Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Greater equality or papering over the cracks?

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Greater equality or papering over the cracks?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 11:49
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Location: Location!
Posts: 2,300
Received 35 Likes on 27 Posts
I often think that those of us who volunteered for "technical" arms like RAF aircrew or the Navy had this subconscious, ulterior motive - we were quite ready to die ourselves, but preferred to do our slaughter at a distance, where we didn't have to see the grim results or hear the screams of the dying. Put bluntly, there's something inherently wrong with asking a woman (however much of an Amazon she may be) to do this. And a nation which needs to ask it is not much of a nation in my book. Fuddy-duddy I may be, but that's the way I see it. - Danny

I am on exactly the same wavelength as Danny, to whom along with the many other sterling contributors to this wonderful thread, I wish a very happy Christmas and an even better New Year.

Jack
Union Jack is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 11:55
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
" there's something inherently wrong with asking a woman (however much of an Amazon she may be) to do this."

that is a judgement YOU are making without asking the lady (or ladies) if they agree

I'd give you credit and say you were being gallant but some of the ladies would definitely say you were being sexist, misogynist and patronising

Placing the female sex on a pedestal is very Victorian but the world has moved on - they are capable of making up their own minds and deciding what they want to do - this is the 21st Century not the 19th.....
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 12:34
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Far North of Watford
Age: 82
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Any talk of equal opportunities in support of this proposal is criminally misguided. Serving in the Armed Forces is not a commercial employment. The Armed Forces exist to secure our national interests through the threat and, when required, delivery of state violence. Proportionality is necessary for reasons of finance, social acceptability and economy of resources. However, the aim is to defeat any threat. Any dilution of capability puts that aim, and those trying to achieve it, at risk.
Though emotionally I find the idea of a female killing in close quarter combat repulsive, I will concede that this may be an old fashioned and now socially irrelevant view.
If our nation wishes to permit our females the opportunity to serve in infantry and other combat arms, so be it. HOWEVER, any downgrading of physical and mental standards to permit them to do so is criminally irresponsible. Set the standards required for a soldier. Only anyone who can meet those standards is acceptable.
Genstabler is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 12:44
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 509
Received 21 Likes on 6 Posts
Nicely put Genstabler, in order to maintain the current ban on women serving in infantry units the Armed Forces must show that there would be a degredation of operational capability. Some of the points made elsewhere in this thread are subjective but the fitness test is absolute, therefore must be gender neutral- no ifs or buts and no change to allow more women to pass. If they want to join the infantry then they do exactly what the men do, if they can't crack it they get removed just like a man would.

Melchett good idea about the current test but why not remove the age difference as well?
vascodegama is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 13:12
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dead Dog Land
Age: 77
Posts: 531
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
According to Arrse, the IDF tried femail infantry some years ago and collected data on all aspects of their findings, maybe someone ought to take a look at what they found.
The Oberon is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 13:15
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in my combat underpants
Age: 53
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
1. Would the RAF want its jets serviced by someone who could pass a screwdriver turning tick test, but who had cognitive skills when it came to understanding the servicing manual or putting together complex engineering solutions?
What are you on about? The Armed Forces sets it's entry requirements for each Trade and Branch, then tests and trains accordingly. I don't care what gender anyone is if they can pass the requisite tests. We're not talking about allowing simians to serve, we're talking about human beings. I'd not want an infanteer fixing a jet but that has nothing to do with anything.

2. Have you considered the additional ingrained decision making pressures on local commanders when working out their combat appreciations, if women were also factored in and involved? Please evidence either way.
They have been doing this for the last decade in Iraq and Afghanistan and those local commanders have coped with both girls and boys. If you want to discuss pressures upon local commanders, then look at the complexity of non-integrated systems and sensors and their effect upon decision-making. THEN you might begin to understand the context and how low down the thought process gender is.


3. Have you considered the impact on our men when coerced as prisoners, faced with the threat of mutilating or beheading a female prisoner if they failed to co-operate? Once again, please evidence.
No difference whether it would be male or female. Formed units are cohesive because of the camaraderie. Your rather disturbing female mutilation scenario would be equally distressing it it were your best mate.


4. How will you address the emotional dynamic of the team set up deployed and ensure that the undeniably carnal desires of young, fit people don't upset the apple cart.

Don't judge all people by your standards. All other mixed gender teams in the Forces cope with such 'desires' and they get along. You do know that women serve in the RAF these days don't you? We don't deploy the WRAF to a nearby base then ship the ladies in under the supervision of a matronly WRAF WO so they can work near 'the boys'.
Mr C Hinecap is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 14:00
  #87 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 80
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Mr C Hinecap
. All other mixed gender teams in the Forces cope with such 'desires' and they get along.
Actually they often get along too well.

I know from experience that the pressures when people are thrown together in close proximity for months at a time can create bonds and break up marriages.

You mentioned "your best mate" such friendship will not usually cause the break up of a marriage back home. If that best mate is of the opposite sex, and succeed in keeping the relationship platonic, will the spouses left at home see it that way?
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 14:23
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in my combat underpants
Age: 53
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You mentioned "your best mate" such friendship will not usually cause the break up of a marriage back home.
Once again, you are ignoring all the other military units that deploy. Aircraft squadrons have female aircrew, engineers, admin. 90SU have women, RLC have female drivers, medical teams etc etc. Somehow, these units manage to get along, they are mixed gender and I doubt they have divorce rates any worse than an average infantry unit.
Mr C Hinecap is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 14:35
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: 59°45'36N 10°27'59E
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On the subject of sexual tension etc: UNISEX ROOMS MADE GENDER INSIGNIFICANT
M609 is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 14:59
  #90 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 80
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
M609, interesting. Back in the. 80s, on the premise as exercise as you would in war, our stn cdr decreed that dormitories in the HPS would be unisex with toilets used on a programmed basis. It worked even if only for a few days until the queen bee declared that "her" gels had to be accommodated separately.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 17:25
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
'Once again, you are ignoring all the other military units that deploy. Aircraft squadrons have female aircrew, engineers, admin. 90SU have women, RLC have female drivers, medical teams etc etc. Somehow, these units manage to get along, they are mixed gender and I doubt they have divorce rates any worse than an average infantry unit.'

...none of which had the job of closing and engaging with the enemy.

This debate has had some excellent points made in it - none from Chinstrap.
gijoe is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 17:39
  #92 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 80
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Mr CH, apologies, I see your point now, divorce rates would be the same between reactive duty and proactive duty personnel.

I suspect the close quarter stress levels might result in even greater for infantry.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2014, 17:55
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 2,449
Received 72 Likes on 33 Posts
I believe Fallon recently said something to the effect that the ..Armed Forces should reflect the society they serve....

On that basis one can only presume that the profile of the UK Armed Forces will in future be recruited/trained to achieve:

16% of personnel (rising to 32% by 2050) to be over 65.
64% of personnel (rising to ??? by ???) to be overweight.
23% of personnel (rising to ??? by ???) to be obese.

How about an aspiration that the Armed Forces of the UK should represent the very best of the society they serve....?
Biggus is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2014, 00:11
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Darling - where are we?
Posts: 2,580
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
How about an aspiration that the Armed Forces of the UK should represent the very best of the society they serve....?
Don't be so silly Biggus. Such an idea would never be permitted - smacks of elitism and goes wholly against the concepts of mediocrity we now strive for in order to be fully inclusive.
Melchett01 is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2014, 06:28
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 76
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Melchett,
Please don't try to talk our 'inclusive' society up.

Try - "Lowest Common Denominator".
Stanwell is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2014, 10:48
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"HOWEVER, any downgrading of physical and mental standards to permit them to do so is criminally irresponsible."

I have a funny feeling women might come low on the physical tests but outperform the blokes on the mental tests.................

in which case presumably they'd be the officers and the blokes could continue as the PBI
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2014, 12:37
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Far North of Watford
Age: 82
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Careful Harry! You are letting your chip show again.
Genstabler is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2014, 20:35
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 256
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
gijoe:
...none of which had the job of closing and engaging with the enemy.
This debate has had some excellent points made in it - none from Chinstrap.
The point you are replying to was about divorce rates in mixed units. Nothing specifically to do with "the job of closing and engaging with the enemy".
baffman is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2014, 13:33
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 44
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is if the bloke next to you in the PB is too busy thinking about his failing marriage to concentrate on his job.
Skymong is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2014, 20:12
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 256
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is if the bloke next to you in the PB is too busy thinking about his failing marriage to concentrate on his job.
Regrettably the current all-male infantry has no immunity to failing marriage.
baffman is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.