Being bigger is the only advantage you can have.

[Earnest]

Understood. I was speaking more generally, though, since I'm not qualified to speak about military stuff.

They teach us techniques, but it's for the same reason a lot of people get into karate these days, for tournaments, and to stay in shape. We have our own fighting style called Modern Army Combatives and we run tournaments where soldiers fight each other UFC style... But in the field, your adrenaline is going, you're wearing 80+lbs of gear, your tired, stressed, angry, and scared. You've been taught since day one to trust your rifle most of all. Your rifle holds the key to survival and accomplishing the mission. Once that rifle is no longer useful, when you find yourself in a situation without it, all you're trying to do is really get away.

You're ultimate goal in hand to hand combat is not in fact to kill the enemy. It's to get away. You want to get out of that combat zone so you can get more ammo, or a new gun, whatever. You just do not want to be on the battlefield without a weapon. Battles are never fought between just two men. When you get into a hand to hand fight, you're racing the clock. Eventually someone else is going to get over there and shoot either you or him, and you're betting that his buddies will show up first because you always go with the worst possible scenario. So you want to kill or disable this guy and run. So you shove him against a wall, you drop him to the ground, you jam your knife into his neck, and you get the ******** out of there. There's not the time, or the ability to stay and fight.