Why no female soldiers?

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

Women can't be in a Combat Arms MOS which includes Infantry, Armor, and Field Artillery.

Palantas

I'd swear there are some jobs open to females in FA and ADA, at least on the officer side. I should probably look this up.

Why do you think the APFT is BS? I'm not disagreeing with you just wondering what you're opinion is.

SpartanMSU

Because it's not a meaningful standard. If it's necessary that I run two miles in 15:54 to be an effective soldier, why does that change once I hit 22 and then 27? Why is the female standard dramatically lower?

At best, the APFT describes some arbitrary level of personal fitness (which is only marginally useful for telling how well a soldier will perform physically at his job). I can't think of anything else in the Army that's like this. Consider: Two guys go out for EIB...

• Soldier A scored a 125 on his GT, so he's only allowed three no-gos before he fails EIB.
• Soldier B scored an 82 on his GT, so he's allowed four no-gos (and if he'd scored under an 80, he'd get five!)

How foreign does that sound to normal military thinking? Yet it's considered perfectly normal that a female comes in two minutes after me on her run, but gets a higher score. Is the Army a "from each according to his gifts" organization?

Nothing else is like this. You have to put on and clear your pro mask in nine seconds, regardless. You have to shoot 36 to get Expert, regardless. At Air Assault school, you have to complete the 12-mile in a certain time. In Ranger school, you have to complete a certain number of patrols. These are actual standards. They describe capabilities; they translate to a soldier being able to do something. When all the soldiers in a unit meet a group of standard, it's trained in a certain skill set. It's able to utilize those skills on deployment.

Now, say everyone in a unit passes their PT test. That translates into that unit being able to...do what exactly? You can't ascribe any particular characteristics to the unit ("B Co. can move X distance in X time"), because for one, the PT test doesn't actually translate into any warfighting task. Even if it did, the PT test standard varies between individuals, making it completely useless in describing whether or not a unit is able to do something.

I get what you're saying and I agree with you. However, I think the whole reason they make us take the APFT is to keep us in shape. They don't want someone performing to the least of their abilities for their age/gender. I don't think it has anything to do with how well you'll be able to perform your job, even though they may be correlated.

I really don't get how some people can't even pass the APFT. Honestly if you can't pass the APFT and you're 18-25 you should just quit.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Good news then...they are making plans to redo it.

Palantas

I've been hearing that for over eight years now. I was actually hearing this before I enlisted. I'm sure they'll get to it eventually. The military's like the Shire: Change comes slowly, when it comes at all.

They are changing basic as we speak though.

We had a guy in my platoon who weighed 260 lbs, with all his gear and his weapon, possibly over 300 lbs. If he got shot and can't walk, how do you expect a woman soldier to help him or bring him to cover? And women aren't better snipers than men, I don't know where you heard that...

chaddk

I don't think there's a set ratio of either men being better or females being better with firearms. I'm sure some women are great marksmen and some men are horrible as well. However, you do have a point of male physical strength of saving another trooper. However, for this topic there are too many Pros and Cons.

People tend to overlook the fact the it's not just the women themselves. One of the biggest reasons is because during combat men will have a natural tendancy to protect the women. The cold hard fact is that mission accomplishment is a priority over troop welfare, and women in combat would get in the way of that.

SnipeyMcSnipe

They don't want someone performing to the least of their abilities for their age/gender.

SpartanMSU

Emphasis added. Can you think of anything else in the military where instead of simply having a standard, you're required to do something to the "best of your ability?" That's completely foreign to the military way of thinking.

William Shakespeare once said: "Losers always wine about doing their best. Winners go home and **** the prom queen."

They are changing basic as we speak though.

SpartanMSU

What PT test is currently being given in Basic?

When I get a new FM 21-20 and go to a c|ass on how to grade the new PT test, then I'll believe it.

EDIT: Which might be a while. It's been a while since I've taken or graded a PT test.

[QUOTE="MrHogknuckles"]

My master and Dark Lord says that in battle, men need to focus on battle only. With women and men together in the trenches, theres bound to be relationships. Relationships hinder fighting men. If you have lil miss 9mm runnin round satisfying her hormones, going from mr. 7.62 mm to MR. 20mm someone is going to be jealous and upset. Cant have that crap on your mind when you need to back each other up in a fire fight. Besides, that's what passes and R & R are for. You can get what you need in town or in a village. Same reason they dont want gays in the military. Can'tr isk Sergio and Daniel having a tissy when they need to be focussed and backing each other. Send all replies to darklord.com

magicalclick

Without woman, they TURN gay anyway. :twisted: