RAF Regiment
 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...ntry-v5wbmlqxc

Women will be allowed to join the RAF Regiment, the air force’s infantry unit, from September, paving the way for the first female infantry troops in Britain to be deployed in the field next year. The defence secretary announced the lifting of the barrier yesterday. Sir Michael Fallon said that it was “a defining moment for the RAF as it becomes the first service to have every trade and branch open to both genders”.

About 11 women, a mix of serving staff and civilians, have expressed an interest in joining the 2,000-strong regiment, which is tasked with guarding airbases and aircraft around the world. The regiment was due to open recruitment to women by the end of next year, alongside the Infantry and Royal Marines, but a recent review of work practices found that in terms of risks it was closer to the Royal Armoured Corps, which is already admitting women to its training ranks.

The opening up of the RAF Regiment to women a year earlier than planned is part of a wider move to allow servicewomen to take part in ground close combat roles that was announced a year ago.

Air Chief Marshal Sir Stephen Hillier, chief of the air staff, said: “The RAF is committed to providing equal opportunity to all, so it’s fantastic to be able to open recruitment to the RAF Regiment to women ahead of schedule.”

Interesting that they say that potential female recruits will be treated exactly the same as men. Will that mean they have to pass the male version of the fitness test which I think is vital for a trade like the RAF Regiment.

RAF Regiment Fitness Tests
 

Yes, male and female officers and gunners will undergo the same tests. After a long and detailed study, the Regiment's fitness tests have been updated to more accurately reflect the demands of its operational tasks. (For example, the loads carried on operations are higher than in the past, despite everyone's best efforts to reduce them, so the new tests are likely to reflect this). This will ensure the tests are more likely to stand any legal challenge, should someone - male or female - fail a test and decide to take legal action over the fairness of that and the consequences.

Females still excluded from one branch - Catholic Priest!

I'll get my hat and coat!!!!!!

I guess they've got rid of Kennel Maids then?

Surprised nobody picked up on that gem. Any Rocks any good with a Guitar to take on James Blunt?

I thought they had been doing trials with a couple of transsexuals anyway?

Of course, this is old hat to some RAuxAF Sqns, who had gunners of the female persuasion over a decade ago...

I've never been in the least bit against women aircrew, in my limited experience they seem to make just as good pilots/WSOs as blokes. As an ex Rockape officer though I do admit to having qualms about this. There is no logical difference I suppose between a man or a woman sitting in an aircraft, pressing a button and sending either troops on the ground or enemy aircrew to oblivion, they end up dead either way. But we are talking here about getting up close and dirty and maybe having to stick a bayonet in your adversary. Am I wrong to think it's not the sort of thing we want women to be doing? Just cultural conditioning I suppose.

Cant have the 5 miler of Death watered down now can we.....

Tankertrash,

You miss the point.

"....not the sort of thing WE want women to be doing..."

Who is WE?

As a man you have no right to tell women what you think is right for them to do, or not to do. That's kind of been the point of sex discrimination legislation of at least the last 40 years...


You may not like the idea, but frankly it has nothing to do with you what a woman can and can't do.

I think we can all agree from the outset that the primary purpose of our Armed Forces is to fight and win our wars? They are not a vehicle for promoting gender equality or any other minority sexual agenda, whatever the merits of those causes.

In recent publicity announcing that, from September, women would be free to serve in the RAF Regiment, Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said “a diverse force is a more operationally effective force.” Coincidentally, in a separate statement, the Chief of the Air Staff eerily concluded that “a diverse force is a more effective force.” Neither of the top men offered any evidence to support their respective conclusions.

As a mere tax payer these days I warmly welcome this improvement in operational effectiveness – more bang for a buck as it were. On the other hand, I am also of a generation that occasionally shows some irritation towards the political correctness agenda. So, in a masterstroke of having cake and eating it, the MOD has gingered up the front line whilst simultaneously advancing the cause of gender equality. Brilliant, but what I find difficult to comprehend is why it has taken our Armed Forces so long to come to this conclusion?

I deplore the trend of putting our national breeding stock in harms way and much of the politically correct double-speak we increasingly hear.
Dinosaur? Me?

Yes I am unashamedly so!

TTN ... I shall be drinking with a serving lady wg cdr Nav tomorrow. I shall seek her perspective ;)


I will not impose my ancient views on this Forum.

Pr00ne
 

Quite frankly I don't care what you think either! You seem to be typical of the modern PC world where there is no longer freedom of speech.

Let me tell you a little story - I have a friend who used to be a crewman on RN 'Junglie' Sea Kings. On his first tour at sea on HMS Ocean it was an all male crew, then on his next tour ladies were now part of the crew. Separate sleeping and toilet/shower accommodation had to be provided, which meant less space for everyone.When it came to re-victualling at sea previously a line of matelots threw the sacks of spuds etc from one to another; once the ladies were part of the crew only about 2 of the complement of 50 were capable of doing the work. So much for equality!

On that basis I think it will be fine. I've seen plenty of females involved in some vicious CQB, usually on a Thursday night after NAAFI chucking out time. Frankly they were terrifying!

I checked with Miss PN as was. CFT was a team effort, they helped her and she didn't carry the 10 kg weight. She did get to do hand grenade practice, GMP, drive a Humvee and even a Bradley.

The live grenade practice was something else. Best not to drop it in your trench.

The Female of the Species

WHEN the Himalayan peasant meets the he-bear in his pride,
He shouts to scare the monster, who will often turn aside.
But the she-bear thus accosted rends the peasant tooth and nail.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

When Nag the basking cobra hears the careless foot of man,
He will sometimes wriggle sideways and avoid it if he can.
But his mate makes no such motion where she camps beside the trail.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

When the early Jesuit fathers preached to Hurons and Choctaws,
They prayed to be delivered from the vengeance of the squaws.
'Twas the women, not the warriors, turned those stark enthusiasts pale.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

Man's timid heart is bursting with the things he must not say,
For the Woman that God gave him isn't his to give away;
But when hunter meets with husbands, each confirms the other's tale—
The female of the species is more deadly than the male.

Man, a bear in most relations—worm and savage otherwise,—
Man propounds negotiations, Man accepts the compromise.
Very rarely will he squarely push the logic of a fact
To its ultimate conclusion in unmitigated act.

Fear, or foolishness, impels him, ere he lay the wicked low,
To concede some form of trial even to his fiercest foe.
Mirth obscene diverts his anger—Doubt and Pity oft perplex
Him in dealing with an issue—to the scandal of The Sex!

But the Woman that God gave him, every fibre of her frame
Proves her launched for one sole issue, armed and engined for the same;
And to serve that single issue, lest the generations fail,
The female of the species must be deadlier than the male.

She who faces Death by torture for each life beneath her breast
May not deal in doubt or pity—must not swerve for fact or jest.
These be purely male diversions—not in these her honour dwells—
She the Other Law we live by, is that Law and nothing else.

She can bring no more to living than the powers that make her great
As the Mother of the Infant and the Mistress of the Mate.
And when Babe and Man are lacking and she strides unclaimed to claim
Her right as femme (and baron), her equipment is the same.

She is wedded to convictions—in default of grosser ties;
Her contentions are her children, Heaven help him who denies!—
He will meet no suave discussion, but the instant, white-hot, wild,
Wakened female of the species warring as for spouse and child.

Unprovoked and awful charges—even so the she-bear fights,
Speech that drips, corrodes, and poisons—even so the cobra bites,
Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw
And the victim writhes in anguish—like the Jesuit with the squaw!

So it comes that Man, the coward, when he gathers to confer
With his fellow-braves in council, dare not leave a place for her
Where, at war with Life and Conscience, he uplifts his erring hands
To some God of Abstract Justice—which no woman understands.

And Man knows it! Knows, moreover, that the Woman that God gave him
Must command but may not govern—shall enthral but not enslave him.
And She knows, because She warns him, and Her instincts never fail,
That the Female of Her Species is more deadly than the Male.

Rudyard Kipling

Yes but when push comes to shove can a woman in a trench put a rifle bayonet in some crying conscripts guts and twist it ? If yes then ok carry on, if not then I'm afraid you're not what's required, some one who will kill the enemy.

Some appauling attitudes here from some I believe as gentlemen. The CQB and bayonet argument is quite simply laughable and maybe you should all go and dribble into your travel blanket with your cup of cocoa thinking of the good old days of Benny Hill and On the Buses. Have you not considered that the female aircrew may very well find themselves in a toe-to-toe fighting situation when their aircraft spears in and the locals aren't friendly? There have been some incredible stories of women under fire in Iraq and Afghanistan with medals for gallantry to back up their actions. Please keep your minds open or your sneering mysogeny to yourself.

For me it's quite simple, if the females pass the same selection then great. As long as there is no discrimination in the required standards as there is now, then everything is equal. See https://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediaf...2735D95037.doc
However, how can it be right that a peak of fitness female 17-29 has to reach broadly the same standard as a 50-54 male? This cannot be right and if the Chief and the SofS are really truthful about equality then either the female fitness scores need to rise to that of the males or the males need to drop to that of the females. Quite frankly the levels of fitness amongst some of the female and male cadre is poor and there are way too many with a sick-chit and "excused from games". I like to consider myself a feminist but the discrimination between male/female Service fitness requirements does the female's cause of equality no good whatsoever.

LJ

'There have been some incredible stories of women under fire in Iraq and Afghanistan with medals for gallantry to back up their actions. Please keep your minds open or your sneering mysogeny to yourself.'

The ones I can think of have been combat medics putting their lives at risk in the best traditions of the medical services for their teams.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...r-bravery.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...e-courage.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...n-bravery.html

If they were men they'd be described as having big brass ones, just don't know how you would describe the receipients here.

I think some of us are missing the point. The issue is not one of doubting efficacy of the servicewoman. Rather, would I, as a section commander, be skewed in my combat appreciation and as a consequence, not commit a female to the fray? Would I, if captured, be placed under needless self induced pressure if a female comrade was about to be gang raped in front of me?

'Hey, sort yourself out, dinosaur bloke!'.

Maybe. Or maybe, it's not my fault, it's not anyone's fault, it's simply the product of tens of thousands of years of evolution. Will be get through it? Yes, our professionalism and conditioning will see us prevail. Does some slavishly adherence to an abstract political concept make us a better society, though? Thankfully, I'm quickly getting beyond the point of giving a damn.

Sorry, meant to add. The female Aircrew who find themselves toe to toe and the other women who have rightfully received gallantry awards were all done under self-defence. Taking the fight to the enemy and assaulting fire trenches etc are a totally different thing.

I always come back to the sports analogy. When I see no gender segregation in all sports at all levels then cross gender infantry is OK, until then, forget it.

Mind you a mixed gender Calcutta Cup match at Twickenham might be a good watch.

Well some Cops have had them for years.

Now only from personal experience from the lady's I still know from my time in green.

The Girlies who didn't get involved with humping Bergan's are generally normal. No real lasting issues apart from a rather unlady like vocab and a pretty brutal method of dealing with idiots.

Now the ones that got involved with the humping and dumping running around with weight are to a woman, broken. Thier bones, cartilage tendons and ligaments are all stuffed. One had to get a knee replaced at 35 and another is in the process of getting hip replacements at 43. I also believe one of the others who I am not in contact with is now in a wheel chair after some vertebrae collapsed. Not saying this doesn't happen to the blokes as well but the numbers of the full effort ladys who are now broken is spectacularly high.

On the subject of sticking a knife/bayonet in someone. Its really not an issue these days and hasn't been for some 20 odd years. Your just as likely to get stabbed by a gang of girls in Croydon as you are a gang of boys.

Seems to me that those in favour are those writing the rude riposts.
Well here's what I think:
I do not think women should be in any sort of infantry operation except as special operators. Women do not compete against men in sports - or should we have mixed weight-lifting?
We are giving in to the very, very few PC activists with an axe to grind.

ive no doubt about a woman being able to pull a trigger/stab etc, the US Marines I worked with seemed happy enough with it.
it's the getting there that worries me, the enemy won't give a **** about non gender specific issues, so, as long as the standard is met......fine.
Female RAF recruits paid compensation for marching injuries - BBC News
I agree that it is more aimed at undoing the appalling recruitment situation rather than a huge leap forward in other ways.

AlR

Given that some of our foe in recent conflicts don't (allegedly ;))seem to be too fussy which side they bat on are you saying that, if captured, you don't feel you would be placed under needless self induced pressure if a male comrade was about to be gang raped in front of you?

My point was that Fallon said that "a diverse force was a more operationally effective force." That is, I assume, a mixed force of men, women and others will be more operationally effective than the existing all- male composition. He provided no evidence for this. And if he he is right, what is the optimum mix of diverse components?

A high standard of combat effective fitness for all is a laudable aim. It means that anyone properly qualified can be posted to any appropriate role - a manning dream.

However many individuals are capable of outstanding work in one role but physically unsuited to most other role related jobs. It is right that that individual is dismissed the service for failing a fitness test?

I have in mind a particularly large computer programmer in a particularly rare computer language. He was superb at his job but needed his own high capacity swivel seat.

Or first rate navs and pilots on the V-Force who could fulfil their deterrent role but if forced to bail out would have been a lost cause. What is better an average all rounder or a role star?

Worked with three women on tornado Sqns years ago who couldn't lift the aircraft ladder up to and onto the cockpit. They couldn't be put together on a servicing team as the job wouldn't be done with them. Equality is fine as long as it really means that. My fear is that despite assurances standards will be dropped to accommodate the PC brigade.

All this talk of "diversity" reminds me of a conversation I had in Kuwait just before the last Gulf Unpleasantness with my USAF opposite number.

Over a beer (well - alcohol-free Bud!) he was extolling the virtue of a representative fighting force reflecting the ethnicity of the country.

"Indeed", says I "so why doesn't that apply to your Olympic Track and Field Team......"

Which kind of makes my (serious) point. If these "Rockettes" [you heard it here first!] can pass the same tests to the same standards as the chaps - then why not? Best person for the job.

We had the same arguments over female aircrew and even - before that - on arming females. Let's grow up and say if you can do the job then you may do the job, whatever your personal collection of X and/or Y chromosomes may be......

Seems to me the rabbit hole we are disappearing down is the collision between:

a. Women who can meet the same standard as men should be allowed to do the job.
b. For physical tasks including infantry soldiering it's harder for women than men to meet that standard, which is discriminatory.

I don't know how we square that circle. b. for example was responsible for paying compensation to women injured in training; and is why crew who couldn't carry ladders were employed when a. should have prevented it.

Simply put, no. And as a factual correction to another post, the bayonet was used often in Afghanistan.

Once again, I have no issues with the technical ability of female soldiers. And I think we'll eventually overcome issues surrounding men being overly protective, or about an enemy being overly exploitative. Because we're good enough, and because conditioning in training against a more liberal societal backdrop will provide context. I just don't think it'll make us a better society. We are becoming artificially and politically inured over the course of decades, to factors which have ingrained themselves naturally over millennia, certainly centuries - and that will come at a cost. Whether or not the cost is excessive, whether or not we'll adapt, whether or not we need to adapt, I no longer care much. It's about the cost of something, versus the benefit of it, not the calibre of the individuals at all. And, let's face it, none of us here can possibly hope to answer that. You reap what you sow and I'll have long withered on the vine by then. For now, fetch me my gin.

I'm sure that one thing can be guaranteed, and that is that the MOD will royally cock up its implementation, which will lead to claims of discrimination.
Even the phrase "Rockettes" is on dodgy ground.
I loved joining the police and finding this all out the hard way!!

Ok, here is a female Silver Star holder. Got it for hand-to-hand clearing trenches whilst under fire. Military woman receives Silver Star

Here is a lady that you might have heard of famous for her soldiering skills:
http://www.maidofheaven.com/maid_ass...nhorseetty.jpg
Joan of Arc

Here is another closer to home:
https://heroinesofhistory.wikispaces...277/548921.jpg
Boudicca of the Iceni

For the followers pf Japanese warriors there is Tomoe Gozen and Nakano Takeko:
http://images.mentalfloss.com/sites/...lic/00429v.jpg

Pirate Grace O'Malley took up arms with her crew to fight hand to hand. There was Lozen the female Apache warrior. Chilonis, the Spartan warrior who fought with a rope around her neck so she could commit suicide rather than being taken alive. Arawelo the Somalian queen who hung her opponents by their testes if they survived her battles - her army was all female. Jeanne Hachette who defended her town with an axe against the Duke of Burgundies troops. Finally, as one example of a woman who fought for 13 years as an infanteer in the British Army in the 18th Century there is Christian Davies - veteran of the Battle of Landen, Battle of Schellenberg, Battle of Blenheim and Battle of Ramillies wounded in several by musket shot.

Here is a recent Israeli female Medal of Valor winner: https://israelnewsonline.org/female-.../#.WWoTjLHTWhA

So for pity's sake grow up gentlemen. It is only your "little women" prejudices that are letting you down. As for injuries, I was working on a unit with a Regional Rehabilitation Unit on it - lots of men with torn tendons, knackered knees and fractures - it isn't a totally gender specific issue!

LJ

Lower ranks have been dismissed for failing the test whilst people in positions of power or with bosses with a bit of clout blatantly get away with it. Frequently I've seen people in uniform who were frankly, an embarrassment. I would have put my mortgage on them not passing the test.

Rosevidney1 (#12/13),

The Dinosaurs were very successful in their day, and lasted a good long time. Can I join your Dinosaur Club, please ?

And ORAC's (#18) Kipling quote is absolutely 'on the button'.

Five years ago, in my Post #2504 on Page 126 on this Thread, I wrote:

"Having said that, I must admit that for me (and, I rather suspect, for many others, another less creditable reason may have played some part. We can all laugh now at Corporal Jones ("they don't like it up 'em!") and at the bloodcurdling yells of bayonet practice on TV. But the real thing isn't funny at all".

"Can you really envisage what it takes to thrust six inches of cold steel into another human being's guts, twist it so that it doesn't stick (doing still more damage), pull it out and then do it again and again (against all your civilised instincts?) I remember a terrible chapter in "All Quiet on the Western Front", where the German narrator, marooned between the lines in a shellhole with a French poilu, with whom he at first becomes friends, is forced by circumstances to disembowel his new "oppo". (Hitler banned the book in Germany as pacifist propaganda). As usual, Kipling has the words for it":

"I do not love my country's foes / Nor call 'em 'eroes - Still, / Where is the sense in 'ating those / 'Oom you are paid to kill?"

"There was a way out: accept the risk of death for yourself, but volunteer for a technical arm like the Air Force or the Navy, where you will kill clinically, at a distance, where you won't see " the whites of his eyes". Was this a form of cowardice? Probably. All I know is, I take my hat off to the PBI, who had to do the dirty work".

IMHO this applies with even greater force to the female. Is it "Right" to ask a woman (the giver of human life) to do this ? What is the "Right" and the "Wrong" in this case ? I find Kant's "Categorical Imperative" ("what would happen [to the human species] if everybody did this all the time ?") gives the best answer: Clearly, you must protect your breeding stock at all costs, to secure the next generation, whereas the males are expendable.

Of course, this will not meet the approval of the "Annie Oakley" persuasion ("anything you can do, I can do better"). We must agree to differ.

Danny.

Oh dear Danny:

Are you watching Wimbledon at the moment? I don't fancy your chances against Venus Williams in a tennis match old fruit...

LJ

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noor_Inayat_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violette_Szabo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odette_Hallowes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_Rowden

I leave these four ladies for your contempplation, in that they were as brave as any man in the situation they were in.