While women in the Military is usually a bad idea because of having to work around menstrual cycles, dual personnel facilities, incidences of rape, and the fact the majority of women cannot drag a 300lb downed soldier from out of the line of fire to a safe spot while also carrying 50lbs of supplies on their back, I'm still of the belief there are some combat positions that they could excel at.
I've seen some studies in the past that indicate women on average (not all) are about 1/20th of a second slower in reaction time than men. The tests come from video games that were designed to measure hand-eye coordination and visual impulse control. (I've been digging for the article, I'll post as soon as I find it.)
That explains why, typically, women prefer not to play games that require snap reaction time like fighting games and shooters. There are some notable exceptions to this, as there are with all things, but it does hinder their combat effectiveness at an average.
In terms of advantages on the battlefield, a woman's small stature and thinner shoulder width are of benefit for tight-confined combat scenarios. In addition, women generally have better precision (not necessarily accuracy) with firearms, as they are far more patient with their shots as an innate compensatory result of their relatively longer reaction time.
What are a few ideas you might have for a good combat troop position (not a desk job) for women to hold that emphasize the strengths of women on the battlefield while avoiding the weaknesses?
Here are some positions I think they would excel at and why:
Sniper
Snipers usually work in teams of two, where a spotter aides in mapping wind patterns, watching where the bullet lands, and other logistics about taking a shot. This alleviates the burden of the woman in having to carry the same kit as men despite not having an equally rigid frame to do so. Have the spotter be a large man, and carry the pack as they already pretty much do.
Long-range snipers don't particularly need to focus on reaction time, as a moving target is nigh impossible for even the best of snipers, and wildly firing at a moving target is a good way to tell your position to the enemy.
Additionally, women's smaller frame, thinner shoulders, and smaller height allows for a better cover scenario when perched in full ghillie suit.
Shooters like Annie Oakley have shown us that some women can certainly excel at this position, and I doubt she was as much of an anomaly as they make her out to be, simply because few women even attempt such a craft as trickshooting.
Pilot/Tank Crew
A woman's small frame allows for easy mobility in tight quarters. Pilots, Tank Crews, even Navy engineering and mechanic positions benefit from this. Also, the smaller frame of women mean a G-suit doesn't have to work as hard to equalize pressure in high-speed aeronautical maneuvers.
Ordinance Defusal
Okay, sure, it's a job no one wants to do, but a lighter female would be much safer than a large man. At least there would be a nominally greater chance a land mine won't trigger because the person stepping on it is 50-100lbs lighter. Also, smaller hands and bomb defusal go hand-in-hand, if you pardon the pun.
Thoughts?
Sure as cooks they would be just fine. Oh relax I’m kidding. I think as long as no standards are ever lowered for any roles it is ok. But I do think combat should be left to the strongest men. Probably an unpopular opinion.
Of course you are kidding, men make better cooks anyway (just step inside any professional kitchen)
I'd argue that chefs and cooks are different things.
Cooks are really good at following a recipe to the letter and have great technique in doing so.
Chefs not only can follow a recipe, they can make and modify them while they cook. They know flavors like scientists know molecules and mathematicians know derivatives.
As for who makes a better cook versus chef when it comes to men and women? Well, let me just say there is a precedent for why there are more notable men inventors than women and more notable women assistants than men.
My husband is the better chef, no doubt. I make a great sous chef and clean up crew. The every day mundane cooking, I’m fine. Want something that tastes really great? He’s your man!
That's the important factor. When I was younger, knew a woman who wanted to be a firefighter. She trained in Olympic-style weightlifting to where she was nationally ranked (and invited to some international competitions).
She would say how that training was the only way that she could possibly meet the physical expectations required.
There was no interest in her mind that they adapt to her wants, she knew she had to beat a test designed to challenge men and that meant she would have to be in peak fitness as a woman to meet that challenge.
As long as the female can do the job, then fine. I am a female veteran, I know my limitations. I would be a high-risk in combat, as I wouldn't be able to carry out of harms way my buddy, etc, d/t not having the same muscular build as those who can carry bodies/rucksacks, etc. I know some females who have lots of strength and can perform most, if not all, actions similar to a man and would be an asset.
No to all. I think this is a good summary why. Women have a very vital role in the military. Just not on the battlefield. IMHO and experience as a Marine. https://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/women-combat-units
Good points, the yeast infections make sense as a problem that probably can't be overcome.
Okay, you've convinced me to that end.
I had never considered yeast infections. Yeah, I can see how that would be a problem. They could even use it whenever they wanted because I don't think I've ever even heard of a case where a yeast panel didn't come back with something.
Idk our corpsman always had vagisil on them. Cures jock itch etc
Honestly I think there's way more important things for our gender relationships in society. Instead of fine-tuning women's role in the military, I'd be happier if our government rewarded and incentivized femininity in other ways. Remember Obama's "Take time to be a father" PR junk? (As a divorced dad with the government preventing me from seeing my kids, and knowing many others in same situation, those seemed like painful sarcasm.) Stuff like that, but celebrating home cooking and motherhood instead of dropping off 2-year olds at government-run daycare. STEM is dandy, but eliminating home ec is not a good trade-off. Our government has been working against the strengths of our women for years, outside of the military.
I'm sure the military could do a better job, but in my view they're a lagging indicator of our society's dysfunctional gender roles, simply coping with the civilian population that we have. I think they've done a better job holding the line and keeping us sane than the civilian population. Apologies for the rant.
I agree with you fren... Raised like a boy, even though I'm female. Did male dominant jobs alot.. then once I had my first child I had to teach my self motherly things because I was never taught from my own mother. Had to learn how to cook, breastfeed and be caring an patient. The important roles of the mother have been attacked for some time, and it's showing in the newer generations...
Edit: also if we focused more in our society on how to communicate and take care of each other and work as a team (Male and Female both have strengths to bring to the table) maybe we would have less family's falling apart... But it's set up this way to divide us by our weakness. Hence, all these comments about women not capable of blah blah blah.
Indeed. Glad to hear your perspective; thanks.
Having a hard time distinguishing these two in context of target shooting. If I'm precise, I'm accurate, and vice versa. Yes?
No. Accuracy is how close you are to hitting your target.
Precision is the grouping of several shots to one another.
You can be accurate but not be precise, depending on the target. If I intend to hit the broad side of a barn, and I hit every shot, then I am accurate. If every shot is 10ft from one another, I'm most certainly not precise.
You can also be precise, but not be accurate. If every bullet you fire is less than 1 inch from one another, you are precise, but if you are 5ft from your intended target, you aren't very accurate.
https://wp.stolaf.edu/it/gis-precision-accuracy/
Because women tend to be more patient, their grouping is better. But depending on other circumstances, their accuracy is about the same as men.
That's not to say a man can't train to stagger his shots and therefore be more patient and precise, but it is more innate to women.
OK thanks
Might want to do some checking on female snipers of the past. Some are good, very good, but more aren't.
Emotion plays a big part in any battlefield situ. When you are shooting at someone, there is emotion, unless that has been thoroughly squelched, and women seldom are able to do that. Look up Vietnam, and the lady sniper that White Feather killed. On the other hand, WWII Russian women snipers were very good.
There is also a matter of endurance and physical strength. Unless you've been in a war situ, that's something that cannot be understood.
i would prefer there be NO women in the military, minus nursing/support roles.
No.
Hmmm. Female veteran here. Disagree with your statement. In my command, their were several women stronger than men that were in the same command. Even had a 7 month pregnant female going beast mode flipping tires and doing intense workouts while some of the men could barely run around the track.. this is divisive generalizations.
Also worked for UPS, where they receive very heavy packages.. was told by my supervisors I was the best package handler they had.. also I was the only female working in that position.
Generalizations = Ignorance.
Your comment about me being a leftest liberal is comical. You seem to be triggered just as quickly as a leftest would be when disagreed with...
Not all women are fit for these jobs you speak of, but to generalize the whole female group as incapable is ignorant.
As an Army (that is ground combat) guy, I believe we have gone too far. this is not to advocate only clerk-typist and Nurses, but to say that ground combat is not the right place for women. I include skills like sniper here as well - people do not understand the tactical application of these roles. In this specific example, being a tactical sniper is a lot more than just putting steel on target. I am especially concerned about tokens and quotas - once a career field is open, the bean counters will take over and make tactical life even more dangerous.
The Navy and Air Force are generally less focused on the physical skills requiring power and endurance, such as long patrols or changing the road wheels on a tracked vehicle. However, for any of the services, the roles that women are playing today in combat enabler positions in the several fields of C5ISR are absolutely critical to both tactical and strategic success. Women are also crucial to our Psyop and CA efforts and are frequently able to talk to people (especially but not exclusively women and children) who would be resistant to men.
So I believe that women are a necessary part of our force structure, but we should not allow political correctness to drive their roles.
I think the physical aspects of the work are not the issue. If a woman can pass the same standards for a given role then it's not a problem. Statistically this is obviously not gonna happen too often so the standards get lowered.
I think the real problem is psychological. Men fundamentally behave differently when women are present. Particularly towards other men. Men also bond differently with other men than they do with women. This bond is essential for operational effectiveness.
The same issues are also seen in the civilian workforce. They are not unique to the military. Women entering male dominated professions can cause serious problems if it disrupts the culture.
If a woman, same as any man, can do the job and do it well, I have no problem. I do have a problem with the way they are "lowering the standards" so the weaker women and men (physically, mentally and emotionally) can take the spots in places where they will be a big liability problem on a real battle situation or long term employment in rough or harsh conditions. Even your toughest of tough have breaking points with some of the shit they go through/see out there.
Fighter pilots do have emergencies as well, my hub had to talk one in for a landing for two hours once because, his environment controls shut down, all his instruments were frozen, his hands were frozen to the flight stick, his co pilot had passed out, the guy somehow manage to stay alert, his only visual was his smart watch for altitude and my husbands voice for two hours and he managed to land the plane and had to be peeled out of the cockpit on landing by the medical. <-- If it was anyone with a lesser constitution and will power, the plane would of not made it. Military is one work place they should not lower the standards to get in the only time imo would be in an extreme need to do so.
I haven't been in the army, but I do know a bit about it from my own research. I'm not able to join the army, otherwise I probably would have.
Endurance and strength can be modified, but not frame. I think women, if they underwent the proper regiment could meet the requirements you laid out, but they definitely would not be your "average" female, I'll preemptively agree with you there. The psychology of pissing and shitting your pants as a sniper also aren't above the capacity of a woman. Besides, women require less caloric intake and could probably last longer than a man in an attrition situation (I'm speculating on this last point).
I think infantry all around would be a bad idea for women, which you probably agree with. Primarily because of the additional logistical nightmare and psychological trauma if they were captured by the enemy. They would be seen as targets and hunted simply because of their value as a sex puppet.
I have no problem with women in the military as: nurses, cooks, seamstresses, and office personnel. But anything having to do with weapons and machinery needs to be left to men.
This might be the last non-PC refuge on the Internet :)
The internet in 2021: GAW and Babylon Bee
I knew plenty of women involved with the remotely piloted aircraft. Most were great, sadly there were also the quota fillers, and I will never understand why the quota fillers were the ones being picked to be groomed for leadership over the ones that were actually good officers and NCOs.
So as long as we group them together in Shrimp Brigades, we're cool
Good point, I hadn't thought about that.
I remember hearing about this a while ago- I've not checked out validity of the details, but it looks like the odd sniper would be very useful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Pavlichenko
I would just load them up with weapons and then tell them that the enemy 'looked at them funny' and BAM!! Bye bye enemy.
I just watched a shooting breakdown where a female cop was alone and having an interaction with an average sized combative male. Some highlights:
The female cop could not manhandle the suspect and couldn't even budge his arm to put him in cuffs
She resorts to begging the suspect to surrender
When that doesn't work, she says "when my [male] backup arrives, you will be arrested"
When the guy finally attacks her, the cop shoots his mom, misses him, and then just stops.
She has a chance to empty her gun into him and doesn't and ends up getting thrashed to the ground in short order screaming, "oh God no"
Enter beast male backup jacked up on testosterone who proceeds to kick suspect so hard in the face that his laced boot flies off, then proceeds to pick said suspect up and slam him down on the ground like a dish towel
the end
When I was enlisted, I always as long as the standards are the same for both sexes in combat roles. I am considerably large than most females, if I’m hit I need to know that ol’ girl can carry or drag my big ass to safety. If the pt test were changed and a big boss bitch can pull her weight and mine, fine by me. I was actually in the unit that had the first female cav officer. She could hang with the guys, but that is an exception.