Fighting is for men

[rw4th]

This has turned into the typical discussion of degraded standards and I think one of the core issues of the article has been missed in this discussion. The CF has dumped any kind of "warrior culture" from its recruiting and strongly discouraged it in units in order to make a career in the CF more appealing to women and therein the recruiting problem lies. Young men who want to join the army to be warriors are discouraged by the recruiting approach and should they surmount their apprehension and give the CF a chance, they find very few places in the military where "warrior-ness" is actually encouraged.

 

[jmackenzie_15]

This has turned into the typical discussion of degraded standards and I think one of the core issues of the article has been missed in this discussion. The CF has dumped any kind of "warrior culture" from its recruiting and strongly discouraged it in units in order to make a career in the CF more appealing to women and therein the recruiting problem lies. Young men who want to join the army to be warriors are discouraged by the recruiting approach and should they surmount their apprehension and give the CF a chance, they find very few places in the military where "warrior-ness" is actually encouraged.

Which in short, is the biggest reason why I don't like us being called peacekeepers.We're warfighters, that in some circumstances, do peacekeeping missions, if you want to get technical.

But because of all this peacekeeper talk, the general public around where I live are under the misconception that we are no longer canadian warriors but team canada world police.

Lame.

 

[Gunner]

In the National Post today:

Re: Fighting Is For Men, Barbara Kay, Nov. 5.

As a female combat arms officer with operational experience, I find that Ms. Kay's archaic comments do a disservice to all serving personnel, both male and female. Fitness standards in the Forces have not been lowered or "dumbed down to accommodate women's lesser strength and ability," as she claims. All combat-arms soldiers, regardless of gender, must annually demonstrate their level of fitness by completing a 13-kilometre march, carrying a weight of 50 lbs, in full fighting gear in two hours and 22 minutes. There is no separate test for women, nor is there any flexibility on the time requirement.

That a reputable newspaper would print such a column on the eve of a national day of remembrance for service members is especially disheartening. Canadian female soldiers, alongside their male counterparts, are accomplishing phenomenal things in all parts of the globe.
I would like to remind Ms. Kay that service in combat arms is by choice -- a choice that is not easily made by either men or women. I serve and fight to protect and uphold basic freedoms, and I take offence that someone would have the gall to make such inappropriate and generalized statements.

Captain Rowena Williams, Ottawa.

 

[paracowboy]

In the National Post today:...Captain Rowena Williams, Ottawa.

while I already stand on record as agreeing with her over-all theme, did Capt. Williams actually use the BFT as a valid means of measuring fitness? She makes it sound as though it's difficult, or even worthwhile. And, I don't believe that Standards have been lowered to accomodate women, but the fact that they have been lowered is indisputable.

I like her standing up and refuting this dumbass article, but she could have chosen her ammunition better.

 

[Infanteer]

Young men who want to join the army to be warriors are discouraged by the recruiting approach and should they surmount their apprehension and give the CF a chance, they find very few places in the military where "warrior-ness" is actually encouraged.

Is this "warrior-ness" we seek (funny, the WWII vet in the family never talked about Warrior-ness being a factor in destroying the German war machine, but I digress) dependent upon an all-male environment?

I like her standing up and refuting this dumbass article, but she could have chosen her ammunition better.

+1

 

[rw4th]

(funny, the WWII vet in the family never talked about Warrior-ness being a factor in destroying the German war machine, but I digress)

You're right, they didn't and that's because they didn't need to. It was understood that jobs like the infantry were typically "testosterone fuelled" environments. Men of that era had not yet been subjected to the emasculation efforts that men in our times are subjected to (did anybody back then even imagine what a "metrosexual" is?)

Is this "warrior-ness" we seek dependent upon an all-male environment?

No, it's not, but the testosterone environment that is typically associated to it is usually unattractive to women (but It does not mean that some women are not be suited to the work). If we changed our recruiting and got rid the bullshit PC culture, those women (and men for that matter) that volunteer would be much more suited to closing with and destroying the f-ing enemy

 

[Infanteer]

No, it's not, but the testosterone environment that is typically associated to it is usually unattractive to women (but It does not mean that some women are not be suited to the work). If we changed our recruiting and got rid the bullshit PC culture, those women (and men for that matter) that volunteer would be much more suited to closing with and destroying the f-ing enemy

You're right - I agree with you as well; the proof is in the pudding in Ubercree's reference to Canadian Native Youth going to the South because organizations like the USMC sell the "warrior culture" better.  I guess this revolves back to standards - tough, realistic training and standards would provide the foundation for a "warrior culture" - irregardless of gender (for example, although open to all CF members, do you think the JTF-2 needs to make any gender specific policies or allowances?)

 

[paracowboy]

Men of that era had not yet been subjected to the emasculation efforts that men in our times are subjected to (did anybody back then even imagine what a "metrosexual" is?)

well, they called them by different names: Dandies, poppinjays, etc. Males (particularly young males) have always done stupid things to attract women and tell themselves they are stylish or what-not. It probably goes back to cro-magnon times.

No, it's not, but the testosterone environment that is typically associated to it is usually unattractive to women (but It does not mean that some women are not be suited to the work). If we changed our recruiting and got rid the bullshit PC culture, those women (and men for that matter) that volunteer would be much more suited to closing with and destroying the f-ing enemy

You're right - I agree with you as well; the proof is in the pudding in Ubercree's reference to Canadian Native Youth going to the South because organizations like the USMC sell the "warrior culture" better.   I guess this revolves back to standards - tough, realistic training and standards would provide the foundation for a "warrior culture" - irregardless of gender (for example, although open to all CF members, do you think the JTF-2 needs to make any gender specific policies or allowances?)

these last two sum it up quite nicely.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Time out

 

[hockeysgal]

Okay so I'm fairly certain this might open a can of worms, but I really want to know the opinion of the forum on this.

So anyone who has read this thread will understand why I would like to know your opinions.  Although I am obviously hoping to prove Scipio wrong any answer works for me, it is after all your opinion and you are entitled to it.  For a reference to the mentioned post see this thread: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/41949.0.html

I would be surprised to see a vote turn out that actually is in support of keeping women in combat roles.  I feel an anonymous vote would turn out in my favor among combat infantry members.

Apparently this is what Scipio believes and I would be quite happy to prove him wrong, so please vote and add your comments if you have anything to add.

Cheers

Inf Off

 

[Cabose]

Why shouldn't women have the same rights to defend ones country as any of us guys?  Don't we live in a free society where women have equal rights as men?  Wouldn't saying you cant join the army because your a women take away that freedom? 
Leum

 

[karl28]

I think that a woeman who wants to serve her countries armed forces should be aloud to do so and no restrictions should be placed on them in what trades she can do . If she wants to be combat arms let her as long as she meets the requirements of the job that's all that matters .

 

[Screw]

Why kick 'em out? One standard for everyone in the combat arms! Meet IT or get out. Man, Woman, Sgt or Pvt.

 

[Glorified Ape]

I vote yes, though I think there are issues with cost effectiveness in training women for the combat arms.

 

[Screw]

I vote yes, though I think there are issues with cost effectiveness in training women for the combat arms.

I can see that- training isnt cheap. Especially with some of those figures I believe you posted regarding women/men failure percentages. Although wouldnt better selection do better for both men and women?