Dempsey to combat arms: Prove it!
Our buddy, Rowan Scarborough, in the Washington Times writes today that Chariman of the Joint Chiefs, Marty Dempsey, has moved past the point from which women will have to prove themselves equal to men in regards to assigning females to combat arms specialties;
ArmyGen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has said that if a service wants to keep a job as a male-only occupation because of its high physical demands, the service will have to show why those tests should not be lowered to accommodate women.
Tests of strength are particularly important to special operations. About 15,000 combat positions, a fraction of the 1.4 million active force, are subject to integration.
“The only option now is to offer reasons why they can’t do it,” said an Army special operations veteran who believes U.S. Special Operations Command will cave to White House demands to include women. “I haven’t heard that anyone has the courage to say they can’t do it, either. Maybe the new [military occupational specialty] can be 18P — Special Forces camp follower. Is that PC enough?”
An ArmySpecial Forces soldier said the qualification course at Fort Bragg, N.C., to earn the Green Beret is so demanding that the Army will have to lower standards for some tasks in able for women to succeed.
So, there you go. I’ve said since the beginning of this most recent series of discussions that the generals are going to do whatever it takes to please their political masters and it looks as if none of them have the courage to speak up.
So where are these all-important veterans in Congress? Other than Duncan Hunter, I haven’t heard a peep out of them. You’d think that Miss Lindsay Graham who drags out his commission at every opportunity would stand up for future warriors who will have to fight the next war after substandard training. And where the Hell is John McCain, who understands the rigors of war more than most?
Category: Military issues
Where are Grahamnesty and McLame?!?
Oh Jonn you scamp!
Maybe if there was an illegal immigration angle to all of this you could get those two jokers to take a stand, but otherwise forget it.
So years of evidence of physiological differences are not relevant. I suppose when women are getting killed or permanently injured by going through the course that would only prove that the standards are wrong.
It’s sad to see our military leaders whimpering at the feet of Political Correctness and feminism. EVERYBODY knows that women cannot physically compete with men and cannot meet the current training standards. That fact is not stopping obama and others from neutering our military. You can bet that the Taliban, China, Russia, Al-Queda, North Korea, etc. all welcome this new policy. Expect class-actions lawsuits to be be brought by females that fail the training or actually make it to Infantry/SF units, citing “gender discrimination, hostile work environment” etc. leading to a further degradation of warfighting capabilities. This is a disgusting development, pushed by liberals who put PC ahead of combat effectiveness.
I’m wondering how women will fare when it comes to defending themselves in ground fighting techniques – against an opponent who is bigger and stronger than them?
I guess they’ll also have to lower the rope at Victory Pond.
@3 Amen, Jumpmaster; we are going to be in a very sad state indeed in the coming years.
Duck and Run Dempsey is a political hack with no regard for the safety or effectiveness of our military. Plainly stated, “obama’s bitch”.
Ha, mccain ! “Mr. They Won” so we do as they tell us, POS. What little credibility he had was lost long ago.
Political correctness, like rules of engagement, will most certainly get you killed needlessly.
Is it any wonder that Marty Dumpster got re-nominated as CJCS?
Sigh. As long as the wars of the future involve daily showers for combatants, are conducted around menstrual cycles, and don’t involve carrying anything heavy or climbing anything steep then we should be good-to-go.
The avalanche of power-point slides that will inevitably follow the integration of women to combat arms, and all that entails, better be the deadliest thing the U.S. military has to face for a while.
“Prove it?” A tabless cunt (Dempsy) wants Special Ops to prove the impossible?
Another waste of time to satisfy the progressively enlightened beautiful people.
Don’t make me laugh.
“Maybe the new [military occupational specialty] can be 18P — Special Forces camp follower. Is that PC enough?””
My apologies to the ladies on here, but that is some funny shit right there.
Is it a requirement for the GO’s to turn in their balls after they put on their second star?
If they do this then women need to register for selective service.
The duty status of all the congress critters with military experience is DUSWUN on this issue.
This is a great disservice to women. They will go into battle thinking they are prepared and end up captured, tortured, and killed because the PC command did not have the balls to tell them they don’t have the skills to do what the men do.
So…how many people saw this coming and even posted about it? I did. I knew from the first whimper that it would be different and unequal standards. Dempsey has gone ass over tea kettle, batshit crazy. But…the POTUS and liberals are loving this. The feminists will be out with banners flying now to be sure their little girls will be allowed to do pushups from their knees and all the other attendant crap that will go along with lowered standards. I am f@cking pissed beyond words.
@13 You are right and my anger left that out of my post. It is ultimately the woman who will suffer most.
Am I correct in assuming that ‘people will get killed if we lower standards’ isn’t going to be a viable reason for not doing it?
I am all for gender equality, as long as it’s truly equal and gets the job done. If not, not.
When did we switch from being a country where they have to prove your guilt to one where you have to prove your innocence?
The only thing this will accomplish is an increase in body bags.
Dempsey is a no-talent, incompetent, PC assclown.
I miss the Army, but I am glad that I am out in so many ways.
I agree with Green Thumb. If equal treatment is mandated then selective service needs to be mandatory for females as well.
I really hope the Army’s Infantry and Special Forces branches are able to put together good examples as to why this needs to get nixed for their MOSs. There are quite a few historical examples of strength being required to perform combat missions. The catch all will be are there enough leaders in the higher ranks willing to put their careers on the line to get this done. The GOs aren’t going to do it, their paychecks and privileges are tied to Congress, and unfortunately, the current administration’s agenda.
On a brighter side, I don’t think the Marines are going to have a problem. They have quite a few studies to show proof that females are not able to pass the standards along with why the standards where established in the first place.
Raise your hand if you didn’t see this coming!!
Changes to equipment will be next, so that there are gender spcific TA-50.
@17 – What are you fuggin’ talking about?
You guys all done complaining yet? Don’t worry, we girls aren’t going to show up and emasculate you.
We’ve had this discussion before, although no one prior to this said anything quite as uncouth as giving SpecOps women a new designation as whores, as per that soldier’s quote above. That’s about as low as you can get. If you’re that afraid of women, get some help with your problem but DO NOT TAKE IT OUT ON US UNLESS YOU’VE SQUEEZED SOMETHING THE SIZE OF A WATERMELON THROUGH AN OPENING THE SIZE OF A KEY LIME.
I agree with GT, if they do this, then women should also be required to register with Selective Service. And no, I do not think the standards and requirements should be lowered. You either meet them or you don’t. If you don’t, you don’t get the job. Nothing has changed in load-bearing weights since the days of the Roman army, when the foot soldiers (hastati) generally carried between 66 and 95 pounds of gear, armor, weapons, and food on bivouac.
Dempsey is dead wrong about that. If you guys want me to I’ll send him a letter straightening him out. I’ll even post it so you can see it.
Oh, yeah, that thing about our menstrual cycles: what you don’t know about women is a LOT. A little thing called a diva cup replaces pads and tampons, is far more sanitary because it’s made of silicone and will not cause toxic shock syndrome, and all of us know about prostaglandin blockers in Advil, Midol and Pamprin. Any questions?
If not, then get over it.
There’s a reason our world class professional female soccer players schedule warmup games against men’s college teams, it’s because the pro women can’t compete with professional men’s teams…
We accept that women have a different physical standard at every level of world class athletics than men because of physiology. Every professional female runner, hockey player, soccer player, marathoner all know their male counterparts at that level will crush them….
But now with a professional military depending on demanding physical standards established to weed out the merely average strong professional males from world class strong professional males are suddenly being asked to prove or explain why women should be excluded from these tasks? Someone should ask Dempsey why West Point doesn’t start a female at right guard on the men’s varsity football team, what a complete and total brown nosing ass licker this guy is….too bad when he reaches down between his legs instead of finding Mattis sized tennis ballds he only has a couple of sweet-pea sized baby testicles…
C’mon you officers who are supposed to be leaders, pretend you still have your original set of big boy balls and start acting like leaders who are actually interested in fielding the strongest Infantry and Spec Ops organizations the world has ever seen instead of some pale imitation.
VOV-yeah a lot of college women’s basketball teams have squads of guys (mostly former high school players) who scrimmage against them to help them up their game. Pat Summitt was one of the coaches who started this, and you can see the results in how her teams won, but even so she had to put some restrictions on the guys-for instance, stay below the rim.
A state championship caliber high school boys team would beat the WNBA champs, and it wouldn’t be close-if nothing else the women couldn’t run the court with the boys.
Women’s world records in track and field events are equivalent to boys high school marks (the women’s high jump record, for example, is less than the boys record for where I went to high school). I’m not sure what Dempsey would accept as “proof” (God knows there are plenty of studies out there), maybe let him hand pick a squad of females to lead on house to house raids in Afghanistan and report the results-you know, if he survived.
I blame the mwr, the constant re-runs of G.I. Jane in mwrs have given these officers another good idea fairy moment.
I don’t know what the actual height requirements are for women in the Navy these days, but I do know that the shortest SEAL was 5 feet tall, which makes him two inches shorter than I am.
The only way women can possibly qualify is to choose larger, more heavily built female body types, along the lines of power lifters, not some skinny little twit who can barely lift her own ditty bag. OK? No, you don’t change pushups to girls’ pushups, they stay the same. You don’t change pullups to hanging, you keep the pullups. But this isn’t going to happen because the muscle mass required to meet those standards increases the BMI index to make someone who is 5’6″ appear to be a fat little toad, when in fact, she’s probably more fit than the idiot who checks her weight.
I’m not arguing with you guys about standards. They should NEVER be changed or lowered to meet some PC checklist. It compromises the safety of everyone else if that is done. And it should never be just one woman assigned to a SpecOps team. It should be half men, half women. Period.
This has about as much to do with equality, as going after big tobacco had to do with health. The military structure is being deliberately dismantled, by people that have an interest in seeing it dismantled.
God help our military.
Coming from a civillian perspective – this is downright scary. And it’s scary because it’s people like “me” who understand that it’s the health and strength of our military which actually keeps us safe. I feel this very same way when women want to have other jobs which require me to put my faith in their ability to carry out the physical demands of the job – case in point – firefighters. I do not care oneiota about the sex of the person who gets my child out of my burning house. I only care that the person has the ability to do so. I am absolutely unwilling to make any concession on the basis of gender. The standards need to be brutal and they need to be that way because actual lives are at stake. If you are a woman and you can’t meet the standard, then I don’t want to ever have to rely on you. You are a liability. To your fellow firemen and to the public. I don’t see how this is any different WRT the military. This is truly terrible for us all.
@26 Agreed, if the standard doesn’t move and women make it great, I’ve no quarrel. I doubt that is how this plays out though….I believe the standard drops and guys who used to fail and women who would never have qualified are going to make it in and the force will be less than it was….
@21. He’s saying that getting people killed by lowering standards is a cost that the politically correct are willing to pay. He’s not agreeing with it.
@30 Thanks now I understand the post.
Ex -PH2, does that handle mean you were a corpsman?
@32, USMC Steve – no, PH2 means I was a Photographer’s Mate Second Class, or E-5. I still work in photography.
@33 That explains the great photos on your FB page. You have skills!
#26 Ex-PH2
No offense, but you might be missing the point. This isn’t about whether women can meet the current standards, or even an order to lower certain standards. It’s about, at least it seems to me, Dempsey putting a burden of proof on the combat arms branches that would require them to demonstrate why any standards should exist at all.
PC trumps common sense even if the empirical evidence goes back to the Romans.
In a way, it’s sort of like saying you shouldn’t discriminate against letting blind people into flight school just because no blind person has ever crashed a helicopter.
Dempsey and his ilk are as dangerous to our military readiness and national security as can be. Physiological and physical facts be damned- the PC lackeys at the GO/FO level will ram this through, to the extreme detriment of our security and mission accomplishment. I’m sure there are senior leaders fighting this with all they’ve got. Once the standards get lowered, how many 3 or 4-stars (and their senior enlisted counterparts) will side with honor and integrity and resign in protest? Answer: zero.
@22: While I won’t argue the differences due to hygiene issues, I will argue what I know from experience when it comes to bringing women along on a Task Force of combat troops. Ya see, they did this experiment back in the early 80’s and it was a disaster, since there were all sorts of “special” requirements that went in to bringing females with. Logistically it was extra requirements that slowed the deployment down and added a lot of headaches for those tasked with the accomodations. Simply put; separate shower facilities, separate sleeping areas (all with razor wire and guards), separate everything, except chow. Now, that wasn’t the women asking for all that, but rather Command wanting to keep good order within the ranks, as well as CYA for anything that could be construed as a formal issue later on. Whether individual women want to admit it, or not, there are going to have to be certain safeguards put in place at all levels of training and duty stations. That’s just the reality of it all. Plus, with the amount of political pressure being brought to this; you know that the standards are going to be lowered, Dempsey said as much.
There I am, it is week 2, at the PJ Indoc course. My buddy and I are on the pull-up bar; I am trying to knock out that 6th pull-up. I know that if I don’t get it I am going home. 6 is my minimum for this week. I have been told that if I cannot do 6 I would not have the strength to do my job; that I would be putting my team and my survivor at risk. After hanging on the bar for what seems like an eternity we both drop off.
I am going home; this was my last chance to meet the standard. I am out of here. I look over and my buddy is being praise for setting a new female record for week 2, for being able to do 2 pull-ups.
Yes, this is going to work.
If the standards are lowered to accommodate women does that mean all standards will be equal (Lower)or will men still need to meet the original criteria? Will Special Forces be like Special Education? If any person can’t carry their share that puts more extra strain on all of the other team members. That strain can mean the difference between life and death. By the way, does anyone know the DOR rate for males for BUDS and SF Selection?
@34-Sparks, I don’t have a Facebook page yet. Haven’t had time. I do have a blog with some photos, but no FB page.
I’m not sure exactly what Dempsey’s agenda is, but I read that article in its entirety, and the more experienced people in SpecOps/SEALs, etc., all agreed, as I do, that lowering standard requirements creates a greater risk to an entire team.
While you GUYS go on about wimmin stuff, you forget one little thing: any SpecOps team in the field goes for long periods without everyday stuff like getting rid of that facial hair you hairy beasts all grow. Women don’t have that. Everyone on long-term forays into remote areas, whether it’s military or just hiking into back country, goes for long periods without a simple thing like a shower. As someone else has put it so eloquently, “We all smell like ass”. So you all smell like that homeless guy who sits up front on the bus and mumbles to himself. The problems of pit stops can easily be solved; hikers do that all the time.
But women can’t grow beards, so how is Dumbass Dempsey going to solve that problem?
@35 Perry Gaskill – Using the comparison of putting a blind person into a plane to fly it doesn’t work. There’s a huge difference between your silly argument and reality.
It’s just horrifying to realize that the people who lead some of the most courageous people on the planet are such abject cowards.
It’s a very simple answer. Here goes:
Because they’ll get killed, General. The very fact you’re asking for them to be lowered proves that. You claim to think the standards are too high.
We lose entirely too many warfighters as it is with the current standards. How on Earth is lowering standards going to save lives? Lowering them will surely cost lives.
Just because we’ll have more of them isn’t going to help anything. It just means there are more targets and the overall effectiveness of the fighting force will diminish greatly.
Man the fuck up, General Dumpty. Tell Barrack no, this is a very bad idea in a sea of bad ideas.
Ex-PH2: while the individual’s comment Jonn quoted above about “MOS 18P” was ill-advised, you’re misrepresenting it to make it worse that it actually is. “Camp follower” does not equate to “prostitute”. That was one category of camp follower; there were many.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_follower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tross
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vivandi%C3%A8re
Camp followers were also not exclusively female. Many if not most Civil War sutlers were male.
prove the standards exist for a reason? hey Marty, the ARMY did a study a few years ago showing the average load for soldiers in Afghanistan. The lightest load was somewhere around 98lbs. How’s that for proof? How about tankers? TCGST exists for a reason. I guess women won’t be assigned as loaders and will be exempt from performing PMCS on an M1A2. Maybe they can make sandwiches while the guys are doing the heavy lifting
@43
Mortar butt-plates are a trifle heavy as I recall.
Guess we won’t be fielding them anymore.
Hondo, in the Roman era, they were frequently the women and families of soldiers in whatever legion was present, and the women did include a number of prostitutes.
And anyway, I did that for effect, you know.
@26- I think you need to explain this statement, ” And it should never be just one woman assigned to a SpecOps team. It should be half men, half women. Period.”
How is that going to happen, in any way shape or form, without DRASTICALLY lowering standards?
If Standards are upheld your only, realistically, going to get a fraction of a percentage of women in these units.
I’m confused by that statement.
It’s about balance, findip. If it’s a half-and-half team, instead of one-of-nine, then it is a team instead of a ‘token’ placement designed to meet PC whining.
@32USMC Steve – are the Steve in this video?
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=marines+scaring+another+marine&mid=9EF82656CC13C8EEAEA69EF82656CC13C8EEAEA6&view=detail&FORM=VIRE2
@47
Your not answering my question. How are you going to create a large enough pool of women to uphold standards to personnel half of a team?
Its probably going to be fractions of a percentage. Not enough women available to constitute half of a special ops team.
So, realistically, your probably going to get the odd woman every 10-15 platoons. I’m probably being generous.
@47 The USMC is having a difficult enough time right now getting a single woman to pass their Infantry Officers Basic Course, nevermind expecting enough to pass the greuling requirements of SFAS or Ranger School without lowering the standards to fill half a Team.
Let’s not also forget, when they lower those standards they will be “gender neutral”(Lowered), so you will have males passing who otherwise would have been cut. How are they going to fill slots? Are they going to do it based on gender or on ability?
This is why this is just utter bull shit, political correctness run insane. They are not looking at this as a way to improve combat effectiveness of these Units, it is being done for purely political reasons.