Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Quote:
Data collected during a monthslong experiment showed Marine teams with female members performed at lower overall levels, completed tasks more slowly and fired weapons with less accuracy than their all-male counterparts. In addition, female Marines sustained significantly higher injury rates and demonstrated lower levels of physical performance capacity overall, officials said.
And they are talking about the results of ground combat operations exercises.
And they are talking about the results of ground combat operations exercises.
and because they are talking about comparison of men to women in ground combat operations and they have concluded that women are less capable in all aspects they seem to be testing you are arguing what? That they should not be in combat operations? Hell man how the heck do you expect to accomplish that. You do realize that for every ground pounding knuckle dragger there are at least 5 support soldiers. So I go back to the point I have been saying. You and everyone here that has been arguing that we are somehow less of a service is playing into our enemies hands and perpetuate a falsehood.
and because they are talking about comparison of men to women in ground combat operations and they have concluded that women are less capable in all aspects they seem to be testing you are arguing what? That they should not be in combat operations? Hell man how the heck do you expect to accomplish that. You do realize that for every ground pounding knuckle dragger there are at least 5 support soldiers. So I go back to the point I have been saying. You and everyone here that has been arguing that we are somehow less of a service is playing into our enemies hands and perpetuate a falsehood.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner
Some view the military as if all servicemembers are 11Bs. The problem here is that only a tiny percentage are actual 11Bs.
So long as the measuring stick is what a male 11B can do, most females are always going to fall a bit short.
I was never an 11B, when measured up against them, I should think that I would fall short.
The military has a thousand other jobs, I am sure that in many other jobs a female could perform just as well as a male can perform.
Obviously I have never gone to sea with any female crewmen, but I do not see where having females at sea would be such a bad thing.
I said:
Quote:
The army has data from the 80s of women operating in combat roles, including many competitive exercises in which women were placed in combat teams with men. The results have been absolutely consistent: Women do not perform as well in ground combat operations as men. Period. They have the data, it's not even a debate. women fail in those positions when put to the test. it's like arguing that a wnba team could succeed in the nba.
That continues to be true in combat-adjacent fields as well, because they all involve a lot more donkey work than people think.
You guys are trying to prove me wrong by talking about every damned thing else. Typical strawman argument.
... You guys are trying to prove me wrong by talking about every damned thing else. Typical strawman argument.
It was not my intention to pick a fight with you.
Recently one of my tenants [a one-enlistment disgruntled vet] kind of went off on me, saying that I am not a servicemember and that I had never served in combat. In his mind, only 11Bs are the 'real' servicemembers, and as such they are the only guys who serve in combat.
The fact that I am assigned to the Fleet Reserve, I carry a DOD ID card, the DOD pays me a check every month, provides for my health care, I have full base privileges, and I am subject to recall to Active Duty if Congress ever decides it is necessary, is completely beside the point.
Reading this thread, I was thinking of him and his attitude.
Recently one of my tenants [a one-enlistment disgruntled vet] kind of went off on me, saying that I am not a servicemember and that I had never served in combat. In his mind, only 11Bs are the 'real' servicemembers, and as such they are the only guys who serve in combat.
The fact that I am assigned to the Fleet Reserve, I carry a DOD ID card, the DOD pays me a check every month, provides for my health care, I have full base privileges, and I am subject to recall to Active Duty if Congress ever decides it is necessary, is completely beside the point.
Reading this thread, I was thinking of him and his attitude.
And I'm an intel guy, so I wouldn't be a "real" serviceman by your neighbor's regard, either.
But all the other men in my family have been Army--infantry, and in actual ground combat--since the Spanish-American War.
Women entered my own career field in the mid-70s. The Air Force considers intel to be a combat-adjacent field (inasmuch as our most significant task is to be on the flightline briefing and debriefing combat pilots), so it was considered "non-traditional" for women. I noted that by 1979, 20% of the O-1s (second lieutenants) in my intelligence wing were women, which was a huge female percentage. I wondered then what the field would look like in twenty years.
Indeed, exactly 20 years later (and I'd even returned to that same wing by then) my boss was a female two-star. And she was good at her job.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
