more about the f*#king birds

#1
Today whilst indulging in a nice moment in the toilets i picked up this months copy of soilder magazine and had a flick through, to my dismay i found that as of next year the army will be going back to single sex basic training intakes on reading further i discovered that this was a result of the 'usless femmes' not being as good as the lads and struggeling to keep up on the physical side of this and also that a much higher percentages of 'usless femmes' were on the biff or getting medicaly discharged from the army so to this end they are yet again cutting them some slack (as if its not easy enough for them allready) and as a direct result of this i will lose more hair and get older at a rapid rate of knots due to a large influx of sub-substandard f*#kwits that i have to work with (if you haddent guessed im taking about the birds)

am i going over the top a little bit or am i quite justified in saying this
 
#2
I can say i have had more than my fair share of pain in the arse females in my time however you have gone over the top on your wording.

It actually states that the problem is when trying to bring recruits up to required fitness, which i believe is a major problem at the minute for all recruits, female recruits are being pushed to hard to quickly and are therefore more prone to injury and discharge.

Which then brings up the old arguement of same job, same pay, same standards.
 
#3
Come on Smooj, you saying you would rather have a two tier system?

All trades now in the Sigs are gender free (ah bless I remember the times when 3 Sqn * Sigs remained un-infected) anyway back to today, If you feel that the gals are getting away with it then look at how they are being managed.

So many at senior management are victim to Jedi mind tricks of females. They can harness that doe eyed deer about to be run over look and manipulate the situation. Not in my office however but it has its drawbacks. I have to keep filling the box of man sized cleenex outside the Troop door.

I have a few female soldiers at the mo, a couple give all a real run for their money and put many blokes to shame! The flipside is I have a couple of networking shirkers who continue to embarass themselves socially by their Officer/SNCO groupie antics (thing is many are too stupid to see they are being played like an musical instrument).
 
#4
gents you are talking utter pish

the statistics show that neither males nor females benefit from mixed-sex phase 1 trg. So let's just be clear it's only phase 1 that's being put back to single-sex. Putting a bunch of teenagers in a highly physical, highly disciplined, highly competitive (compared to civvy street) environment is stressful enough without factoring in sex. These kids (and that's what most of them are) are hanging out their arses on PT etc and trying to impress the opposite sex at the same time! At least putting them in male-only or female-only troops for phase one means they can have comparitively similar progressive physical training. There's lot of really fit females out there, but you can't compare their physical prowess to the fittest blokes, it's just physiologically not right.

On the plus side, all that time away from blokes means when they come out of training they're gagging for it. Er...their trade training I mean :wink:

CS
 

TARE

Old-Salt
#5
It never mentioned or blamed anyone for getting rid of guilford or WRAC in the first place. I thought we were not to discirminate in the army, so why now the split (excuse pun) again. If you speak to any females that was ex wrac they will all agree that it was better training in a same sex environment. But now they demand same rights as us. Im sure there will be some litigation cases in the outing from current serving females for being discriminated against.
 
#6
CardinalSin said:
There's lot of really fit females out there
Is there :twisted:

I don't see a problem with the current system, what happens next ? single sex regiments (because all the same reasons for single sex recruit training applies to other units)
 
#7
Does this mean that Techs will end up with thier own Phase 1 training aswell - by god they need it.....

Going back to the all-femme training, won't this 'encourage' the queen bees to get busier....????
 
#9
polar said:
CardinalSin said:
There's lot of really fit females out there
Is there :twisted:

I don't see a problem with the current system, what happens next ? single sex regiments (because all the same reasons for single sex recruit training applies to other units)
Get real that's bound to happen!!! 8O !!! As CS says there are a lot of females out there who can give the blokes a run for their money, never mind STAB's :wink:
 
#10
sh1t_list said:
Does this mean that Techs will end up with thier own Phase 1 training aswell - by god they need it.....

Going back to the all-femme training, won't this 'encourage' the queen bees to get busier....????
Quite possibly!!! But as it's not illegal any more what can be done??
 
#12
Does this mean that Techs will end up with thier own Phase 1 training aswell - by god they need it.....
Thats another can of worms mate, but if you think that the techs are the only trade group that need extra training, then you're sadly mistaken. I'm a tech, and I've found that most trade groups are 50% populated with fat biffs :oops:
 
#13
sh1t_list said:
Does this mean that Techs will end up with thier own Phase 1 training aswell - by god they need it.....
Very droll Sh1tLips!! Now clean you teeth!! :wink:

Some birds are equally as capable as their male counterparts, but..

Got to agree with the comments about about doe-eyed birds using their gender to manipulate some SNCOs / Offrs - F*cking Infuriating!!

I had cause to speak in a "Robust" manner to a particular fem some time ago after weeks of trying the softly - softly approach, only for her to promptly turn on the waterworks for the OC, who dragged me over the coals. Fair enough though, he soon saw sense when I furnished him with a full list of her particular failings.

My advice would be, in today's care-bear environment, try where possible to record all your professional dealings with troublesome soldiers (both male & female) openly, and ensure they are well aware of it. That way they wont have a leg to stand on when a similar situation arises.

Oh, and AGAI the little f*ckers every chance you get!! :wink:
 
#14
frt_legends said:
Got to agree with the comments about about doe-eyed birds using their gender to manipulate some SNCOs / Offrs - F*cking Infuriating!!
I would hate to say this (at the risk of being labeled a bad so-and-so) but you used to get a lot of people playing the racial hate card as well to get to places within the Army.

Don't know how that is nowadays, but it certainly was a problem when I did my time. People were generally afraid to give these coloured blokes a serious bollocking incase the usual 'racist' cards were drawn out faster than a ninja's throwing stars.

I've also served along side many brilliant women in my time, and have seen a few of today's generation of girls in action. For the most part--they do get the job done.

It just seems, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, that it is often the minority who let the majority down--the occasional crybaby girl who generally generates a feeling of resentment for all girls.

I can't speak for all, but I've met my fair share of forces girlies who could probably kick MY ass into next week. I certainly wouldn't want to meet a few of them in a darkened alley.
 
#15
Manchester_Rogue said:
I can't speak for all, but I've met my fair share of forces girlies who could probably kick MY ass into next week. I certainly wouldn't want to meet a few of them in a darkened alley.
There's some scary female tech sup specs. Horrible dungaree-wearing man-faced bints.
 
#16
but does it not make you want to sign on the line and do one to the forigen leigon every time a bird get placed above a bloke (not in that way) purly because she needs yet another chance to come out of her shell or because she spreads her legs to a senior, or a femme that clearly dosent have the skills to carry out a simple radio check get premoted ahead of you,

a story i feel i have to share, a couple of years ago i asked for details on a course, i was informed that sqn policy was to carry out another completly unrelated corse for which i didnt hold the correct rank for, but yet a meer month later a red arrse siggy bird was loaded on to the course i had originally asked for.....why was this was it because she was genuinly good or showed potential in this line of work or mabey she pulled the female card none of these reasons it was plain and simple she let the training wing sgt stick body parts in her a big change is required
 
#17
Why is it, as soon as a woman achieves something in the Army, every single bloke within earshot thinks its either:

She's humping the CO
She played the gender card
She bribed her way on
She had the standards lowered for her to make it easy for her to complete [insert thing here]
People gave her the job/rank/appointment because she's a woman and it makes good press.

Can guys actually accept that maybe, just maybe, there are women in the Army that can do their job just as good--if not better--than some guys?

No wonder why women aren't too overjoyed to join the Army because they're always seen as second class people, and even when they do put in 300% more work than anybody else, they're STILL seen as only half a person.

My wee cousin from Scotland wants to join the Army. She wants a trade, so naturally I'd point her towards the REME. She has a good college qualification in engineering (I think, I'll have to check) and knows her stuff. Problem is, I am thinking of talking her out of joining the Army, purely because of the attitudes of some men that she is undoubidly going to get into contact with.
 
#18
Manchester_Rogue said:
My wee cousin from Scotland wants to join the Army. She wants a trade, so naturally I'd point her towards the REME. She has a good college qualification in engineering (I think, I'll have to check) and knows her stuff. Problem is, I am thinking of talking her out of joining the Army, purely because of the attitudes of some men that she is undoubidly going to get into contact with.
Send her to the RAF - if she is to get on in the army she'll need to be better than the guys to be treated anywhere near the same. Since women are generally less physically robust than men, her relative lack of strength will inevitably be seen as her being crap at the job by many bigoted fools. Sad but true.

CS
 
#19
Aye Cardinal, I see what you mean about having to try 2x as hard to be considered as good.

I was once on an indoor pistol range with two para reg guys and a young lady armourer from the REME. Her accuracy with virtually every weapon there showed up both the para reg guys and myself.

Was a shame really, because she had to put up with a LOT of stick from her work collegues, mostly because they were jealous of her I think. It's hard for a parachute reg guy to say to a woman 'you're crap' when she out-classes him in both weapon accuracy and handling skills.

A lot of respect was earnt for her that day.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#20
CardinalSin said:
gents you are talking utter pish

the statistics show that neither males nor females benefit from mixed-sex phase 1 trg.
CS
I have to take you up on this CS. In my days (of yore) horizontal PT training was always classed as mixed sex! It is only now, in the PC world we are in, that same sex horitonal PT seems to be more acceptable.

IMHO - go back to the old system :wink:
 

Similar threads

Top