I now subscribe to the "Dusty effect'. Hunkering down in my bunker and waiting for the apocolypse.:D

Not me - I was wild as a dry August wind and always wanted to live as far away from my 'principals' as possible. :D :D

Richard :munchin

"Imitation is the sincerest forum of flattery." :D

There will not be equality and a sexless military until everyone is treated the same and comfortable with co-Ed everything.

As long as we have "Men" and "Women" seperate latrines and shower facilities and a different physical fitness standard to define "qualified" there will be issues with men and women serving in specific roles together.

There is no reason not to expect that many will suffer and some will die, so that a few can achieve some fantasy about what equality is and is not.

There may be roles for women in combat units and those should be defined with tests and qualifications that differ from their male counterparts but do not disrupt the natural order of things.

JMO

ETA: We have and have had women in SF (support roles) for years, they perform their duties with great enthusiasm and professionalism. Some would even be an asset in the field but those roles are limited and very specific.

My sister in law was the Athletic Director at a school here in California when Title IX passed, dictating that both men's and women's athletic teams had to have equal facilities, funding, etc.

I asked her if this meant women could try out for men's teams, she said yes.

I asked her if I could try out for her women's softball team, she said no and couldn't tell me (or admit) why...

There are no women playing in the NFL, the NBA, MLB or NHL for a reason...

Which also begs the question...why do our fearless leaders need all female FETs and CSTs? Why can't a male join those two units? Is my testosterone level too high? I think men should be allowed the option of going out for the CSTs and FETs.

Since when did equality, cultural sensitivity and gender have anything to do with logic?

That's correct. Now, if we flip the circumstances, how effective will a female infantry company commander be at conducting a shura with a local Afghani tribal elder? Nowadays, SF aren't the only ones out in the wild building rapport and partnerships, and there are a heck of a lot of cultures around the world where women are treated far less than equal.

I hear women complaining, with some regularity, that all of the real men are gone, and men don't act like men anymore.

Then I hear my Chief of Staff saying that in order to get women into units where they do not meet the standards, the units will have to reevaluate and justify those standards.

What do you think has happened to the boys who wanted to be men?

Eventually, this is going to get a lot of people hurt.

For those of you unfamiliar with it, there was a combat load study of a "light infantry" unit in the box, and their measured loads ranged between 125 and 145 pounds per man, at significant altitude, for days on end. Any women I know who could physically lift that load (less strength, especially upper body), could not sustain it for as long as the men (lower aerobic capacity), and would suffer permanent damage to their bodies (lower bone density).

TR

I can imagine VERY few places in the 5th Group AOR that would react well to a female Detachment Commander showing up to meet with a counterpart military commander.

These?

Well I'll say, even if USASFC brings back the SF yearly certification, this wouldn't help Groups or the Regiment in a cause. The standards will be changed and arms/hands tied.

Thanks for the assist...and it was my point exactly. Growing up in 7th SFG was another prime example of why women on teams wouldn't being accepted.

Couldn't resist

Attachment 24222

lol Made my day. :D:D