|
Post by stayingupfor GermanStokie on May 27, 2018 16:16:41 GMT
Correct, the number of hip injuries caused to women trying to keep up with their male counterparts is quite high It’s all down to Mother Nature. The female hip is designed for child birth and is not as strong as the male hip. I’m a former Submariner, and I had absolutely no problem welcoming females into the fold on submarines. There is no reason for the subs to be all male. I’ve also been attached to the Royal Marines, and the sheer physically of it would be problematic to most females in my opinion. However, better people than me in NATO say female’s are combat ready for units like the RM and you have to respect that. But they are not, that is the issue. After training alongside them at Sandhurst, with the exception of one or two, they really struggled to keep up with the guys, emotionally and physically. Even the stubborn gunner girls gave it a good shot but were average at best. Im not suggesting they don’t have the intellectual capacity for many roles and there were one or two who were strong.. but not strong enough. And you are right, many injuries for women were hip and back... the men were lower limbs and back.
|
|
|
Post by Dutchpeter on May 27, 2018 17:05:18 GMT
It’s all down to Mother Nature. The female hip is designed for child birth and is not as strong as the male hip. I’m a former Submariner, and I had absolutely no problem welcoming females into the fold on submarines. There is no reason for the subs to be all male. I’ve also been attached to the Royal Marines, and the sheer physically of it would be problematic to most females in my opinion. However, better people than me in NATO say female’s are combat ready for units like the RM and you have to respect that. But they are not, that is the issue. After training alongside them at Sandhurst, with the exception of one or two, they really struggled to keep up with the guys, emotionally and physically. Even the stubborn gunner girls gave it a good shot but were average at best. Im not suggesting they don’t have the intellectual capacity for many roles and there were one or two who were strong.. but not strong enough. And you are right, many injuries for women were hip and back... the men were lower limbs and back. My mistake, it was David Cameron who said females were combat ready not NATO.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on May 28, 2018 8:09:43 GMT
The first woman to join an infantry regiment since defence chiefs lifted a ban on females serving in combat units has quit after just two weeks of training, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
The recruit dropped out of an 18-week course this month after falling behind her male counterparts on endurance marches and failing other physical tests at a training base in Suffolk.
It is understood that when the woman resigned, she admitted having underestimated the physical requirements of being an infantry recruit. She also told officers that living in female-only accommodation made her feel ‘like an outsider’ and weakened her resolve. Her resignation is a huge blow to officials who are determined to integrate women into fighting units in the Army, Royal Marines and Royal Air Force.
And that was RAF Regiment. Hardly infantry
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on May 28, 2018 8:12:14 GMT
It’s purely an excuse in forcing equality
For fucks sake we are not equal
|
|
|
Post by supersimonstainrod on May 28, 2018 8:15:45 GMT
It’s purely an excuse in forcing equality For fucks sake we are not equal Prepare to he ostracised as a raving misogynist for doing nothing other than stating the obvious....
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on May 28, 2018 8:21:14 GMT
It’s purely an excuse in forcing equality For fucks sake we are not equal Prepare to he ostracised as a raving misogynist for doing nothing other than stating the obvious.... I couldn’t give a fuck The odd woman can do it. The majority cannot Because of that this initiative will fail
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on May 28, 2018 8:36:02 GMT
Because of that this initiative will fail You sure? Given we now live in a world where 'equality of opportunity' is no longer deemed good enough (We now live in a world where 'equality of outcome' is what matters) Do you not think they'll just lower the bar so that more women can pass & we can tick the box to show we're not an evil, misogynistic country?
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on May 28, 2018 8:40:41 GMT
Because of that this initiative will fail You sure? Given we now live in a world where 'equality of opportunity' is no longer deemed good enough (We now live in a world where 'equality of outcome' is what matters) Do you not think they'll just lower the bar so that more women can pass & we can tick the box to show we're not an evil, misogynistic country? They won’t lower the bar However the tests are outdated and will change to be more in line with what is needed
|
|
|
Post by supersimonstainrod on May 28, 2018 8:48:41 GMT
Prepare to he ostracised as a raving misogynist for doing nothing other than stating the obvious.... I couldn’t give a fuck The odd woman can do it. The majority cannot Because of that this initiative will fail I've always had the same attitude whether it's jobs in the military,construction,engineering,banking etc: the only thing that should truly count is whether the person possesses the requisite skill sets to perform in the role to the desired standard,be they mental or physical aptitudes or both,gender,race or disability etc I couldn't give a fook about as long as they can do what's required reasonably well and get along with people. Opening up career pathways for females into previously male dominated 'old boys clubs' professions is undoubtedly a good thing,but ultimately it has to produce suitable candidates whatever the field,otherwise,as you say the exercise will fail. Granted the military may expose the disparities far more keenly because you guys face/may face life or death situations where the right physical aptitudes are absolutely essential.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on May 28, 2018 8:49:07 GMT
It’s purely an excuse in forcing equality For fucks sake we are not equal We get the front line, they get the kids
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on May 28, 2018 9:03:29 GMT
I couldn’t give a fuck The odd woman can do it. The majority cannot Because of that this initiative will fail I've always had the same attitude whether it's jobs in the military,construction,engineering,banking etc: the only thing that should truly count is whether the person possesses the requisite skill sets to perform in the role to the desired standard,be they mental or physical aptitudes or both,gender,race or disability etc I couldn't give a fook about as long as they can do what's required reasonably well and get along with people. Opening up career pathways for females into previously male dominated 'old boys clubs' professions is undoubtedly a good thing,but ultimately it has to produce suitable candidates whatever the field,otherwise,as you say the exercise will fail. Granted the military may expose the disparities far more keenly because you guys face/may face life or death situations where the right physical aptitudes are absolutely essential. Let’s look at military accommodation in barracks In multiple people rooms the accommodation blocks are almost always separate In single rooms the accommodation is usually mixed It does depend on unit and how many females are actually there In a training barracks they will almost certainly be separate for many reasons One of the things she found tough was being away from the men in female accommodation. That says to me she is not tough enough mentally
|
|
|
Post by Mendicant on May 28, 2018 9:29:19 GMT
Marlady's combat ready judging by how she was talking to me last night. Proper fighting talk. Give her military training and she'd start a revolution in a well ironed uniform before later changing her mind and being quite kind to the enemy as though there had never been a problem in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by supersimonstainrod on May 28, 2018 12:52:08 GMT
Marlady's combat ready judging by how she was talking to me last night. Proper fighting talk. Give her military training and she'd start a revolution in a well ironed uniform before later changing her mind and being quite kind to the enemy as though there had never been a problem in the first place. The next world conflict could be triggered by someone leaving the toilet seat up?....
|
|
|
Post by Linx on May 28, 2018 20:36:54 GMT
The Soviets had women in the frontline during WW2: the IDF (Israelis) have had women in equal combat roles to men since its inception.
My personal military experience is limited to a couple of years in the TA in my early 20s but, from how I see it, gender differences shouldn’t really be an issue in a number of combat roles: tank crew, artillery, aircrew, engineers, navy, etc. Frontline infantry is one area that surely would be problematic, however. Close combat situations where physical strength and weight are factors would surely put a female soldier at a disadvantage that would endanger not only herself but others in her unit.
|
|