A Battlefield is not Gender Neutral

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

[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.