Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

US Forces Basic Training - Co-ed

I think rhetoric is getting in the way of joined-up thinking here.
Nope - read back how many posts start off talking about how weak women let the side down, which end in allusions to tree-hugging etc etc

Is it that you really desire everyone to be 'equal' regardless of creed, colour, gender, religon, sexual orientation and ability ?
Everyone is equal regardless of creed etc - but that's completely irrelevant!! What I want is for everyone to be selected on their ability to do the job - and the requirements of the job to be laid down in stone and not moved either way to suit some person's agenda.

It's hard enough to get anyone to join and remain, (male or female,) let alone looking for Demi Moore.

Too bad - if the Nation can't produce enough men of the required quality to be soldiers, well tough. We will just have to reduce our Forces drastically, remove ourselves from the UN Security Council and admit our Nation just can't cut it wrt to quality and quantity as far as the male species goes any more.


I wouldn't say that it's the fault of females in the forces that the lads cannot hack it, if indeed they can't, so the gender question is only muddying the waters.
The gender question is the only one I'm addressing here, in response to the enormous articles posted on this thread. I get highly pissed off that a system, devised by men (ie senior officers) produces low grade soldiers of both genders - with the women being held up as the worst offenders. So, who recruited, selected and devised the regime under which they were trained? Men!!
(The low grade men get mentioned as an afterthought.)


What I suspect might then become apparent is that we will find a lot of men, who are not physically capable of being soldiers, being exposed for the frauds that they are.

I suspect that a lot of the men who reckon they are steely eyed killers, only held back by their urge to protect their lady comrades, are liars. I think they know that come the day when the bullets are flying they will use any excuse to keep their heads down and hide behind some girly, claiming they were trying to protect her. (OldAdam, I do not believe you are one of aforementioned)

But of course, we don't know do we, as this is supposed to a hypothetical scenario as women - of course - are non-combatents...................

(and only a man would come up with the notion as ridiculous as a non-combatent soldier).

So, why don't we just bite the bullet on this one and expel women from the Military. But let's not pretend it's because they're not strong enough - let's admit the truth which is that men are not strong enough to cope with the reality of women fighting and dying for their country, their families and their beliefs.
 

biffa

Old-Salt
im a serving fireman and ex bootie ...the problem should not revolve around whether woman are suitable per se , but whether our standards are high enough....standards are dropping in the uk in all areas ..anti social behaviour, industry etc etc ..so the services are almost under peer pressure to follow suit ......in the fire service recruits or trainees do not even learn the firemans carry on the premise that "they will prolly never have to do it" even carry downs have stopped in london ... i belive they are making both our jobs more dangerous , training should be as realistic as possible so that on the fire or battleground you have half a chance ..surely that is true health and safety isnt it ??? im sick and tired of carrying recruits or being told "nah mate wasnt taught that" by some dripping recruit...the awful shame is that contary to un educated belief most fireman are professionals who are firecly loyal of high standards and our little tricks of trade but if im honest in about 15 years if we carry on the way we are you might as well call a green goddess ....
 

chicken_jim

Old-Salt
A few thoughts:

The lack of hard realistic training inphase 1 and 2 means that recruits turn up at units unprepared for th hard facts of life. Instead on being nurtured through everything they are expected to do things for themselves, by themselves. This hurts, especiially in PT and on exercises This probably explains the high dropout rate of soldiers in the first couple of years of service. :(

Secondly women are less fit than male soldiers but in my experience most of them are more mature, dedicated to their jobs and more capable tradesman. Prehaps it is a question of good leadership maximising soldiers strengths and trying to minimise their weaknesses.

Finally, had a lecture from a WW2 vet the other month who told us that during their exercises the instructors used to shoot at them, aiming to miss, to give them a feel for incoming fire. They used to loose 1 or 2 an exercise. Perhaps training is getting easier after all. :?:
 

New Posts

Top