View Full Version : They're going to let women try out for BUD/S in 2016
I came across this on another board and thought it would be relevant to share and post this article on this board.
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/jun/17/Pentagon-women-combat-seals-riverine/
Personally I don't think it is the place of women to be in SOF outfits be it the SEALs, Rangers, etc.
If they were going to do this, they should have segregated units--but at the end of the day, what is the whole point? This all sounds like more PC political BS to me.
Honestly being one for equality I'm all for it.
So long as the standards are identical. Qualified SOF candidates don't grow on trees so if we can get a few more and they simply come with tits, I'm fine with it.
Again..."so long as the standards are identical."
Honestly being one for equality I'm all for it.
So long as the standards are identical. Qualified SOF candidates don't grow on trees so if we can get a few more and they simply come with tits, I'm fine with it.
Again..."so long as the standards are identical."
x a million. You make the grade or you don't.
"so long as the standards are identical."
but they won't. they aren't in a single other area in the military physically. it won't be for SOF,
Alpha Sierra
06-18-13, 04:27
Again..."so long as the standards are identical."
They won't be. They never have been and never will be so long as feminists have the ear of someone in congress.
Guess we'll find out in 2016. I don't think anything will come of it, suffice it to say that I think everyone can agree that BUD/S is far more difficult than this:
Women fail Marine IOC.....again (http://sofrep.com/18946/women-fail-marine-infantry-officer-course-again/)
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-18-13, 07:00
http://youtu.be/A8I9pYCl9AQ
Replace Super with special and I think you get the real issue at play here.
Failure2Stop
06-18-13, 07:05
It isn't a matter of physical aptitude or emotional robustness that puts me in the "against" category.
As the Israelis say, "Men and women stay too warm together". The bullshit that brings is phenomenally destructive to the effected unit.
Segregated units would have to be implemented. To believe that human nature will dissolve in the face of political agenda is laughable.
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
The_War_Wagon
06-18-13, 07:12
Huh... it's not April 1! :haha:
women can't carry heavy things far..
a simple matter of body weight, chemical structure, and joint / bone strength..
I guess the answer is to eliminate all federal funding and requirements for title 9 college sports.. Uni-gender sports should be the norm. The best player plays.. I mean it's an even playing field right?
The are extraordinary women doing special things for national security. Kicking in a door, physically pummeling down opposition and implementing violence for the state isn't one of those skill sets.
Voodoochild
06-18-13, 07:48
Well I look at it like this Women haven't been able to pass the Marine Corps IOC so what makes them think that Women will be able to pass BUD/S? I mean hey best of luck but I don't see it ending well.
Army Chief
06-18-13, 07:58
Time for me to retire.
AC
No one should tell them they can't but they shouldn't ;)
I'm a Father of 3 Girls and can't get behind this and if held to the same standard there is no way I see one making it.
Honestly being one for equality I'm all for it.
So long as the standards are identical. Qualified SOF candidates don't grow on trees so if we can get a few more and they simply come with tits, I'm fine with it.
Again..."so long as the standards are identical."
Its my understanding that the Navy has plenty of SEAL applicants at the moment and is turning away plenty of people every month.
VooDoo6Actual
06-18-13, 08:23
Won't be same standard.
People need to wake up & recognize the totality of all this.
NCPatrolAR
06-18-13, 08:32
I thought a woman had already completed BUD/S
They won't be. They never have been and never will be so long as feminists have the ear of someone in congress.Then we need to start doing a better job of competing politically. If feminists are beating us we're doing something wrong.
Its probably also worth noting that while this seems to be the direction of the current political landscape, this is still a rumor. The article indicates it was supposed to be announced yesterday by the Pentagon, but I haven't seen any announcement.
From the admittedly small amount I know of the current Naval SOF recruiting process, I would expect it to be one of the last elements to "fall" to political correctness.
When are the Olympics going to become gender neutral?
Forget the SEALs, Rangers, and SF the regular Infantry breaks young men and sends them home.
Now take a few aggressive females and add them to an Infantry company, and have you increased, decreased, or is the combat readiness neutral? As much as we want them to be professional they are still young people with young emotions.
"so long as the standards are identical."
but they won't. they aren't in a single other area in the military physically. it won't be for SOF,
In 1999 I was the XO for the Bradley Leaders Course. Engineer branch called us up and asked if they could send female LTs to the course. We said sure but they have to pass the BGST. When learning and practicing for the Bradley Gunner Skills Test you spend hours each day manipulating the 90 lbs receiver while sitting in the gunner's seat. It's all shoulders and arms. They didn't send any.
I came across this on another board and thought it would be relevant to share and post this article on this board.
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/jun/17/Pentagon-women-combat-seals-riverine/
Personally I don't think it is the place of women to be in SOF outfits be it the SEALs, Rangers, etc.
If they were going to do this, they should have segregated units--but at the end of the day, what is the whole point? This all sounds like more PC political BS to me.
Didn't they allow some women to attempt Ranger school and none past? I'm having deja vu here for some reason.
I thought a woman had already completed BUD/S
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTrsk5dGfFD1SjKQllVQaLroSkCSDZOBSNEuGNTDAhicbrh6bHs
On women as SEAL's...
"They would train and fight together and you better get the **** out of their way." - Brandon Webb
Really?
Alpha Sierra
06-18-13, 09:54
Then we need to start doing a better job of competing politically. If feminists are beating us we're doing something wrong.
Radical feminazis have been at it for a looooong time.
What happens after the 1st "sexual harassment" charges because some instructor talked harshly to them on the course?
I don't see anything but :rolleyes: from this.
NCPatrolAR
06-18-13, 10:21
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTrsk5dGfFD1SjKQllVQaLroSkCSDZOBSNEuGNTDAhicbrh6bHs
Not thinking Demi, but Warrior Princess
Color me unimpressed. Another attempt to hammer a square peg in a round hole.
.46caliber
06-18-13, 10:38
What would the pinning ceremony be like?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Radical feminazis have been at it for a looooong time.No reason for us to quit before even starting. Europe in 1944 had been occupied for a few years, so did we turn away?
Not thinking Demi, but Warrior Princess
Ha! Forgot about her....
Does that count if it was intact when going through BUD/S?
NCPatrolAR
06-18-13, 11:15
Its what's inside that matters
Again..."so long as the standards are identical."
Standards only become identical after being watered down to the lowest common denominator. We have seen this for decades in the civilian sector.
Its what's inside that matters
So how soon until the discussion that only transgendered men can be successful women in the SEALs?
Women wont be able to handle regular infantry work let alone Ranger School or BUD/S. They are just to small physically and their bodies are built weaker than a mans.
There probably are a very small percentage of women who could make the cut and do the job. But what benefit does weeding through all the others get us? How does adding women to combat arms units make us a better fighting force?
We don't let people in the military who have physical characteristics that MIGHT cause problems (ie flat foot) but we are going to allow women into a field where we know 95% or more are not going to make it and that ones that do are not going to excel.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
06-18-13, 12:24
I did MWTC Bridgeport in 09, maybe 2010. We had three wooks tag along with us. Small humps of 3-5 miles in rough terrain became 8-9 hour humps. Long humps meant we were carrying their packs in the trucks and eventually they were riding shotgun in one of the trucks with a relieved look on their face. That solved that debate for me.
Also, what makes ANYONE think that if the best of the best wooks cant even stick it out in IOC, then they surely can become SEALs?
Aside from the obvious physical deficiencies and the possible watering down of standards (which would be the worst outcome of this, IMO), my thoughts are that every woman that gets a slot for BUD/S, is one less slot for an able-bodied male that has a better shot at making it.
Time for me to retire.
AC
I did...
When has the elected government LET the standards remain? So far, IOC has, but the PC debate over that is just beginning...
Guns-up.50
06-18-13, 13:20
The problem with the "equal standards" is they don't compare physical ability to physical duty. So there may be many "qualified" but still are unable to preform the functions of the operator. The standards imply that a female will be less likely to engage in a physical fight or duties. Man or women it takes a certain strength, its not a sexist thing for me I think weak men should still be booted too. Hiking up a hill the incline wont change just because one is a women. Introduce weak links into a unit and expect a broken chain.
RogerinTPA
06-18-13, 13:31
I thought a woman had already completed BUD/S
That was a female intel captain back in the 70s who claims to be the first to complete the SF Q course...
http://www.armyparatrooper.org/dropzone/showthread.php/12785-The-quot-only-female-ever-to-earn-the-Green-Beret-quot
http://www.militarywoman.org/forums/showthread.php?15166-Capt.-Kathleen-Wilder-Female-Green-Beret&
Its my understanding that the Navy has plenty of SEAL applicants at the moment and is turning away plenty of people every month.
I'm not talking about people who apply, I'm talking about people who can complete the program.
I did MWTC Bridgeport in 09, maybe 2010. We had three wooks tag along with us. Small humps of 3-5 miles in rough terrain became 8-9 hour humps. Long humps meant we were carrying their packs in the trucks and eventually they were riding shotgun in one of the trucks with a relieved look on their face. That solved that debate for me.
Also, what makes ANYONE think that if the best of the best wooks cant even stick it out in IOC, then they surely can become SEALs?
Well said...
My question is: can it be un-done down the road? This is a goddamn abortion of epic proportions.
Alpha Sierra
06-18-13, 15:17
My question is: can it be un-done down the road? This is a goddamn abortion of epic proportions.
Have you ever seen any affirmative action undone? Ever?
There's your answer.
Magic_Salad0892
06-18-13, 16:54
I doubt the military will let this happen.
I doubt the military will let this happen.
You mean it's as absurd as promoting a radical muslim to the rank of Major and putting him in a position to tend to the psychological well being of US soldiers?
Magic_Salad0892
06-18-13, 17:30
You mean it's as absurd as promoting a radical muslim to the rank of Major and putting him in a position to tend to the psychological well being of US soldiers?
****. You got me.
Honestly being one for equality I'm all for it.
So long as the standards are identical. Qualified SOF candidates don't grow on trees so if we can get a few more and they simply come with tits, I'm fine with it.
Again..."so long as the standards are identical."
Don't you guys pay. attention! This has already been settled. GI Jane has been out for years. :lol:
While they may not make SEALS, Rangers, Delta or Force Recon they would/could train together and still be quite formidable - especially under cover operations where no one would suspect them.
I thought I read something like this exists. If not it should.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
SeriousStudent
06-18-13, 19:31
What military effectiveness is gained by this?
My God, this is like some bad cartoon from "Terminal Lance" or The Duffel Blog. :(
Alpha Sierra
06-18-13, 19:43
I doubt the military will let this happen.
The military does what it is told by civilians in government. Unfortunately.
In the end its not the gender, its whether the units will maintain their standards. The minute they start compromising in order to increase the female sucess rate is when the unit effectiveness will begin to decline.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
Moose-Knuckle
06-18-13, 20:19
I thought I read something like this exists.
I've heard through the secret squirrel vine that there are females within the ISA.
We have some Crossfit girls here in SD that could undoubtedly handle the physical side of BUD/S, but muscles and endurance aren't what get you through.
It's mental.
99% of men, much less women, aren't prepared for that. Hence the attrition rate just in first phase. There's two more phases after that and then SQT. It never lets up.
Bring on the ladies in 2016. We'll see who doesn't have quit in them.
GeorgiaBoy
06-18-13, 21:57
What military effectiveness is gained by this?
If the women that pass are just as capable, what military effectiveness would be lost?
As long as the standards are identical, go for it. I doubt any will make it.
Standards are standards. Nobody is going to give a rats ass if you're male or female when you're doing the types of jobs SEALS do....
SeriousStudent
06-18-13, 22:11
If the women that pass are just as capable, what military effectiveness would be lost?
Because there is a lot more to military effectiveness than the ability to pass BUD/S. And I am absolutely not denigrating in the slightest anyone that does.
Do you really, really think that it would be a good thing to stick women in infantry-style combat units right alongside men? I do not.
I was a Marine rifle squad leader. I am intimately familiar with the interaction of alpha males in that environment. They WILL NOT treat the women the same as they would treat another grunt. It will not happen.
My daughter is a Soldier. I encouraged her to join the military, and an extremely proud of her service.
But putting women into those environments makes no sense. If you think the military is about fairness and opportunity, I encourage you to spend an evening reading the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It's not a jobs program. It's about killing people and breaking stuff. This will not advance that goal.
I am aware there are female spooks. I know one. She is a very, very capable person. And she would be one of the first people to tell you that this is a really, really poor idea.
The military is not fair, it's not politically correct, and crap likes this gets people killed. And even worse than getting people killed, it gets them killed needlessly in a fashion that loses battles.
Omar Bradley said it it the job of the officer to be economical with his men's lives. He knew a bit about leadership and winning wars. This will cost lives, and not win wars.
And please, please, please do not say this is just like racism in the last century, because it's not.
If this crap happens, it will kill people. Needlessly.
Agree that it's fine so long as the standards are not compromised for the sake of the female gender. The rest doesn't matter. Pass the training and win in combat. Nothing wrong with this.
If the women that pass are just as capable, what military effectiveness would be lost?
As you are arguing from a feminist prospective...
Let's say the Army/Navy SOF programs uncover a few diamonds in the rough annually. Is it worth upsetting the apple cart just to prove to you and the other feminists that a few women could make it?
Heavy Metal
06-18-13, 22:36
If the women that pass are just as capable, what military effectiveness would be lost?
You might have a few who can squeak by but I bet they won't be just as capable for long.
If Uncle is going to spend a few million borrowed bucks making a SEAL, it should invest it in ones that are not highly prone to stress fractures.
What is rucking for months on end gonna do to even the above-average female? Trash her for life quite quickly I suppose.
RogerinTPA
06-18-13, 22:44
Agreed, however, according to several reports, the women trained by SF for the Cultural Support Teams are doing a tremendous job with the teams in the field and holding their own in gunfights. They go through quite a workup but, it is not the Q course. CSTs may be the only acceptable and credible alternative for women who want to go SOF, but fail to go, or get through, already established SOF training. I've had them in my classes at airborne and air assault schools back in the day and they did as good as the males, so I say give them a shot.
As you are arguing from a feminist prospective...
Let's say the Army/Navy SOF programs uncover a few diamonds in the rough annually. Is it worth upsetting the apple cart just to prove to you and the other feminists that a few women could make it?
You might have a few who can squeak by but I bet they won't be just as capable for long.
If Uncle is going to spend a few million borrowed bucks making a SEAL, it should invest it in ones that are not highly prone to stress fractures.
What is rucking for months on end gonna do to even the above-average female? Trash her for life quite quickly I suppose.
That training screws most people up physically. If that's the soldiers choice so be it. If they can do it god bless em.
In the long run its the mental makeup of the soldier that makes the final product the physical is a close second. I just don't see a lot of females making it. They (for the most part) just think differently than men, and there are very few men who make the cut.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
Heavy Metal
06-18-13, 22:49
It may be the Solider's/Sailor's choice but we are the ones who have to make the disability payments for the rest of their life.
It isn't just possible they are gonna screw themselves up, it is more likely than not.
There is a reason you don't find women in the NFL or Professional Boxing.
A silly PC idea that does nothing to increase the effectiveness of our elite combat units.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
06-18-13, 23:58
If the women that pass are just as capable, what military effectiveness would be lost?
You weren't in the military right? If I am wrong, mea culpa.
Can you give me some of your first hand accounts of women in the military? Can you please let me know of situations in the military during heavy combat and horrible conditions where the presence of a female would have improved the conditions?
Life with military men, especially grunts, and even more so with elite units is different than life is in Womens Studies class, no matter how many feminists and feminist supporters want to claim it isnt. Those without the EXPERIENCE AND FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE frankly do not know shit.
MountainRaven
06-19-13, 00:35
The military does what it is told by civilians in government. Fortunately.
Fixed.
You do not want it the other way around.
Omar Bradley said it it the job of the officer to be economical with his men's lives. He knew a bit about leadership and winning wars. This will cost lives, and not win wars.
What does what Omar Bradley said about an officer's job have to do with the socio-economic impact of cannibalism in the northern Gobi desert?
And please, please, please do not say this is just like racism in the last century, because it's not.
If this crap happens, it will kill people. Needlessly.
How? In what way?
How is this different than what was said about white men taking orders from black officers? From what was said about how white NCOs and officers might treat black enlisted men differently than white enlisted men?
You weren't in the military right? If I am wrong, mea culpa.
Can you give me some of your first hand accounts of women in the military? Can you please let me know of situations in the military during heavy combat and horrible conditions where the presence of a female would have improved the conditions?
Life with military men, especially grunts, and even more so with elite units is different than life is in Womens Studies class, no matter how many feminists and feminist supporters want to claim it isnt. Those without the EXPERIENCE AND FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE frankly do not know shit.
Ever serve with women who passed BUD/S? Who were Navy SEALS?
No?
What was it you were saying about experience and first hand knowledge?
---
My two cents: If a woman can make it, let her make it. Odds are so few will get through that it will be a couple of trial cases at best, at which point in time we will be able to gather evidence regarding the impact of female SOF personnel on the operational readiness and capabilities of the units they are part of.
Everything else is just speculation.
Agreed, however, according to several reports, the women trained by SF for the Cultural Support Teams are doing a tremendous job with the teams in the field and holding their own in gunfights. They go through quite a workup but, it is not the Q course. CSTs may be the only acceptable and credible alternative for women who want to go SOF, but fail to go, or get through, already established SOF training. I've had them in my classes at airborne and air assault schools back in the day and they did as good as the males, so I say give them a shot.
Your argument is entirely disingenuous. A CST member is no more an operator than a truck driver or cook assigned to the same unit.
NCPatrolAR
06-19-13, 07:55
Before this begins a downward spiral; lets not turn on each other and start degrading each other's service time.
Fixed.
You do not want it the other way around.
Certainly not, but I want the civilian leadership to give missions, constraints and a budget to the military, not ****ing micro-managing shit like this. It almost always results in the degradation of combat effectiveness and has a serious potential to cost lives.
RogerinTPA
06-19-13, 13:14
Your argument is entirely disingenuous. A CST member is no more an operator than a truck driver or cook assigned to the same unit.
Your statement is disingenuous as it serves nothing more than to 'flick shit' at something you don't understand or what I actually said.
I never said a CST member was an operator, merely relating anecdotal accounts on how they performed in the field and listed them as an alternative career path. You read way too much into it.
Your statement is disingenuous as it serves nothing more than to 'flick shit' at something you don't understand or what I actually said.
I never said a CST member was an operator, merely relating anecdotal accounts on how they performed in the field and listed them as an alternative career path. You read way too much into it.
I'll just agree to disagree. NCPatrolAR redacted my post which would have certainly made it clear that I understand the subject at hand and more importantly you all to well.
In hind sight, I'm glad he did. Back to why women in combat is a bad idea...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.