The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Interesting Poll: Should women join the infantry (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..9~10~11~12~13..16~17~18 [Next]
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
819 Posts

Profile of acesover
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 01:45, critter wrote:
Upper body strength. I was not aware that soldiers bench pressed each other out of dangerous situations. I think we've all learned something today.


That is OK. I am sure there are many things you are not aware of. Smile
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
819 Posts

Profile of acesover
I just enjoy watcahing you guys dig up a few, very few instances tht an incident occured and use it as if it were the norm. Come on people, you can fool some of the people all...well you get my message.

Just for your information I knew of Sherri Gallagher long before you mentioned her as I have been interested in both pistol and rifle competition for many many years and while I do not compete any more I keep up on the news of the sport. I learned a long time ago that both rifle and pistol is more of a discipline than an endurance sport. I am quite sure that I can still shoot better scores then 85 90% of those in the armed forces but could not go into combat with any of them because of my age and physcial condition or I should say lack of physcial condition. In other words I could out shoot them but would be a lousy soldier at this time. Not to mention that I have yet to ever see a paper target shoot back. :

If the winner of a firefight was determined by who shot the most x's under timed fire I would definitely select Sherri. However if the winner was decided who came out of a fire fight alive that broke out while walking through the jungle and you were fired upon by an unseen enemy and probably lost 2 or 3 men instantly I would look elsewhere.
However I would love to have her as a sniper if she could emotionally handle it.
While this thread is not about Sherri she is a very unique individual and deserves a tremendous amount of credit and respect for her accomplishments and perhaps would make an excellent combat soldier. There must be something in her genes as her mother was also an exceptional competitive shooter.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
819 Posts

Profile of acesover
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 00:44, mastermindreader wrote:
Yes, I agree with Lobo. I, too, have NOT argued for lowering standards. Believe it or not there ARE women who can compete effectively with men in sports and everything else. To bar them from any activity based solely on their sex is, in my opinion, patently wrong and an equal protection violation.


This topic has never been about banning women. It is about their ability to function as COMBAT SOLDIERS under fire and duress. It is not about violating their rights. It is not a rights violation it is about them surviving and not endangering the lives of their fellow soldiers. As this is just getting weird I can only say that I served under very adverse conditions and none of the women I know would be able to stand up and do the things we did. For the MOST overwhelming part their bone stsructure is smaller and their muscle mass is smaller and I don't want to get into their emotional state as that could start another topic entirely but after 3 wives ask mastermindreader. Smile
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Acesover-

You were the one who said that in all of the sports you mentioned, women dominate COMPLETELY.

I have shown that is demonstrably false. And I guess you have no explanation for the fact that a woman won the Army's "Best Warrior."
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Do you actually believe that women in basic training are held to the same standards as men? Have you spoken with anyone who has been through mixed-sex basic training at for example Fort Jackson in the past decade?
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 10:44, Woland wrote:
Do you actually believe that women in basic training are held to the same standards as men?


Where do you get that conclusion from my posts? I have said repeatedly that I believe that women should not be restricted from any form of service BASED SOLELY ON THEIR SEX. I have also repeatedly said that those who may be allowed in combat roles should have THE SAME MENTAL AND PHYSICAL qualifications as the men.
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 10:57, mastermindreader wrote:
I have also repeatedly said that those who may be allowed in combat roles should have THE SAME MENTAL AND PHYSICAL qualifications as the men.


I agree. Which I would hope would be based on the current physical fitness standards for men. Not by lowering the male standards in order to qualify more women. Look at what it takes to score a 300 PFT for male Marines and look what it takes to score a 300 for females. Making the male standard the standard for combat soldiers across the board would be a good first step.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 11:20, Marlin1894 wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 10:57, mastermindreader wrote:
I have also repeatedly said that those who may be allowed in combat roles should have THE SAME MENTAL AND PHYSICAL qualifications as the men.


I agree. Which I would hope would be based on the current physical fitness standards for men. Not by lowering the male standards in order to qualify more women. Look at what it takes to score a 300 PFT for male Marines and look what it takes to score a 300 for females. Making the male standard the standard for combat soldiers across the board would be a good first step.


I agree. And I am thankful that someone has finally understood the point Lobo and I have been making.
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 01:45, critter wrote:
Upper body strength. I was not aware that soldiers bench pressed each other out of dangerous situations. I think we've all learned something today.


You don't think upper body strength is important to a combat soldier?
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Thanks, Bob. I think you've answered the question regarding theoretical qualifications. What about concerns for unit cohesiveness and discipline?
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
I agree. And I am thankful that someone has finally understood the point Lobo and I have been making.


And if they didn't lower the standard I think the question would pretty much take care of itself. You'd have a very few women that made it through and it wouldn't be much of an issue. But honestly, I do believe that if they did that, and say 98 +/- percent of females who tried washed out, there would people saying it's an unfair situation and the standards need to be lowered. We'd be right back where we are. You can pretty much take that to the bank.

I'm sure when the issue of allowing women in the Military in the first place came up a lot of people said "as long as they can meet the same requirements as the men, I'm all for it". But then they realized that doesn't really work. That's why we have two sets of standards now.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
My only point is this: Assume that 98% cannot meet the standards. Fine. The other 2% should be allowed in combat roles. As has been shown, there ARE women - admittedly not many - who CAN meet the standards and they should not be discriminated against based solely on their sex.

As to the sports issue - I still think its funny that after a woman pitcher defeated a men's team, the league ruled that women were no longer eligible to play. If that's not blatant sexism, I don't know what is. (See the link I posted earlier for the full story on this.)
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1194 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 06:19, mastermindreader wrote:
Did you read the link I posted above about Sherri Gallagher, the woman who won the Army's "Best Warrior" competition competing against eleven men? Here's a more detailed article about her directly from the Army:

http://www.army.mil/article/47144/First_......of_Year/


Yes, but if they'd made them box...
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 11:29, Marlin1894 wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 01:45, critter wrote:
Upper body strength. I was not aware that soldiers bench pressed each other out of dangerous situations. I think we've all learned something today.


You don't think upper body strength is important to a combat soldier?


Oh, I know it's important. But I think leg strength and endurance are more important. It was kind of intended as humor anyway.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 11:40, mastermindreader wrote:
My only point is this: Assume that 98% cannot meet the standards. Fine. The other 2% should be allowed in combat roles. As has been shown, there ARE women - admittedly not many - who CAN meet the standards and they should not be discriminated against based solely on their sex.


No, I know what you are saying. I think there are a whole host of reasons it's not a great idea. That's my opinion. But the physical requirements always seem to be the first argument people bring up. To me the answer is simple. Figure out the requirements an individual needs, based on the actual job, and apply it evenly across the board. And go from there.

The fact is there are two sets of standards right now. I don't think that's "fair" necessarily. Again, for several reasons. But if you are talking about combat infantry I believe there should one standard for anyone who chooses to become a battlefield combatant. And I think the standard should be quite high. It's no joke of a job.
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
819 Posts

Profile of acesover
I am not going to belabor my point of view. However please read what this contest consists of. Here is the link. http://www.army.mil/bestwarrior/2010/events.html

If you were a grunt and served tell me how most of these things come into play in a real situation. Like we need to know laws etc. I am sure we broke many laws in our tours and that is the real world not a contest. Go with your feelings that women are as capable and I wil go with mine. However my reson for the way I feel is because I was there. Yours is because you read something somewhere written by someone. Whatever. Can't forget that fast pitch girl. Smile

I know that when in Nam, current events and and counseling and US government and the constitution really helped us immensely...your kidding right? Yet this is an integral part of the best warrior competition...well I guess none of my guys would have faired to well in this test. We just survied (that is some of us) and killed a few of the enemy along the way and...well better left unsaid.

It seems very little of this contest is based on "survival and killing" which is what I feel a combat situation is all about. You may think differently and when being attacked you can quote the US constitution to the enemy and counsel him, maybe pass on some anger management ideas to calm him down. That should work. Bang your dead and so is your bud, you just bought the farm. You feel you are correct and that is all that matters. So be it. Believe what you want. I know what I believe so I Believe what I want. We can definitely coexist.

Just asking. Do you feel that best warrior competition means that the person who wins this competition is the most competent soldier in the armed forces and can overcome all other opponents in a combat situation? Or did they win some sort of contest that much of it has nothing to do with combat at all?

Not taking anything away from any of the winners and while winning this contest is something to be extremely proud of it has very litle to do with surviving in combat. Having said that I would have in my prime not even been able to qualify to compete other than in rifle. But I feel I came out a winner as I survived in real life and death situations and am here to talk about it.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1194 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 11:54, acesover wrote:
Not taking anything away from any of the winners and while winning this contest is something to be extremely proud of it has very litle to do with surviving in combat. Having said that I would have in my prime not even been able to qualify to compete other than in rifle. But I feel I came out a winner as I survived in real life and death situations and am here to talk about it.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 11:52, critter wrote:
Oh, I know it's important. But I think leg strength and endurance are more important. It was kind of intended as humor anyway.


I know you were kidding. But if you had to do it for a while you might think different. "More important" is based on a situation. There are defiantely times where you need pure upper body strength and all the endurance in the world, or leg strength, won't do you a bit of good. I'm sure you can think of a few. That's why pullups, and flexed arm hangs for women, are one of the things that are tested in the basic physical fitness test. They don't test how many squats anyone can do.
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
Yeah, I can think of a bunch. I was just thinking of the specific instance of helping an injured comrade when I typed that. "Lift with the legs."
But, mostly, I just liked the visual.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 12:01, critter wrote:
Yeah, I was just thinking of helping an injured comrade. "Lift with the legs."


What if you have to pull them out of a hole? lol
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Interesting Poll: Should women join the infantry (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..9~10~11~12~13..16~17~18 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.21 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL