Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Different Military Training Requirements For Men And Women


PhuturePriest

Recommended Posts

PhuturePriest

This was touched on before on a thread of mine about a law allowing women to be on the front lines. I was told quite blankly that men and women both get equal physical training. This has just proven to not be so: http://www.npr.org/2013/12/27/257363943/marines-most-female-recruits-dont-meet-new-pullup-standard http://liberallogic101.com/?p=5496 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-boland/female-marines-not-required-do-1-pull

Not even one? Men naturally have more upper-body strength, this is simple science. I'm 5'5" and 115 lbs. I'm not exactly Rambo, but I can still do at least 6 full pull-ups and 50 full push-ups. If a woman can rise to the challenge (And it is indeed a challenge for most women to meet the standards of upper-body physical training that most fit men can do, as is clear if you read the article), I have no issues with her being in the military. But if you can't even do one pull-up, you need to either do some real physical training, or graciously let go of your dreams of ever seeing the front lines. You don't want soldiers who are going to be quick casualties because their training was inferior. This is not to mention when bullets are flying and bombs are going off and wounded people are on the field, you can't afford to have soldiers that can't pick up the wounded, and who are only there because of political-correctness. Soldiers who can't help the already wounded and who can't keep up pace and carry themselves and their gear over the terrain means an ineffective fighting force, more friendly casualties, and less unfriendly casualties.

Edited by FuturePriest387
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was touched on before on a thread of mine about a law allowing women to be on the front lines. I was told quite blankly that men and women both get equal physical training. This has just proven to not be so: http://www.npr.org/2013/12/27/257363943/marines-most-female-recruits-dont-meet-new-pullup-standard http://liberallogic101.com/?p=5496 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-boland/female-marines-not-required-do-1-pull

Not even one? Men naturally have more upper-body strength, this is simple science. I'm 5'5" and 115 lbs. I'm not exactly Rambo, but I can still do at least 6 full pull-ups and 50 full push-ups. If a woman can rise to the challenge (And it is indeed a challenge for most women to meet the standards of upper-body physical training that most fit men can do, as is clear if you read the article), I have no issues with her being in the military. But if you can't even do one pull-up, you need to either do some real physical training, or graciously let go of your dreams of ever seeing the front lines. You don't want soldiers who are going to be quick casualties because their training was inferior. This is not to mention when bullets are flying and bombs are going off and wounded people are on the field, you can't afford to have soldiers that can't pick up the wounded, and who are only there because of political-correctness. Soldiers who can't help the already wounded and who can't keep up pace and carry themselves and their gear over the terrain means an ineffective fighting force, more friendly casualties, and less unfriendly casualties.

 

 

I'm visiting home for the Holidays.  Last night, I was out drinking with a friend of mine who is currently in the Marine Corps and has been deployed to Afghanistan.  He and some other old High School friends were laughing about the last time he and a friend got really flooped up on acid.  They made plans do do it again in a few months.  He was smoking an e-cig.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Semper Catholic

I'm visiting home for the Holidays. Last night, I was out drinking with a friend of mine who is currently in the Marine Corps and has been deployed to Afghanistan. He and some other old High School friends were laughing about the last time he and a friend got really flooped up on acid. They made plans do do it again in a few months. He was smoking an e-cig.


Let me guess your friend is a lance coolie turd nugget who probably tells everyone about all the "combat" he saw in the stan when really all he did was POG it up.

Those guys definitely exist.

As for females as someone who is a "real" Marine aka an infantry type my only interaction with females has been pretty terrible. They bring nothing to the fight and are a huge liability. War isn't an equal opportunity environment. Probably the last remaining arena where that holds true.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PhuturePriest

Let me guess your friend is a lance coolie turd nugget who probably tells everyone about all the "combat" he saw in the stan when really all he did was POG it up.

Those guys definitely exist.

As for females as someone who is a "real" Marine aka an infantry type my only interaction with females has been pretty terrible. They bring nothing to the fight and are a huge liability. War isn't an equal opportunity environment. Probably the last remaining arena where that holds true.

 

I remember the last time you spoke about it, and I think you said something about how female Marines you've seen haven't been able to keep up pace and things like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Dad and I had lots of discussions about the subject. I was applying to West Point at the time. He knew that I would be one of the few who could keep up with the guys. His bottom line was that in close quarters infantry, to stay alive everyone has to do their job. However when the bullets start flying, he doubted that would happen because you go primal. A man's primal instinct is to protect women and children. Even if the female was doing her job, the man next to her might not because he might try to protect her over doing his job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

men and women are definitely different. Which means there are unique talents a woman can bring to a military endeavor that men simply can't.

For that reason it might be justified in the odd situation for people (e.g. women) who can't meet physical standards to be placed in positions with duties the successful completion of which hinge on the application of superior physical strength (e.g., combat infantryman.)

But in general, no. The benefits do not outweigh the risks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Women should have as much right to die for the entertainment of politicians as men currently enjoy.

 

 

We also need to extend Selective Kidnapping to women, as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Semper Catholic

My Dad and I had lots of discussions about the subject. I was applying to West Point at the time. He knew that I would be one of the few who could keep up with the guys. His bottom line was that in close quarters infantry, to stay alive everyone has to do their job. However when the bullets start flying, he doubted that would happen because you go primal. A man's primal instinct is to protect women and children. Even if the female was doing her job, the man next to her might not because he might try to protect her over doing his job.


Simply not true at all. If someone gets hit you immediately secure the area and start giving them medical attention. That's regardless of gender or nationality if it's a terp.

We stopped the "leave him to die" thing even before ww2. People who propagate this myth watch to many movies.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Semper Catholic

Women should have as much right to die for the entertainment of politicians as men currently enjoy.


We also need to extend Selective Kidnapping to women, as well.


Yeah except no male infantry platoon is going to risk the lives of those Marines or Soldiers just because a female thinks it's their right.

Part of the reasons this will never work is because a fire team or squad needs to have absolute confidence in the Marine next to them. It's not about being and individual. If you suck you got left at the PB or FOB. That goes for guys too.

And yeah yeah no blood for oil and stuff too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Semper Catholic

men and women are definitely different. Which means there are unique talents a woman can bring to a military endeavor that men simply can't.
For that reason it might be justified in the odd situation for people (e.g. women) who can't meet physical standards to be placed in positions with duties the successful completion of which hinge on the application of superior physical strength (e.g., combat infantryman.)
But in general, no. The benefits do not outweigh the risks.


Yes talents like falling out of patrols and crying a lot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes talents like falling out of patrols and crying a lot.

 

Better at attentional control and task-switching, better at stress management, better short-term memory, better at scarce resource allocation. Sex-linked gaps in these skills begin opening in early elementary school.  They are all useful skills in the military, not so useful if the chick with those skills can't execute on them because she couldn't throw the grenade far enough and is dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simply not true at all. If someone gets hit you immediately secure the area and start giving them medical attention. That's regardless of gender or nationality if it's a terp.

We stopped the "leave him to die" thing even before ww2. People who propagate this myth watch to many movies.


I didn't say anything about someone being hit. I was talking about a man in a fire fight who might not cover his position properly due to his feeling compelled to protect a female soldier. It isn't my idea. It was my father's opinion. He'd seen more front line action than any person I've ever met, so I respect his opinion. My uncle agreed with him. That uncle carried shrapnel in his body from Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima so I also respected his opinion. It could be they were just old foggies who thought women should stay in the kitchen.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Semper Catholic

I didn't say anything about someone being hit. I was talking about a man in a fire fight who might not cover his position properly due to his feeling compelled to protect a female soldier. It isn't my idea. It was my father's opinion. He'd seen more front line action than any person I've ever met, so I respect his opinion. My uncle agreed with him. That uncle carried shrapnel in his body from Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima so I also respected his opinion. It could be they were just old foggies who thought women should stay in the kitchen.


Hun sometimes it's best to leave things up to people who actually know what they're talking about
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...