Women in the army

Dave!

Hey folks,

bit of a controversial subject!

I don't think most people would object to women being in the army AT ALL. There is no shortage of administrative duties, as well as medical, etc., that don't require much physical prowess to carry out.

The controversy arises when you talk about whether women should be on the front line along with men, and when you consider the different limits set for each.

For example, entry requirements to the army are as follows:

1.5 mile run:

* Males - 11 Mins 30 secs
* Females - 13 Mins


* Males - 20 push-ups and 20 sit-ups
* Females - 20 push-ups (Modified) and 20 sit-ups

I'm assuming the "modified" push-ups are to make it easier...? Although I could be wrong, and it could be something to do with their tatties getting in the way lol

But regardless, the different times for the run says alot. If men and women are to be given the same tasks, then they should have the same standards, should they not? There's no point in letting a woman in and then having her lag behind the rest of the platoon, is there? Obviously everyone has their strengths and weaknesses and people will lag behind. But there is supposed to be a standard that you strive to reach. If you're on a mission and you have to reach an area by a certain time, then EVERYONE has to reach it by that time. Why not give males 13 minutes to do the 1.5 miles too?

Do these different limits extend to recruit training, BTW?

There's also the issue of women being a "distraction" to the male recruits... i. sexually, and ii. because males will instinctively feel compelled to "protect" the females especially, which may leave others vulnerable.

Another point brought up was that a man would be more likely to trust another man with his life, than a woman.

A few controversial points of discussion there, but give them a bash anywho!

PS. read this topic in 'Nuts' magazine a while ago

Flying

This might be regarded as Sexist but IMHO they should not be there, we had them in the Navy, which caused countless problems with all but a very few.

And they extend A7 to the extent of insanity, we could not have them on VCP's in the Leb and they most of the time would refuse to do PT's or route marches and if they did it was minus webbing,helmet etc.

In a nutshell its a mans army and they have no input to real solidering, I am old school but that is my opinion

biko

I'm for women in the army, all the way to the front line. They might not be ranger material (forced long marches etc. Then again most men are not ranger material...) but they can squeeze a trigger with the best of us. They have just as much as us to lose if the enemy wins, why not let them fight too?

When they started using blacks in the US army the old schoolers objected saying blacks don't have good night vision. Maybe again the army needs to adapt, not the recruits.

Flying

biko wrote: »

I'm for women in the army, all the way to the front line. They might not be ranger material (forced long marches etc. Then again most men are not ranger material...) but they can squeeze a trigger with the best of us. They have just as much as us to lose if the enemy wins, why not let them fight too?

When they started using blacks in the US army the old schoolers objected saying blacks don't have good night vision. Maybe again the army needs to adapt, not the recruits.

The act of the women playing the A7 card if you fart in there presence, use foul language (quite prevelant when on the ground), if you bump into them you are up on orders for bullying or harassment (one example, a young private bumped into a female on the queue in the cookhouse, he was subsequently brought up on orders for this, I can go on and on) but they are more trouble than good.

Conor108

Whats A7?

newby.204

A7 is th PDF answer to bullying and a royal pain in your arse if your a male.You can't just do your job because it covers soooo much you never know who you might offend!!

Rew

Spot the people who have never sat down and read A7... :rolleyes:

biko

A7 - http://www.rdfra.ie/regulations/a7.shtml

Flying

Rew wrote: »

Spot the people who have never sat down and read A7... :rolleyes:

I've read it alright and had it females use it as a tool to further themselves in the army, A7 = Political correctness at is sickest level.

Also eventhough A7 is part of DFR it is then up to the BN or Coy commanders to have their out determination of it, some will use it for the most minute action, others wont use it at all.

You cannot run an army on the same level as outside in the civilian world but sadly that is the way the army is going to the extent you can apply the same level of discipline now as was previously and the "New" army and its members can sue via civilan means or have an injuction taken out against Senior Officers or NCO's !

sickpuppy

If women in the army want to be taken serious they should have to do the same physical exams as men.
Jaysus you here women harping on about equality so make them take the same fitness tests.
And in all reality if it came down to a fix bayonets situation who would u rather have by your side men or a bunch of women easy answer i think.
The gardai in my opinion have let too many women in as it is.
How many women could chase and apprehend an assailent dman all regardless of there training,
What if awoman becomes pregnant? shes not much use then that may sound horrible sexist but its true.
Keep the women for non active duties nursing logistics combat waste of
time.

Conor108

Rew wrote: »

Spot the people who have never sat down and read A7... :rolleyes:

Well I'm only 16 so I don't need to read it:D yet

Rew

There is an instructors course that outlines A7 and the TI (I forget them number, 04/06 possibly) that came out subsequently. As long as you operate within those its busniess as uasual. A7 is is just the manifestation of a changing world and the Army has to adapt. People will always use the letter of the law as a weapon regardless of the actuall law. Every NCO should be familiar with the contents of A7 and the TI. There's also a very usefull laminate card for instructors.

I know females who are far better then their male counterparts and I know some that are far worse. Having a penis or not having a penis doesn't have an effect on the type of soldier you are its up to the indvidule. Its also worth noting that there are hardened sexist bastards throughout the Army who's attitudes help create the super bitch's that people are refering to here. That applies to all ranks and all branches.

And who's to say there are no female Rangers? Their not precluded from doing the course.

eroo

Rew,it is a fact there are no female Rangers.In fact,most(if not all) Int'l SF's do not have women.It is an option...basically not sexist..

Flying

Rew wrote: »

There is an instructors course that outlines A7 and the TI (I forget them number, 04/06 possibly) that came out subsequently. As long as you operate within those its busniess as uasual. A7 is is just the manifestation of a changing world and the Army has to adapt. People will always use the letter of the law as a weapon regardless of the actuall law. Every NCO should be familiar with the contents of A7 and the TI. There's also a very usefull laminate card for instructors.

I know females who are far better then their male counterparts and I know some that are far worse. Having a penis or not having a penis doesn't have an effect on the type of soldier you are its up to the indvidule. Its also worth noting that there are hardened sexist bastards throughout the Army who's attitudes help create the super bitch's that people are refering to here. That applies to all ranks and all branches.

And who's to say there are no female Rangers? Their not precluded from doing the course.

I know of one female who went for selection about 10 years ago she was gone within exactly four hours..

As for the hardened sexist bastards you are talking about, I dont doubt they exsist but females in general get preferential treatment over males all the time and it is in fact we as men as penalised for this as the powers to be are scared of a female crying "disrimination".

It was one said to me across the water " Equal rights = Equal discrimination "

If they want the same pay and do the same jobs, well they should actually do the job and not moan about their gender and if they dont like it "Get Out" !

Rew

I know of a fella who begged to be binned after 4 hours of selection, big deal. Going for it in the first place is more then alot of males in the DF do. There having trouble druming up candidates these days.

Im not saying there isn't cause to say that some females make a point of getting by the easy way but the same can be said from plenty of males. In fact males in the DF were taking the piss out of the system for an awfull lot longer, and long before A7 existed. Your guilty of the double standards that your complaining about by not pointing the finger at all the fat bastards creaming it within the system.

Women in the DF have two options:
1) Be better then most of the men, but don't get recognition of that
2) Find other ways to get by

Basicly the result is a partially product of the environment either way. BTW its entire recruit Pln's pulling the A7 card these days not just the females.

Oilrig

I've served in the PDF and since as a Civvy on security contracts in hot climes. I don't care who my buddys are as long as they're up to the job, e.g. that includes being able to drag me out of a kill zone should I get hit.

From my perspective I would assume one physical standard for all would apply.

Then again, security contractors don't have equality laws to worry about... :cool:

Flying

Rew wrote: »

I know of a fella who begged to be binned after 4 hours of selection, big deal. Going for it in the first place is more then alot of males in the DF do. There having trouble druming up candidates these days.

Im not saying there isn't cause to say that some females make a point of getting by the easy way but the same can be said from plenty of males. In fact males in the DF were taking the piss out of the system for an awfull lot longer, and long before A7 existed. Your guilty of the double standards that your complaining about by not pointing the finger at all the fat bastards creaming it within the system.

Women in the DF have two options:
1) Be better then most of the men, but don't get recognition of that
2) Find other ways to get by

Basicly the result is a partially product of the environment either way. BTW its entire recruit Pln's pulling the A7 card these days not just the females.

Rew on the last point about whole Pln's I agree, the messing going on these days is just taking the piss

astraboy

"the excessive or frequent consumption of alcohol in the company of subordinates" Heh Heh Heh. If they came on an RDF camp they would get some shock! I don't see the problem with sergeants and corporals having a few beers with the recruits or privets. It helps build relationships if anything, you get to see how people are in a relaxed environment and this helps when you are on exercise.

I remember getting a lecture on the sexual harressment etc on my first recruit camp. People still crack jokes etc anyway. I would hope the PDF takes issues of harassment seriously without punishing people that have made some silly remark that offends one person. In the end if you are that sensitive you should not be in the PDF!

Rew

The PDF is a work place and the smallest remark can blow up in to a major issue like anywork place these days. Mixing of the ranks socially is nfine but when you see an officer or NCO locked off their face druling over some 17 yr old recruit you lose recpect for them pretty quickly and thats what that particualr quote refers to.

martinr5232

astraboy wrote: »

"the excessive or frequent consumption of alcohol in the company of subordinates" Heh Heh Heh. If they came on an RDF camp they would get some shock! I don't see the problem with sergeants and corporals having a few beers with the recruits or privets. It helps build relationships if anything, you get to see how people are in a relaxed environment and this helps when you are on exercise.

I remember getting a lecture on the sexual harressment etc on my first recruit camp. People still crack jokes etc anyway. I would hope the PDF takes issues of harassment seriously without punishing people that have made some silly remark that offends one person. In the end if you are that sensitive you should not be in the PDF!

Familiarity breeds contempt.

Flying

It depends on the unit moreso methinks

bada-bing

flying, could you tell me are you RDF or PDF, and are you in long?
its worrying to see people who have such a low opinion of the uses of women within the DF. There are many many worthwhile areas where well trained women could potentially play a very valid role, be that at home or overseas. Only recently the benefits of having women overseas where highlighted - in the humanitarian role they are often looked upon more favourable by the local population. Women are often more usefull in an int gathering role as people are more inclined to open up to a woman.
I know that there are women out there who are giving other females in the DF a bad name... but the same could be said for so many young lads who are unable to pass their fitness test, going sick constantly, pulling out claims of bullying etc.
I whole-heartedly agree that females should have to complete the run within the same timings as men. It is unfair, and unacceptable that a female could be selected to go on a course over her male counterpart, who is not eligible for selection on the basis of having failed his fitness test, despite the fact that he may have ran it in a quicker time. In fact, i feel that the ARW are leading the way as regards equal opportunity - they are by no means opposed to having a wonam within their ranks, that is IF she can pass that same selection criteria set down for alll who apply. Whoever brought up that story about the female going for selection who only lasted 4 hours.. thats four hours longer on selection than most soldiers will ever spend.
On the whole A7 issue.. its designed to prevent misure of power - blatant bullying that is no longer acceptable, and serves no purpose. Its purpose is not to create an atmosphere where training can not be tough and realistic. As is said so often "its a guideline" ;-) And if we were to be up on orders for bad language we might aswell bivvy up in the CO's office!

arybvtcw0eolkf

I'm in the Defence Forces twenty two year's and have never seen a woman do a job that a man couldn't do better, and I've seen men do jobs that a woman couldn't possibly do.

bada-bing

could you mention some of the jobs that no woman could possibly do??

arybvtcw0eolkf

bada-bing wrote: »

could you mention some of the jobs that no woman could possibly do??

No, it would take me twenty two years

Flying

bada-bing wrote: »

flying, could you tell me are you RDF or PDF, and are you in long?
its worrying to see people who have such a low opinion of the uses of women within the DF. There are many many worthwhile areas where well trained women could potentially play a very valid role, be that at home or overseas. Only recently the benefits of having women overseas where highlighted - in the humanitarian role they are often looked upon more favourable by the local population. Women are often more usefull in an int gathering role as people are more inclined to open up to a woman.
I know that there are women out there who are giving other females in the DF a bad name... but the same could be said for so many young lads who are unable to pass their fitness test, going sick constantly, pulling out claims of bullying etc.
I whole-heartedly agree that females should have to complete the run within the same timings as men. It is unfair, and unacceptable that a female could be selected to go on a course over her male counterpart, who is not eligible for selection on the basis of having failed his fitness test, despite the fact that he may have ran it in a quicker time. In fact, i feel that the ARW are leading the way as regards equal opportunity - they are by no means opposed to having a wonam within their ranks, that is IF she can pass that same selection criteria set down for alll who apply. Whoever brought up that story about the female going for selection who only lasted 4 hours.. thats four hours longer on selection than most soldiers will ever spend.
On the whole A7 issue.. its designed to prevent misure of power - blatant bullying that is no longer acceptable, and serves no purpose. Its purpose is not to create an atmosphere where training can not be tough and realistic. As is said so often "its a guideline" ;-) And if we were to be up on orders for bad language we might aswell bivvy up in the CO's office!

14 Years between the British Army, PDF (Army and Naval Service), Women (the Majority off) play the A7 card constantly and get preferential treatment as the powers to be are more scared of them for legal reasons than the Taliban, the same also goes on in the BA.

I am now a civilian as one I got sick of the back stabbing in certain units and incompentence (spelling) of the idiots that are being promoted and cannot do the jobs.

AFAIK people are becoming SGT's in less than 6 years in the army, in my day it was nearly an impossiblity to get an NCO's course and then even a standards course.

They are promoting idiots with no experience and females because they need to keep the numbers up.

As for women in the ARW it will never happen the simple as that and having females oversea's has caused more problems that enough.

The above is from experience and not from bias.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Flying wrote: »

14 Years between the British Army, PDF (Army and Naval Service), Women (the Majority off) play the A7 card constantly and get preferential treatment as the powers to be are more scared of them for legal reasons than the Taliban, the same also goes on in the BA.

I am now a civilian as one I got sick of the back stabbing in certain units and incompentence (spelling) of the idiots that are being promoted and cannot do the jobs.

AFAIK people are becoming SGT's in less than 6 years in the army, in my day it was nearly an impossiblity to get an NCO's course and then even a standards course.

They are promoting idiots with no experience and females because they need to keep the numbers up.

As for women in the ARW it will never happen the simple as that and having females oversea's has caused more problems that enough.

The above is from experience and not from bias.

Thats mostly been my experience also.

Lockstep

RE women in the army, I'm all for it as long as they do the same tasks and have the same requierments.

I'm not one of those people who thinks that if a black woman and a white man apply for a neurosurgeon job, the woman will automatically get it despite her being a streetsweepr etc.

BUt I do think having a lower requirement is a bad thing as it might cause the men to think less of female soldiers and would be basically unfair.

I'm glad women have equality but I do think that being equal to men is just that.
Equality.

miss no stars

RE fitness test ONLY. For the record I ran mine in just over 10 minutes. (I'm female)


The run is a measure of AEROBIC fitness only. Not a measure of speed. A female who runs 2.4km in 13 minutes is aerobically as fit as a male who runs it in 11.5 minutes. I'm not claiming that the female is as fast, but she is as AEROBICALLY fit as her male counterpart who just scrapes a pass. The pressups are modified for a reason. The male version requires a lot of strength in the lower abdomen. Men have muscle there, women have an organ. The test is designed to be an equal test of fitness - muscular and aerobically. If there were not allowances made for different physiology it would not be a fair test.


As far as I'm concerned, and as far as I've experienced, a female will be yelled at just as much as a male will be if they don't keep up in a SIA.

Also, let's not forget that the Soviet army and the north vietnamese had women as front line soldiers to great success. As a female I've come across a LOT of bizarre attitudes from male NCOs and officers. Stuff like "Oh she can't carry that, that's too heavy" or "oh can you carry that?", even if I'm carrying less than someone else. Let us not forget that females are a realatively recent addition to the DF, as such all females in the DF are the product of male attitudes.


As for the role of the DF. Given that it is involved primarily in peace operations females are a neccessity. If giving females the extra minute per mile to pass the fitness gets women in then what is the problem? If anyone wants, I can dig up the exact phyiscal differences between males and females that result in that extra time allowance.



Something about a can and worms...

Hagar

miss no stars wrote: »

A female who runs 2.4km in 13 minutes is aerobically as fit as a male who runs it in 11.5 minutes. I'm not claiming that the female is as fast, but she is as AEROBICALLY fit as her male counterpart who just scrapes a pass.

If I was in a foxhole waiting to be resupplied with ammo from 2.4km away send a man with the ammo, don't send a woman to put her aerobics cert on my dead body 90 seconds later.

That's what it boils down to in the end.

miss no stars

So send one.

But why not send me rather than the lads who finished 90 seconds after me?

Hagar

Fair enough comment.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Hagar if I'm in a foxhole I want the woman, every time!.

Lockstep

miss no stars wrote: »

. The pressups are modified for a reason. The male version requires a lot of strength in the lower abdomen. Men have muscle there, women have an organ.

I'm no expert on this by any means whatsoever but do the lower abs make that big a difference?
When I'm doing the aul press ups I feel the major workings in my arms, shoulders and chest.
Keep in mind I am not knowledgable on human physiology or what muscles a press up works.
Just asking.

miss no stars wrote: »

Also, let's not forget that the Soviet army and the north vietnamese had women as front line soldiers to great success. As a female I've come across a LOT of bizarre attitudes from male NCOs and officers. Stuff like "Oh she can't carry that, that's too heavy" or "oh can you carry that?", even if I'm carrying less than someone else. Let us not forget that females are a realatively recent addition to the DF, as such all females in the DF are the product of male attitudes.

I agree but keep in mind that often when women were in an army, it is often for countries that were running desperetely short of men. An example would be such as women only really being used in relatively large numbers by the Russians in WWI after the battle of Tannenburg, the Russians realised how short of men they were.
Women were rarely used as direct combatents, and when they were used it tended to be for guerilla warfare by forces who were at a loss to fight conventionally (as in the Soviet union who had lost a lot of their PDF at the beginning of Operation Barbossa or the Vietcong) and where women they werent expected to get to grips with the enemy.

miss no stars wrote: »

As for the role of the DF. Given that it is involved primarily in peace operations females are a neccessity. If giving females the extra minute per mile to pass the fitness gets women in then what is the problem? If anyone wants, I can dig up the exact phyiscal differences between males and females that result in that extra time allowance.

It still means that women are being given an advantage over men which could make a man who failed to get in bitter, or a man who does get in have a lower opinion of his female comrades.
I amn't in the army, but I imagine that mutual respect would be a good thing for the army and damaging it in any way is something to be avoided.


I am definetely pro-women in the army.
But again, there should be a universal standard applying to everyone.

This is an army where there really isnt any room for allowances, if someone fails the requirements, be they male or female it's hardly a good thing.

miss no stars wrote: »

So send one.

But why not send me rather than the lads who finished 90 seconds after me?

Fair point, but which would be a better idea? Choosing a woman who MIGHT be able to do it in under 12 minutes, or a man who will definitely be able to.
Well done, your obviously fitter than a lot of recruits, be they male or female. But having the standard for women being lower means that a lot of women will be slower than a lot of the men.

Flying

miss no stars wrote: »

RE fitness test ONLY. For the record I ran mine in just over 10 minutes. (I'm female)


The run is a measure of AEROBIC fitness only. Not a measure of speed. A female who runs 2.4km in 13 minutes is aerobically as fit as a male who runs it in 11.5 minutes. I'm not claiming that the female is as fast, but she is as AEROBICALLY fit as her male counterpart who just scrapes a pass. The pressups are modified for a reason. The male version requires a lot of strength in the lower abdomen. Men have muscle there, women have an organ. The test is designed to be an equal test of fitness - muscular and aerobically. If there were not allowances made for different physiology it would not be a fair test.


As far as I'm concerned, and as far as I've experienced, a female will be yelled at just as much as a male will be if they don't keep up in a SIA.

Also, let's not forget that the Soviet army and the north vietnamese had women as front line soldiers to great success. As a female I've come across a LOT of bizarre attitudes from male NCOs and officers. Stuff like "Oh she can't carry that, that's too heavy" or "oh can you carry that?", even if I'm carrying less than someone else. Let us not forget that females are a realatively recent addition to the DF, as such all females in the DF are the product of male attitudes.


As for the role of the DF. Given that it is involved primarily in peace operations females are a neccessity. If giving females the extra minute per mile to pass the fitness gets women in then what is the problem? If anyone wants, I can dig up the exact phyiscal differences between males and females that result in that extra time allowance.



Something about a can and worms...

Well if you want to go into combat fine, can you carry a wounded man off say 80kgs to a Medical aid post 3 to 5km's away, can you force march with up to 150lbs of kit not including a weapon which sometimes is a mag etc.

Women are not on the frontline in helmand nor basara or either bosnia during the civil war when I was there.

They were not allowed on VCP's in the leb for good reason.

If you want equal rights take equal discrimination, the army is simply a male role nothing else, you all want equality and the same pay but are not willing to work for it.

AckwelFoley

Id be all for it too

Actually, in the irish army, id have an all female frontline.

Those cut throat b*****s woould wipe out the chineese army in an after noon...

Weapons of choice.. a wooden spoon and a Sex and the city box set.


Studies have shown women can be more agressive than men in different ways, but Flying has made some pretty valid points why they may not be suited on the frontline

eroo

Same standards for males and females is the only way..If they can't reach the male requirements in the fitness test then they shouldn't be in.Females should be just as fit as males..otherwise they are only going to be a burden out on the field.
But I do think women have roles in the DF..but unfortunately there are certain things that women cannot do that men can..well some women can but most can't..i.e.rucking w/ 60lb pack could be a problem for some

Prolatarian

''can you carry a wounded man off say 80kgs to a Medical aid post 3 to 5km's away, can you force march with up to 150lbs of kit not including a weapon which sometimes is a mag etc.''


Can You

Flying

Prolatarian wrote: »

''can you carry a wounded man off say 80kgs to a Medical aid post 3 to 5km's away, can you force march with up to 150lbs of kit not including a weapon which sometimes is a mag etc.''


Can You

Off course I can that is my point they cant unless they are a butch lesbian bodybuilder on steroids !

ken_goldwing

I have just left the Army (PDF) after 22 years and i'm sorry to say but women should not be in the army,, bitching, moning, cribing, im sick, i cant do that Sgt, **** and yes the A7 a womans tool.

Pathfinder

bada-bing wrote: »

could you mention some of the jobs that no woman could possibly do??

What about if part of mortar or anti-tank platoon and having to carry seriously heavy kit, or a GPMG for a long period in the field ? Or even having to TAB (tactically advance to battle ) carrying a full fighting order ?

Women have a place in the army, but not as infantry soldiers. In Iraq they play/ed a valuable role in searching females.

In NI they served in a very difficult and testing role with 14Int/Det as undercover operators, saying that, there was no kit to carry, which is the bread and butter of the infantry.

bada-bing

miss no stars wrote: »

RE fitness test ONLY. For the record I ran mine in just over 10 minutes. (I'm female) ...

thats fair going, well done.. are you PDF? and do you not run in the all army?

It hasnt been my experience at all that going sick, as in the "ongoing plague", has been an exclusively female thing.. the opposite if anything. and a7 is certainly been quoted be males as much as females these days believe me.

I agree of course that very fit females are not going to be as strong or as fast as the fittest of males, but that is not to say htey are not going to be better than a high proportion of males, hello name me a unit where none of the lads have trouble passing their ITs? they have trouble filling trips overseas as it is, without bringing in a requirement that only the fittest infantry boys go.. i think the fitness test should just be made the same for girls and it would eliminate alot of problems.

Well i think ayway, the army would be a very boring place without the slagging that goes on between males and female collegues

bada-bing

well you are a seriously pessimistic individual! all you do is bitch. maybe the army just wasnt for you and that is the reason for all the negativity. hope you are happier now as a civvy anyhow.

Chuck U Farley

Dear o dear, ye could cut the heavy testosterone atmosphere with a chainsaw in here.

Prolatarian

I just dont get the idea that because some of the women in the army arnt up to it then they should all be booted out.

Pathfinder

Chuck U Farley wrote: »

Dear o dear, ye could cut the heavy testosterone atmosphere with a chainsaw in here.

Totally agree, who said women and guns don't mix


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yryV-5TfwvE&feature=related

Pathfinder

bada-bing wrote: »

thats fair going, well done.. are you PDF? and do you not run in the all army?

It hasnt been my experience at all that going sick, as in the "ongoing plague", has been an exclusively female thing.. the opposite if anything. and a7 is certainly been quoted be males as much as females these days believe me.

I agree of course that very fit females are not going to be as strong or as fast as the fittest of males, but that is not to say htey are not going to be better than a high proportion of males, hello name me a unit where none of the lads have trouble passing their ITs? they have trouble filling trips overseas as it is, without bringing in a requirement that only the fittest infantry boys go.. i think the fitness test should just be made the same for girls and it would eliminate alot of problems.

Well i think ayway, the army would be a very boring place without the slagging that goes on between males and female collegues

On a serious note I would love to see a females reaction after digging a trench for 6 hours in the rain, is told to fill it in your unit is moving on.

Or how they cope on an exercise or field patrol being unable to wash for a week or more.

Do the army supply free primrose oil

Chuck U Farley

Check these little ladies,


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVz6d24Q52c&feature=related I have had the privilege to know both men and women who have served in these units. Apart from the, me from Mars you from Venus factor, both sexes have proved they compliment each other in a combat situation.


Guys what’s da problem???

Pathfinder

Chuck U Farley wrote: »

Check these little ladies,


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVz6d24Q52c&feature=related I have had the privilege to know both men and women who have served in these units. Apart from the, me from Mars you from Venus factor, both sexes have proved they compliment each other in a combat situation.


Guys what’s da problem???

......Woman don't serve as frontline combat troops with the IDF.

And from what I have seen the Israeli infantry soldier is vastly over rated, mostly due to media propaganda.

No one has answered my points about carrying kit etc ?

Chuck U Farley

Pathfinder wrote: »

......Woman don't serve as frontline combat troops with the IDF.

And from what I have seen the Israeli infantry soldier is vastly over rated, mostly due to media propaganda.

No one has answered my points about carrying kit etc ?

IDF troops, both sexes serve side by side and as far as frontline goes, there is more action going on in the streets whilst on patrol than the frontline border areas, where you will find female troops as well.


And as for vastly over rated, mostly due to media propaganda what can I say everyone’s a critic.

Pathfinder

Chuck U Farley wrote: »

IDF troops, both sexes serve side by side and as far as frontline goes, there is more action going on in the streets whilst on patrol than the frontline border areas, where you will find female troops as well.


And as for vastly over rated, mostly due to media propaganda what can I say everyone’s a critic.

T

[FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+2]Israeli women won't see combat[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+1]Study finds females can't lift as much, march as far as males[/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=-1]Posted: October 20, 2003
2:55 p.m. Eastern

[/SIZE] [FONT=Palatino, Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times][FONT=Palatino, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times, serif]
[SIZE=-1] © 2003 WorldNetDaily.com [/SIZE] [/FONT] [/FONT]

[FONT=Palatino, Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times]A military study conducted by the Israeli army has concluded women are a weaker sex, which means they will continue to be barred from most combat duties. [/FONT][FONT=Palatino, Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times]According to the study's findings reported in the Washington Times, women safely can carry 40 percent of their body weight compared with 55 percent for men. Because military-age women weigh 33 pounds less than men on average, the total weight-lifting disparity between the sexes amounts to 44 pounds on average. [/FONT]

Israel Defense Forces soldiers
[FONT=Palatino, Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times]In terms of endurance, the study found while men could handle 55-mile marches, any trek longer than 32 miles was found to be too arduous for women. Researchers attributed this to the fact that the amount of oxygen-carrying hemoglobin in women's blood was more than 10 percent lower than in men's blood. [/FONT]
[FONT=Palatino, Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times]The Times reports Israeli army doctors assessing these limitations recommend women not serve in front-line infantry positions, artillery units or tank crews. [/FONT]



he army study mirrors the earlier findings of Israeli scholar Martin van Creveld, a specialist in international conflict and author of the book "Men, Women and War," who found that women lacked the physical strength needed for fighting at close quarters and that their relative weakness could, in some cases, put themselves and their comrades in unjustifiable danger.

Van Creveld concluded sending women into frontline combat units would reduce efficiency, increase costs and could prove "criminal." His opinion largely swayed British officials in their 2001 decision not to lift the ban on women in combat.