Mormon Women In Combat

[thesometimesaint]

Ah, but that's the point. For whatever reason, the military culture is not conducive to keeping ones zipper zipped. Present and recent past experience has and is showing that putting young men and women together in a job where you don't go home every day at 6:00 is asking for problems.

This is not to denigrate nor presume immorality on the many fine members of the military both LDS and non-LDS who are able to stay morally clean. But objective evidence strongly suggests they are in the minority in the military even more so than in the civilian world.

Where ever young men and women have access to each other. It's going to be a problem. No group is immune. What the military does is allow for the prosecution of illicit relations between superiors and subordinates. The civilian world could take a cue from the military on that score.

I don't know as the military is any better or worse than civilians, but the military does prosecute at about 1/2 the rate as civilians do.

[Sleeper Cell]

This also does not mean that women will get drafted. Men no longer get drafted. It is an all-volunteer army, and enlistees and officers can usually pick which specialty they want to pursue (after taking an aptitude test prior to enlisting). ...

If a woman can handle a job as well as a man, then why not give her the option? It's called free agency.

And all that can quickly change. IIRC, the draft was abolished after the Civil War; reinstituted for WW I; abolished afterwards; then reinstituted for WW II; and abolished after Vietnam. Each draft was instated after major reductions in the size of the army, followed by an unexpected crisis that made it necessary to quickly increase its size. Once again, we are on the verge of making major cuts in the size of our armed forces. How can we be so sure that there won’t be a future crisis that will, once again, require the draft be reinstated?

If and when that day comes, your daughters and sisters will be drafted (it will be legally impossible to exclude them). So much for their free agency. Many will be assigned to combat units whether they like it or not. Again, so much for their free agency. Should they not be assigned to combat units in proportion to their numbers, somebody will almost certainly sue for discrimination. (a female soldier who was denied a combat assignment, a male who was denied a rear echelon job, etc.)

We should not be so dismissive of the “what ifs” when making major policy changes.

BTW, several members of my family -- male and female -- have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. I am equally proud of all of them.

Edited January 25, 2013 by Sleeper Cell

[thesometimesaint]

And all that can quickly change. IIRC, the draft was abolished after the Civil War; reinstituted for WW I; abolished afterwards; then reinstituted for WW II; and abolished after Vietnam. Each draft was instated after major reductions in the size of the army, followed by an unexpected crisis that made it necessary to quickly increase its size. Once again, we are on the verge of making major cuts in the size of our armed forces. How can we be so sure that there won’t be a future crisis that will, once again, require the draft be reinstated?

If and when that day comes, your daughters and sisters will be drafted (it will be legally impossible to exclude them). So much for their free agency. Many will be assigned to combat units whether they like it or not. Again, so much for their free agency. Should they not be assigned to combat units in proportion to their numbers, somebody will almost certainly sue for discrimination. (a female soldier who was denied a combat assignment, a male who was denied a rear echelon job, etc.)

We should not be so dismissive of the “what ifs” when making major policy changes.

BTW, several members of my family -- male and female -- have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. I am equally proud of all of them.

Given the history of this country we're virtually guaranteed that some crises will occur, whether real or fake.

They still have agency. What they, and we, don't have is the ability to choose the consequences from using that agency. IE; I have the agency to choose to jump off of a high cliff. I don't have the agency to choose whether it will hurt when I hit the ground.

The USAF has never had a Draft. It has always been all volunteer. In the military the higher the scores on their induction tests the more options are open to them. Also combat units have more demanding physical requirements than regular units. While it is generally true that men have more upper body strength than women. There are certainly some women that are as strong, or stronger, than some men. Women have to meet the same physical requirements as men. No exceptions.

There is no way to prepare for all possible future contingencies. What we can do is prepare for the most likely to occur in the relative near future.

Give them my thanks for their service.

[rpn]

Spare me the paternalistic concern. Don't you think women are smart enough to figure out whether the military is for them, and decide what duties to absorb? And don't you think that any woman who is physically able and WANTS to should be able to do whatever she wants without anyone else deciding for her?

[blackstrap]

Is it true that the current physical requirements during basic training have been adjusted for females and older men ?

[rpn]

Basic training requirements are different for men and women. But the announcement of women in combat made it clear that the requirements for those in each specific role in the military will stay the same. Basic training is for all specialties, but not all military people need to be able to do what infantry people, or navy seals or ________________ must be able to do. And because everyone will have to be able to meet the requirements of the job they do, women will be less represented in some specialties, no doubt. But that is different from not giving an equal chance to compete for the job.

[Saints Alive]

Is it true that the current physical requirements during basic training have been adjusted for females and older men ?

Currently there is a sliding scale that determines how many push-ups, sit-ups, and how fast you must complete the 2-mile run. The scale is based on both sex and age and you receive an adjusted score based on your performance.. They have said that women will be required to meet the same standards, I don't think it is clear whether that means the same number of push-ups etc. or the same score. There has also been talk of changing the current fitness test for some time now so who knows what's coming down the line. Hopefully women will be required to do the same number of repetitions and not just the same adjusted score.

Here is a link to the current standards: http://www.apft-standards.com/

Edited January 26, 2013 by Saints Alive

[BCSpace]

I do differentiate between the sexes and I believe women in general should have no place in combat. However, I have no problem with the market deciding. Some women will choose combat positions and some of those will succeed and some will fail. Lessons will be learned and carried back. The instinct of men to protect women however, could be very problematic in warfare.

[thesometimesaint]

BCSpace:

I think a stronger instinct is to protect your friends in arms regardless of sex.

[Saints Alive]

One of the rare times I agree the TSS, in battle you are going to protect your buddies regardless of their sex.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I just heard that the Pentagon has changed its rules about women in combat and will now allow it. I just want to say that I have seen enough men come back from combat that are hurt and suffering from their experiences. I never want to see that in another woman. From what I know about the situation, it has to be about the money. Women now make up 27% of the military.

More disturbing to me is that I know a young Mormon woman who is a missionary who plans to enlist in the Military when her calling is finished. I am in shock and can not imagine how this ever could happen. It is well documented that the hygiene needs alone of women in field operations is a big pain in the neck for them.

What a travesty!

Women should not be in that type of environment. It destorys too many men, we don't need our sisters exposed to this!

[thesometimesaint]

Pa Pa:

I don't know as anyone NEEDS it. But if we're going to fight wars there is no point in excluding half our population of otherwise qualified personnel solely on the basis of sex.

I worked with a lady whom was a professional power lifter. She could pick me up, and carry me anytime she wanted to. There would be no physical reason, if she wanted to, to be excluded from ground combat.

Edited January 28, 2013 by thesometimesaint

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Pa Pa:

I don't know as anyone NEEDS it. But if we're going to fight wars there is no point in excluding half our population of otherwise qualified personnel solely on the basis of sex.

I worked with a lady whom was a professional power lifter. She could pick me up, and carry me anytime she wanted to. There would be no physical reason, if she wanted to, to be excluded from ground combat.

Sorry the idea of women in war is too horrible a thought, as pilots, yes; though I wish this was not needed.

[sweetpotatoh]

About time.

[Saints Alive]

Heard on the news today the UK did an 18 month experiment on women in combat rolls. Less than 1% made it through. The majority either dropped out or where physically unable to stay (i.e. were injured etc.). I don't know that it justifies exclusion but it is a fact that, on average, women do not preform to the same physical standards as men. Are there women who are above average and can out run and do more push-ups than the average man? Sure, but they are the exception not the rule. OTOH, I am a man and have neither the desire nor the physical ability to live the life of an infantry man.

[Calm]

There are a number of armed forces over the world that have women in their ranks. Which ones allow women in combat?

Found an article listing them: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/01/25/map-which-countries-allow-women-in-front-line-combat-roles/

So now one needs to look at their success rate.

Edited January 30, 2013 by calmoriah

[ERayR]

Pa Pa:

I don't know as anyone NEEDS it. But if we're going to fight wars there is no point in excluding half our population of otherwise qualified personnel solely on the basis of sex.

I worked with a lady whom was a professional power lifter. She could pick me up, and carry me anytime she wanted to. There would be no physical reason, if she wanted to, to be excluded from ground combat.

Don't you think it is a good idea to have that half of our population in reserve as healers of the horrible mental wounds that war inflicts on those required to participate. It certainly makes sense to have aa reserve of the sane to help heal the insanity.

[Tacenda]

I'm glad the women have to be able to pass a physical test like the one described above. That's the only way I can see a women serving in combat. Making sure she is able to protect her life and those of others. They shouldn't be given a pass on things. They need the physicality of the job. It's vital!

Edited January 30, 2013 by Tacenda

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I just heard that the Pentagon has changed its rules about women in combat and will now allow it. I just want to say that I have seen enough men come back from combat that are hurt and suffering from their experiences. I never want to see that in another woman. From what I know about the situation, it has to be about the money. Women now make up 27% of the military.

More disturbing to me is that I know a young Mormon woman who is a missionary who plans to enlist in the Military when her calling is finished. I am in shock and can not imagine how this ever could happen. It is well documented that the hygiene needs alone of women in field operations is a big pain in the neck for them.

What a travesty!

True, one of those PC things we don't talk about...we have enough young wounded young men with "PTSD", we don't need young women suffering the same.

[Saints Alive]

True, one of those PC things we don't talk about...we have enough young wounded young men with "PTSD", we don't need young women suffering the same.

They already do! More logistics convoys are ambushed than infantry patrols. At least the infantry can stand their ground and fight back, logistical convoy SOP is to run.

[thesometimesaint]

Don't you think it is a good idea to have that half of our population in reserve as healers of the horrible mental wounds that war inflicts on those required to participate. It certainly makes sense to have aa reserve of the sane to help heal the insanity.

Women are no more proficient at the healing arts than men are. Though they generally are paid less. The best thing anyone can have for things like PTSD is a fellow Vet whom has been there, and is willing to really listen.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Don't you think it is a good idea to have that half of our population in reserve as healers of the horrible mental wounds that war inflicts on those required to participate. It certainly makes sense to have aa reserve of the sane to help heal the insanity.

I do with all my heart, women are natural healers.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

They already do! More logistics convoys are ambushed than infantry patrols. At least the infantry can stand their ground and fight back, logistical convoy SOP is to run.

All are trained...when being overrun even cooks are Infantry.

[Saints Alive]

All are trained...when being overrun even cooks are Infantry.

So then why can't women do what they have been trained to do?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

So then why can't women do what they have been trained to do?

They can if attacked, we do not send them after trouble.