Advice for women on BMQ and other courses [MERGED]

[HItorMiss]

Though I wish I could agree with you on the concept of if she CAN do the job she should be allowed, I think you are ignoring the other side of that equation. That side being so long as we continue to raise our Son's to protect woman (IE: Girls are precious don't let things happen to them, protect your sister she is weaker then you etc etc) You cannot effectively integrate woman into that force as seamlessly as yo might like. The IDF report highlighted that issue. It's so driven into the majority of men that seeing a woman hurt require us to take more action then we would normally.

Do I think this is right, no I do not. But I have seen it with my own eyes ( no not in combat). And that is just one aspect of this issue but one of the Major ones. The other being as I have said, the PT standard and in all honesty my personal experience being that of disappointment.

 

[time expired]

OK Vern,you are right the trials are done and there in  lies part of my
problem,you see I was involved in the trials as a section NCO i/c in
4 SVC BN. in the late 70s.I was appalled at the manipulation of info.,
the glossing over of problems that went into proving this trial was
a success and  that women belonged in a near combat role.Given this
distortion I am doubly suspicious of any results of conclusions reached
in trials conducted in a combat arms environment.At the time I become
interested in the subject and informed myself further,I read this report
in ,I believe a US Army related publication,as they were also bringing
women in increasing numbers into the military.This was driven, whether
you accept it or not, by the feminist movement in the US.I am not a
sexist and feel that a woman should be allowed to do any job that she
is intellectually and physically qualified ,I always found independent
capable women very attractive and not at all threatening.However I
also feel that in the case of the military the operational efficiency
should be paramount and not be hampered by sociological factors
and given most men's cultural mind sets, women in combat roles are not
adding to this efficiency.Another thing Vern is most of us were given
our cultural values by women, our mothers.
                                                Regards 

 

[Strike]

HoM,

I respect your opinion as you are a level headed guy who had BTDT.  HOWEVER  ;D don't forget a certain Inf officer (female) who was the PA for the CLS a few years back (think she was RCR).  She made an immense impression on more than a few young men.  Of course, maybe it was her position as an officer that helped a bit as they were less likely to question her.  Then there is one woman I went to school with who was the first female ARMD officer.  She could run most men into the ground.  That's how high her PT standard was.

I remember talking to some crusty old CPO about when women were first introduced on the ships.  The Navy is very big on tradition and there was quite the uproar.  After a few years, things quieted down, and the ones who were the happiest with the results were these same crusty old POs.  Even the wives of the men serving commented on how their husbands were being more respectful to them!  (This from the wife of said crusty chief.)

We talk about culture and our attitudes about women having to be protected.  Most of us that are serving are of the opinion that we can protect ourselves quite well, thank-you.  And that likely comes from how we were raised.  So yes, there needs to be a change and the only way these attitudes WILL change is if we start on our own and stop perpetuating the myth that girls are made of sugar and spice.  We may well be, but I am made from unrefined, raw cane sugar and hot peppers!  How's that for spicy!

So one sees the problem lies not with
the women but with us and our ingrained cultural values and that to me
is a valid reason to not have women in the combat role.

Time Expired, different country, different culture.  Find me something from Canada.  Otherwise, this is just a fancy little story.

 

[HItorMiss]

Strike,

In all honesty right now I see those persons you have talked about as exceptions to the rule ( well OK not totally it might well be 50/50 at this point) I have known 2 officers who were great at what they did. I don't disagree with woman in Cbt Arms completely I just have probems seeing it totally working in today's culture. It has been mandated by the CF of course an it wont matter what some people feel I just hope that something seriously bad does not occur that throws the whole mess into a harsh light for public consumption.

Bah what do I know, in the end I just shoot people and I think I should stick to what I am good at  ;D

 

[mudrecceman]

In the end, I think part of the problem is the "she is good at XXY for a girl"...which goes in line (I think) with the points a few of you are eluding too.

If "we" can't measure our troops and officers by one measuring stick, things will never change.

And that, IMHO, is the key.  Throw away the "girl" and "boy" measuring sticks. 

One standard.

(ya I know people will say "it ain't gonna happen.  Those are the ones I am talking about.)

My 2 bones.

 

[armyvern]

Though I wish I could agree with you on the concept of if she CAN do the job she should be allowed, I think you are ignoring the other side of that equation. That side being so long as we continue to raise our Son's to protect woman (IE: Girls are precious don't let things happen to them, protect your sister she is weaker then you etc etc) You cannot effectively integrate woman into that force as seamlessly as yo might like. The IDF report highlighted that issue. It's so driven into the majority of men that seeing a woman hurt require us to take more action then we would normally.

Do I think this is right, no I do not. But I have seen it with my own eyes ( no not in combat). And that is just one aspect of this issue but one of the Major ones. The other being as I have said, the PT standard and in all honesty my personal experience being that of disappointment.

Girls can do the job and have been doing the job in the CF. The girls are already here, it's decided; and they aren't going anywhere.

That side as long as we raise our sons how?? My son has not been raised to think of women as weak and requiring his protection. My son has been raised to respect females and males and to value all people for what they do and don't do, and for the efforts that they put into their attempts at such, each on their own merits.

My daughter has been raised, not to think that she needs to be protected by man, but to be strong in her beliefs, and that if she wants to do something that she can do it; provided that she works hard, puts her her utmost 110% effort and believes in her abilities; as has my son. She has been raised with the very same values as my son.

Both have been raised to respect each other. Both have been raised to have no expectations of others, that they would not apply to themselves.

WRT the PT standards, my thoughts on this have been expressed many many times on this site. One standard for all. That being said, I know how you feel about those who can't meet them. And I've seen males and females who didn't meet them. Both should be treated the same way. I'm not talking push-ups and situps either, as that isn't the PT standard for Cbt Arms or LF anyway, it's the 13km BFT. And males fail that too and, as far as I'm aware the standard is the EXACT same for both males and females in that Army fitness test, so the argument of lower fitness standards on the fitness test fro combat arms personnel is false. Their test is exactly the same, regardless of sex.

 

[2 Cdo]

WRT the PT standards, my thoughts on this have been expressed many many times on this site. One standard for all. That being said, I know how you feel about those who can't meet them. And I've seen males and females who didn't meet them. Both should be treated the same way. I'm not talking push-ups and situps either, as that isn't the PT standard for Cbt Arms or LF anyway, it's the 13km BFT. And males fail that too and, as far as I'm aware the standard is the EXACT same for both males and females in that Army fitness test, so the argument of lower fitness standards on the fitness test fro combat arms personnel is false. Their test is exactly the same, regardless of sex.

You had me until you called the BFT as a PT standard. That's the first thing wrong with the Forces right there, the BFT is no more a measure of fitness than I am His Holiness the Pope! If anyone in the Forces fails a 13 km walk with a little bit of weight and does not have a precluding medical condition (Like an amputated leg) they should be released immediately. It's a f*cking walk, how does a person fail a walk?

By the way, I am also a little old fashioned and don't believe women should be in the combat arms. I'm sure some (very few) can do it, but I don't like it. No amount of discussion will change my mind, it's my opinion, but I will accept it as nobody important really cares what I think about it anyway! ;D

 

[armyvern]

You had me until you called the BFT as a PT standard. That's the first thing wrong with the Forces right there, the BFT is no more a measure of fitness than I am His Holiness the Pope! If anyone in the Forces fails a 13 km walk with a little bit of weight and does not have a precluding medical condition (Like an amputated leg) they should be released immediately. It's a f*cking walk, how does a person fail a walk?

By the way, I am also a little old fashioned and don't believe women should be in the combat arms. I'm sure some (very few) can do it, but I don't like it. No amount of discussion will change my mind, it's my opinion, but I will accept it as nobody important really cares what I think about it anyway! ;D

Dude,

Not liking the fact that women are in the combat arms is a far cry from saying they shouldn't be in the combat arms ... especially when you've admitted that some can do it. There are people in my trade that I don't like in there ... but guess what ... they are still there.

I said the minimum fitness standard for the Army right now is the 13km BFT. There's already another thread on the board somewhere where I say it's too easy.

My response was in relation to HitorMiss' post that it has been his experience in the combat arms that women weren't meeting the same fitness standard as the men in the combat arms. I simply stated the fact that, as it stands right now, yes they are. The minimum standard is the BFT and females and males are all required to make the same timing, dig the same trench within the same standard time, carry the same amount of weight on their backs, and to complete the 100m casevac.

His two posts are below, and both times he mentions physical standards as one of the problems. My point is that both men and women in the combat arms are required to perform the exact same fitness test to the exact same standard. There is only one standard for the 13km and the other tasks inherent with that LFC Fitness Test.

If the women aren't capable of completing that test, of course they shouldn't be there. Nor should any man. But, right now, it is the standard, and his remarks that insinuate that somehow in his experience the women are not meeting this standard (and are still employed in the combat arms) is not accurate.

...
Do I think this is right, no I do not. But I have seen it with my own eyes (no not in combat). And that is just one aspect of this issue but one of the Major ones. The other being as I have said, the PT standard and in all honesty my personal experience being that of disappointment.

I myself am highly HIGHLY skeptical of woman in Cbt Arms. I have seen it with my own eyes and have been less then thrilled with the results in terms of their overall performance. Yes some men have been less then great at doing the job but so far from my experience if I took the women I have seen in Cbt Arms (Infantry as is my trade) and an equal number of men I would find the avg of poor performance on the physical soldiering aspect of that job to be much higher in the females. ....

 

[HItorMiss]

Vern,

The PT standard I was referring to was the very first entrance standard to the CF, as for the quote about the physical soldiering I was not referring to the BFT but oh say Section attacks, long humps or extended exercises, where in all of the above case's no female NCM I have personal experience have preformed anywhere near standard.

If you want to say they pass the BFT so therefore they are meeting the standard I cannot argue that as fact. If your saying that because they pass this test they are preforming all aspects of the job to standard then I sure as heck can argue that. Yes absolutely men fail at the above but as I pointed out far fewer in my neck of the wood's then woman have. That you can't argue as it's personal experience. Do I think some woman can do the Job, sure do I have seen 1 Officer who was absolutely amazing at what she did. However one positive example does not change my view on the subject.

And my initial argument was more on cultural norm in western society, which I agree with the findings of the study conducted by the IDF. Western Society sets itself up for failure in how it raises it's Male's to treat woman in a protective way verse true equality.

 

[tree hugger]

I have seen 1 Officer who was absolutely amazing at what she did.

...but she shouldn't be allowed to be cbt arms?  Why again?

 

[armyvern]

HitorMiss,

Send the one's that can't perform off to range control like happens with the men. What's the problem again?? No, I don't know how the females that you physically work with each day perform their daily tasks, but I can assure you that there are men in your trade who don't either.

If they are still in your trade, that's a leadership problem, not a 'what sex they may be' problem.

Do you actually propose to say that because most women can't perform in the combat arms, that the ones who can ... shouldn't be allowed to??

Imagine if we applied that standard to the men as well. Sorry boys, but a couple of men can't do their daily tasks to a good standard ... therefore, even you men who CAN will NOT be allowed to join the combat arms either.

Ooops, there goes the combat arms off into non-existance. Why the double standard?

 

[HItorMiss]

Tree Hugger....

Do I think some woman can do the Job, sure do. I have seen 1 Officer who was absolutely amazing at what she did. However one positive example does not change my view on the subject.

Vern easier said then done when a Bn has 4 women eyes are on them wether you want to admit it or not.....

 

[HItorMiss]

To further my reply to Tree Hugger,

I don't feel woman in Cbt Arms is a bad thing honestly, though so far in my eyes it's a dismal failure of an experiement. My argument was on the findings of the IDF report on the effect of woman on men in the Cbt Arms. who's findings I agreed with.

I have been side tracked on PT standards by Vern, who though is technicaly correct is way off the mark in my book. But we wont ever agree onthis subject so were both arguing to walls on in it.

 

[geo]

HOM,
The BFT is just the begining of the whole thing.  Both men and women have to perform in their job - at all times, throughout the entire year.... not just the one time the BFT is being performed.

And there are plenty of men that, for one reason or another, fail miserably while the women (most of them at least) succeed.

This year, out of the 90 odd that did the BFT with me, one man and one woman failed.... go figure.

 

[tree hugger]

How many would change your view?  ...Wait don't bother, I think I know the answer!

 

[armyvern]

Vern easier said then done when a Bn has 4 women eyes are on them wether you want to admit it or not.....

What does having eyes on them have to do with their ability to do their job?? What is this statement in relation to?

 

[HItorMiss]

Geo,

Re read my statement on the BFT.
As I have stated I was not referring to the BFT when I made reference to Physical Soldiering and when I did reference the PT standard was was referring to the very first standard when entering the CF,an no one here can argue that there is a lower standard for woman then men it's in black and white!


Vern,

It's simple shuffling off the 1% of failures to range control when it's men is simple....when you get rid of 3 out 4 woman well you get where I am going. Again I point out my main argument is base off the IDF report here people. We can argue PT or personal experience all we like no one is going to change there ideas on it.

 

[armyvern]

HorM,

That's a Leadership problem them. That's where it needs to get fixed. It's not going to be fixed by denying those women who can do the job properly the opportunity to do so. And the respect for those women who CAN do the job, will never be what it deserves to be if the Leadership isn't going to deal with situations like the one you've outlined.

Like I said, if they can't DO the job, they shouldn't be there (male or female). I have no problem with that. But, neither those men, nor those women, keep themselves there ... someone is allowing them to remain, that's wrong.

Male or female:

I have never stated that someone who couldn't do the job should be allowed to remain.

I have stated that those who CAN do the job should be allowed to remain and do that job.

 

[Scott]

tree hugger,

Methinks you're trying to vilify someone here. HoM never once stated that women shouldn't be in the combat arms. In fact, you put the words in his mouth, so to speak.

Scott
Army.ca Staff

 

[armyvern]

Geo,

Re read my statement on the BFT.
As I have stated I was not referring to the BFT when I made reference to Physical Soldiering and when I did reference the PT standard was was referring to the very first standard when entering the CF,an no one here can argue that there is a lower standard for woman then men it's in black and white!
...

That's absolutely true. But it is not applicable to females in the combat arms. Once they have made it through their applicable combat arms qualification ... they are required to meet the exact same PT test standard as the men. We are talking about women in the combat arms in this thread.

PS ... there's also a lower PT standard for a man who's 30 than a man who's 23 on the Express Test. And that's in black and white too!! The difference in Express standard is not limited to a difference between males and females. But, regardless, that is NOT the standard fitness test for the Army nor the combat arms MOSIDs (thank goodness). Just thought I'd point that out for the uninitiated.