Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Women serving in combat in Western Armies

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Women serving in combat in Western Armies

    Most of the discussion is on women in infantry arms of the US and UK but I am curious how goes women serving in the same role in Germany, Scandinavia, France, Poland several other Western nations.

    Were there controversial reactions? Any women who have served in Afghanistan/Iraq who have solidified the decisions to allow women in combat? Its a difficult ongoing struggle here in the US but was it the same in other Western nations?

  • #2
    Well we have a few women in some combat tasks but I don't know if they saw any action in Afghanistan and it was not a primarily combat troop and the northern regions were relatively peacefull. Women may apply for most FDF SF units but well some like SEO and REO are not really that physically challenging and if any unicorn made it into the hardcore units, then they are not making a big fuss about it due to obivious reasons.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Gumiman View Post
      Well we have a few women in some combat tasks but I don't know if they saw any action in Afghanistan and it was not a primarily combat troop and the northern regions were relatively peacefull. Women may apply for most FDF SF units but well some like SEO and REO are not really that physically challenging and if any unicorn made it into the hardcore units, then they are not making a big fuss about it due to obivious reasons.
      With FRDF there were only three women (out of 200), when I was in. It's one of these troops with with least demanding entry tests and pushes to accept women.

      I have serious doubts any has made it to the SF and number in infantry is negligible.

      They make a big fuss of women in the military doing anything. We should also note that it's easier for them to get in to Reserve Officer School due to lowered standards. (for example woman gets "excellent" score from physical tests with results that would be average for men)
      Last edited by PEMM; 13-12-2015, 01:07 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        So was there any controversy in recent years with women in infantry roles or women in combat in Afghanistan?

        I wonder what parallels are there or what exactly is the reason why say in the UK/USA/Australia there were more hindrances to women in combat compared to those in Scandinavia or Germany or France? Could it be that "peacekeeping" missions primarily were seen as different than war operations and thus the differences among nations in regard to women in their armed forces?

        Comment


        • #5
          My experience is that 99% of the woman in combat units are there because politicians want to.
          They rewrite complete courses and skip whole parts if they don't make it.
          If they would keep high standards it would mean that there are at most a few induviduals able to keep up, just like 75% of the men.
          Functional at the units they are often treated differently by the guys.
          Often they are helped because the men feel sorry for them, even huge fuckups are forgiven.
          Personaly I think...(know for myself) it's not working out with the infantry and if so it would drasticly decreases overall performance.
          They should skip that bullshit and take care the units are as good as they can get instead of being a feminist social working place.
          I base it on service experience with regular and elite combat units.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by PEMM View Post
            I have serious doubts any has made it to the SF
            What would you consider SF in this context? Like SEO is officially SF but not really what people usually think about when it is debated whether women should be allowed in SF roles.

            Originally posted by PEMM View Post
            and number in infantry is negligible.
            I wouldn't say that but then again its subjective. From the total 900000 its negligible but we would notice it if they would be removed from my wartime battalion.

            Originally posted by PEMM View Post
            They make a big fuss of women in the military doing anything.
            The PR department does when they know or can about it. But the same applies for new gear and you may or may not know what exists in reality but is non-existent as far as our public narrative goes.

            Originally posted by PEMM View Post
            We should also note that it's easier for them to get in to Reserve Officer School due to lowered standards. (for example woman gets "excellent" score from physical tests with results that would be average for men)
            True but then again they are not too many and it does not reduce the total number of men in arms.

            Originally posted by TheFreeLegion View Post
            So was there any controversy in recent years with women in infantry roles or women in combat in Afghanistan?

            I wonder what parallels are there or what exactly is the reason why say in the UK/USA/Australia there were more hindrances to women in combat compared to those in Scandinavia or Germany or France? Could it be that "peacekeeping" missions primarily were seen as different than war operations and thus the differences among nations in regard to women in their armed forces?
            Well for starters when they have more issues mixing women and men in civil life then they are going to have even more in a military setting. Like casual mixed baths are still a culture shock for most americans.
            Last edited by Gumiman; 14-12-2015, 08:26 AM. Reason: addition

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Gumiman View Post

              What would you consider SF in this context? Like SEO is officially SF but not really what people usually think about when it is debated whether women should be allowed in SF roles.



              I wouldn't say that but then again its subjective. From the total 900000 its negligible but we would notice it if they would be removed from my wartime battalion.



              The PR department does when they know or can about it. But the same applies for new gear and you may or may not know what exists in reality but is non-existent as far as our public narrative goes.



              True but then again they are not too many and it does not reduce the total number of men in arms.



              Well for starters when they have more issues mixing women and men in civil life then they are going to have even more in a military setting. Like casual mixed baths are still a culture shock for most americans.
              What are your sources, those "Defence megazins" full of PR?

              Those currently serving woman with combat units could be replaced in a blink of an eye by men with higher standards that just fell short on the normal "men" standards.
              If you would follow the standards of the 90's a lot of men recrutes would'nt make it aswell, those lower standards are allready an issue.
              Those ladies that could make it with normal standads are less then one on thousands, not to mention the number of following impracticalities that would degrate units.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Static-Line View Post

                What are your sources, those "Defence megazins" full of PR?
                You are being pretty vague here. Sources for what?

                Originally posted by Static-Line View Post
                Those currently serving woman with combat units could be replaced in a blink of an eye by men with higher standards that just fell short on the normal "men" standards.
                Not possible. Firstly they would have to be trained and secondly there are not enough willing equally suitable ones. Especially with paramedics where your average professional one is infinitely more qualified than the 9 months and little rehersals conscripts.

                Originally posted by Static-Line View Post
                If you would follow the standards of the 90's a lot of men recrutes would'nt make it aswell, those lower standards are allready an issue.
                Those standards were anyway a guideline. A certain amount of troops HAVE to be produced and we can't just tell a unit that sorry no platoon leaders for you guys.

                Originally posted by Static-Line View Post
                Those ladies that could make it with normal standads are less then one on thousands, not to mention the number of following impracticalities that would degrate units.
                Make it to what? What impractilities do you mean? Besides of the lack of non-synthetic bras.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Gumiman View Post

                  You are being pretty vague here. Sources for what?



                  Not possible. Firstly they would have to be trained and secondly there are not enough willing equally suitable ones. Especially with paramedics where your average professional one is infinitely more qualified than the 9 months and little rehersals conscripts.



                  Those standards were anyway a guideline. A certain amount of troops HAVE to be produced and we can't just tell a unit that sorry no platoon leaders for you guys.



                  Make it to what? What impractilities do you mean? Besides of the lack of non-synthetic bras.
                  Where you base your opinion on, I wonder if you noted how much efford they put to put a hand full of ladies in combat units and make a media show of it.

                  Thousans and thousands of male recrutes did'nt made courses allthough they out perform those very few ladies, how some female recrutes made it is a shame...skipping all physical elements.
                  Physical tests of 18 year old ladies are simular to men at their ends of their careers in multiple countries.
                  About practical issues with mixed genders,aswell from the male side you can write a 200 page book.
                  I hope this leftwing hype ends soon, they are NATO militaries biggest issue.

                  As a Infantrymen,Air Assault,Marine or Ranger you should be better then this..those names should have a sertain degree of value, one to be proud of.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    We -- the Republic of Korea, though not technically 'western' -- have female infantrymen who perform as riflemen and anti-tank or mortal crew. They've been deployed to Vietnam, Iraq, Lebanon and again Iraq over the course of Vietnam/Gulf War and the War on Terror (the Lebanese contingent today still have female NCO and COs leading combat patrol).


                    The ROK has also maintained an all-female special forces paratroop unit embedded into the 7th AIrborne Brigade of the ROK Army Special Warfare Command. Some of their members have performed covert South Korean missions into various 'unspecified territories of strategic interest' during the Cold War.

                    Tarantula Unit of the 35th Special Assault Team

                    There is an entire thread dedicated to the existence of this particular unit at Reddit.

                    https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPor...e_unit_of_the/

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ambassador View Post
                      We -- the Republic of Korea, though not technically 'western' -- have female infantrymen who perform as riflemen and anti-tank or mortal crew. They've been deployed to Vietnam, Iraq, Lebanon and again Iraq over the course of Vietnam/Gulf War and the War on Terror (the Lebanese contingent today still have female NCO and COs leading combat patrol).


                      The ROK has also maintained an all-female special forces paratroop unit embedded into the 7th AIrborne Brigade of the ROK Army Special Warfare Command. Some of their members have performed covert South Korean missions into various 'unspecified territories of strategic interest' during the Cold War.

                      http://i.imgur.com/xz1Lfsc.jpg"]Tarantula Unit of the 35th Special Assault Team[/URL]

                      There is an entire thread dedicated to the existence of this particular unit at Reddit.

                      https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPor...e_unit_of_the/
                      I wonder how they perform on physical tests, and if they could walk 140km with a 50kg backpack with 3h of sleep a week. If they can drag a fully equiped Infantryman of 120kg with them if he is wounded. Those things are counting putting labbles or tags on them isnt a challenge.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Static-Line View Post

                        Where you base your opinion on,
                        Personal experience and what I have read and talked with other people.

                        Originally posted by Static-Line View Post
                        I wonder if you noted how much efford they put to put a hand full of ladies in combat units and make a media show of it.
                        Not really but I was not in a combat unit during conscription service and in a combat unit only later in regional troops.

                        Originally posted by Static-Line View Post
                        Thousans and thousands of male recrutes did'nt made courses allthough they out perform those very few ladies, how some female recrutes made it is a shame...skipping all physical elements.
                        Physical tests of 18 year old ladies are simular to men at their ends of their careers in multiple countries.
                        Thousands? There has been 751 women who completed FDF reserve officer school in 38 courses. Thats a average of 20 per course.

                        Originally posted by Static-Line View Post
                        About practical issues with mixed genders,aswell from the male side you can write a 200 page book.
                        Please do tell. I'm male and have usually been in a mixed unit. Issues yes but AFAIK the worst of the lot were always male. Afterall they did not have the option of quitting without consequences prior to taking the oath.

                        Originally posted by Static-Line View Post
                        I hope this leftwing hype ends soon, they are NATO militaries biggest issue.
                        FDF is not a NATO military.

                        Originally posted by Static-Line View Post
                        As a Infantrymen,Air Assault,Marine or Ranger you should be better then this..those names should have a sertain degree of value, one to be proud of.
                        Are we still talking about the same army? Light infantry is mass produced and used in FDF.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Static-Line View Post

                          I wonder how they perform on physical tests, and if they could walk 140km with a 50kg backpack with 3h of sleep a week. If they can drag a fully equiped Infantryman of 120kg with them if he is wounded. Those things are counting putting labbles or tags on them isnt a challenge.
                          I know where you are getting but generally speaking, the pure physique of Korean-ethnicity soldiers even male, generally, are not on par with their Western counterparts. This was particularly true during most of the ROK's existence when its average soldier was 5 feet tall and collectively malnourished (though it didn't prevent them from performing well against comparable armies like Viet Cong). If you are talking about females then most of your doubts about the female's physical strength are even more likely to be spot on.

                          Nonetheless, female commandos are a continued legacy of the past Korean army when the country was so poor that it needed female volunteers alongside male conscripts to field adequate number of foot soldiers who can hold the line in times of war. We didn't have female conscripts at times when we might have needed, for even more deep-rooted 'cultural' reasons than the US military itself, though female volunteers were OK if they could put up with the relatively harsh conditions of Korean military life (and lousy pay). For the ROK at the time decisions like these were not a matter of political appeasement but a matter of national survival when military resources in all aspects of strategic warfare were stretched thin and very scarce. If you look around the globe hard enough, there will be even better example places of that same situation where countries have to not just admit but actively conscript females into their ranks so that they'll be able to meet the numbers demand. The most westernized militaries among them are also some of the most cutting edge as well.

                          Some countries simply do not have the physical leeway to look at their military as a source of political debate/correctness but rather as something constantly operating on shoestring manpower and resources compared to the magnitude of existential threat it is arrayed against.

                          Situations in the true 'West' may be somewhat different for various reasons, but there are 'western' militaries who make reasonably good use of their female number even owing directly to mission requirement (female operators mingle better in some specific battlefields that the ROK has in mind for its OPLAN than others) and strategic necessity.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Gumiman View Post

                            Personal experience and what I have read and talked with other people.



                            Not really but I was not in a combat unit during conscription service and in a combat unit only later in regional troops.



                            Thousands? There has been 751 women who completed FDF reserve officer school in 38 courses. Thats a average of 20 per course.



                            Please do tell. I'm male and have usually been in a mixed unit. Issues yes but AFAIK the worst of the lot were always male. Afterall they did not have the option of quitting without consequences prior to taking the oath.



                            FDF is not a NATO military.



                            Are we still talking about the same army? Light infantry is mass produced and used in FDF.
                            Reservists, I a whole lot of countries they are called Infantry.
                            With all respect to reservists ofcourse because they are valueble.
                            But those arent usualy they units they send out on missions but rather guard bridges etc.
                            Standards and units differ per country, those numbers you called are highly unrealistic in other countries amongst combat units.
                            Im not telling it would'nt work in the whole of the millitary, just at specific roles where high physical requirements are vital.
                            Basic Infantry equipment,surroundigs,climate,drills and SOP's require allready a high physical fittness and strength, lowering standards brings people in danger and will increase losses.

                            Next to that it will big issues within the unit, especialy considering the culture those units often have...and that's not their fault that they are more rough or macho it's their warrior culture. Ladies are very very often seen as a "Nato matrass" by them.
                            And very very very often they behave like that..seriously.
                            Let the guys be proud and rough, they need to tackle big obstackles when they get the call their "culture" helps them with it.
                            On mission you dont have place for this nonsense.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Static-Line View Post

                              Reservists, I a whole lot of countries they are called Infantry.
                              With all respect to reservists ofcourse because they are valueble.
                              But those arent usualy they units they send out on missions but rather guard bridges etc.
                              Standards and units differ per country, those numbers you called are highly unrealistic in other countries amongst combat units.
                              Im not telling it would'nt work in the whole of the millitary, just at specific roles where high physical requirements are vital.
                              Basic Infantry equipment,surroundigs,climate,drills and SOP's require allready a high physical fittness and strength, lowering standards brings people in danger and will increase losses.

                              Next to that it will big issues within the unit, especialy considering the culture those units often have...and that's not their fault that they are more rough or macho it's their warrior culture. Ladies are very very often seen as a "Nato matrass" by them.
                              And very very very often they behave like that..seriously.
                              Let the guys be proud and rough, they need to tackle big obstackles when they get the call their "culture" helps them with it.
                              On mission you dont have place for this nonsense.
                              So you were talking about a different military. Good day sir.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X