The Folly of "Women in Combat"

[dgs49]

Better than I could say it:

A senior Defense Department official said the ban on women in combat should be lifted because the military's goal is "to provide a level, gender-neutral playing field." I'd like to think the goal of the military should be to have the toughest, meanest fighting force possible. But let's look at "gender-neutral playing field."

The Army's physical fitness test in basic training is a three-event physical performance test used to assess endurance. The minimum requirement for 17- to 21-year-old males is 35 pushups, 47 situps and a two-mile run in 16 minutes, 36 seconds or less. For females of the same age, the minimum requirement is 13 pushups, 47 situps and a 19:42 two-mile run. Why the difference in fitness requirements? "USMC Women in the Service Restrictions Review" found that women, on average, have 20 percent lower aerobic power, 40 percent lower muscle strength, 47 percent less lifting strength and 26 percent slower marching speed than men.

William Gregor, professor of social sciences at the Army's Command and General Staff College, reports that in tests of aerobic capacity, the records show, only 74 of 8,385 Reserve Officers' Training Corps women attained the level of the lowest 16 percent of men. The "fight load" -- the gear an infantryman carries on patrol -- is 35 percent of the average man's body weight but 50 percent of the average Army woman's weight. In his examination of physical fitness test results from the ROTC, dating back to 1992, and 74,000 records of male and female commissioned officers, only 2.9 percent of women were able to attain the men's average pushup ability and time in the two-mile run.

In a January report titled "Defense Department 'Diversity' Push for Women in Land Combat" Elaine Donnelly, director of the Center for Military Readiness, points to U.S. Army studies showing that women are twice as likely to suffer injuries and are three times more undeployable than men. Women are less likely to be able to march under load -- 12.4 miles in five hours with an 83-pound assault load -- and to be able to crawl, sprint, negotiate obstacles with that load or move a casualty weighing 165 pounds or more while carrying that load. Plus, there are muscle-challenging feats, even for men, such as field repairs on an M1A1 Abrams tank.

Then there's the pregnancy issue, which makes women three to four times as likely as men to be undeployable. And once deployed, they often have to be medically evacuated, leaving units understrength. Finally, there's another difference between men and women rarely considered in deliberation about whether women should be in combat. All measures of physical aggressiveness show that men, maybe because of testosterone levels 10 times higher, are more aggressive, competitive and hostile than women. Those attributes are desirable for combat.

Here are a couple of what-if questions. Suppose a combat unit is retreating in mountainous terrain in Afghanistan, where a person's aerobic capacity really makes a difference, and the women in the unit can't keep up with the men. What would you propose, leaving the women behind to possibly be captured by the Taliban or having the unit slow down so the women can keep up, thereby risking causalities or capture? What if a male soldier is washed out of the Army's Advanced Infantry Training program because he cannot pass its physical fitness test whereas a female soldier who can't perform at his level is retained? Should male soldiers be able to bring suit and be awarded damages for sex discrimination? How much respect can a male soldier have for his female counterpart, who is held to lower performance standards?

There's another issue. The Selective Service System's website has the following message about draft registration: "Even though the Secretary of Defense has decided to allow women in combat jobs, the law has not been changed to include this. Consequently, only men are currently required to register by law with Selective Service during ages 18 thru 25. Women still do not register." How can that, coupled with differences in performance standards, possibly be consistent with the Defense Department's stated agenda "to provide a level, gender-neutral playing field"?


-- Walter E. Williams, PhD.

[Grim Reaper]

In a January report titled "Defense Department 'Diversity' Push for Women in Land Combat" Elaine Donnelly, director of the Center for Military Readiness

I'd like to point out that this organization is not affiliated with the Department of Defense, it's a non-profit organization that was formed in response to DADT being passed that allowed homosexuals to join the military. So they don't like gays and they think women belong in the kitchen.

Then there's the pregnancy issue, which makes women three to four times as likely as men to be undeployable.

If only there was some sort of pill they could take...

And once deployed, they often have to be medically evacuated, leaving units understrength.

I'd like to see the report on this. Both times I was deployed to Iraq, we never had to send back any of our female soldiers. We did have to send back one older (male) sergeant because of a heart attack.

How much respect can a male soldier have for his female counterpart, who is held to lower performance standards?

Plenty, because the physical fitness test is only a relatively small part of the bigger picture. Mental discipline and a willingness to get the job done matter more than the ability to do a couple exercises.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Make the females pass the same testing as the males. No quarter, no lesser requirements. Those that make it are fine, those that don't, shouldn't be deployed. Make 'em sign a "no lawsuit" paper besides. As far as pregnancy, all females should have those birth control shunt thingies installed and if there is a male equivalent, then the males should have them installed also.

As far as "in the field business" (aka bathroom, jerking off, etc) the unit can figure it out for themselves.

[rubato]

Leon Panetta said that women in combat would be required to pass the same fitness tests as men. Perhaps this idiot didn't read the statement?

And further, you can plot male and female abilities on bell curves and those curves overlap a great deal. Mentioning only that the peaks of each curve are at different points, the medians, hides the fact that the areas overlap a great deal; a large number of women outperform the 'median' male and it would be foolish not to get the best from each gender.

""Not every woman makes a good soldier, but not every man makes a good soldier. So women will compete," said Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif. "We're not asking that standards be lowered. We're saying that if they can be effective and they can be a good soldier or a good Marine in that particular operation, then give them a shot."" Leon Panetta

Yours,
rubato

[Guinevere]

Panetta is exactly right. it's about opoprtunity. Men and women wash out -- but at least men get the chance. Women should have the same chance.

And oldr, what is a "no lawsuit" paper? Why would women have to give up rights to join the military than men don't have to give up?

[Rick]

If they can hang let em. Women been at war for a long time chauvanism here is certainly outdated.

Showing wounded women on the groovetube will not sit well with the general public though...

[oldr_n_wsr]

And oldr, what is a "no lawsuit" paper? Why would women have to give up rights to join the military than men don't have to give up?

Those that "wash out" wash out. No lawsuits saying they need a lesser standard in order to join the combat troops.

Fire "women" have been able to gain entrance to the FD by passing lesser standards than their male counterparts. I am sure there are plenty of males who, had they been able to use the "lesser" standards, would now be firefighters.

[rubato]

And oldr, what is a "no lawsuit" paper? Why would women have to give up rights to join the military than men don't have to give up?

Those that "wash out" wash out. No lawsuits saying they need a lesser standard in order to join the combat troops.

Fire "women" have been able to gain entrance to the FD by passing lesser standards than their male counterparts. I am sure there are plenty of males who, had they been able to use the "lesser" standards, would now be firefighters.

Can you show proof of this? I am only aware of Police and Fire departments which use uniform testing requirements for both men and women.*

yrs,
rubato

*Back in the 1970s the CHP required applicants to be 6ft tall and have a 40in chest. This was changed to a physical ability test in part because women felt the 40in chest was discriminatory.

[oldr_n_wsr]

My computer here at work will not let me access the FDNY site but from what I have been told by FDNY personell, the test was lowered so women would more likely qualify. Don't know if it was lowered "across the board" or just for women. From what I remember, one of the tests was altered so that men had to carry a 200lb sack but the women only had to drag it for x distance.

[dgs49]

For anyone who favors women in combat, I continue to ask the 9/11 question: If you were incapacitated on the second floor of your house during a fire, would you rather see a man firefighter or a woman come into the room to rescue you?

The answer is too obvious to mention.

[rubato]

For anyone who favors women in combat, I continue to ask the 9/11 question: If you were incapacitated on the second floor of your house during a fire, would you rather see a man firefighter or a woman come into the room to rescue you?

The answer is too obvious to mention.

I would hope for a competent person. And not you.

yrs,
rubato

[Big RR]

Firstly, I would also wonder what my choice of a firefighter gender would have to do with women in combat.

But then, I would prefer, as rubato said, a competent firefighter, male or female; [perferably one with a partner, or three.

[Crackpot]

You know just about anyone can do the "firemans carry" it relies more on leverage than brute strength

[Andrew D]

For anyone who favors women in combat, I continue to ask the 9/11 question: If you were incapacitated on the second floor of your house during a fire, would you rather see a man firefighter or a woman come into the room to rescue you?

The answer is too obvious to mention.

Long ago, some friends and friends of friends and I were rappelling off the side of a building. When my turn came up, the person holding the rope for my mount was a young woman (we were all young then) whom I did not know. Someone suggested that perhaps a man should hold the rope for my mount. I looked the young woman in the eye and asked her whether she could do this. She looked me right back in the eye and said "yes". Our mount -- my mount and her holding the rope -- was universally regarded as the best in the whole rappelling adventure.

When what I need is the combination of strength, competence, and confidence, a strong, competent, confident woman suits me just fine. Indeed, I'll take her in a heartbeat over someone who thinks that his competence somehow springs from his testes.

[Gob]

What do you mean by "holding your rope" Andrew?

[Sean]

It's a euphemism...

[oldr_n_wsr]

[perferably one with a partner, or three.

It's very rare (never!) that a firemanperson goes anywhere inside (or around or up on) a building alone. If one is alone, it means they got seperated somehow. Not a good thing.

[oldr_n_wsr]

[perferably one with a partner, or three.

It's very rare (never!) that a firemanperson goes anywhere inside (or around or up on) a building alone. If one is alone, it means they got seperated somehow. Not a good thing.

[Big RR]

FWIW, I am all for establsihing whatever physical standards are needed for any job, including soldier, and applying them equally to both genders. However, they should be standards needed in the job, not something arbitrarily assigned. If being able to sdo a certain number of pushuips or situps is needed, that should be demonstrated before the stnadard is set. It might be a far better standard to show you can carry the typical load a soldier carries over a difficult terrain, since that's what we really wanrt to see. Likewise for firefighters; we'd get damn few men or women qualifiying if they had to be able to dead lift 200 lbs, but many would qualify if they had to show they could carry a weight slung over their shoulders of an amount likely to be encountered when fighting fires, or carry a hose a distance likely to be carried. It is not relaxing standards to make them relevant to the actual job conditions, it is making them fair and defensible.

[Guinevere]

Here are the MA Firefighter Physical Ability tests:

http://www.mass.gov/anf/employment-equa ... ts.htmlare

Stair Climb

This event simulates continuous stair climbing, an activity that firefighters may perform when getting to a fire at an incident scene. For this event, you will be required to step on a rotating staircase (also known as a stepmill) at a pre-determined stepping pace for a specific period of time. You will get a 5-minute rest period after this event. The required time to remain on the stepmill is 200 seconds.

Ladder Event

This event simulates various activities related to using ladders. You will be required to remove a ladder from a rack, carry it some distance, raise a weight of approximately 45 lbs. attached to a rope that simulates the raising of an extension ladder, lower that weight and return the ladder to the rack from which it was taken. The event ends when the ladder is back in the rack. The time limit is 35.56 seconds.

Hose Advance

This event simulates the actions necessary to manipulate a fully charged fire hose. You will be required to pull 50 feet of hose through a U-shaped course with several turns. There will be a ceiling on the U-shaped course to prevent you from standing upright. The time limit is 20.00 seconds.

Forcible Entry

This event simulates breaking down a door to gain entry to a burning structure or an incident scene. For this event you will be required to strike a rubber pad mounted on a moveable post. You will use a 12 lb. sledge hammer to move the post a set distance. The post and structure are weighted to simulate the force you would need to exert on a door in order to gain entrance. The time limit is 13.91 seconds.

Search

This event simulates the actions necessary to enter and search a smoke-filled structure. You will be required to crawl through a dark wooden tunnel with obstructions and turns. The tunnel is approximately 65 feet long. The tunnel is 4 feet high and 4 feet wide. At one location in the tunnel there is an obstacle on the floor and at one location there is an obstacle from the ceiling. In addition, at two locations, the tunnel is reduced from 4 to 3 feet in width. The time limit is 39.00 seconds.

Rescue Through a Doorway

This event simulates the actions necessary to drag an unconscious victim out through a doorway to get the victim to safety. You will be required to drag a 125 pound dummy approximately 30 feet, along a zigzag course to a designated area at the end of the course. In this event, there is a low ceiling over the course to prevent you from standing upright. The time limit is 36.00 seconds.

Ceiling Hook (Pike Pole)

This event simulates the use of a pike pole or ceiling hook. A pike pole or ceiling hook is a fire fighting tool used to tear down ceilings or open walls while looking for hidden fires. This event will require you to take a pike pole, tipped with an industrial hammer head, and thrust it upward at a metal plate in an 8 foot ceiling. The metal plate weighs approximately 60 lbs. And must be lifted six inches in order for the strike to count. You will then step over to the next part of the event, where a pike pole handle is suspended from a ceiling height. The pole is attached to a counter balance that weighs approximately 80 lbs. You must pull the pole down six inches in order for the pull to count. You will be required to perform one push and five pulls in a sequence. The event will require you to perform four one-minute periods of work, in which you will try to do as many push-pull sequences as possible. Each work period will be followed by a 30 second rest period. You must complete 25 full repetitions.

When I have time later, I'll see if I can figure out what percentage of MA firefighters are women. I do know the first passed the Academy in late 2004.