Women in Australian Defence Forces front line?
 

"Women would be able to serve in frontline combat units including the SAS and commando units, under a controversial Australian Government plan" - A push by Defence Personnel and Science Minister Greg Combet would remove gender as a criterion for selection for specialised categories of military service.

There's a lot of debate about this in Australia at the moment, and I'm wondering what the situation is in other countries, and particularly if anyone here has any practical experience and observations of women in the front line.

I spent some time in the Australian Army in the early 1970's, and I'm of the old-fashioned opinion that gender equality theory has no place at the pointy end of things, but I'd be prepared to change that view if there were evidence to the contrary.

Any views?

If the girls can pass Selection for the SAS and satisfactorily complete the subsequent twelve months of training, ('chop' a possibility at any time), then they have probably earned their right to be there.

It has been said that it is far more distressing for a male to see the blown to pieces body of his female counterpart than the male.

My wife is an aussie, and she would probably scare the crap out of the Taliban, especially if they said they would be home at 4.30 sober, and came home at midnight slightly worse for wear and smelling of tequila.

As western women have been so professionalised and liberated already such that no western culture is replacing its population by a long way, I suppose there's no harm in the last generations experimenting in equality in this last taboo area.:bored:
It would also save an arms race – in a total war, you can increase the lethality of your munitions simply by conning your enemy to put their women in the firing line (a woman can have several children).
But what about the negative effect on the male warrior's macho drive? - impressing and protecting females? What's it all for?:confused:
What about women's rights to be supported in their role as mothers and wives? We have had several decades of spin that they do not have to do the traditional wife thing with the result that so many men cannot aspire to a long term stable family life and western Europeans are in a mode of auto genocide. The current scene of western men trotting off to Asia for a partner does not have quite the same romantic/noble air as the Romans and the Sabine women
What about using the armed services to change the regime that has destroyed our culture in the last 60 years?:E
How much longer do we have to tolerate political correctness castrating us? - we should protest long and loud that putting our women in the front line is going too far.:=

As long as me tea's on t' table when I gets in at 'alf past six...:E

only cos you cannie cook Sgt Slabber

But once a company of fighting Amozan's are sync'd up on their monthly cycle and then put into battle for 4-5 days per month, they will challange the '300' for fighting abilty.

I wouldn't argue with them...would you :)

Walter K., if this was a formal debate, I believe the other side would have a hard time shooting your argument down (unless, of course, P.C. 'rools' applied, where contrary views such as yours are not allowed).

Leaving the military argument aside for one moment, the fact is, over the last forty years, we, so-called 'civilised, (and we think) smarter than those other "less advanced" cultures') in the West have been merrily aborting ourselves into (not so long term) oblivion.

Our one-person-one-vote democracy will bite us severely in our collective (and no longer quite so numerous) bums in the not too distant future when those other cultures that we have weclomed into our midst but not assimilated become large enough to vote us onto the proverbial back benches. As some will know, it's happened already in some areas.

Women @ War
 

I seem to remember war being a fairly physical affair. So if women are now 'equal' in the eyes of the PC Brigade can we do away with Women's Categories in Tennis, Athletics, Golf etc?

Of course not, we can be equal without being identical; but this doesn't suit the Loonies.

mrmrsmith,

Did I say I could?

Limit of my koookin' ability is:

1. Open 8 Man compo box
2. Select 3 tins at random
3. Open tins, decant contents into mess tin, large
4. Stir
5. If heat source available, heat to taste, scoff
6. If no heat source available, scoff as is
7. Enjoy...

Back to thread: Women in Australian Defence Forces front line? As has already been written here, if they pass the test, do the job, etc., why not? The UK has put a number of women in "frontline" posts in the 'stan - see Michael Yon's blog "Precision Voting". Okay, so they are not in "Front Line Combat Units", but thay are ine the "Frontline" and I don't think they could get closer to combat if they tried. As Michael writes...

Precision Voting

RJM

You seem to have concerns about (your words) women 'at the pointy end of things' You need to be clear about what 'combat arms' you are refering to. For combat arms read 'to close with and destroy the enemy' and its generaly taken to be those whose weapons are 'direct fire' rather than 'indirect fire'

As this is an aviators forum, I'm guessing here, but you are alluding to female pilots. There are FW and Rotary Wing pilots in the RAF. To my knowledge in FW across a broad range of aircraft incl pointy things. In the AAC there are quite a few female RW pilots including on Apache and it doesn't get more 'sharp' than that. For the FAA I believe they also have RW female aircrew as well.

I have trained female aircrew and they are just as good if not, on some occasions , better than their male counterpart. So nothing to be drawn from that. If they make the grade they are in.

Check with Isrealis DF views they have expirience of how men react to wounded females.

LB

I'm a big guy, but I still know there are women out there that can kick my heiny.
Who here could beat the Williams sisters on the tennis court? Or some pro boxers, weightlifters, or pretty much any pro athletes at their game?

Female combatants are just as worthy/lethal, if they meet the same criteria, and should be allowed to give it their best.

Women can operate on equal terms. However, when they bear children they can still do it but they have to find themselves someone to raise their children for them - nanny, husband, extended family, wife - growing children generates a chemical, emotional and hormonal impact on a women in a way that it can't possibly on a man as they don't grow the child within their being. It takes a certain type of warrior women to walk away from her child and go into battle to face death. I am not saying it can't happen or that it won't but this is the reality and it raises questions about the role of women in the military and in society. Currently our society is not set up for that level of equality - families are disenfranchised due to mobility so children are not surrounded by extended families and raised by their grandparents like they could be in the past, husbands also have careers and don't often want to make the sacrifice of being primary carer and 24x7 365 days a year childcare is expensive and means to some extent control has to be relinquished with regards to how the child is nurtured.

In the phillipines women often leave their children to be raised by their grandparents while they work overseas housemaiding and sending money back to their families to raise them. But this is part of their culture and it is the norm. I was raised by my grandparents while my parents worked but neiher of my in-laws would take my kids on for 6 months so that me and the missus could go into combat.

Often it's not about equality - it's about practicality. They day will come, once the solution has been found that is cost effective and workable. At the end of the day, if they are up to the job and they need the money women will find a way. They are resourceful like that.

Ostralia,Ostralia we luv you
 

You said,

"I'd be prepared to change that view if there were evidence to the contrary".:ugh:

In response to an idea from a politician..........

A push by Defence Personnel and Science Minister Greg Combet would remove gender as a criterion for selection for specialised categories of military service.:=


In answer to your quesion,.......... no you wouldn't, now go away:mad:.................and a reply from the front bench opposition spokesman said to Greg, you're A Pillock mate!.............whilst others in the landownunder said............but it's Ostralian to be able to give people the idea that we can all do anything we want to cos that's our right................or was that Monty Python!............both of which are living in fantasy land. :confused:

dumdedumdedumdedumdumdedumdedumdum,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Wow, what an act to follow.. :ooh:
When I joined the RAAF, women were not allowed to train as military pilots.
A few years later that all changed, and as Low Ball said they're doing just fine. I have flown with/trained (and on occasion suspended from training) female pilots and surprise, surprise - not much different to the blokes.:hmm:
However what was "surprising" to the politicians, feminazis and other sundry members of the Loony Left was that there was not the flood of female applicants for pilots course. From memory there were four on the first course that allowed female trainees, and I'm pretty sure there has never been more than that on a course.
Can it be..just maybe...perhaps, that being a military aviator doesn't appeal to females as much as it does to males? I'm pretty sure the same applies to submariners (wierd bunch:eek:), special forces, infantry etc. Somehow I can't see masses of female applicants wanting to join the ranks of the SAS, Commandos, ADF flying units, submariners etc.
So what is Combet the Commo's agenda? Is his focus the enhancement of the ADF's operational effectiveness, or just another cynical attempt to curry favour with the female demographic?
I have no problem with women is the ADF. My concern is that once again this issue is being used as political football without proper regard to the effect it may have on our operational effectiveness.

I suspect Greg Combet's agenda is simply to boost the number of first year ADF recruits before the next federal election.

Low Ball, I was being a bit sloppy. My time in the ADF was in the infantry 1971 - 1973 and I was thinking of the army in this instance.

By 'pointy end' I really meant physical combat rather than the pointy end of an aircraft. I have no air force experience, btw, only a PPL, and I have no objections to women flying combat missions.

I suppose on reflection that a strong, fit woman could have completed the infantry training we did, and I read about a lady A10 pilot who for a while was the most effective US pilot in Iraq.

I'm wondering, though, whether having women under direct fire would, regardless of the woman's skills effectively increase the lethality of the enemy's munitions, because a woman can bear more than one child.

Why is this an issue?

How many women did the Russians have on the front line in WWII?

Boadicea / Boudicca knocked seven bells out of how many of the roman legions?


So women have an established history of fighting on the front line for a good few years & have you ever seen someone stupid enough to intervene in a fight between two women? Who comes off worst?


Women have fought for equality for many years & I am a firm believer in their right to it. However, it also means you have to take the sh1tty end of the stick as well as any of the perceived benefits, so there should be no bar whatsoever to women in ANY combat position. Every serviceman & servicewoman knows the risks when they sign on the dotted line and as I recall, most of the time there's a clause about obeying lawful order even to the cost of their own lives, so being blunt the wrost that you can have happen to you is spelt out at the start before you join & you shouldn't join if you can't handle that.

Can anyone shed any light on a rumour I heard that the Mil were looking at putting a kid into foster care :eek: so they could send the mother on an out of area? I guess she has nobody to look after the child for her eg. husband/parents.

I've got no problem with this as long as the standard stays the same!!

Some may disagree with me but in the RAAF's experience it has, despite the best efforts of the social engineering of the politicians and some senior officers who pander to it.
I agree - they can panel as many females as they want. As long as they achieve the required standard, good on 'em!