Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Passing a training class, though rigorous, does not mean one is an effective combat leader.
So the US Army doesn't, in your opinion, have it together when it comes to picking and training combat leaders. OK. I think I know whose expertise in this field I trust the more.
As it happens, Army Ranger School is a program specifically designed to test an individual's capacity in all of these areas.
Yet somehow, hundreds of men have washed out of ARS while these two women completed it.
Are they exceptional? Yes. Everyone who completes Ranger training is, it's designed for that purpose. Most men who even qualify to enter are forced to give up as well.
Do you really want to compare the rate of competition between men and women in the program? Not to mention you would get the absolute best women applying for this first chance opportunity and they barely graduated 10% of female applicants. Then you go onto the men, who have already had scores of graduates already, meaning the cream is construe fly being collected and not allowed to be built up like for the women, and they gran dusted over 25%.
So the US Army doesn't, in your opinion, have it together when it comes to picking and training combat leaders. OK. I think I know whose expertise in this field I trust the more.
Training and real world experiences are not the same thing.
Anyway, here's my take on that. Even after the distinguished combat history that African Americans earned in every preceding war from the Revolution to the WW2 there were those who could not, would not believe that African American had any place in front line combat forces. It wasn't until the Korean and Vietnam Wars that having to fight alongside each others did white soldiers, sailors, or Marines get it through their racist heads that the black guy laying next to them was every bit as capable a warrior as they were.
I suspect that if there were any men in the Ranger class who felt that women had no place in combat before, there are far fewer now. The future will follow in the same path, just as it has with African Americans and homosexuals, over time when given the opportunity, these men will change forever the doubts, recriminations and misogynist attitudes that are being held today.
I am not saying you were referring to me personally, but read your own bolded, You think people who are against women in special forces are some narrow minded people who discriminate against anybody who are not one of them. This is not the case at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyflower3191981
This being said, my friend once posted this
There is also the factor of being reduced to base creatures, under going immense combat stress, and being in country for an extended period. Human beings will be human beings and seek the comfort of those around them. Basically men and women alike will find a way to physically ease there stress, especially after moral erosion. I have heard of to many co ed units issuing Non-Judicial Punishments out for infidelity during deployment. Not to mention females getting shipped back for becoming pregnant during deployment. This totally compromises mission readiness, presents a grievous logistical challenge, and the unneeded allocation of wartime resources.
You must also factor in man's primordial nature to protect his female counter-part. Whether they are physically involved or not, men have the natural urge to protect the female at all cost, by instinct. This instinctual urge does not make it fair on the battlefield at all and actually clouds sound judgement and the decision making process.
All in all, females should not be allowed to participate as combatants not merely because of their flaw, but because man's flaws as well. Flaws that are a by product of human nature. No matter how much we try to fight it there is still that chance. In war we should not risk the lives of fellow service members, men and women alike. As service members of this country, we should focus on defending the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. We do this by excelling on the field of battle...
Do you really want to compare the rate of competition between men and women in the program?
Nobody has disputed, at any time, that it is a lower percentage of females who could complete a program like the Army Ranger School. You've completely demolished a point that no one has argued, so go you.
But you seem to apply the logic of average female vs. average male to a situation having to do with specific individuals. And when it comes to individuals, I'd much rather be in combat alongside a female Ranger than alongside a male who couldn't complete the course.
How about you? The guy who couldn't hack it vs. the woman who could, is that really a hard decision?
Nobody has disputed, at any time, that it is a lower percentage of females who could complete a program like the Army Ranger School. You've completely demolished a point that no one has argued, so go you.
But you seem to apply the logic of average female vs. average male to a situation having to do with specific individuals. And when it comes to individuals, I'd much rather be in combat alongside a female Ranger than alongside a male who couldn't complete the course.
How about you? The guy who couldn't hack it vs. the woman who could, is that really a hard decision?
I would rather be in combat with a male ranger than a female ranger. And the majority in the military agree that they would rather have their fellow combat troops be male.
It is not like we are running out of people to take the course and fill these roles. Especially at a time we are drawing down our military. If we were facing a larger threat, especially one that could compromise our actual borders my tune would change. But we are no where near that point.
I am not saying you were referring to me personally, but read your own bolded, You think people who are against women in special forces are some narrow minded people who discriminate against anybody who are not one of them. This is not the case at all.
If a woman qualifies for a position under the same standards as a man, you did not take part in their evaluation, you've never served with that person, yet you take a position, essentially prejudging them based upon no other criteria than their sex... that's pretty much the definition of gender discrimination.
I would rather be in combat with a male ranger than a female ranger. And the majority in the military agree that they would rather have their fellow combat troops be male.
That's one of the great things about the military, it ain't a democracy. So what you or anyone else would "rather do" is pretty much irrelevant.
If a woman qualifies for a position under the same standards as a man, you did not take part in their evaluation, you've never served with that person, yet you take a position, essentially prejudging them based upon no other criteria than their sex... that's pretty much the definition of gender discrimination.
Judging someone based on physical characteristics is not gender discrimination when those physical characteristics are required to complete specific tasks.
Unless you think the NBA is discriminating against women by not allowing them to play.
That's one of the great things about the military, it ain't a democracy. So what you or anyone else would "rather do" is pretty much irrelevant.
And the winner of taking comments out of context is TheWiseWino!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
