well, i feel i can safely step in here now that the bomb has already been dropped and the attitudes are directed at someone else for a change (howdy tat!).

there is a decided lack of ability to assign blame in the proper place here.  it always cracks me up to see this stupid rage going on here because it was the stupid MEN in the military (or politicians, but still men) who let women into the service in the first place.  and it was MEN who decided that the standards would be lowered so that more women would be able to "pass."  and it was MEN who decided to changed things so the women wouldn't get offended.

if you want to get pissed at somebody, try starting there.  you'll never be able to convince me that women were in high enough places and in large enough numbers (either in the military or in Congress) to get these changes made on their own.  and no amount of bitching or complaining from ANYBODY should have deterred the "big tough" armed forces decision makers from doing what was right for the armed forces and the defense of the nation.  i think it's more pathetic that they were swayed by public opinion.  how disgusting is that!

and there is a huge freakin' difference women in the military and changing all the rules to allow women in the military.  women in the military is not the evil.  if the single standard for men were applied to women, the only women in the military would be those who COULD hack it.  (and i'm guessing these would also be the women who didn't make a big deal out of being female, so that it would hardly even be an issue).  only when the standards are changed to help the women succeed, does the problem with gender arise.

illustration:  two new recruits in basic.  one male, one female.  male can't hack it.  female can.  he fails, she doesn't (and i'm talking about the male standard here.)  he's a sniveling weakling, who's merely sent home because he couldn't hack it.

different scenario:  two new recruits in basic.  one male, one female.  he's great at everything.  she's a soldier's worst nightmare, weak, crying, scared.  she fails, he doesn't.  she's a snivleing weakling who's sent home because she couldn't hack it.  "BUT SHE'S ALSO A FUCKING WOMAN WHO HAS NO BUSINESS BEING IN THE ARMED FORCES BECAUSE SHE FUCKING SUCKS AND IS SO FUCKING WEAK AND IS SO FUCKING STUPID."

see the difference?

i agree with the consensus that the military is weakened.  but i disagree with the assumption that it's merely the presence of females that has done it.  if the only females allowed were the ones that could hack it, i'm pretty sure that there wouldn't be the problems that there are now.

disclaimer:  this argument does NOT address the question of the propriety of women serving in the armed forces.  when things such as unit morale (being predominantly male), integrity of the forces, pressure from society is considered, i do not advocate women in the military.

The "MEN" in the military that let women in, lowered standards, and changed things GOT ORDERS to do that by the CIVILIAN leadership, often pussy whipped PC liberal males (I refuse to call these people men). THE CVILIANS MAKE POLICY, [B]NOT[/B] THE MILITARY LEADERS.

Wow.  That is really one of the worst arguments I've heard in quite a while, regarding any issue.  "Well, we asked for it, but it's YOUR fault because you gave in."  Just like a woman.

Anyway, point taken.  I hope the government isn't swayed by whining women anymore.

Well, Fuck Me. That's the best post I've seen in weeks.(Beeellllccch!)

I like the way ARlagy talks.... my 2 cents now.

As a former Marine, I knew a few Marines of the female gender, (I hate the term Woman Marine "WM" cause I ain't called a "MM") and my complaint then, is the same now.

One set of standards, all pass it or fail it. If my physical requirements are X, then all physical requirements are X. to give the women lower requirements is rediculous.

If they want the ability to do the same job, meet the same requirements. Women want equality, and they deserve equality...but are willing for a few to ruin it for all.

I'm just wondering what the range has to do with this? The only person to mention a woman's performance on a shooting range - until now - was another woman, after all.

I think the whole issue of men vs women in combat boils down to the fact that the average male soldier can do everything an infantryman is required to do, and the average female soldier can't. I also think that everyone here is aware that this isn't due to the females not giving 100%, but because the average female doesn't have the muscle mass, cardiovascular capacity, or strength/endurance that the average male soldier does. But my thought is that if a female can do everything that's required of an infantryman, then let her hump that ruck alongside the guys - and if a male can't, either get him in shape so he can or kick him out.

Personally, I wouldn't care if my "fighting position co-occupant" was a male or a female, as long as he/she could do his/her share of the work. I like to think that when I was in, I was professional enough to treat a female soldier in my section (didn't have any, I was artillery) the same as a male soldier and not see her as a potential sex partner.

they're men, nonetheless.  if you want to make it a gender issue, i can make it a gender issue too.  i don't necessarily consider those whiny wimpy females to be women, but you guys seem to have no problem labeling them as 100% representative of the entire female gender.

and it matters little whether it's civilian or military.  the decisions were still made by men.



i didn't mean it quite that way.  but yeah, i guess if the shoe fits.... but i wasn't advocating women in the military.  i was simply saying that the ultimate decision was not with women, but with the MALE decision makers.  so if you really want to place blame, place it with the people who made the decision to allow women into the military in the first place.  yes, women in the military is rife with problems, but that never would have happened had the decision-makers had big enough cojones to stand up for what was best.

and if it was a political decision, it looks even worse for those who made the decision.  political expediency should never be the determining factor.  

you can bitch at the women for not being able to do it, with very good reason.  but bitch at the decision-makers for letting them be there in the first place.

Please.  My mother was in the Women's Army Corps and served as a nurse in a forward Mobile Army Surgical Hospital.  Women make a valuable contribution to the armed forces.  

The attitude that insecure men like you have is what allows the fem-nazi movement to march on.  People see how horribly women are treated by assholes like you and get pissed, so they feel that things need to be changed for the [i]few[/i] women who whine and can't keep up.  



In my experience women bitched no more than men.  I find it kind of amusing that the same attitude that was pervasive prior to racial integration of the armed forces has been present for the last 30 or so years against women.  The same "they can't fight, they'll run away, they're cowards" arguments were used against blacks in the military.  They were proven VERY wrong in Vietnam.  

I do not personally believe that the average woman has the physical strength or stamina to keep up with the average male combat soldier.  However, I have seen a few women meet and exceed the standards set for men in the Marine Corps (they still have seperate training standards and battalions).  The women who can meet these standards should be allowed to be in fighting units, because they have demonstrated that they have what it takes.

And if you are foolish enough to believe that women don't have fighting spirit, just remember "Hell hath no fury to a woman scorned."




"Do what you will,
just stop the ego-driven idiocy."

Are you an "army man?"  Have you seen actual combat?  I have, and have seen tough talkers like you shit themselves and freeze, useless to everybody.




"Do what you will,
just don't talk tough unless you have actually done something tough."

[b]Still, while I can't speak for other women I'll wager I can take any of you three's beer-swigging-football-watching-hiring-local-help-to-mow-the-lawn-candy-asses to town any day of the week on the range or in the field.

I am a graduate of Royal Military Academy Sandhurst.  My squad (all women) won the Red Blue games three times in a row, twice as aggressor forces.  We also took fifth in Swiss Raid Commando.

I personally have taken 3rd, 5th and 6th in the Swiss National 300 meter free rifle competition. I've qualified the equivilant of "Master" with a Sig 551, H&K 91 and Expert with the H&K p7m8. I have completed 26 jumps and hold two jump badges including an alpine night jump badge (at night over alpine forest- I'm not aware of any other military which even attempts such things anymore).

I was twice invited as an olypmic alternate to the fencing team (I have been foil fencing since I was 8 and beating men in regional and national competitions on an embarrassingly regular basis), I skied world cup downhill when I was 15 and I hold a 5 handicap in polo.

I don't care if you call it a fox hole, a dog tag, a fighting position or a "walking cluster fuck."

I'm not concerned about sexual harassment because any man who even attempts it with me is in for the surprise of a lifetime.  If I am feeling generous his testicles might re-emerge from his upper abdominal cavity a week after I'm through and he will be quite lucky if he doesn't learn what his own freshly removed, bloody spleen tastes like in the process, just before I straighten my evening dress and go back to dancing the tango with my date.

However- when you, sirs, decide to mouth off about never fighting with women beside you- well you're just showing how ignorant and soft you've really gotten.

It amazes me how "big tough men" tremble at the thought they might have to share a fox hole with a woman.  Get a grip you flab-ridden softies.  Christ- we usually stop menstruating during combat or other stress.  What are you worried about?  (A little blood too scary for you to handle?)

If you would rather die than have women pull your sorry shot-up ass out of a fox hole, lay down covering fire and sweep the flanks so we can haul your sorry, bleeding not-quite-a-corpse-yet body into a chopper, well I wish we could let you.  Unfortunately, duty is duty and I will save your soft beer-insulated bloat whether you like it or not.  Get used to it.

-Tatja
[/quote][/b]



That all sounds well and good,but how are you at performing the "whip around" maneuver?

Are there special Mil spec tampons?

This is seriously a pile of shit. When you start banning terms that people have been using in the military for so long you destroy the true meaning of "equal rights".

I couldn't disagree with many more, Even to allow a few in combat arms units is to destroy the units cohesion.  Maybe in a hundred or so years after we have conquered human nature and the will to reproduce, but not today.

AR Lady
Obviously you have never heard of Patsy Schroeder (SP?) one the reasons the military is as screwed up as it is today.  She along with a lot of other Congress Persons made the military change by making funding dependant on the changes.

tatja-

Would you please post a "non-camo" picture of yourself?

I did not have the Honor of serving in the United States Armed Forces in my youth, and I thank all of those who are and have done so.
I also respect those that are and have served in our allies armed services, including yourself.

Were you to kick my testicles into my lower abdominal cavity, I hope you would be wearing red high heels.
Thank you...Tough Chicks really give me the blood-gorged blue-veiner!!!.[shock]

This is the ultimate example of how Politically Correctness is fucking up not only our military, but the whole nation.

The military is supposed to be made up of trained killers.  Now, not only do they have to take "sensitivity training" (read as: total fucking horshit), but now we have got to change our traditional naming convention so we won't "offend anyone."  

I saw one of the young girls who was injured on the USS Cole, in an interview right after the attack.  She was a cutie... and somebody's sweet little girl.  But as I heard her crying about how horrible it was (and I am sure it was horrible), I told my wife, who was also watching TV, that "little girls don't belong on warships."  Hey, I am from the "old school."  I don't want sensitivity training for our troups.  I want them to go out and kill the enemy.

ID tags and fighting positions, my big old butt!!!

[:(!]

ARnSC

Hey!  I'm leafing through my history of war, looking for victorious female armies since the dawn of man.  Guess what!  That chapter is BLANK.  I've been uniformly unimpressed with the physical strength and endurance of women in the USMC/USA/USN/USAF as witnessed by myself over twenty years in the USMC, and six years as a civ in a joint military organization.  This should not be misconstrued as meaning women don't have intellect, "heart", or can't kill.  Of course they do and can.  they make excellent intel collectors and snipers.  They just can't carry the infantrymans load.  Anyone who tells you otherwise is telling a story.  Physical strength counts, although DACOWITS and every other progressive will say it doesn't.  Most women don't have it.  Otherwise they'd be playing pro baseball/basketball/football and be present on killing fields worldwide in much larger numbers.  Please point out what I'm missing and post sources, please.  Of course there are exceptions to most rules, and there may be exceptional females.  But exceptions don't fill the ranks.  Quantity does, and vast quantities of physically and mentally strong males are present to meet that requirement.  I will grant you that womens sports programs have come a long way in the last twenty years, but it isn't enough.  I have female soldiers that work for me, and I am loyal to them, and they are loyal to me, but place them in combat?  I wouldn't want to see that, especially against North Korean Special forces, Spetznaz, or any "progressive" third world army, for that matter.



Jim

there are two angles i can take here.

the first, she's one woman.  congress is made up mostly of men.  most of the votes are male.  so it was still men that ended up making the decision.  her tactics may have had some effect, but it ain't like the good ol' boys couldn't have told her to sit on it and spin, the bill wasn't passing in that form.  they've done it before for other issues they wouldn't cave on.  why was this one so different?

second, if you're trying to tell me that this one woman had the power to influence EVERY single man in congress to get her way, then perhaps women should be in the military, even in combat, since it's obvious that we're so strong we can bend a man's will and make him do something he doesn't want to do.

let me reiterate for those who missed the point in the first place.  blame the women for being whiny and wimpy.  blame the decision makers for letting them there in the first place.

You know, quite frankly I don't care what sex, color, or whatever the men and women that fight for their country are.

I don't buy this crap about women not being able to do shit either.  In the book Stalingrad by Antony Beevor, he discussed the Soviet nurses crawling out into the battle field UN-ARMED to retrieve wounded and dying Soviet soldiers that their buddies were leaving to die.  You can't possibly sit here and tell me that ALL women would cower and whimper in combat, when history has shown time and time again that many women have exhibited extraordinary bravery and strength in combat situations.

Now, have we taken it to an extreme yes!  We should NOT have to remodel multi billion dollar submarines so women can serve on them.  The women that demand this are entirely selfish and are not acting in the best interest of the military or the country.  Not to mention having to compromise a subs mission because someone got pregnant.

If they can pass the same standards that men have had for years, more power to them.  If not, then your right they need to go.  But sit there and say they would all break and cower and run away....

I think not.

Look,

Men have been fighting wars from the beginning of time.  The issue is, women dabble in warfare, and for men it is an expectation.    Why do woman feel diminished by men when it comes to combat?  Why in the past couple thousand years have we maintained the status quo?  What advantage, strategic or tactical do women have over men in combat?

Now that I have been branded, a sexist let me say this.  I love woman; I have had them as supervisors and as employees.  They are just as competent or incompetent as their male counterparts.  As a mater of fact, I currently have four female Quality Engineers working for me that show a level of commitment that is impressive.  Having said that, as long as the strongest woman is weaker than the strongest man is, things will stay the same.  History shows right or wrong might makes right.

When it comes to killing people, I want the best person for the job.   The real test is to see how many of us are willing to send our daughters off to die.

Also,

Tatja, why the hostility?  If you need to prove your masculinity fine, but the general rule of fighting is if two people of equal skill fight, the larger of the two will win.  Now, I do not want you to remove my testicles, but I guarantee there is a man, or woman who would feed them to you if you pissed them off.  If you have an issue, feel free to email me, but you have never been “expected” to fight while I have along with the other countless men in this country.

Tat, I have no problem with you fighting alongside me, I am mostly a panty-waste anyways, and if one day you feel lonely, you are more than welcome to marry me, you are such a cutie, and at least semi bad-assed, you are my kinda woman.

Much as I hate to see stupid whiny ass bitchy females fuck up the proud military tradition that is the U.S. Armed Forces I also regret seeing the poor treatment of someone who is NOT the problem. Tatjana is also a member of the U.S. Armed Forces and deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Until she proves undeserving.


I swear some of you are the same guys who wouldn't let girls into the treehouse 15 years ago.

Americans killed in Vietnam conflict:

Male:     At least 58,000
Female:   At least      8

Tatja was not in the US military she is an Austrian (and an attractive one at that I might add).  After talking to her I can say she is not a whining feminist that some have claimed and even agreed that most women don’t belong on the battle field.

AR Lady
We have a saying in the Marine Corps; it is the mothers of America that have F-ed up the Corps.  The reason for that the majority of voters are women.  When a mother complains to her congressperson (be they man or women) about how harshly their sons are treated.  That Congressperson takes not and sends a Congrint.  Having done many Congrints, I can honestly say most are unfounded, and the result of someone talking to a mother and telling how they got punished, etc.  Unfortunately, the mothers of America often do not see things in the light of what it takes to win wars, but rather how dare they do that to my son.  That generates a lot of heat on the local level for the unit commanders.  The solution, we have gone from the days there was effective corrective action take to correct transgressions and weakness, to a more kindler gentler approach of documenting everything with counseling.

From the book "Stolen Valor" pg. 467.

"Lieutenant Lane was the only woman killed by enemy fire during the ten long years of the Vietnam War."

Like I said, woman are not expected to fight, men are.  I am not arguing, I am just stating the truth.

"Chicks cant hold they smoke... Das what it is!"

Name the movie guys!

M.

You had me 2nd guessing myself there...

Right Actor, Wrong Movie.

M.

i've worked with females in the military as well. my overall opinion is, keep them in non-combat jobs. that austrian lady might be more the exception than the rule. i cant imagine a battalion of combatant women that exist.  

arlady's comment about placing the blame on men is pathetic. men may have made the final decision but it is society that is at the root of the change.

we all have our place in the world.  the trick is to find it and stay put.

Hell, where I come from this is considered foreplay! [BD]

Commandant General Mundy summed it up nicely afew years ago when asked by a reporter about the contribution women make to the Marine Corps.
"Our women Marines are outstanding. They are an important part of the Marine Team. They're fantastic."
The reporter then asked if the Marine Corps needed women....

Gen. Mundy quickly replied:

"Absolutely not."

When congress noticed that there wasn't a proportionate amount of women (and minorities)in the officer ranks Marines, the Officer Selection Officers were told to give academic and fitness waivers to those women (and minorities) who desired to become Marine officers and didn't quite meet the required standards.
They did this.
Two years later, congress noticed that these same sub-par, women (and minorities) were underperforming at Marine OCS.
They concluded that the only possible reason that this could be occurring was DISCRIMINATION.

It didn't seem like you were arguing - my post was intended to underline and show the extent of the disparity you pointed out.

The "8" may be "9" now. There was something I saw about one more non-combat death.

Damn, I'm in love. My type of woman.

There's not a woman on this planet that could carry a pack, weapon and combat load for 25 miles, drop pack, and then kick my ass.
No way.
That sums it up.

(I'm just not in to that stuff [;)])

What is "cockpit" going to be changed to?


BOX OFFICE......

Recent British testing of women for combat showed that they were not up to the job. For example, they lacked the strength to dig in in hard dirt, etc.

The fact is, women in combat is a big mistake.

Tat,

You look completely Hooah to me and I'd gladly go against you in the 'hand to gland' pit anytime.  I'm also a former fencer (1987 Junior Olympic seed), a shooter (GSSF), and Army type guy.

Would also like to see you "out of uniform", so to speak, and in civvies.  

Still don't think women should be in front line combat, but for other chauvenistic reasons I'd love to discuss ad nauseum over a glass of wine or a 40 oz.  (LOL)

RLTW,

TS

I think [b]bitch[/i] is the correct spelling.

Most people who support this shit are men.  I don't think the majority of women want to see 18 year old girls on the front line.  They're smart enough to know, that despite the total bullshit that Hollywood is putting out these days, that 118 pound women are fairly limited when it comes to phyisical stuff.  

Hell, I guarantee you, there is not a woman alive today on this planet that can play football (the real thing for you European pussies) at the college D1 level except perhaps kicker.  Now, if they can't do that, HITF can they be in combat?

They don't have the size, speed, and strength, and the very FACT that the Army had to lower their standards is proof of that.  

Women are very capable, they're very smart, they can do just about anything, but they do not belong on the f**ing battlefield.  

And please, leave the ww2 Soviet chicks out of this.  The communists put out so much propaganda that it's hard to know what's true and what's not.  All I know is that the Weirmacht had a 20-1 kill ratio over the soviets, but over-extended themselves and simply fought too many wars, too many fronts.

Amen!

When males are in control of the aircraft it will be called a cockpit, if females are in control of the aircraft it then becomes a box office....

I am, quite frankly, in love...

There's only one way to end this. I'll see you all on the front. [;)]

Yeah, I like her too.  I don't even care if her unruly hair *does* look like a tangled-up tan, tumbleweed.

Why don't you emigrate?[:P]

What I can't understand is why *anyone* signs up for the armed forces these days.  Just a religion of a different sort, I guess.  Our government doesn't deserve to play god with such fine, freedom-loving people.  But to each his own.

I've known two women who were in the Army.  One was so-so, she did a lot of administrative paper shuffling.  Doubtful she would be any good in battle.  Hates her brother's guns, thinks it is awful that he would teach his kids how to shoot.

The other one was deathly afraid of her M-16, even threw it on the ground and claimed she would not clean it.  Totally brainwashed anti-gunner, minority EEOP type.  Useless as the day is long--couldn't even pull her own weight as a hairdresser, let alone a soldier.

Sure, there are lots of men who I can say the same things about.  But like I said, I can't see why everyone is so fired up to protect a government that doesn't deserve our loyalty or respect, let alone our lives.  

Fact1:Women are very good marksmen.:) I have been beaten by them many times.  

Fact2:Men are twice as physically strong as women.  There are exceptions on both sides.

I don't care if I'm in a fighting position with a woman or man.  I might need that other person to carry my 5'11" slim 185 pound ass, out of harms way.  If you can't do you don't belong there. PERIOD. (uhh disregard that last sentence) [:D]

I've done long distance Romance......it don't work.[grenade]

Doug  



 

[violet]Tatja...I've seen that pix before....your playing with the boys here too?[/violet]So can you pick up your wounded troop at 6'3 250 lbs.and hump him/her outta the hot zone under fire.... [b]GOOD FOR YOU![/b] GIRLS[rolleyes]....Brouhaha bud,it means exactaly what I said.No I'm not being'wise but I've seen that pix before.By playing with the boys I mean PLAYING w/boys= (US)ar15.comers