It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A female Navy Seal? not yet.

page: 10
29
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   
I've watched ATS for quite a while, but I thought I'd join today to make a reply. I'm surprised that in this thread no one has spoken out about many facts that I find pretty obvious when analyzing this topic. The main point that comes to the front of my mind is that the military is about the status quo. When things start to move away from this or have the possibility to move away from it, they don't respond too terribly well.

The problem isn't with what a woman can or can't do (I'll touch on a few points later). It mainly has to do with what the Navy Seals are now and you want it to change to accommodate a new system. Let's say that we get women who can fully meet the requirements of a Navy Seal. Awesome, we've now come to a new set of circumstances, and this will be why this will not ever be allowed. We are bringing in the opposite gender into a squad oriented paradigm. There are a number of problems that can occur that would not have to be dealt with normally. We have the possibility of male members not working well with the female members in individual teams. I see earlier that it was responded that if they can't adjust then they shouldn't be a seal. Unfortunately the current establishment will not take this point of view.

If a paradigm has been set that has performed to overwhelming success and is threatened by a new condition, the military just wont allow that new condition in. It's really that simple. They won't lose what they have now to accommodate something new. Other factors that may come into play that would cause new situations would be the men's response to protecting a female, the possibility of relationships to occur (This can happen with gay men as well. But let's be honest there are a greater number of heterosexual members of the armed forces.), the possibility for new emotional dynamics to enter the squad (People do develop feelings for others no matter their intent.), and finally we reach physical differences.

Physical differences when it comes to endurance of the body is very different within men and women. Our bodies are different on a GENETIC level. As one person replied before and was mistaken, conditioning will not be passed on genetically. Sorry biological reproduction does not allow for the passing of these gained traits throughout a lifetime. One main difference between women and men in athletic scenarios is that women's bodies deteriorate differently than a man. Joint related injury is much more common in women in high impact scenarios. This is due to how women use their bodies compared to men. Men and women can both run at similar levels but when women decelerate from running this causes added injury to the ACL due to how a woman's body is shaped. This is just one example. There is nothing you can do about this. Squad operations are based on set tactics. When a new set of circumstances due to gender have to be made to accommodate new individuals that can radically change the way things operate, the military will take the easier route of maintaining the current status quo.

Just my observations.




posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Redwookieaz
Seriously I am amazed at the attitudes of some of the guys here. You guys really believe that guys are better than women? I can't believe in this day and age that sexism is still so rampant.

I know that most men are stronger physically than most women, I'm not delusional, but if a woman can pass the same tests and meet the same requirements then why should they not be able to serve?

Btw, I have a friend who is a professional kickboxer. Some guy kept mouthing off to her about how he could beat her ass becuase she's a girl. Guess what, she gave him the beat down of a lifetime. It was hillarious.

You guys are seriously underestimating women.
edit on 2-6-2011 by Redwookieaz because: Grammar oops.

It is not sexism,it is realism to point out why women would not fit into a unit like the Seals,just like 99 percent of the men that try out for them.

Your story of the pro kickboxer is childish at best,how would your friend do up agenst another kickboxer in there own weight class if they were male??

Most are not underestamating woman but again being realistic.You on the other hand are a perfict example of why certian people would not fit in the Seals with your childish "beat down " commment especially if you are a woman.
edit on 3-6-2011 by Battleline because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Why is this thread still ongoing? I already showed you there ARE special operator women RIGHT NOW. knew two of them personally.

Why continue this thread?



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   
geeze!

there is no need for sealy's!

do anyone know what a seal team does besides swim underwater with war paint?

lol,

do you think we would know if there are ANY women in the pipe?

grow up, ya sexist.

you wouldn't make it in my army, to paraphrase.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 08:56 AM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


My only concern is most males in battle would carry a sorta lil sister or daughter type respect for the seal ladies when they are in deep recon and it may get other team members killed due to them trying to keep an eye on lil sis or daughter. I feel women can = kill even if not with the same hand to hand technics, but its kinda embedded in us men well some of us men to look out for you all..

Be well

edit on 6/3/11 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   
It amazes me how deluded men are LOL

1) Physical requirements...Usually men are stronger. Fact. But im sure there are a few women out there that contest this. If a women can PASS her physical let her in. Since when did winning a fight always rest on strength? What about agility, tactics, and survival instinct?

2) Biological differences...What on Earth has menstraul cycle got to do with it? I miss mine cuz i get a nice needle in my ass every 3 months!

3)Mental capabilities...this one makes me laugh..apparently women have the weaker mind!! Havent all the men just stated that they wouldnt like women in the forces as they would be compelled to rescue the women over their objective?!?..man up!..we wouldnt offer you the same courtesy
not that that reasons not BS anyway, I know half of you dont hesitate to kill civilian women and children abroad you brainwashed baffoons!! (courtesy of wikileaks)

4)Fear of abuse...Dont be so damn patronising!!..This is something women have to be wary of at any given time or place. Heck it happens in the military its self..even to the men!! I personally think it would have more of a phycological effect on males as it usually goes against there very nature (Unless gay)..women are very aware of all the possible nasty, disgusting things that MAY happen to them....and if they still want to sign up..who are men to tell us?

Men have suppressed us women long enough, even though they are superior in one way only.. physical strength. Wow! Cuz thats alot to go on ENNIT?!?

Put it this way, since human kind began, the men have been in charge and look at the shambles that is the world today...yee not very good is it? I hope soon women will take their rightfull place as EQUAL to or SUPERIOR than MAN...because we are
Youz just dont know it yet..not fully anyways. Lets get back to basics and take a leaf out of the lionesses, hyenas and black widows books..we need to put men in their places. After all, there just sperm doners.

ETA: All the British and European solidiers that I have personally spoke to are amused at the poor standard American soldiers and seals are trained to...combined with their inflated ego's...I'd bet my left hand the best women we have would wipe the floor with some of your guys

edit on 3-6-2011 by Sinny because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by VagabondSoul
 


When i served in the early 90s this issue was brought up, i can remember the instructors asking us about our opinion regarding females becoming seals when we were interviewed, before selections. No one rejected the idea at all.
Norway got their first female "under water demolition expert" in 1992, that is not a course anyone should take lightly.
there is about 90% fail rate there as well.





edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sinny
After all, there just sperm doners.


You are strong but please give us more credit. Im sayen



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13
 


Aww indeed, I don't aim this at all men...there are some of you that would agree with everything I said in my above post..We as humans should be working together, not always trying to resolve these kinds of issues..However we must get our message out there strong and clear as crystal..because it is the men i was refering too that are in power, and it is them that we must put right..we still love the rational thinking man!




posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sinny
It amazes me how deluded men are LOL

1) Physical requirements...Usually men are stronger. Fact. But im sure there are a few women out there that contest this. If a women can PASS her physical let her in. Since when did winning a fight always rest on strength? What about agility, tactics, and survival instinct?

2) Biological differences...What on Earth has menstraul cycle got to do with it? I miss mine cuz i get a nice needle in my ass every 3 months!

3)Mental capabilities...this one makes me laugh..apparently women have the weaker mind!! Havent all the men just stated that they wouldnt like women in the forces as they would be compelled to rescue the women over their objective?!?..man up!..we wouldnt offer you the same courtesy
not that that reasons not BS anyway, I know half of you dont hesitate to kill civilian women and children abroad you brainwashed baffoons!! (courtesy of wikileaks)

4)Fear of abuse...Dont be so damn patronising!!..This is something women have to be wary of at any given time or place. Heck it happens in the military its self..even to the men!! I personally think it would have more of a phycological effect on males as it usually goes against there very nature (Unless gay)..women are very aware of all the possible nasty, disgusting things that MAY happen to them....and if they still want to sign up..who are men to tell us?

Men have suppressed us women long enough, even though they are superior in one way only.. physical strength. Wow! Cuz thats alot to go on ENNIT?!?

Put it this way, since human kind began, the men have been in charge and look at the shambles that is the world today...yee not very good is it? I hope soon women will take their rightfull place as EQUAL to or SUPERIOR than MAN...because we are
Youz just dont know it yet..not fully anyways. Lets get back to basics and take a leaf out of the lionesses, hyenas and black widows books..we need to put men in their places. After all, there just sperm doners.


LOL its not only strength its endurance and overall fitness too.


marathon fastest time = A man
half marathon fastest time = A man
10k time = man
5k time = man
Bench Press = man
Most push ups = Man
Most pull ups = Man
Any swimming record im aware of the top performance is held by a man
Take a trained male mma fighter put him in with a trained female mma fighter see how she fairs, same with a female boxer.

Its not about being sexiest its just about the reality of things. Men cant have babys (reality) , the best women cant outperform the best men in endurance, strength overall fitness events. Records don't lie, I hate when being politically correct gets in the way of facts.

I concede women are better at some things or have a knack for being better at some things then men. But when it comes to the best athletes in the world the top men v/s the top women, women are gonna lose every time.



edit on 3-6-2011 by ker2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Sinny
 



Then together the issues shall we ALL dissolve.
Be well



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by gallopinghordes
 


you can yell and complain all you want. it isnt gonna happen take to el banco



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   
read about the donner party.

women survive longer coz they have different fat stores.

that's gotta count for something, right?


i can guarantee there are women seal's.

now that i really think about it.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by ker2010
 


My bad..I used the term "Strength" loosely...I meant all of the above that you just posted.
Every persons performance will differ in these areas...But im sure you get my general point? Every woman that passes her fitness in the Army should have a high level fitness, and under the possibilty of death im sure will perform to an even greater standard..In war your not trying to win the olympics..your there to kill or protect..if you die you die, its what you signed up for.

Not that anyone we're currently fighting are trained to a high standard either, most of them just have guns in their hands :/

ETA: You have only challenged me on the physical point I notice...as I said before..thats alot to go on ENNIT?!?


edit on 3-6-2011 by Sinny because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Men have the strength, determination, stamina, endurance, and knowledge of how to fight in special ops. As for woman, they are faster, much more dexterous, easy manipulators, somewhat more stealthier, and some other things. Both sides have their cons, I don't see why a woman cannot join the special ops because of her gender.

I mean, come on! This isn't some samurai army where only men are allowed, this is special ops. Similar to an assassination group or a ninja group. Women are accepted as well to get the job done.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
You bring up some very good points and thank you for the discussion.Your highlighting the biggest problem which is change. Just like the fight that gays in the military are having.

Yet the military doesn't seem to have a problem adapting to new technology, funny how that works.

Regarding change in physical prowess, I understand that this is not a trait that is passed down through genetic means. And thank you for bringing up that point.
The knowledge that IS obtained is what is used. Athletics have been dominated by men. So the male physique has had the opportunity to be studied for a very long time, and the abilities get enhanced. Only recently has female sports and atheletic ability has been studied. The technology is only beginning to be developed. Just look at the shoe industry. How many kinds of shoes have been developed for each sport? Any training, athletic gear has been developed only studying the male physique.
Bodies are different, I totally agree with you there. But the knowledge of training abilities and enhancing aspects of athletes is proportionally done for men, not women.
Instead of only focusing on weakness, if you take a particular weakness, like the statement you have made about long distance runners, and develope a shoe or other gear that corrects that weakness, then you can start accomodating the female form to run. Instead we get shaper shoes for the butt. :/
That is the best way I can explain it. If that makes sense.

But because women are now allowed to compete, women are improving faster then men in running:


Dr Tatem said: "If current trends continue, then women will run faster than men in the 100 metres of the 2156 Olympics." The researchers plotted winning times for the Olympic 100 metres against the year the race took place and found that there was a straight "linear" relationship for each sex - in other words both men and women were getting consistently faster


independant

Women can also run faster at a later age, many of the NY marathons are being won by women in their thirties.


Men do not like being compared to an un attainable form like GI Joe anymore then women like being compared to a barbie doll.
Technology is developing at breakneck speed, that now we can compensate for weaknesses in both men and women.
I figured macho men would be happy to not have to obtain the GI Joe standard, and to allow technology to level the playing field for them as well, by allowing other attributes then arm strength, to enhance the team.

So many on here abhor other countrie's mentality of treating women like property. What makes this country great as that women can be teachers, police officers, drivers, and vote.
So why should that apply to everything BUT the military?

But all these discussions here paint a broad stroke, women can't, men can't. Some have pointed out the exceptions.

But when working on a team, every person brings a strength and weakness to the table. It is time to take advantage of technology and either support and enhance the strengths and weaknesses of the individual. If a woman is an incredible marksman, and can sit on a wall and assisinate somebody, is it necessary that she have huge biceps to bludgeon down a door?

One day we won't need ground troops anymore. War will be done at a computer screen. So what will the argument be then?


Originally posted by VagabondSoul

I've watched ATS for quite a while, but I thought I'd join today to make a reply. I'm surprised that in this thread no one has spoken out about many facts that I find pretty obvious when analyzing this topic. The main point that comes to the front of my mind is that the military is about the status quo. When things start to move away from this or have the possibility to move away from it, they don't respond too terribly well.

The problem isn't with what a woman can or can't do (I'll touch on a few points later). It mainly has to do with what the Navy Seals are now and you want it to change to accommodate a new system. Let's say that we get women who can fully meet the requirements of a Navy Seal. Awesome, we've now come to a new set of circumstances, and this will be why this will not ever be allowed. We are bringing in the opposite gender into a squad oriented paradigm. There are a number of problems that can occur that would not have to be dealt with normally. We have the possibility of male members not working well with the female members in individual teams. I see earlier that it was responded that if they can't adjust then they shouldn't be a seal. Unfortunately the current establishment will not take this point of view.

If a paradigm has been set that has performed to overwhelming success and is threatened by a new condition, the military just wont allow that new condition in. It's really that simple. They won't lose what they have now to accommodate something new. Other factors that may come into play that would cause new situations would be the men's response to protecting a female, the possibility of relationships to occur (This can happen with gay men as well. But let's be honest there are a greater number of heterosexual members of the armed forces.), the possibility for new emotional dynamics to enter the squad (People do develop feelings for others no matter their intent.), and finally we reach physical differences.

Physical differences when it comes to endurance of the body is very different within men and women. Our bodies are different on a GENETIC level. As one person replied before and was mistaken, conditioning will not be passed on genetically. Sorry biological reproduction does not allow for the passing of these gained traits throughout a lifetime. One main difference between women and men in athletic scenarios is that women's bodies deteriorate differently than a man. Joint related injury is much more common in women in high impact scenarios. This is due to how women use their bodies compared to men. Men and women can both run at similar levels but when women decelerate from running this causes added injury to the ACL due to how a woman's body is shaped. This is just one example. There is nothing you can do about this. Squad operations are based on set tactics. When a new set of circumstances due to gender have to be made to accommodate new individuals that can radically change the way things operate, the military will take the easier route of maintaining the current status quo.

Just my observations.




posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by fooks
 


No there isn't


I weigh 210lbs on average. My full kit (I serve in the army) with body armor, helmet, ammo, camelback, accessories (first aid pouch, radio, etc.) and weapon weigh in at 60lbs. That doesn't even include a ruck sack. So fully loaded for combat I tip the scales ~270lbs. There is very few besides juiced up body building women that can pick me up, put me on their shoulders and carry me for 100 yards say I get shot. A woman may be able to do a hundred pushups and run 5:30 miles, but that's carrying her weight. Its just a fact of nature. Sure there are the stories that woman have picked up cars off their babies from extreme adrenaline. But the fact remains that the physiologic make up of a woman is not suited for combat.

I won't even get into the psychological impact on males seeing women suffer and die on the battlefield.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by FreedomCommander
 


Well said!

Each gender has their pros and cons...shouldnt we have a mix to utilise full potential?



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Jo Jo
 


So maybe the women couldnt pick you up and take you to safety, but whos to say she wouldnt be the one to take out the guy that was gonna take you out while you laying around all injued tho? Whos to say she wont be the one providing surpressing fire while a male comrade picks you up?

ETA: Phycological effects of a man seeing a woman injured??? Like it dont work the same way round when the females watching the men get blown to peices :/ silly logic IMO

edit on 3-6-2011 by Sinny because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Jo Jo
 


hi jo jo,

you sure you are responding to me?



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join