More than half of females in bootcamp cannot do 3 pull ups

chrismarco
reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe

 

That's a tough one...If a woman wants to serve her country and possibly give her life should we lower the standards?

edit on 3-1-2014 by chrismarco because: (no reason given)

If it were just her life she would be risking then I would have no objections to her doing so. She can have all the heart and soul she needs to be a superb soldier and serve her country honorably, but what happens when pure brute strength is needed to save lives and she does not have what she needs? Other lives have been put at risk because the standards were lowered just to give one the illusion if equality? That is not fair to others who must depend on her to have their backs.

There are women who do have the strength and can do the job just as well as the men... but there are not tons of them out there that do.

At the VERY LEAST they should not be allowed in combat situations if they can not pass the same physical fitness tests the rest of the "soldiers" have to.

If it were your life on the line, you would want to know (as well as you could at any rate) that WHOEVER is by your side has a snowballs chance in hell of helping you physically should you require it.

reply to post by chrismarco


At my peak I could do 35 consecutive pull-ups. Now I cannot do as many but I am pretty sure I have more strength. The variable that changed is my body weight. I am heavier now. Fill a backpack up with 20 pounds and see how many less you can do. You might be surprised. You might do less than 3 even.

Well that was tangent to your question.

You have to bear in mind pull-ups are primarily back muscle with arms and core as secondary. In other words not all the muscle groups including legs. It would be silly to use pull-ups to prove this point.

That said, I think this ship has sailed. Yes men are on average stronger physically.

In today's military climate we are gravitating towards remote pilots, essentially gamers, flying drones. Physical strength is becoming less not more critical.

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe


I wouldn't want to serve next to someone who is minimally qualified any more than have a surgeon perform a heart surgery on me who made it by the skin of his teeth to become a surgeon.

Selfishly because I am not in the military I really don't care who volunteers with the exception that they will serve and protect my country to the best of their ability..

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


I agree..I think our military could rely less on physical strength if we actually employed the might of our military which includes all the fancy gadgets....as long was we have politicians who prefer to occupy rather than get in and get out we need the frontline combat troops or boots on the ground..

chrismarco
reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe

 

I wouldn't want to serve next to someone who is minimally qualified any more than have a surgeon perform a heart surgery on me who made it by the skin of his teeth to become a surgeon.

Selfishly because I am not in the military I really don't care who volunteers with the exception that they will serve and protect my country to the best of their ability..

edit on 3-1-2014 by chrismarco because: (no reason given)

I can't really argue with the honesty.

I find it hard to get worked up about it myself since it doesn't affect me. I wonder though if those in the military do worry about such things. If it were me (same with your surgeon comparison) I would. I would hate to be seen as being "against my own gender", but it is what it is.

I think what this proves most is that they should not have changed the PFT for females. They did a flex arm hang before and i think the min was... like 45 secs, +/- 10 secs. Which if you don't know what it is, do a pull up and then hold your self up there for as long as you can until your arms straighten out. Which is supposedly better designed for females bodies. So, is the marine corps setting the females up to fail? Or did the disprove the fact that the female body isn't designed like the male body to preform the pull up.

reply to post by Sremmos80


I guess it would be interesting to hear feedback from troops who actually serve in combat. Are women proving to be a detriment on the battlefield?

Does the mixing of genders allow for more issues that make both male and female soldiers less effective when paired up/grouped together?

This could have easily become a very divisive subject but the response have been incredibly civil...

reply to post by chrismarco


I think you hit it on the head there, yes females deserve to be in combat with males. But they are a natural, instinctive distraction, males instinctively feel the need to protect females where as they feel a male in the same situation would require less help. Take a 2 battle field injuries, male and female. From what I understand, the male medic would check the female instinctively first, where that time could of been needed to start treatment on the male that may have a more serious, less noticeable injury. Extreme situation i know, but just my lamens terms of what I'm getting at

Note: I'd say if you asked most combat vets, male at least, your gonna get the answer to keep women out of combat. But I'd say most of that comes from the "if it anit broke, dont fix it" mentality that dominates the military

reply to post by chrismarco


G,day mate.. firstly i figure you are a civilian.
that says a mile full
your thread could start a fairdinkum blue. er a real anger fest.
when a female can carry 26 and a half pounds of M60 machine gun plus 200 to 400 rounds of link plus 40 lbs of personal equipment and not menstrate in the bush which by the way does leave a scent.
when said female can hump through the jay/scrub/bush and do 10 klik in a tropical climate and not leave the blokes worried that if the shtf and she is captured that the blokes wont be held responsible for her being raped. that the family of the wounded troopie she could not carry out of the contact wont hold her responsible. stuff it. i had better stop or i will ark up (get upset/rip yer friggin head orf).
BUT hay you have not been shot at or seen yer mates charlie uniformed
.
I served in south vietnam. no women should be humping with the crunchies/infantry/grunts.
BUT. all other jobs should be open to them and there in lies another problem women that cannot lift the supplies containers.
I had better stop now cause i have seen the results in the lowering of fitness and endurance levels to accommodate the new thinking, AND I AM NOT IMPRESSED.
If there are any of my U.S.vietnam brothers watching this thread this old nui dat digger says G,day, and if you were one of the yank heavy arty blokes supporting us thanks mate. thanks. i bloody mean it. i owe you blokes a beer or two thanks

reply to post by Sremmos80


Thanks Sremmos...it's off to bed for me...thanks for chit chat folks...have a good evening..

reply to post by pronto


I am a civilian and I regrettably did not serve...I understand you point completely and I don't disagree with your statement minus the scent of ones menstruation but we can agree to disagree on that one.

The reality is the world has changed and we must face facts that women are now part of the fabric of war...the real question is where do they belong?

If a women could hump the same amount of weight as you did back then would they be a good candidate for the battlefield?

Thanks for your service my friend...

reply to post by pronto


I felt like I was eating at the Outback Steakhouse when I read your post. Just teasing. I could almost hear your voice in my head for some reason, I just had to say that (again) me being a female.... I have to agree with you on the points you made. It's ridiculous to ignore facts to achieve the illusion of equality IMO and that is what's happening here.

I was raised being told life isn't fair and not to expect it to be. I think maybe somewhere people stopped telling their kids this so they expect it to be fair when in reality it can not always be so. We are not equal in every way and that may make for some (seemingly) unfair circumstances, it is just a simple fact of life.

Thanks for your service with us.

"Gender Neutrality"! HA!

Yeah, because nothing says "Equality" quite like reducing the minimum requirement in favour of females.

Then again equality according to america is men on the bottom, women on top.

Just like racism. White racism doesn't exist. Equal rights is black on top, white on bottom. Just look at how big zimmerman is compared to every black person that played "knockout".

Neutrality my effing arse! The requirements of a military were imposed in the first place because it's a f*cking military. They are standing in between you and what will kill you.

America has lost its touch with reality.

and not menstrate in the bush which by the way does leave a scent.

I am trying to imagine Charlie stopping dead in his tracks mid pursuit with a *sniff* "I smell human. Female human. The enemy is near."…

3 pullups eh. No good at all. Every bloke I know does 3 pull ups before they get out of bed and Im not talking the proverbial. Why theyre eating razor blades with their wheetbix just to prove they have a set of manly teeth. I know a bloke who once chopped off his own legs because he didnt need them. Us me are just all round suoperoiur.

Now you dainty women, with your flowers in your hair and frying pan hands.

You cant fight in war. Coh... your apron strings will get in the way. Plus youre all too perfumed and glowing. Youd bring attention to us blokes trying to kill a guy with a kleenex granade.

Yep. Now excuse me i have to go build a mac truck out of a box of matches and a toolbox.

reply to post by winofiend

Now excuse me i have to go build a mac truck out of a box of matches and a toolbox.

You should consider using your minds eye to concentrate your testosterone energy then channel it to your testicle chakra. Many the manly have manifested things this way. From shot guns to Ford F150s to Budweiser.

reply to post by chrismarco

I agree..I think our military could rely less on physical strength if we actually employed the might of our military which includes all the fancy gadgets....as long was we have politicians who prefer to occupy rather than get in and get out we need the frontline combat troops or boots on the ground..

Well seems to me the issue then isn't women in the front lines so much as TPTB making those choices to begin with

Still, I think we will find technology will replace more and more tasks and necessity for physical strength as time goes on, and thus render these arguments moot. For better or for worse.

chrismarco
reply to post by pronto

 

I am a civilian and I regrettably did not serve...I understand you point completely and I don't disagree with your statement minus the scent of ones menstruation but we can agree to disagree on that one.

The reality is the world has changed and we must face facts that women are now part of the fabric of war...the real question is where do they belong?

If a women could hump the same amount of weight as you did back then would they be a good candidate for the battlefield?

Thanks for your service my friend...

G,day mate. yes the world has indeed changed, and not for the better. If more blokes had more than lemonade running through their veins we would not be having this convo.
then again we need to wake up to the fact that we, yes even my mates who came home in boxes and your kith and kin who came home the same way were used abused and cast aside.
there is no frgigin way that a bloke should allow a sheila/wench/chick/bird/female. pause, deep breath. steady mate, not to deep you might blow a fuze. mate u gotta love red hair. sorry i digress.
there is no way we should allow or condone our women doing that which we blokes should be doing

Lucid Lunacy

and not menstrate in the bush which by the way does leave a scent.

I am trying to imagine Charlie stopping dead in his tracks mid pursuit with a *sniff* "I smell human. Female human. The enemy is near."…

edit on 3-1-2014 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)

Mate you are a civvie. prob been nowhere and done nothing i will leave it there.
but on a personal note is that lager/draught or bitter your pix is holding.
why.
if its a YANK lager your stuffed mate. if it is either of the other two and it is less than 7 % its swamp water.
BUT, if yer holding a canadian larger or a kokanee, there will be peace

AliceBleachWhite

More than half of soldiers can't give birth, so, since they can't give life, how can we expect them to take life?

Yup.

Strength training can mitigate this and anyone that can't do 3 pull-ups can work at it and eventually be able to do 10, 20, 30, or however many is required as per how it is with situps, pushups, or any exercise.

AHahhaha! Nice one Alice

Thread = owned.

I don't like the blanket philosophy here, Sure some women can't do three but I'm sure there are many many that can do fifty.

reply to post by pronto

Mate you are a civvie. prob been nowhere and done nothing i will leave it there

If by that you mean a civilian life is of no importance then I wonder what you're actually fighting for. You're right probably best we leave it there.

Are you sure you didn't infer more out of my post than you should have? I isolated one small aspect of your post and you assumed I was antagonistic to the whole of it? I gave no reason to think that. The idea of Charlie smelling female menstruation in the battlefield makes me envision an elven ranger in a forest taking a big whiff and yelling there are orcs nearby. In other words I think that part of your post is fantastical. If me calling that out makes me a worthless civilian in your eyes so be it.