Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Lady Eileen; All
Training women for combat with physically stronger men necessarily lowers the standards for training overall. This leads to a weaker military...

The lady is right on the money. As an undergrad I considered joining Army ROTC to serve my country. To be sure of the decision, before signing I went through their basic training (held after the sophomore year for those who don't join earlier) in Fort Knox, Ky.

The experience was eye-opening and disappointing, as there were double-standards for everything. Women got higher scores for fewer push-ups and sit-ups and extra minutes to complete a mile-run. This was important, as our physical fitness score was a large part (perhaps 1/2; I don't recall exactly) of our total score in camp.

The rigged standards for physical conditioning were more than matched by the favoritism in the practice command positions. All of us trainees longed to be selected for command posts, so we could demonstrate our leadership. But even though women made up only 13% of us, half of the senior command positions were reserved for them.

Thus whereas nearly all of the women could look forward to the opportunity of proving themselves as company commanders or executive officers, most of the men had to settle for squad leader at best.

The clear message to the men was that objective standards aren't nearly as important as being favored politically. This hurt morale enormously.

The favoritism wasn't just unjust and harmful to morale; it also undermined the quality of the training overall. Because teamwork is so important, much of the training took place in small groups in the field, where we had to work together to accomplish some goal. Invariable, the teams with women members had to slow down and wait for the women.

As a result, I, who had never exercised before in my life, was not challenged physically at all during my basic training. I can only imagine how the fit men must have felt! In the end, disgusted by the political corruption, I decided not to sign with ROTC.

Many of my peers who felt similarly, and had other good options in life, also decided not to continue in the ROTC because the feminist politics had so undermined the military. Others who stayed on did so only because they didn't see better choices in their lives.

The end result of all this nonsense is a weakened, politicized, feminized military. In that context, Jessica Lynch is nothing but a media-hyped side show.

A final note: a few years after I decided not to join the army, I was at a conference on changing technology's impact on the military. One of the panelists was the general in charge of training programs for the Army. When I recounted my tale and asked for his response, all he could do was sputter and talk about how proud he was of his daughters who were then serving as officers.

This, of course, is the great tragedy of the current situation: so many people have made major commitments to the status quo of women in the military that it's nearly impossible for them to be objective and admit they, and the system, are wrong.

346 posted on 11/08/2003 11:42:49 AM PST by Stop Legal Plunder ("When words are many, sin is not lacking." -- Proverbs 10:19a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies ]


To: Stop Legal Plunder
Wow! That was one insightful post bump!
361 posted on 11/08/2003 12:16:01 PM PST by Chief_Joe (From where the sun now sits, I will fight on -FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 346 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson