USAF must provide breastfeeding stations for nursing personnel

originally posted by: seaswine
I'm having a hard time understanding what the beef is here.

Nursing a child is one of those things that moms have done since, forever? And if they're also in military service, want a private place to take care of their baby, I'm ok with that.

Same here. Life is just too cushy, if nature is now controversial, lol.

originally posted by: seaswine
I'm having a hard time understanding what the beef is here.

Nursing a child is one of those things that moms have done since, forever? And if they're also in military service, want a private place to take care of their baby, I'm ok with that.

I think it's a control thing.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Really? You're resorting to Bulverism? That's the logical fallacy you've opted to hitch your little wagon to in this discussion?

:rolleyes:

What you've "typically found" sounds about as appropos to this conversation as someone typically finding they'd stepped in dogcrap would have to the same discussion. I wasn't putting women down, I was endorsing the traditional Western position where military service is concerned. I may be a goddamned caveman, but I'm not a misogynist or a chauvanist. I adore women who have taken an onus of personal defense upon themselves. Every woman in my immediate family can kick a man's ass and, on the off chance they cannot, can place a wadcutter at center mass and two taps to the head before the POS they're defending themselves against reaches them again.

Jesus Christ, this is why we can't have nice things. There are rolls in society which are the traditional and logical purvey of men and there are rolls in society which are in women's wheelhouses... both are equally important and it isn't intended as a slight to admit these more suited roles exist.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Really? You're resorting to Bulverism? That's the logical fallacy you've opted to hitch your little wagon to in this discussion?

Hmmmm. I don't see it that way, I think I was just sharing my opinion.

I wasn't putting women down, I was endorsing the traditional Western position where military service is concerned.

My comment wasn't directed towards you. If it was, I'd say I can empathize that you have daughters and don't want them joining. But given our state of affairs it's needed(females in the forces, not necessarily your daughters) , a lot of boys can't join because they can't pass the physical requirements, that's a problem.

Our foreign policy has been multi front, so we need everyone we can get since we're fighting useless wars.

But the OP is about the Air Force and breast feeding. Truth be told college is extremely expensive, so many women join to pay for college, because we're past the era of single income families, and why carry debt.

I may be a goddamned caveman, but I'm not a misogynist or a chauvanist.

Never said you were, you have daughters, so I doubt you are.

But I still maintain most men I know who think women aren't capable of being alphas have insecurities. I agree their are gender tendencies, but I don't think we should set those up as barriers. If a woman can pass physical requirements and want to serve or need the financial option, who cares?

Jesus Christ, this is why we can't have nice things. There are rolls in society which are the traditional and logical purvey of men and there are rolls in society which are in women's wheelhouses... both are equally important and it isn't intended as a slight to admit these more suited roles exist.

Again, tendencies.

I love to cook as much as I love to shoot, or four-wheel. I'm all for recognizing gender tendencies, but I won't let that define what I want to do, or discourage a sister on what they want to do.

Coast Guard Academy has one across the hall where I work. Really nice setup. It's been there for about 8-9 years. Several other buildings have had them for quite some time as well. Nice, but small stereo system you can bluetooth your phone into for some tunes.

a reply to: Scapegrace

I've missed a good bewb thread.


Because bewbs.


But in all seriousness, as long as they aren't mission critical, the babes can do whatever they want.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Lumenari

My daughter outshot everyone on her junior rimfire league last year (including her brother) and has so far been the best natural shot I've seen on every weapon I've placed in her hands from archery to rifle to shotgun... I sure as hell hope I've raised her smart enough to not go into the military.

To each their own...

Some of us feel that as citizens that we should give something back to our country.

Others... not so much.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I may be a goddamned caveman, but I'm not a misogynist or a chauvanist.

and...

There are rolls in society which are the traditional and logical purvey of men and there are rolls in society which are in women's wheelhouses...

~drops mic and leaves the thread~

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
But given our state of affairs it's needed(females in the forces, not necessarily your daughters) , a lot of boys can't join because they can't pass the physical requirements, that's a problem.

Wrong card to play... Women couldn't pass the physical requirements, either... so the military reduced them for female enlistees.
classroom.synonym.com...

Passing standards for women in all services are usually lower. For example, a thirty-year-old man in the Army who has already graduated basic training must run two miles in 15:54 to pass, while a thirty-year-old woman needs to run two miles in 18:54. The Marine Corps is the only branch of service that gives women a different test. As of the date of publication, the Corps has attempted to level the standards, but is being met with resistance. For example, the Corps replaced the flexed arm hang in the female test with the pull-up test normally used for males, but halted the change due to the failure rate among women.

But the OP is about the Air Force and breast feeding. Truth be told college is extremely expensive, so many women join to pay for college, because we're past the era of single income families, and why carry debt.

My household is a single income family, and yes, it is very possible and workable so long as you don't buy into the BS that everyone needs to have an iPhone, new laptop every 3 years, etc.

But I still maintain most men I know who think women aren't capable of being alphas have insecurities. I agree their are gender tendencies, but I don't think we should set those up as barriers. If a woman can pass physical requirements and want to serve or need the financial option, who cares?

As shown above, they're not passing the same physical requirements, they're passing specially assigned physical requirements which are reduced forms of what's being asked of men. Question... is the enemy going to fight a bit softer if they realize they're going against a female US soldier? Are we seeing the military artificially creating bastardized "equality" in the name of modern sensibilities totally unrelated to matters of war and defense of country?

I love to cook as much as I love to shoot, or four-wheel. I'm all for recognizing gender tendencies, but I won't let that define what I want to do, or discourage a sister on what they want to do.

We're not exactly talking about hobbies or private industries here, though, we're talking about national defense... it is a different ballgame.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Wrong card to play... Women couldn't pass the physical requirements, either... so the military reduced them for female enlistees.

But this thread is about the Air Force, not combat roles, and not the Marines who have a different test. Honestly, maybe in a way, you're getting your wish. Women are filling non combat roles, competing and getting it so that men who don't make the cut, do combat.

Question... is the enemy going to fight a bit softer if they realize they're going against a female US soldier?

Nope, but they know the danger. I don't feel the need to decide for them.

Are we seeing the military artificially creating bastardized "equality" in the name of modern sensibilities totally unrelated to matters of war and defense of country?

Are we less capable woth women in the military?

We're not exactly talking about hobbies or private industries here, though, we're talking about national defense... it is a different ballgame.

Agreed. Let's get our men and women back home from needless wars and get our military back up to snuff.

Edit for a side note: props you provided for your family though. I'm sure you take great pride in that, and I would never knock you for it. But some women don't want to stay at home. Glad you and your wife are happy with what you all have though

Well about time. A mother generally breastfeeds for approximately 1 year. It is healthier for the baby to have breast milk. Not an unreasonable request at all.

Besides Gentlemen, you don't want to deal with the wrath of a woman who suppresses lactating too early.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Since 2015, the Department of Defense has permitted women in combat roles, so yeah, this does include women in combat roles.

As to whether we are less capable with women in the military, I don't have a universal answer for that. Obviously, their service brings nuances to the table which carry benefits. That said, as a man, I'd find them to be very much a potential liability in any combat scenario. We don't fight nice people in war zones. I have no idea if this is considered a major violation of modern sensibilities, but it is at least truthful... there is a strong psychological factor involved within most men who were raised with traditional values. My job on this planet is to provide for and protect the women in my life. If I see a man getting beaten down by another man, I might stop and try to chase off the attacker. If I see a woman getting assaulted by a man, firearms will be drawn and very possibly fired. In the same vein, I can only imagine knowing your brother in arms has been captured by the enemy is an emotionally excruciating experience, but knowing that a female "sister in arms" was being held by that same enemy, doing God knows what to her would be on a totally different level.

As for more practical reasons, when you consider the lessened physical requirements the extend to the female soldiers, yeah... there is a direct avenue for reduced capabilities. If you're a 200 lb man and you go down and require emergency carrying out of the field, do you think the 125 lb person is a good choice, or would you feel more likely to successfully be extracted being carried out by another 200 lb man?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I think those combat roles are pretty scarce, and this goes back to tendencies.

I was speaking in context of the thread though, Air Force. There are a lot of light duty roles in this sector as it encompasses a lot of technology and our focus has shifted more toward that to alleviate boots.

I think the physical standards should be kept for combat roles though. If they pass that, they really want it. My predispositions on whether a woman doesn't matter if one can prove me wrong.

The worrying that a woman is captured because of what they're capable of... They probably have more of a chance of it happening at home or in the service than while by an enemy combatant, obviously I'd be worried if they were captured just like anyone else.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

It's been researched. Mixed units perform much worse than all male units.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Scapegrace

Women do not belong in the armed services. Young men fight to keep their women safe at home, it's always been that way and it shouldn't have been artificially changed.

You do realize that that armed service is not just about "fighting".
In China women have been soldiers for over 5000 years.

Yes, I do and so what, who gives a flip what China has done for 5000 years? Until recently, China also bound the feet of female concubines because the wealthy found deformed, child sized feet to be arousing... doesn't mean it was a smart or ethical practice. Women don't belong in the military. They nosed their way into the military because, in America, style and image are more important than substance and logic. Better to fake it that they actually belong in the military and are the equivalent to men in terms of war fighting than to possibly admit that there is a reason why the males of every animal species spar and fight during the rut while the females tend to intermingle peacefully.

And just like you dont give a fck about what china does, the majority in the u.s doesn't give a "flip" about your backwoods sexist take on it. Women are allowed in the armed forces, and have fought just has bravely as male counter parts so the issue is settled regardless of what hicks like you think.

On top of that i'm sure this is refering to bases ect. That aren't directly in combat zones. unless i'm missing something and they're sending pregnant soldiers to the iraq and other hot zones with their babbys....... which I highly freaking doubt. So how does this make us look weak and "unwarlike" to our enemys? Oh it doesnt? Alrighty then. Continue with your idiocy.

This thread can’t be real. You people do realize that women serve in the military right? And that women can get pregnant even while in the military? And that women in the military are allowed to breastfeed??? Jesus H. Christ!!

I’m completely dumbfounded at how some of the responses on this thread are! Never mind the OP. How could this topic be an outrage?!? They’re not saying they need a lactation foxhole. Pregnant women are non-deployable.

2019 and people still think women shouldn’t serve. I served for 14 years beside some amazing men AND women. Women performed their jobs exceptionally. If they want a private room to pump breast milk...they earned it!!

Easy fix to get this done.

The vendor supplying the $500 hammers just includes a feeding station which each hammer.

a reply to: Scapegrace


Ummm...does anybody really get offended by moms breastfeeding...really...?

I mean...

D’oh...crikey...I forgot that Mom...could very well be some hairy moobed...dude...

Dude...







YouSir

a reply to: funbobby


Ummm...twenty...?

Try 300...

But when the drill says...drop and give me 300...private...

You do what the man says...


Soooo...I did my three hundred pushups...I sure as hell wasn’t going to let the drill see me flinch...


But I never left his at attention formation to use the latrine ever again after that...bad case of the skitherincktums...bad...







YouSir

a reply to: Assassin82

Even if we provide "adiquet" maternity leave, which I doubt.... I'm having a tough time trying to navigate this one.

Kids need two solid years with their parents, both of them. If parents are stateside (active duty) , we damn well shouldn't be vilifying anyone, much less a service member for trying to do best by their child. Breastfeeding isn't taboo, it's the lifeblood of our youth. Proven to defend them from a host of preventable illnesses.

Rather than address the growing need for both parents to be bread winners, here we are.

I say this while admiring those who were raised traditionally, I think they're an important balance to our society in fast moving times. But that shouldn't keep up from having constructive conversations.