Are We the American People Prepared for This(Non Election) I am NOT!

[Felix The Assassin]

Physical abilities = physical limitations. In PT shorts, and T-shirt, I tip the scales at 245Lbs. Once the tape-test is complte my Army BFI = 14.5%.

In full battle rattle, my total combat weight then becomes 338lbs.
38lbs = IBA/ Uniform (body armor)
28lbs = New Ruck (back pack) system
6lbs = M4 w/30 rd magazine
15lbs = LBV (Load Bearing Vest) Not on IBA (Ammo, H2O etc)
6lbs = Helmet

IBA range in weight from 18-24lbs
Basic load on back pack 22-30lbs
Weapon M4 = just under 7, M16 almost 10lbs
I prefer the LBV over the IBA, some attach the qucik clips to their IBA, basic load 180 rds, 2qts water, 1st aid kit, bayonet etc.
Kevlar new style = 6, old school = 8.

Now, one set fits all, for Small soldiers add 85 lbs, Medium add 87lbs, Large add 90, and XL+ add 93-95. Ok, so you take the back pack off - 28lbs. Think of still wearing 50+lbs of gear on ones body, think of reaction time, and impaired movement.

Consider the physical difference. The Army has changed Basic over the past months to prepare new recruits to fill directly into combat ready units. No longer can little Johnny pass the PT test at 2/3 standard. HOWEVER, the Female chart has yet to cahnge.
Lets use the entry 17-21 year olds.
Push-Up for PASS M=42 F=19 for MAX M=71 F=42
Sit-up for PASS M=53 F=53 for MAX M=78 F=78 No typo, equality.
2mile run PASS M=15:54 F=18:54 for MAX M=13:00 F=15:36.

We, as in the Armor Battalion, conducted an unsponsored test during gunnery a few years back. We invited any and all of the soldiers, and keyed towards female soldiers, to attempt tank crew operations simulating loading the main gun. We had quite a few show up, only 5 of the 27 soldiers could manage the task. Of the test personnel 12 were female 15 male. Of the 5 that could actually load the main gun 100% were male. The dummy round we use to train loaders with is 100% physically identical to the actual round it replicates. Except it is made of poly and not combustable cartridge. Anyhow, the task is to retrive the round from the ammo well, load it into the main gun, check the path of recoil, arm the gun, and announce UP. Now for tankers this is clocked for a maximum of 7 seconds, with seasoned loaders accomplishing the task in under 3 seconds. We did not hold time standards, just to see who could do it. A 120mm dummy round only weighs 52lbs for SABOT and 64lbs for HEAT. 5 of 15 males could actually accomplish the task. 0 of 12 females. Total of 5 for 27. Again there are no-longer any non-shooters! Right.

Mentality has been brought up. I have trained all of my military career to do nothing more than 'Put Steel on Target'. To Kill. To Destroy. To Conquer. To Annihilate the enemy. To push through the objective. To secure the far-side, re-organize, care for the wounded, call or conduct CASEVAC, and prepare for the counter attack. It's in my blood. It's instilled in my tank commanders, and pounded into all of my LTs!

Now, I can see enhancing the training for ALL NON-DIRECT COMBAT units, and turning them into shooters. The new remark is there are no longer non-shooters we are all shooters. There are no defined front lines. Then by all means get trained. Get hot, get prepared. Dish it out if you receive fire, just do it. Just don't think the mission is to difficult when you are called to the engagement area.

Now, lets discuss headline news. Are we the people prepared to see equality in the KIA listings? This is where my train of thought was heading, but after I've just bored you all into submission, the real question is can we handle HEADLINE NEWS?

[Djinn Raffo]

Originally posted by The Hierophant: True, but that is the male's problem, not the female's.

It's a problem that will cause mistakes though. Felix said he is not ready for it. Lucern said that "it would be disadvantageous to a unit if some guys don't think the women are capable or should be there at all". And he is right. If you have a combat unit made of predominantly men and several women the men would not be as effective because of the mental hurdle of being alongside women.

I'm not saying that it's wrong to have women in combat at all. Just that, exactly as Lucern stated, currently their would be a disadvantage to that unit because of the males attitudes towards those women. Disadvantage in combat situations is a bad thing.

And to take it further, I recall reading (maybe at this forum) about a situation that could occur with prisoners of war. You and your squadmate, a female, are captured and placed in seperate cells. The female is being raped in the next cell and you are aware of it from your own cell but are powerless to do anything to stop it. I imagine that the female would have the training to attempt to mentally deal with this as a possible consequence of her being a captured soldier. You the male in the cell would be the one having the breakdown.

But at any rate.. if females are eventually going to stand side by side with males on the battlefield then this will be a step in that direction. And I think is the males who will need more training that the females to get them over whatever mental barriers they have of serving in the frontlines together.

[aleph_null1]

Originally posted by Felix The Assassin: Physical abilities = physical limitations. In PT shorts, and T-shirt, I tip the scales at 245Lbs. Once the tape-test is complte my Army BFI = 14.5%. In full battle rattle, my total combat weight then becomes 338lbs.

Right, so there are obvious physical limitations -- gender independent -- that might keep one from performing certain jobs. I, for example, weigh all of 125 lbs, and could not carry nearly that sort of weight.

I can max any SEAL or Marine Corps PFT, however, with room to spare. Pushups / Situps 130+, Pullups 40+, Run / Swim times without worries. All because I've obviously got nothing to pull / push / kick around, and my heart's got an easy time of things. And I'm a smoker

The point is people -- not sexes -- are suited to different things. I've no doubt that our Women's Rugby team has some girls who could carry a wounded Felix off the battlefield without trouble

As for mental difficulties on the part of some guys, I'd say it's far past time them to either adapt or retire... and most of them would probably agree.

[Lucern]

Felix said:

Now, lets discuss headline news. Are we the people prepared to see equality in the KIA listings?

This is a valid point I think Felix. As a society, we do still treat women differently in a number of ways based solely on gender. Female criminals aren't likely to receive the death penalty or even comparable sentences than male criminals who did virtually the same thing. Then there are cases like the [highly embellished] Jessica Lynch ordeal, which wouldn't have been told the same if she was a he. As is, every KIA's pic is eventually shown on TV, and we're pretty sensitive to any KIAs (especially at the beginning of a conflict). It's pretty hard to see guys my age (22) and even younger on the screen without some sort of reaction deep down. Seeing women there would be very hard for some, even at the ratio of 17:100 that they represent. Obviously Felix (assuming he's not playing Devil's advocate) and others who aren't prepared to see them in that kind of combat aren't prepared for equal casualties either. As for myself, I can't say it bothers me much more than any other casualty, which is certainly not to say it wouldn't affect me.

Djinn Raffo said:

And to take it further, I recall reading (maybe at this forum) about a situation that could occur with prisoners of war. You and your squadmate, a female, are captured and placed in seperate cells. The female is being raped in the next cell and you are aware of it from your own cell but are powerless to do anything to stop it. I imagine that the female would have the training to attempt to mentally deal with this as a possible consequence of her being a captured soldier. You the male in the cell would be the one having the breakdown.

Possibly. I have the unfortunate distinction of knowing about torture and those who live through it from my work with a UN-funded non-profit (politically motivated torture, not POW torture). 90% of the organization's female clients were raped while confined, and about 25% of the males - often while family members were made to watch. I'll just suggest that IMO no training will prevent a breakdown for either squadmate, particularly the female one. Such is torture, and it's awful. I think you're on to something with the idea that there is more than just women in combat that many men aren't prepared for.

And from a gender studies POV, aleph_null1 is right that of course gender does not inherently limit a person. It's a biological factor, but not necessarily a blanket limitation you can cover all women with. Ask Virginia Woolf