Women in the Infantry?

[America's Finest]

I wasn't talking about the relative safety of a SA or doctor's office. I was thinking more in terms of what the OP had posted regarding infantry units on the battlefield engaged in combat with the enemy. Would someone be able to "suppress" a biologically conditioned response while being fired upon or while bombs were dropping out of the sky? I'm sorry, but I don't know the answer to that. Maybe one of the AD or RET members could tell us what was going through their minds at a time like that and if biologically conditioned responses could be "suppressed" or not during a battle. Thanks.

If the response can be suppressed during normal settings then it can be done in combat. It may be difficult but its possible.

It is also human nature to protect your friends. Friendship is not banned from the military among co-workers even though a soldier can easily show favoritism towards his friends if one were to be wounded. Its the same concept.

 

[caroline]

If the response can be suppressed during normal settings then it can be done in combat. It may be difficult but its possible.

It is also human nature to protect your friends. Friendship is not banned from the military among co-workers even though a soldier can easily show favoritism towards his friends if one were to be wounded. Its the same concept.

America's Finest ... I don't mean to sound rude and perhaps you were AD before entering USMA, but I don't recall reading that before now. If I'm remembering correctly, I believe one or both of your parents are/were AD.

I was serious in wanting a response from a man who had been in an a combat situation. I don't want this response just for the heck of it or to promote a "women can do anything men can do in the military" type of agenda. I simply would like a first-hand opinion as I have a vested interest with my oldest daughter now beginning to think more seriously about her future and college choices.

Thank you for your response but it didn't answer my question and I am truly interested in a response on this topic.

 

[America's Finest]

America's Finest ... I don't mean to sound rude and perhaps you were AD before entering USMA, but I don't recall reading that before now. If I'm remembering correctly, I believe one or both of your parents are/were AD.

I was serious in wanting a response from a man who had been in an a combat situation. I don't want this response just for the heck of it or to promote a "women can do anything men can do in the military" type of agenda. I simply would like a first-hand opinion as I have a vested interest with my oldest daughter now beginning to think more seriously about her future and college choices.

Thank you for your response but it didn't answer my question and I am truly interested in a response on this topic.

The logic I am giving you exists wether I have been in combat or not. If you fail to acknowledge it for that reason alone, that is simply your loss. There is no agenda, I was refuting the points you made to show SVG (as well as anyone who cares) why they were invalid. Regardless of what you think, I believe this post was started by SVG and my information is aimed at answering his question. It appears you have a personal problem with something I said due to the fact that I am the only person you have questioned on this post yet you do not know everyone else's backgrounds. Perhaps I didn't give you the answer you wanted due to your daughter wanted to join the service. If so, feel free to address it via private message.

 

[Maximus]

I wasn't talking about the relative safety of a SA or doctor's office. I was thinking more in terms of what the OP had posted regarding infantry units on the battlefield engaged in combat with the enemy. Would someone be able to "suppress" a biologically conditioned response while being fired upon or while bombs were dropping out of the sky? I'm sorry, but I don't know the answer to that. Maybe one of the AD or RET members could tell us what was going through their minds at a time like that and if biologically conditioned responses could be "suppressed" or not during a battle. Thanks.

Who was talking about safety at the Academy and/or at Doctors office? Did a post get edited???

I think your daughters question was answered as best it could be here, hypothetically. Remember, there are technically no female combatants and the few that did get caught in the line of fire, what are the odds they post here?

 

[caroline]

Now, as far as the genetics of men feeling more protective of women, that can be suppressed. According to that statement, men shouldn't be allowed to be doctors in the civilian world since they will treat female patients more favorably yet this is not the case. Male doctors take care of male and female patients and nobody has complained about preferential treatment.

Maximus ... America's Finest was. And yes, I would call a SA or doctor's office relatively safe as opposed to a battlefield. And the question is not my daughter's, it is mine. I just would like to be prepared for the day the question may be asked.

Additionally, the question I asked is not hypothetical. I asked for a man who had been in combat's point of view. Never did I mention a woman who had been in the line of fire as I know the chances of that are odd and if there was a woman who had been caught in the line of fire she was one of very few.

If there is no one who knows the answer to my question or if someone simply doesn't want to respond, fine. I'm researching this in other ways as well as through this question.

 

[gunner1zeus]

CAROLINE:
You ask a vague question and expect a specific answer,won't happen.
How I felt when under fire changed by the second, that's why training is so important. You do what you have been trained to do when something comes up that training has never covered it's OJT. In combat if you die you lose.

You seem to be looking for validation for an answer you already have, so why not just tell the answer and quit fishing.

 

[America's Finest]

The current debate is whether men can suppress a biological feeling to care for women.

What is the most basic and strongest genetic response humans have? Self preservation. This is the most basic response deep inside every living thing. The fundamental instinct which for obvious reasons is the foundation of the existence of all living things. Go read medal honor citations. If men and women can suppress the strongest and most basic genetic urge to keep themselves alive and show complete disregard for their own lives in order to save their fellow soldiers and accomplish the mission, why can't a man suppress a far less powerful genetic response?

 

[caroline]

CAROLINE:
You ask a vague question and expect a specific answer,won't happen.
How I felt when under fire changed by the second, that's why training is so important. You do what you have been trained to do when something comes up that training has never covered it's OJT. In combat if you die you lose.

You seem to be looking for validation for an answer you already have, so why not just tell the answer and quit fishing.

It's not a vague question. It may be a difficult to answer question in terms of the fact that since women aren't allowed in combat a man who had been in combat wouldn't know exactly how he would respond in such a situation.

As far as OJT during combat, I understand what you're saying.

PS ... When I've reeled in a fish, I quit fishing. Obviously I didn't, until your post, yet have an answer or I would be courteous enough to not waste anyone else's time.

 

[caroline]

The current debate is whether men can suppress a biological feeling to care for women.

What is the most basic and strongest genetic response humans have? Self preservation. This is the most basic response deep inside every living thing. The fundamental instinct which for obvious reasons is the foundation of the existence of all living things. Go read medal honor citations. If men and women can suppress the strongest and most basic genetic urge to keep themselves alive and show complete disregard for their own lives in order to save their fellow soldiers and accomplish the mission, why can't a man suppress a far less powerful genetic response?

I am not debating anything. I was simply asking a question that is possibly unanswerable as I've indicated in my most recent post.

Thank you for the recommended reading.

 

[TWinter]

I am not a combat veteren at all, but I will still post in this thread.

I understand that right now the debate or question is still: can men suppress their instincts to protect women. I would say yes, but I'm not qualified.

What I can say is that I support the points being made before: there are lower physical standards for women, and that precludes then from entering the more physically demanding infantry.

Marine Officers interested in the infantry must run the Obstacle Course once for time at OCS, back-to-back for time at TBS, and with full gear including rifle at IOC. Out of forty candidates from San Diego, and thirty candidates from the Inland Empire, there were five women. Of those women, all had already completed OCS.

None of them could do the obstacles that the men used, until we placed tires, ramps, and other objects to assist them in getting up and over the various logs and poles etc.

The O-Course tests strength, agility, and to a small degree, stamina. It is clear that these future Marine officers don't have the same strength and agility or stamina as the male Marine candidates.

IOC should NEVER lower its standards, because it is dedicated to producing the best small-unit infantry leaders in the country (Marine bias, forgive me other branches). Two reasons:

1) Lower standards equals easier training, less professional development.
and
2) Marine Officers are expected to lead their men from the front. If a woman is expected to lead Infantry Marines she needs to be faster, stronger, and mroe technically proficient then them (obiously there are exceptions, I've met more than my fair share of BEASTLY enlisted men). While she could accomplish technical proficiency, the other two are harder to achieve.

Now SVG, you said that you "pump iron" and "outrun the cross country team". What does that actually mean for your PFT? If you post up a 285 using the male chart then by all means, your point is made. If it's less than that, then I believe your not entirely correct.

 

[caroline]

caroline-
It is a hard answer to define because of the lack of evidence. Currently females are not allowed in front line combat units which limit the chance for qualified, experienced infantry officers to offer an opinion.


Now, I really do not want to answer this because I am not a scientist or a doctor who could truly answer your question, but I will give it a go. I do feel that AF is correct when he stated:
Combat is pure danger! It is my belief that a person’s natural or “biological conditions” response to danger is to save themselves first. That could mean to “Run” or “get down” or whatever else they think or feel will protect them. In other words it is very “unnatural” to stand your ground, prepare to attack and attack in the confusion of real combat.

That is why we train. We train to react! In other words, I do not want my infantryman to “think” during the initial contact, I want them to react in the way I have trained them to do so for that given situation. A unit reacts in combat they way you train them. You train them hard so that they will react appropriately in combat.

Now I have seen Woman in combat. I have witnessed them react as they were trained to do. The same can be said with the men that were with them in their unit. I did not witness any Male Marine “protect” the females within his unit. That being said, it is a limited scope as that unit was not an infantry unit but an MP Company assigned to a Regimental Combat Team (Reinf). They were not "seeking out and engaging” the enemy as an infantry unit would, but they did come under fire and they reacted superbly as they were trained too. Then they continued to follow orders that allowed them to destroy the small attacking unit.

While I do not feel that my limited experience will fully answer your question, it is my best answer.

It was a very helpful answer. I never wanted to engage in a male v. female type of debate. I didn't want to debate the topic at all, just try and understand. Thank you, tpg.

 

[Maximus]

It was a very helpful answer. I never wanted to engage in a male v. female type of debate. I didn't want to debate the topic at all, just try and understand. Thank you, tpg.

caroline, what branch is your daughter interested in and is she preparing for the application? Maybe I can suggest some reading on the subject?

 

[gunner1zeus]

I never wanted to engage in a male v. female type of debate. I didn't want to debate the topic at all

Caroline:

I don't believe you at all. You don't post on a hot subject without planning to debate. I think you wanted to get the old boy's club all spun up and then watch the fun. Thats great that is what these forums are all about. You can't debate an issue without looking at both sides of it. BZ
(ask tpg if he has BZ on his list)

 

[caroline]

Caroline:

I don't believe you at all. You don't post on a hot subject without planning to debate. I think you wanted to get the old boy's club all spun up and then watch the fun. Thats great that is what these forums are all about. You can't debate an issue without looking at both sides of it. BZ
(ask tpg if he has BZ on his list)

Thanks for your support .... I always appreciate being called a liar! But yes, I actually do like a good "good ole boy's club" debate ... some of my best friends are good ole boys; however, this time, I was truly interested in the opinion of a man who was in combat and what went through his mind. In the future if I'm trying to get a rise out of y'all (no pun intended) I'll preface my comments with the following:

THIS IS TO GET THE OLD BOY'S CLUB ALL SPUN UP AND THEN WATCH THE FUN. deal??

I really did want an answer, though I now think it's an unanswerable question, at least for someone like me with no combat experience and no significant advanced biology knowledge.

Maximus ... she's undecided, but tends to like the ones on the water ... but she'll read anything about the SAs.

 

[Xyz]

Now SVG, you said that you "pump iron" and "outrun the cross country team". What does that actually mean for your PFT? If you post up a 285 using the male chart then by all means, your point is made. If it's less than that, then I believe your not entirely correct.

Whoa, yes I mentioned that I am physically fit, but I never said I could currently make the qualifications. Though with proper training and diet, I am sure any fit person could make it. It is all about heart. Most men can't make it through SEAL training, but some do. Most women probably can't make it through infantry, but I'd make a bet that some can.

 

[gunner1zeus]

Whoa, yes I mentioned that I am physically fit, but I never said I could currently make the qualifications. Though with proper training and diet, I am sure any fit person could make it. It is all about heart. Most men can't make it through SEAL training, but some do. Most women probably can't make it through infantry, but I'd make a bet that some can.

SVG:
Do you want to be in the infantry, submarine force or any branch of the military. You are not a member of the military, yet you are questioning the policies in place perhaps a career with the military is not for you.

 

[Xyz]

SVG:
Do you want to be in the infantry, submarine force or any branch of the military. You are not a member of the military, yet you are questioning the policies in place perhaps a career with the military is not for you.

The answer to that is that I want to be where ever I can hope to best lead my troops and serve my country, when the time comes.

Questioning the policies? Rather, seeking innovation. I will obviously accept what may come, but sir, I cannot help but politely remind you that this is a debate thread.

And I suppose some might be fazed by people telling you what you can and cannot do in life, based soley on sex, or opinions, or ideas, but all-in-all it strengthens my ambition to be the best person I can be in life, regardless.

 

[Just_A_Mom]

SVG:
Do you want to be in the infantry, submarine force or any branch of the military. You are not a member of the military, yet you are questioning the policies in place perhaps a career with the military is not for you.

Maybe you aren't or weren't in the military either since you have spent a lot of time on these forums questioning military policy yourself.
The policies in place preventing women from serving in certain jobs in the military are in place courtesy of Congress. The Army Brass would be more than happy to eliminate restrictions on women.
A retired Army Col was just on Fox news the other week and he stated that the only people who do not want women in combat are white males.

 

[gunner1zeus]

Maybe you aren't or weren't in the military either since you have spent a lot of time on these forums questioning military policy yourself.
The policies in place preventing women from serving in certain jobs in the military are in place courtesy of Congress. The Army Brass would be more than happy to eliminate restrictions on women.
A retired Army Col was just on Fox news the other week and he stated that the only people who do not want women in combat are white males.

JAM:
I'm not in the Military, NOW. That is not by my choice. However I've spent the majority of my life in the military. I've earned the right to question military policy. Most of my posts regarding military policy is questioning the need or reason for changes. change for changes sake is not good policy. A great deal of my time in the Navy was as an enlisted, I've seen the effects of policy changes formulated by The Brass with no consideration of the problems caused by the implementation of their policy changes. JAM until you have been there you have no idea of the logistical nightmares caused policy changes that are not needed. Policies conceived by a crystal palace bureaucrat with no idea how the military operates, to please a vocal minority are not in the best interest of the military.
A quote from an unidentified retired Army Col making a unconfirmed comment that white males are the only people who don't wish to see women in combat came as quite a shock to my mother. That statement is racial and sexist. JAM is your husband comfortable in the thought of sending his daughter into combat? How are you doing with your running?

 

[Xyz]

JAM:
I'm not in the Military, NOW. That is not by my choice. However I've spent the majority of my life in the military. I've earned the right to question military policy. Most of my posts regarding military policy is questioning the need or reason for changes. change for changes sake is not good policy. A great deal of my time in the Navy was as an enlisted, I've seen the effects of policy changes formulated by The Brass with no consideration of the problems caused by the implementation of their policy changes. JAM until you have been there you have no idea of the logistical nightmares caused policy changes that are not needed. Policies conceived by a crystal palace bureaucrat with no idea how the military operates, to please a vocal minority are not in the best interest of the military.
A quote from an unidentified retired Army Col making a unconfirmed comment that white males are the only people who don't wish to see women in combat came as quite a shock to my mother. That statement is racial and sexist. JAM is your husband comfortable in the thought of sending his daughter into combat? How are you doing with your running?

The debate is over the OPTION being open for women. That does not mean throw a helmet and camouflage cover on every mother you talk to. Respectfully, I must state that your arguments are becoming more of a personal battle than a debate on the actual topic.

Not to say I agree with the "white males" comment, but rationale behind it includes that fact that white males have always, throughout American and European history, had every right that others lack. Voting, military, land ownership, freedom, jobs, etc, the list goes on. Now as you state that your military experience (which I admire greatly) deems us unworthy of debating a specific policy, could the same not be said towards you, a white male, considering you have never faced oppression of rights based on racial/ethical/gender/etc background?