Women in Special Forces
Karen sends along a link to Jezebel and the Washington Post, both which totally disregard the lives of people involved in special operations and determine that it’s merely a social issue, not having anything to do with the success of our troops in combat. From the Post;
But all is not fair in war. The justifications used to keep women out of combat and special ops units are the same paternalistic, discriminatory excuses used in favor of upholding racial segregation in the military and, more recently, the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy regarding gays and lesbians. In short, they have little to do with individual capability and reveal far more about ingrained ideas and misconceptions regarding psychology, sexuality and physiology.
Yes, once again the intellectually vacant use the racial segregation as an excuse to allow someone to serve. Except that all of us know that Black men are the equal of white men when it comes to their performance in combat. Women, not so much. I’ll never forget the female cadet who told me she couldn’t shine her boots the night before because her “vulva ached”.
Excuses for excluding women from special operations training are more about socialization than actual performance, according to these two authors…two authors who obviously have absolutely no experience with military training as well as no experience in combat.
So their proof that women can train in Special Operations? Hollywood;
Of course, one woman has made it through BUD/S: “G.I. Jane’s” Demi Moore. The 1997 film, directed by Ridley Scott (“Alien,” “Thelma & Louise”), chronicles the story of a fictional Navy officer named Jordan O’Neil, who is handpicked by an ambitious Texas senator to undergo SEAL training as a sort of test case. (In true Hollywood fashion, Jordan stumbles a bit along the way but eventually triumphs over both the physical challenges and her male peers’ antagonistic posturing.)
“I’ll admit that Ridley and Demi and I engaged in a bit of wish fulfillment when we made the movie,” says one of the film’s screenwriters, David Twohy. “Did we really think it was 100 percent feasible (and desirable) that women serve as Navy SEALs? Probably not. But we did think the time had come for a dramatic discussion of the issue, and we thought it because history was clearly showing us the way.”
I’ve never seen the movie because I know the type of stereotypical males they portrayed just by instinct. I’m sure it was made in the model of most Lifetime Channel movies with a dainty woman triumphing over evil, burly men.
Yes, I know there are women directly supporting special operations, but there’s a big difference in gathering intelligence and acting on that intelligence. Patrolling a village while surrounded by infantrymen is whole lot different than being an integral member of a team, upon whom nine other people depend on your particular skill to be successful – perhaps over a weeks- or months- long period. And you have to be at 100% regardless of how you feel one day.
“Men do sort of have an absolute advantage over women in, say, upper-body strength, but the extent to which that really makes sense as an issue, I don’t know,” he says. “My sense is that there are some women who would love to challenge the forces and see if they could get through. And I know some who are so fit that they probably could.”
Yeah, mechanically speaking, men’s center of gravity is their chest and shoulders, while women’s center of gravity is in their hips – that’s why women can do more situps and men can do more pushups. It’s also why men are better at humping the stuff they need to survive combat suspended from their shoulders.
Ever notice how they identify female victims on CSI or Bones by looking at their hips and leg bones?
Women are also more susceptible to knee and hip stress injuries because of the mechanics of their bodies – there’s nothing social about their weaknesses and the potential for them to be a burden rather than an asset to their team in some remote mountainous region battling a determined enemy.
I think it’s rather disingenuous of both of the authors to disregard all of the evidence against women performing in Special Operations roles based solely on their gender-loyalty and without a rational discussion of the facts. There are things men suck at, too (ask my wife), it just doesn’t happen to be fighting our country’s enemy on his terms.
Category: It's science!, Military issues
Why oh why do they continue to throw out the often refuted arguments? As many have mentioned in several other threads; there is a big difference between supporting Spec Ops/Infantry and actually being part of it 24/7. Have any of these “writers” actually participated in not just the training/selection process, but the day to day activities of Spec Ops/Infantry? Would a female be comfortable changing her clothes in front of other squad members who were male? You don’t have the luxury of privacy in the field and you don’t have the luxury of not taking equipment/supplies needed for the patrol because your pack is too heavy. Or, would unit requirements have to change to fit females in the unit? Would that strengthen or compromise unit effectiveness?
I know there are those that say “let them try” as though that would settle it. There may be some women that could do it, in the short term and in a training enviroment; but is it worth it to compromise the system so that you can point to it and say “see, we’re all inclusive and divers”, when you won’t be the one paying the price?
To this I need only copy and paste my comment from a few days ago on the same topic:
Let’s take this from the basics:
Men in the military are not permitted to grow their hair long. I believe this is for good reason. I was told that it was because of the hygiene, and the fact that hair can get in the way or get caught in weaponry. I agree.
Women are not made to cut theirs “high and tight”, but in combat MOS’, wouldn’t those same factors apply.
Not too long ago, a lady commented here, about the once a month hygiene difficulties of a women, and on how much more difficult it is for them at that time. Great point.
Men must meet a certain standard in Physical ability. Because it is what is needed to perform the job. If women in the same MOS’ are held to a lesser standard, how could we expect them to perform the same job, (handling, mounting/dismounting a “Ma Duece” perhaps), as timely and well as a man?
And back to my time in service, (right after we replaced the musket), we had women in the Army, in the Air Force, in the Navy, and in the Marines. They were WAC’s, WAF’s, Wave’s, n BAM’s. They performed a necessary job, did it well, made rank, stayed in til retirement,,,,,,,,
Women don’t have a “right” to be in a MAN’s slot, anymore than a Man has a “right” to a promotion that he did not earn.
The bottom line is this: the PT standards are different for men and women. In order to go combat arms or SF there can be no difference for those standards. A 220 pound guy that just took a round to the chest still needs to be dragged to safety and eventually evacuated whether his teammate is another 220 pound guy that can bench almost twice his body weight or a 130 pound woman who can’t bench her own.
So the next argument that always comes up from the “let ’em try” crowd is this: if they can maintain the same standards as men, why can’t they join combat arms? Well, that’s nice in theory but it is still rife with problems. Problem number one is that the rest of the women in the Army are on the female standard. They call it a standard for a reason. If some females can do it, all others will have to be required to also lest they are considered “lesser women”. And if they cannot make the standard, they would have to be chaptered out and that would take out a huge chunk of the Army’s CS and CSS personnel.
Secondly, women still have periods and women still get pregnant. We cannot afford to gamble the nation’s security on a menstrual cycle.
I have known a few WM’s like that when working parties came around and such: “Gunny, my booty hurts, I’ve got sand in my clit.”
They ain’t all like that but there are enough to tar the rest. But women ain’t up to being grunts, and it is as simple as that.
Something tells me you didn’t get promoted too often Frankly Opionated. Let real military people comment on military issues. That goes for you as well Old Trooper, how do you know anything about the Infantry or Spec Ops other than movies? Unbelievable!!!
Something tells me you didn’t get promoted too often Frankly Opionated. Let real military people comment on military issues. That goes for you as well Old Trooper, how do you know anything about the Infantry or Spec Ops other than movies? Unbelievable!!!
Well, if your standards apply, why are we having this discussion? None of the authors of this latest hand-wringing are “real military people”, are they?
Richter returns in #6. How quaint.
Hey Sphincter; how are ya buddy? I haven’t seen your fake ass around here in a while. I miss your lame ass comments, where you play sooper trooper and tell the rest of us how we’re fake and we suck. You need knew material ya assmunch.
Don’t you have some PT to do? You usually say that after making one of your shitty comments.
Are you still coming up here in August? Don’t forget to bring all your paperwork, fuckstain, because there will be some guys here that are eager to see it all (me included).
* that should be “new material”
Richter that “something” that tells you shit is your butt buddy leaning over your shoulder as he pounds your ass. You are far to ignorant to be considered valid around here.
Somehow I will get over these wasted words to you, but you will never get over the fact that you are another test tube experiment gone terribly wrong.
Hollywood aside, has this actually been tried? Was GI Jane based on an actual experiment? I’ve always heard a “story” about them letting a group of females try Ranger School. The number of females who tried to become Rangers varies from 20 to 100, but the number who actually passed was always constant, 1. As the story goes, the single female graduate was so disgusted with the military after her experience, she left the Army shortly thereafter, and that’s how the story goes.
Frankly, I think we should do this. Why don’t we open up Ranger school for females. I am sure there are many females in Chick Infantry (MPs) who might want to have a go at it, particuarly female officers.
I was always told at my Almer Mater that a Ranger Tab was required of anyone who wanted to make a career out of the Infantry. If this is all about opening up career advancement, I think this would be a good way for females to prove they are ready for combat arms.
Frankly, I don’t think they have a snowball’s chance in hell of making it through Ranger School, BUDs, whatever.
Just out of curiosity, when did the goal of the military become equality of career opportunities rather than protecting and defending the country? Just asking?
Susan,
Initially in 1776. Then again in 1964, and again in 1973 or ’75.
For purposes of disclosure, I am a female. When are feminists going to start acknowledging the reality of their existence. They are different then men and no amount of physical training is going to make them equal to men physically. Personally, I not only don’t support women in Special Operations units, I don’t necesarily want them to be firemen or policemen. There are situation where they just are not equipped to deal with the physical demands of the job. And if you want to try….try and meet the standards set for men not some lameass adjusted standard for women. If that means that your career opportunities aren’t the same as men, pull up your big girl panties and get on with your life!
What PRM said.
Susan,
This has been going on since at least the mid ’70’s.
The left has been attempting to use the military as a petri dish for social engineering experiments. Mostly they get away with it because the Military can’t say know. the left gets some important Congress Critters on board who threaten to hold parts of the budget hostage, or promotions, etc, unless they get certain things “done” and the military ends up having to take it and smile.
FTR- what PRM and Susan said…
You know, I served for 6 years. And yes, I would have loved to have been given a chance to prove myself as a tough girl. And I am tough. Mentally. Physically, I learned how beat I really was when I did try to keep up with the boys. Reality is that they did want to slow down and “help” me regardless of my wanting it or not and that just wasn’t good.
I had to pull up my BGP’s and admit that against female peers, I could give them all a run…but not against the guys. Simple. And I was much better for it. Who wants a chick trying out her proverbial balls all the time, anyway? (A good ‘ol Georgia boy taught me well…)
Just a thought. Since the Sapper program is open to both men and women why not use it as a example to see if they can handle that first. I have been in over five years and only seen three females with the Sapper tab and they were all
Officers.
#12) Bohica my father tells a similiar story. There is rumored to be one woman who actually earned the Tab back in the 70s.
Frankly, I have not much to add from my post on this topic from the other day. Jonn and the commentators above, have even fleshed out the physical aspect even more.
Does anyone notice that it is almost the same half dozen individuals/organisationsthat keep publically advocating for this? With almost exactly the same hack arguments over and over again? Next to the Seal who made anoblique comment about his daughter, the only new person to make an appearance here is Paula Broadwell.
Broadwell was with the 502nd,of the 101st, during the destruction of Tarok Kolache village in Afghanistan a few months ago. She is one of Thomas Ricks Peeps, and her posts are what caused the interwebs melee a few months(Dec/Jan?). I concur with her basic assesment of what happened and why, so I don’t want to go off into a tangent there. Still she seems to be one of these people who believes since women can understand Coin, Combat, or operations means they should be placed there. Thats just plain Stupid.
Then again that seems to be a fault of much of academy in regards to national security in general today. “Iknow how a rifle works. So give me my division command already!”. I read Caesar’s Gallic War, does that mean I know all about France and the low countries? This chick we might have to keep an eye out for.
P.S. I recall a female Marine who actually headed a Lioness team in Afghanistan, who said she didn’t think it was wise to put women in infantry units. Can’t remember the article it was in. Sorry.
P.P.S. I love the comment about women not being the pilots or the Seals, but rest assured there were women involved. I was waiting for one of these broads to point out, how each Seal had a mother, and there for wombs won, it was vaginal vengence!
I used to live up near the Mountain Ranger Camp, aka Camp Merrill, and knew some of the instructors. (sidebar: great book about the MRC here, http://www.amazon.com/Mountain-Ranger-oral-history-1952-2008/dp/1439223289/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1306208028&sr=8-1) It isn’t just a rumor, there really was a small group of females who were allowed to attend RS in the early 80s as one of the “diversity” experiments leg officers are so fond of, two managed to get all the way through and graduate. One did leave the service shortly thereafter, the other stayed in for some length of time, I’m sure her tab raised more than a few eyebrows. For some reason, the Army decided not to make a big deal out of this, and I don’t think they ever publicized the fact in any way. That’s about all the facts the RI’s I knew had about these women. What I find most interesting about that is these women went through the “old” RS, when it still had a strong LRRP component to it, with lots of humping big packs long distances – one of the required patrols was from Camp Merrill over the ridgelines way north to the Blue Ridge power station, about 50 miles. I think a simple way to end any arguments about including anyone in SOF or not is to back up, re-write the training objective standards to reflect true mission requirements, and allow anyone who wants the opportunity to give it the old college try. I was a training officer for a fire department once upon a time, and we actually had a guy who was confined to a wheelchair demand the chance to go through rookie school; we couldn’t turn him down out of hand, no matter how ridiculous the concept, or he’d have filed a ADA lawsuit against the county (which is what he really wanted to do), but I could rewrite the course standards to accurately reflect the tasks firefighters have to do routinely. Which was a good idea to do in any case, instead of the old lift heavy things and run a couple of miles standards we used to use. Besides,… Read more »
If you want to me to go there Old Trooper quit hiding behind Lilyea and man up and tell me where it is. You told Lilyea to block me from this site because you’re a fat pussy and want no part of me coming up there.
News, for you , Junior; I blocked you because I don’t like pussies who try to bully my regulars and have nothing to add to the discussion except insults.
Hey, check it out guys–found another picture of Richter…
http://verydemotivational.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/demotivational-posters-cover-me-porkins.jpg
I have already told you twice you fucking dumbass. If you don’t have the brain power G-d gave a snail, that’s not my problem.
I gave you the date, time, and place. I didn’t ask Jonn to block you. Why would I? Beside, I don’t run and I don’t hide. The whole purpose of you coming up here in August is to have me prove to you that I am a Veteran and for you to do the same. I will have every scrap of paperwork you can think of pertaining to my service; transfer orders, promotion orders, schools I attended, duty stations, awards, etc., including everything from the VA. Now; are you going to put up or continue to just blather on as usual?
Time to knock the sand out of your pussy, Nancy.
Cedo
That sounds like a good question for the Rumor Doctor.
Women do not have to have that time of the month. They cam take birth control every day forever. Does not harm. In combat, this would be a no brained.
jr
#28 Jack Reacher,
Generally speaking, when one alters their body’s chemistry, there’s a price to be paid. To counter your statement, should women be required to pay that price for the sake of identity politics?
I thought that was already being done with the DEPO shot.
The DEPO shot can actually CAUSE break-through bleeding. Also thought to be more prone to cause fatal clots and strokes. It’s not as safe as it was originally thought to be.
Enough. The purpose of the military is to protect and defend. Anything that does not further that objective, regardless of the social policy, is assinine.
Men and women are physically different. This is a statement of anatomy, not politics. Yes, there are probably a very few women who could get through the qualifying schools for special forces and/or meet the requirements of combat arms. There is no doubt that many women are able to endure emotional and physical pain (natural childbirth anyone?). That is not the issue. The question is whether accomodating those few is worth the cost to combat readiness. The answer is no. Therefore, move along.
#22 John the Baptist
Being surprised to read this, I have asked former Ranger Instructors, and have been told that this is just not so. Could you offer a class number and year that these women went through Ranger School? It would surely be news to them.
Thank you.
Sorry FO, but no, this came from casual conversations over beers, and former RI’s who worked with me in that area. I thought it was interesting that the book I mentioned didn’t have even the most oblique reference to this, though all sorts of other myths, legends, and flat out lies are explored in it. It’s entirely possible that it was complete BS, as no-one i knew was directly involved (“friend of a friend” stories), though everyone had a pretty consistent recitation of what I wrote.
I can say from first-hand experience that certain groups of people managed to do some interesting things around that camp in the 70s, who probably wouldn’t be allowed in the gate today, and that training then was far different than it is today. The immediate post-Vietnam era was interesting in a variety of ways, so I don’t think this was entirely implausible. It is interesting that, if it indeed happened, that the Army managed to have no official comment whatsoever about it to this day.
#22,#34 John the Baptist Sooo, “It isn’t just a rumor, there really was a small group of females who were allowed to attend RS in the early 80s as one of the “diversity” experiments leg officers are so fond of, two managed to get all the way through and graduate.” , is actually, “just a rumor”. Thanks for clearing up that the source was “casual conversation over beers”.
Women and men are different physically, so I guess with DADT undone, the Army will have to consider whether transgendered (whether m-f or f-m) would be able to go to Ranger School or SFQC.
How about other, paramilitary special operations forces types, like CIA paramilitary officers? Anyone know if women have been through that and how they’ve done in the field?
I love how so many people point out that men and women differ physically and it seems that they forget that men differ as well. When most talk about a soldier, they have the idea of the 220 pound man. However, as a female in the military, I know most men are not 220 pounds and muscle-bound. I have been on many military training exercises where there would be one soldier that noone could carry because he is so big. As for PT standards, don’t blame the females for them-we didn’t make them. Every female I know can exceed the standards set for the females. And the guys that are usually moaning to me about how the standards aren’t fair, can’t even match my PT standards. Plus, why does noone mention the disparity in the PT standards when it comes to age? I’m just tired of this issue all together. Make the standards reasonable. If a person, male or female, can meet the standard, let them do the damn job and get over the genitalia.
“Every female I know can exceed the standards set for the females”
Can they exceed the standards set for the SF? As far as the age goes the person would have to meet the requirements of the SF tests and not the Army. I know for a fact that the Rangers PT test is three miles instead of two.
Oh and lets talk about hygiene in the field and that females have a higher risk of UTIs then males.
“I love how so many people point out that men and women differ physically and it seems that they forget that men differ as well. When most talk about a soldier, they have the idea of the 220 pound man.”
I love how so many people have had to point it out to people like you that still don’t seem to understand why it has been an issue. You don’t wear your gear on your ass; do you? Men have a higher center of gravity than women, more upper body strength. I, also, love how it has to keep being pointed out that there is a very big difference between PT scores and humping your gear in a combat situation. You seem to have forgotten that part. PT scores are just part of the screening process, but when you have to put that 60-80 lb. pack on your back and start slogging for hours and still be able to respond in a firefight, things aren’t so much about “I am woman here me roar”.
“If a person, male or female, can meet the standard, let them do the damn job and get over the genitalia.”
What standard? The PT test? Like I said, that’s just a very small part of the screening process, because IIRC whenever I did a PT test, I wasn’t in full gear. Have you ever seen what happens at RIP (Ranger Indoctrination Program, it’s where those entering the Ranger Battalion go for a few weeks before reaching their unit in the battalion) You do pushups with your feet elevated, always. Why? To build up your upper body. A lot of times you are training with your gear on just so you can build up to carry it in the field.
Physical differences are a very big part of why, but you haven’t looked past PT scores and yes, genitalia has to be considered from a medical standpoint. If you think your rockin PT score is enough to prove you can do it; maybe you should request a little time at RIP to see if you’re ready?
I AM A 13 YEAR OLD FEMALE AND I CAN BEAT ANYBODY. I HAVE BEAT MY 35 YEAR OLD UNCLE (WHO WAS A MARINE) AT DISTANCE RUNS SIT~UPS. I AM ANOYED ON ALL OF THIS “MALES ARE SUPPEAR TO WOMAN”, AND “I DONT WANT HER TO BE IN SPEICAL OPS BECAUSE WOMAN ARE MOODY” GESS WHAT MALES ARE THAT PERFICT YOU THINK THAT YOU ARE BUT YOU ARE NOT. NO PERSON IS. IF A PERSON MALE OR FEMALE CAN DO THE JOB THEN LET THEM. WHEN I AM OUT OF THE NAVAL ACADAMY I WILL BE THE FIRST FEMALE NAVY SEAL. BUT I HOPE THAT I AM NOT THE FIRST ONE. WHEN I AM OUT IN 2022 I HOPE THAT WOMAN ARE TREATED THE SAME AS MEN NO MATTER WHAT.
And just how far can you carry a 100lb rucksack, youngster?
Hondo – She can’t hear you what with all the yelling she’s doing.
Personally, with the way she writes and spells…I don’t think we’ll have to worry about her making it to Annapolis.
Do they not instruct children on proper use of English grammar anymore???
CI: possibly not. Guess she’s spent too much time listening to Katy Perry sing about USMC training at high volume. (smile)
@Hondo – And ironically, I like to listen to Katy Perry’s videos. I juts do it with the sound off. You say she sings?
Yeah, I understand she has a very nice voice. Not a fan, but I believe I’ve heard a tune of hers or two and, if so, that’s accurate.
And I agree that she is, as the old saying goes, “easy on the eyes”.
I´m a foreigner, but I have to comment.
Here where I live joining the army is mandatory for every man, but not for a woman. Woman can choose to join, but don´t have to. Women can join every group within the army, but there´s a catch. The most gruelling troops do not belong to the army or to the marines or whatever. They belong to Ministry of Internal Affairs and they don´t accept women. It is not because the physical differences. We do know very well that some women can and have past the tests to this group. But. Putting one female among dozens of men in stressful situation is a bloodbath, because it is distracting. If there would be more women, then maybe it wouldn´t hurt, but the tests are brutal and hardly any women qualifys. So, in order to keep the men at line, we keep the women out.
I haven´t joined the army and quite frankly, I don´t want to. I know I couldn´t shoot another person. If the war would come, I wouldn´t want to be in the line of fire. I would want to be at my home, taking care of my kids and making sure my husband would have a home to come bac to.
@ 47 … what country?
If Israel send photos!
I live in Denmark and here females are allowed to join the SF, and have been allowed for 25 years. So far, none have mad it through more than week 4.