Posted on 11/06/2005 5:53:18 PM PST by Plainsman
Technically, the US Army (the senior service) realized this from the beginning (1775). It was only in the mid 1980s that politicians locked targets on the largest service and politicized General Officer careerists caved in.
Some day, we may rightly return to single-sex training for the sex-integrated branches.
(The military simply needs to figure out what women do better than men.)
I am noticing that men are disappearing from the banking industry. I think that's because women are better than men for work that deals with details and organization. I'm sure there are a lot of jobs in the armed forces that require those skills.
If that were the case, black soldiers would not have been integrated into US Army units until the Korean War, when the USMC grudgingly accepted them into the "Stewards Branch" (wow).
Instead, my Army began integration during late 1945 and SET THE STANDARD for the other services to follow.
Admittedly, we went too far with same-sex training and the USMC kept doing it right.
That's one of the problems I had with the alien movies. It is the type of movie where the male marines quickly get massacred (well, there was one woman among them), while the female lead ends up saving the day. Particularly galling is when the marines start getting massacred, and the support people are frozen into inaction. The female lead gets disgusted with them, takes over an armored personnel carrier and goes in and saves the marines. Aaaaaaagh!
I believe my platoon in Basic Training at Ft Dix in 1979 was one of the first male/female platoons.
They announced it to us. They also announced that we were to no longer call them "Drill Sergeant" but simply "Sergeant".
Oh, they were not happy about that at all. But it was the only slip-up we could do that didn't result in push-ups - to call them "Drill Sergeant".
Later on I just assumed this was more Carterization of the Armed Forces as things continued to go downhill from there.
My frame of reference is a little off.
I did Basic in 1985, but we didn't have womens in combat arms back then.
The US Army has led the way on a lot of things, but we screwed the pooch on this one. There should have been plenty of GOs ready to stand up to Pat Schroeder and the RATs, but they didn't.
It's not a question of the women "keeping up with their male counterparts."
It's a question of the women keeping ahead of the enemy.
That's the race they can't afford to lose.
Well whaddaya know?
Women really DO have to be twice as good to be considered equal to men ;^>
Aw, come on. It's standard Sci-Fi. Write a man, and have him played by a woman. Kira Nerys-DS9, Ripley-Alien(s), Zoe-Firefly/Serenity, et al...
Let the weenies have their fun.
Well they damn sure aught to have to do something besides what they want to do.
men are stronger, have heavier bone mass as well as larger muscles...I don't know what the word "robust" means in this sentence, but if it means stamina, women ususally fare pretty well....
what about the gal from "alien"...she looked like she could kick a lot of arses...I understand she's about 6' tall.....
Yep good ole 'affirmative action' really raised the bar for
the Army every since...
I was in 'that' Army in RVN 2/39th 3/61st INF 9ID
Bwahahahahaha
Ah. I was combat support.
Equis caca notwithstanding...
Women taking jobs and causing unnecessary strains and duplication of services, supplies & on TO&E if nothing else is simply a foolish and wasteful business practice
Rape claims, child welfare services,day care,mental hygiene,all the other little feminine needs that demand addressing , needs and services that men tradtional have not needed are criminal waste.,
MOS assignments ,promotions beyond ability etc etc, (the stats have been pretty clear on these issues) are costing taxpayers billions in unnecessary spending and putting a strain on the military to adequately deliver what it is suppose to...and stay within a reasonable budget
Perhaps that is why we have two Armies and a SPECOPS
One for politicians to garner votes with and one to actually do the fighting.
Duplication which costs the taxpayers a heck of a lot more than it should
This waste this tax payer monies thanks to affirmative action policy has been documented in every branch of the military (and government for that matter) except in the Marine Corps...(or at least it is kept to a minimum) The Corps is doing it right or as right as it can considering restrictions and limitations placed upon all the branches...
The Marines have better resisted the pressure put upon them by the Dacowitches and friends-and have not caved as have the other branches- imo)
The Commandant said no...and refused to cave in on many of such issues the 5 sided puzzle palace wanted to impose upon the Marines.
Not too mention the fact that in the military pursuing such insanity some man who had a higher scores is denied the position or the rank...do to affirmative action considerations rather than for the 'good of the service'...
The best man for the job is not getting the job and this comes at a BIG price...efficiency,morale,and very likely- lives.
I repeat when the Army follows the Marines they will be better for it...
imo (P.S. I am an ole phart and set in my ways ..I grew up on military bases)
I said "integration", not "affirmative action". I've had two promotions tied up for six months due to "EO issues", so I'm probably a bit more familiar on the matter.
There's no doubt that The Army led the way on this one, and I'll go further; if The Army didn't do it first, IT NEVER WOULD HAVE HAPPENED. That might be why the Feminysts targeted the Army. Unfortunately, too few GOs stood up to them.
And the marines have many of the same deployment problems that the Army has, when it comes to women, so most of your arguments fall short.
Women and men should train seperately and women should be restricted from the combat arms. I think we can both agree on that. But, both the Army and marines both deploy women in combat zones and the problems (dependent care plans, women "troubles", et al) are mutual between the two services.
I'm not an old fart, so I've seen women deployed in forward areas. Many in CS and CSS roles perform admirably. But the Army should, indeed, recognize that they are NOT MEN and train and billet them as such.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.