A Battlefield is not Gender Neutral

US Defense Watch ^ | June 11, 2016 | Ray Starmann

[pboyington]

It’s 1984 at the Pentagon, where the truth is warped like an old 78 RPM record sitting in the sun all day. At the Pentagon, true is false and false is true and the difference couldn’t be located with a million GPS’.

We are living in dangerous times, when incompetent, leftist social engineers are calling the plays in the Pentagon and in the process, sealing the fate of the US military in future conflicts.

As reported on Townhall this week:

The U.S. Navy and Marine Corps are getting a progressive make-over. The word ‘man’ will be dropped from each job and rating description to make them inclusive and gender-neutral.

Progressive make-over defined as the self-immolation of the US military.

Long gone are the days of ordnanceman, corpsman, or naval aircrewman- the new rating could be called ordinance person, health assistant, and aircrew assistant.

What’s long gone are the days of the US military winning wars.

“This is one more step in how our force has changed,” Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus said in an interview Friday. “Our force has evolved, our force is different. And I believe it’s stronger and better.”

“It’s time for us to let go of telling women, ‘You’re just included. We don’t call you out by sex, but just know you’re part of mankind,'” said Lory Manning, a senior fellow at the Service Women’s Action Network. “When you hear that ‘man’ at the end, the image is a male image.”

We wouldn’t want any male images associated with the military would we Comrade Manning?

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter was asked about this proposition in May by the Associated Press.

“Signifying that in all appropriate ways is, I think, exactly that, very appropriate and needed,” he responded.

Carter said that he did not have any good alternative titles for those stripped of “man,” but that someone smart was going to figure it out.

Uh…huh…

A female yeoman told a senior Navy official that “administrative specialist” would be a better title than yeoman.

There are some Army and Air Force titles that end in ‘man’ as well, but the services are not considering changing them.

The Pentagon has indeed lost its collective mind and is creating its very own version of Newspeak from George Orwell’s famous novel, 1984. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus are living characters right out of the Ministry of Truth in Orwell’s fictional police state, Oceania.

Apparently, in the US military in 2016:

Diversity is a combat multiplier.

Diversity is strength.

Gender neutrality can win wars.

Riflemen no longer exist. They are now rifle people.

Mortarmen are mortar things.

Women in the combat arms will lead the way.

Women in the combat arms and special operations make the military much stronger.

And, my personal favorite…Standards will always remain the same.

Carter and Mabus are certifiably nuts. They need to be carted off in a couple ambulances to Walter Reed, where after their psychiatric exams they will be both deemed mentally unfit to continue holding their offices.

Instant Section 8 – just add Pentagon Kool Aid.

Idiots like Ash Carter and Ray Mabus believe if you alter titles and erase letters, you will somehow create a world where men and women are interchangeable widgets with the same body parts, physical strength, thoughts and emotions.

This pure, unadulterated insanity really began at the ivy covered towers that are the home of the Snowflake Generation, our nation’s overpriced, communist footholds, aka universities. On our nation’s campuses, gender neutral psycho speak is in vogue. Men are no longer men and women are no longer women. They have been replaced by ridiculous made up words and terms that are straight from the Big Brother playbook.

And, the Pentagon is marching right along. Unlike, the intellectual leftist airheads on college campuses, the Pentagon is supposed to deal with reality. The US military is charged with winning our nation’s wars. That is the sole mission of the military. Unfortunately, the Pentagon is now more concerned with transforming the military into a gender neutral fantasy land, than fighting wars and defending the nation.

Here are some questions the military’s executioners have probably not asked themselves:

How are female soldiers and Marines going to survive hand to hand combat fights against a Russian soldier or an ISIS jihadi? The gender neutral nuts will tell you that hand to hand combat is a thing of the past. WRONG. Tell that to the Marines who fought in Fallujah. Tell that to the Delta Force troopers who took down an ISIS prison several months ago. Tell that to the soldiers of the Big Red One who engaged in hand to hand fighting with the Tawakalna Division of the Republican Guard during the Battle of Norfolk in 1991.

Obviously, Carter and Mabus have given no thought on how women are going to carry heavy combat loads on sustained operations. In an extensive study done by the 82nd Airborne, they outlined the various combat loads for soldiers in the famed “Devils in baggy pants” division fighting in Afghanistan.

A Rifleman in the 82nd had a fighting load of 63 pounds, an approach march load of 96 pounds and an emergency approach march load of 127 pounds.

A M240 Bravo Assistant Gunner had a fighting load of 70 pounds, an approach march load of 121 pounds and an emergency approach march load of 148 pounds.

A Mortar Section Leader had a fighting load of 58 pounds, an approach march load of 110 pounds and an emergency approach march load of 149 pounds.

Most women in the world cannot carry those weights for any sustained amount of time or at all, without enduring stress injuries.

Of course these are individual loads and troopers rucking their own loads will not be able to carry more weight to help females. And, what happens when Carter’s mandatory quotas of 25% to 35% percent women in each combat unit are instituted? You’re going to have large numbers of female grunts and Marines who can’t carry a basic load into combat. Combat units are going to be combat ineffective before they even see a green Russian tracer go down range at them.

How about artillery shells? How is your average woman in a field artillery unit going to carry a 98 pound, 155mm round? According to the 2014 Marine study that was thrown into the Pentagon dumpster by both Carter and Mabus, only 18% of female Marines tested could carry a 155 round 50 feet to a gun; whereas, 98% of male Marines could complete the task. It is important to note that that the women tested were the cream of the crop physically in the Corps. The male Marines tested were only in average physical condition.

When you low crawl out of the Disney like, fantasy world of Gender Neutral Land, you realize that US military policy is now based on an allusion and that the Pentagon is lying and betraying an American public with limited, if no understanding of the military.

And, where oh where are the Joint Chiefs of Staff while this delusional destruction marches on?

I call it like I see it and the JCS are nothing more than cowards weighed down by fruit salad and gold braids. I don’t care what they’ve done in their illustrious careers. They are standing by and doing nothing as the US military is destroyed on their watch. Frankly, they should all be court martialed for dereliction of duty.

One day, historians will talk about the power and the glory of the US military like historians speak of Ancient Rome. The famous Roman Legions were weakened and ultimately destroyed by power hungry maniacal leaders, social decay, weakness and cowardice. The US military is on the same collision course, only 1600 years later.

What Mabus and Carter haven’t figured out yet is that our enemies are not politically correct, gender neutral, egg shell walking wallflowers. They’re going to fight us the old-fashioned way, with men. And, we are going to lose.

There is no equal opportunity on a battlefield. A battlefield is not gender neutral. On a battlefield the strong survive and the weak are shot, shake and baked and gutted like Coho Salmon.

You don’t have to be a field marshal to figure out that the US military is on the eve of destruction.

Diversity is not going to carry the day. It’s the death knell of the US military.

[Aliska]

Maybe it works for Israel, but it's not for us.

Are we trying to remake the world in our image? They already probably think we have gone off the deep end.

[Vermont Lt]

The IDF moved women out of ground combat several years ago.

[Pelham]

Pick up a copy of Eugene Sledge’s memoir “With the Old Breed”.

Get a look at what frontline infantry fighting can be like. With rifles and knives and beating people to death with your hands. Is this the party women want to join?

[rlmorel]

Women in combat is insanity, and those who support it in any way have never been in combat, have not taken the time to look realistically at the issue, are politically compromised, or are simply ignorant. For a really good assessment of this situation, written by a female Marine, check this link below by Jude Eden-"Jane of Trades", USMC on women in combat and training.

In particular, about halfway down is her seminal piece: Women in Combat: The Question of Standards, by Jude Eden. I cannot recommend this page highly enough, she served in the USMC in the Middle East, honorably, in non-combat roles, and she knows of what she speaks.

Here, from that article, is the passage that says it all: "...Meanwhile, the argument to maintain the combat exclusion makes itself easily in every aspect. Including women in combat units is bad for combat, bad for women, bad for men, bad for children, and bad for the country.

The argument for the combat exclusion is provable all the time, every time.

Political correctness has no chance against Nature. Her victories are staring us in the face at all times.

The men just keep being able to lift more and to run faster, harder, and longer with more weight on their backs while suffering fewer injuries. They just keep never getting pregnant.

The combat units have needs that women cannot meet. Women have needs that life in a combat unit cannot accommodate without accepting significant disadvantage and much greater expense. Where 99 percent of men can do the heavy-lifting tasks typical of gunners, but 85 percent of women cannot, there is no gap women need to fill..."

And it isn't just the infantry, either. I watched a video of USMC artillery, and they were humping 155mm artillery shells off the back of a truck. They were pulling them off at chest height, duckwalking them over 15 yards, putting them on the ground, then going back and getting another one.

I think they are somewhere around 100 lbs per round.

Sure, there are women who could do that. But the average woman could not.

When in a combat situation, I can certainly imagine times where that nice loader and transporter thingie is not going to be available, or you are simply in a situation where you gotta move the rounds fast using a bunch of people.

To boil it down, my objection to women in combat is twofold: First, simple differences in physical capability and function between men and women, and Secondly, the effect on morale and logistics associated with military activity due to a mixing of the sexes in that environment.

[Pelham]

The biggest problems arise during the long periods of boredom when nothing is going on. Women mixed in among 20 yr old males is a recipe for disaster.

[exDemMom]

So... I’m no longer a woman, I’m just a wo?

That sounds so wrong.

[jmacusa]

A good buddy of mine was an artillery sergeant Vietnam. He was in charge of a four gun battery of tracked 175mm guns.( I don’t think they use this artillery piece anymore). He is definitely against women in combat roles using the same argument about women not being able to handle the weight of rounds plus other issues unique to women that are not shared by men.

[Secret Agent Man]

Yeoman Rand.

Enough said.

[jmacusa]

I agree entirely. I believe during the Gulf War of 1991 there was a Navy ship that had a mixed crew and at least a dozen females on the ship ended up pregnant. Hell, the Navy briefly floated the idea of women on submarines. Think about for a moment.

[jmacusa]

The military loves abbreviation ‘’Mom’’.

[Pelham]

The jealousies and rivalries for the attention of women destroys unit morale. The Navy might be able to put up with that on big surface ships but it could be lethal on small combat units near the front. It’s beyond crazy to be trying it.

[the OlLine Rebel]

THE #1 problem with women in MIL is pregnancy.

Legitimate or not, it is a major hiccup in service. Very disruptive.

Everything else is secondary.

[Wyrd bið ful aræd]

Did not and does not work for Israel — they do not allow women in combat units.

[rlmorel]

I have come to believe there are people who want to see this happen solely for the deleterious effects it will have on our armed services.

But they are aided and abetted by Useful Idiots who don't understand what will happen to those women in combat, and who also view the military as a jobs program as social experimentation lab.

These same people believe that the fantasy and entertainment they see coming out of Hollywood is reality. They believe that females are fully as capable as men in every facet, and that the reason they have never been able to compete is SOLELY because they have been discouraged from doing so at every turn, and have not been given fair opportunities to compete.

They really, honestly believe that if women are trained up at the same level as men, they believe that they will, at an average level, achieve the same level of physical prowess that men enjoy. That a woman will be able to engage in physical combat at the same level, carry the same loads, and endure the same physical privations that men will have to endure in combat.

It is insane. They really do believe it. They don't step back and look at something like a marathon, where the women, first class female athletes who have trained their entire lives at the highest levels, still finish a minimum of 15 minutes behind the first man who finishes. The average female finishes a full 30 minutes behind the average male.

It isn't because women have been deprived of opportunity, or because of inherent sexism. It is because of the irrefutable, well documented, and medically accepted FACTS contained this graph below:

That, and the fact that men have the unfair advantage of natural steroids that exist in the bodies of men the women do not have.

[rlmorel]

Agreed. But if you point that out, somehow you are denigrating women for that.

It is insanity.

[the OlLine Rebel]

I am a woman.

[exDemMom]

Oh, given my chosen career field, I am well aware of the military love of acronyms. This is why I begin letters, “ALCON” and end them, “V/r.”

[rlmorel]

Yes. Liberals seem to think that men and women, especially those in the age bracket of 17-25 will be able to completely ignore biology, work together as complete un-sexual professionals, and there will never be any issues or behavioral problems.

Their argument (and I have actually heard people saying this) is that men and women can do this in the workforce, there is no reason they can’t do it in the military.

It is insanity. These people have absolutely no idea. None.

I have said it before and will say it again: apart from the obvious, undeniable operational issues, logistical issues, and the degradation on mission performance, possibly the most destructive and corrosive effect will be the one that it will have on unit cohesion and morale.

Unit Cohesion and Morale. And you will actually hear people say “How can having women in combat units decrease morale? The opposite would occur...morale would go up.”

Yes. I have heard it.

[Pelham]

When little girls start engaging in vicious fistfights that boys get into then I’ll start paying attention. I’ve never seen women or girls exhibit the rage that comes naturally to angry males. I’ve seen brave women but that’s not the same thing.