Discussion in 'News of the Day' started by Sentry18, Oct 8, 2019.
CYA is in full force with the response.
The Army will either make the test easier for the females, hide the results better, or eliminate the test altogether.
I'm betting on an easier test for women.
The military is not a social experiment. The military has 1 job. WIN wars. Anything that disrupts that effort should not be allowed.
We need the best they can get and if some socially protected special group can't hack it they should find a different MOS.
Will everybody agree ....
There Is a BIG difference in men and women.
I never been attracted to a man.
There is a reason for that.
I always knew that I could never do the physical fitness requirements required by any branch of the service. Push-ups would be a complete and utter failure for me.
Think about it. In my family, males did most of the outside work: lifting bales and other activity that required muscles being worked over and over. Teenage males in farm communities have some muscle. City boys, probably not near as much. It is the work, the chores, that causes many young men to decide that they will not be farmers.
Females did house work which required little work that would require much strength. In my family, gender lines were clearly drawn around what ways you contributed or what work you did. I know it isn't like this as much these days, but it probably is in some families.
My guess is that even some males these days cannot pass the army fitness test.
I would rather my son had a better chance of coming back in a seat than a box. The only way that happens is surrounding him with the best possible people for the job. Well, that and the 240 he carries.
There is a reason for standards, to keep our soldiers alive and fighting.
You are correct.
2849 men took the test and around 855 failed.
The article said the Army was going to spend their time teaching everyone how to take the test. Maybe all the bad guys will give us 2 years of advanced notice before they attack us so the Army can teach the war.
To be fair there should only be one physical fitness test to meet the minimum requirements for military service. I don't care who passes, male or female, give them a uniform, boots and a gun. For special jobs clearly the requirements are a lot higher... again, if they pass the test, so be it, male or female doesn't matter.
Nobody gets a "special test" based on anything but the requirements to serve or do a specific job.
Physical & mental ability to meet the job requirements is the only thing that matters.
This is similar to what goes on in education. The tests often have stuff that is not in the text books, so school purchase test prep booklets. I'd bet the text book manufactures and the test producers are working on this together, so they can sell test prep booklets.
What text books. My daughters brief time back in school was made worse by the teacher reading out an assignment and the kids had to write it down and look it up online. She didn't have a single book and if the computer started a headache they said they would have someone help and read it to her.
Don't know about anybody else.
But when I went in the Army there was no special treatment for women.
If anything they rode us harder.
But I also took basic and AIT with the men.
They didn't separate men and women into separate bases in till 2 or 3 cycles after I went through.
Women did have separate barracks from men.
My Drills were men.
We were taught you were only as strong as your weakest link.
We made sure our weakest link pretty dang strong.
Even after we cut loose for the day.
I lifted weights to build up muscle, ran extra miles for endurance training.
I don't remember and different physical requirements for women than men in boot camp either. They marched on the grinder everyday just like the male companies, ran the same obstacles courses. At night those who needed extra physical training (as punishment for screw ups) were right beside the men in the same gym who needed an extra nudge... After boot and basic electronics school all of my following schools destined me for a warship. Women were not allowed duty on fighting ships so I wouldn't know of any differences during that time.
I do remember when yearly physical qualifications came out that were different for men than women... I remember lots of grumbling going on...
In 1966..there were no women in the army,
I think there were WACS for women.
I don't recall seeing any women in jungle either.
I'm so tuned to protecting my woman/wife I don't know how I would act in firefight.
You must have been in Vietnam?
There certainly should be a different fitness test for women. And different 'specialties' for them too. Damn near all of the non-combat side of the services are 'male-heavy' for no good reason. Women filled a lot of civilian 'man-jobs' in WW2; remember Wanda the Welder? (The famous one wasn't named Wanda, but you catch my drift.)
The Women's Army Corps (WAC) was the women's branch of the United States Army. It was created as an auxiliary unit, the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps (WAAC) on 15 May 1942 by Public Law 554, and converted to an active duty status in the Army of the United States as the WAC on 1 July 1943. Its first director was Oveta Culp Hobby, a prominent woman in Texas society. The WAC was disbanded in 1978, and all units were integrated with male units.
We conduct physical fitness testing for employment and continued employment, while not the Army some of the same implications apply. We initially used a standard test that only took age into consideration, but now (have to) use one that takes in consideration age and gender. Strength testing used to in the form a barbell but is now pushups based. Fortunately tasers came out around the same time as the change over because our female officers were getting tossed around left and right and were losing people they had taken into custody. For a long time the time in service of a female officer with my department was approx. 5 years. Now it's closer to 7-9 years. We have never had a female officer retire, they have all left police work before they had enough time in.
You mean all the cop shows my wife watches have it wrong?
A 120-pound woman really can't whip a 250-pound man every time while her male partner just stands and watches with a stupid grin?
I hate those cop shows.
Thank you, Jim, for your service.
You and me both.
I had a female trainee for a 3 month rotation when I was a training officer, a long time ago. She was about 135#, in good shape, skilled at Tae Kwon Do, and very smart. She was also very cocky and convinced she could handle anything I could. And she dealt with much of what came her just fine, until she met a man who did not give a crap that she was a female. He picked her up and tossed her onto the hood of our car while I was wrestling to put cuffs on his larger buddy (who the call was about). He then threw her on the ground, then up against a wall, then back onto the hood, etc. She never called for assistance, she never deployed less lethals, she just froze up and let herself get thrown around. She transferred out of patrol and became a victim's advocate.
She watched a lot of those same shows your wife does.
That patch on my hat is from my time.
It's 3rd Armored Calvary Regiment.
Been wearing that patch for as long as I can remember, in honor of many friends that didn't come back.
I believe women can serve...just not in combat.
I have never liked war. That may be because I am female, not sure. My dad was in Europe for WW II from Utah Beach until the war was over and if anything came on about war, there he was watching it and we all had to be quiet. I could never understand it. I would have done other things to support our soldiers, just never wanted to see combat. Maybe no one really does.
Separate names with a comma.