Despite what he acknowledged as “challenges” in doing so, Defense Secretary Ash Carter will order that all combat jobs be open to women in an effort to appease feminists. He is doing this against the arguments of the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman according to an associated press report.
The military had already been aggressively looking to “diversify” itself to appease a feminist President and ease the pressure it receives from feminist groups each year.
“Carter’s order opens the final 10 percent of military positions to women, and allows them to serve in the military’s most demanding and difficult jobs, including as special operations forces, such as the Army Delta units and Navy SEALs.”
In fact he did this despite warnings from the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman:
“The Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, Gen. Joseph Dunford, former Marine Corps commandant, had argued that the Marines should be allowed to keep women out of certain front-line combat jobs, citing studies showing that mixed-gender units aren’t as capable as all-male units. Carter said he came to a different conclusion, but he said the integration of women into the combat jobs will be deliberate and methodical and will address the Marine Corps concerns.”
The Defense Secretary’s decision flies in the face of reason, common sense and the recent history of trying to get women into these more intense combat roles.
“That truth is particularly relevant in light of the recent failure of all 45 hand-picked, highly fit women to complete Ranger training and Marine-officer combat training. The 45 women were part of an effort to meet a 2016 deadline mandating that all combat roles, including special forces, be opened up to women — an ideologically driven, reality-challenged initiative.
Putting women into close combat roles isn’t fair to the men who will be relying on them, and isn’t fair to the women who will find themselves continuously at a deadly disadvantage. When we send our soldiers into combat we should be giving them the best possible chance of succeeding and surviving. While women are equal to or better than men at many tasks, they simply aren’t when it comes to combat. Substituting men with far less combat-capable women is profoundly unfair, immoral, and utterly unnecessary.”
Putting Women in Combat Is an Even Worse Idea Than You’d Think
The Defense Secretary’s crazy defense of his new policy
“But the senior defense official said that while Carter recognizes there may be difficulties in opening the jobs to women, he has made his decision and all the services will follow it.
Answering a question from a Marine in Sicily, Carter said, “You have to recruit from the American population. Half the American population is female. So I’d be crazy not to be, so to speak, fishing in that pond for qualified service members.”
So he claims that he would be “crazy” to ignore one half of the population when looking for qualified service members. Ok first and foremost he knows how difficult it is to even find women who would even be interested in joining the military. So really the vast majority of that “half of the population” is not even interested.
Then when you take the tiny fraction of the female population you have to take those who while being interested, can actually pass the rigorous physical tests required to do these jobs. Then when you weed out all the women who can’t pass the rigorous physical tests and you get to those who can – they have to pass the mental training.
They have to be able to become a ruthless killing machine – that is what a solider is on the battlefield and especially in the special ops fields. Can this woman who is physically able handle the emotional task of quietly slitting the throat of an enemy combatant when she is infiltrating any enemy strong hold?
So then if you find that one in a million woman who can physically and mentally do the job – then you have to think of unit cohesion. This is a huge issue in the military. If you don’t have good unit cohesion people die and the mission fails.
So no he is not crazy to ignore half the population (women) when recruiting for frontline combat jobs Mr. Secretary, rather it is crazy to try and pretend that even if you can find that rare woman who can actually do the job both mentally and physically that it will not affect unit cohesion and the capability of our fighting forces.
Trying to pretend that men and women are equally built for combat – that is crazy Mr. Secretary.
I grow tired of this President and those who serve under his command sacrificing our nation’s safety on the altar to their false god – diversity.
Sometimes diversity is a good thing, other times diversity can get a lot of people killed.
God did not mean for women to be in combat
God tells us in his Word the primary reasons that he made women.
He made them to be help meets for men:
“And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” – Genesis 2:18 (KJV)
And he determined that women should do these primary tasks in her pursuit of her help meet role:
“I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.”
Women are to marry, bear children and take care of their homes in service to their husbands and in service to their God.
God does not call women to be soldiers. This is something he made men to do as King David states:
“Blessed be the Lord my strength which teacheth myhands to war, and my fingers to fight” – Psalm 144:1 (KJV)
What about Deborah?
Some feminists try and point to Deborah as an example of women in combat.
But they ignore Deborah’s own opposition to going into battle with the men when she was requested – and really she did no combat but was only their for moral support:
“6 And she sent and called Barak the son of Abinoam out of Kedeshnaphtali, and said unto him, Hath not the Lord God of Israel commanded, saying, Go and draw toward mount Tabor, and take with thee ten thousand men of the children of Naphtali and of the children of Zebulun?
7 And I will draw unto thee to the river Kishon Sisera, the captain of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his multitude; and I will deliver him into thine hand.
8 And Barak said unto her, If thou wilt go with me, then I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, then I will not go.
9 And she said, I will surely go with thee: notwithstanding the journey that thou takest shall not be for thine honour; for the Lord shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman. And Deborah arose, and went with Barak to Kedesh.” – Judges 4:6-9(KJV)
You can see here that Deborah was not anxious to go into the arena of men which was war. She was begged to go by a cowardly man who should have led his men. She even shames him by saying God would take away the honor from him and give the honor of Israel’s victory to a woman – which was a shame on the men.
Just as Deborah knew – God did not design women for war.
We need to stop following the lies of feminism and egalitarianism and return to God’s design for men and women.
Biblical Gender Roles 
1. They will lower the standards needed for women to qualify for the top positions until they mean nothing.
2. I doubt they will also require women to register for selective service.
3. Interesting that the man in the scriptures you quoted above is named….Barak!
Congratulations, ladies! You can now watch as your daughters literally sacrifice them selves on the altar of feminism! I wonder how they will feel, lying in a pool of their own blood and entrails on the field of battle, wishing they would have just stayed at home, gotten married and raised children. How will you feel, knowing you helped put her there?
“Congratulations, ladies! You can now watch as your daughters literally sacrifice them selves on the altar of feminism! I wonder how they will feel, lying in a pool of their own blood and entrails on the field of battle, wishing they would have just stayed at home, gotten married and raised children. How will you feel, knowing you helped put her there?”
What will actually happen: Women will take up the training positions from men in a sort of quota based system, grab the benefits, use up resources. Then, they will either have to be medically retired from injury (drawing benefits the rest of their lives…female athletes incur injury 8 to 10 times the rate of males, this has been verified in military injury studies during basic training as well as medical journals).
Or, they will get pregnant. So the few men who remain will have to fill those slots, staying in the field longer and rotating more often than is mentally or physically healthy for them. So in a nutshell, more MEN will die.
Fwiw, this is already happening now.
That’s pretending that a woman would be as capable in everything else, which of course isn’t the case. Imagine being a seasoned guy in the special forces and you have to go into Syria and risk your life to get some really bad actor in a dynamic and dangerous environment, and your boss who is overseeing this operation is some idiot chick Lt.
Good article in the National Review. They missed one thing about Israel though.
They put all of the women in combat infantry into a single battalian. So whatever problems they bring, they bring it on themselves and don’t undermine the other combat units.
I agree with a lot of what you’ve said here, but is it alright if I offer a little push back on your take on Deborah? We studied Judges in depth at church this summer.
From what I understand, Deborah was present in battle as a prophetess, basically as God’s presence for Barak, not as a solider in any capacity so it doesn’t seem to me that she can be used either for or against women in combat.
I don’t think Barak insisting Deborah go with him should be called cowardice any more than Gideon going through his elaborate routine with the fleece should be called cowardice. I think it’s more in line with the theme that these men really wanted to make sure God was with them before taking a huge risk. Maybe it is cowardice, but maybe it’s more faith/humility/dependence on God. Is it wrong for Barak to want to make sure God’s prophet is with him to direct his actions?
Deborah wasn’t the woman who received the honor of killing Sisera — that was Jael, so it doesn’t seem like a shaming comment to me as much as factual information about what was going to go down. I just don’t see Deborah’s story as negative while at the same time it’s by no means Biblical support for women in combat. People want it to be a story about that when it’s not at all.
LeeLee,
I think the situation with Barak and Gideon were different. Many men including Gideon have sought the Lord’s guidance and wanted to know he would go with them into battle. That is not cowardly at all, in fact it would be foolish to go into battle without the Lord on your side.
But as we can see from the story – Barak had been ordered to go into battle by God previous to this encounter and he had not gone and this is why Deborah had to confront him. This is was a time of great cowardice in Israel.
The glory for the Israel’s victory went to both Deborah and Jael:
So when Deborah said to Barak “I will surely go with thee: notwithstanding the journey that thou takest shall not be for thine honour; for the Lord shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.”(Judges 4:9) that the honour would not be his – this was to his shame. If she had just said God would give Sisera into the hand of a woman – I might agree with you. But her statement about the honor not being his – would have been a dig to any man going into battle.
So Deborah lead the people as a figure of God’s power – because all the men of Israel were in such a cowardly state. And God did literally give the Sisera into the hands of a woman – Jael.
But I believe if Barak and the men of Israel had the courage to do what they were commanded and Deborah did not have to go with them God would have given Barak and his men the honor of that victory and would not have had Sisera killed by Jael.
The Scriptures are clear that women rule over men or take positions of prominence over men it is a shame to them, it is never an honor.
It was not honorable that Deborah had to go into battle with Barak – this is why God gave the honor for the victory to two women – Deborah and Jael and not the men.
I agree that the average woman is not as physically strong or suitable for combat than the average man. I don’t think that there’s really any arguing that. I also agree that there’s a certain set of mental traits that is required of a soldier in combat (the ability to kill on command without question for example) that most women simply just cannot comply with. However, there are rare women whom can live up to these expectations, and even exceed them. If a woman is physically and mentally prepared to be on the front line, then her presence can only be an asset. Why not have the best possible soldiers on the ground? I don’t know about anyone else, but I want the most skilled and ruthless soldiers out there defending me and my country. And if that group happens to include a few women, and she has earned her position fairly, then so be it.
As for cohesiveness, I would hope to God that the soldiers that are defending our nation could band together under any circumstances.
“However, there are rare women whom can live up to these expectations, and even exceed them. If a woman is physically and mentally prepared to be on the front line, then her presence can only be an asset. Why not have the best possible soldiers on the ground?”
Surely your are kidding. First, it is a biological fact that women are 8 to 10 times more prone to injury than a man, when doing the same activity. Second, they aren’t as strong. What you are asking is essentially the same as suggesting NFL sports teams should put women into the competition with men and see how it goes. There wouldn’t be any woman who could compete, and in the absolutely rare outlier circumstance that there were a woman who could even compete as well as one of the players, there are 50 men who could do the same or better.
So how much of our resources (training and the selection process costs a lot of time and money…these resources are finite) should be invested in attempting to find the square peg that just might fit into that round hole? And then she could just get pregnant and cheat the taxpayers out of a soldier who could do the job and NOT get pregnant, plus three years of expensive training. Out the window.
There is really only one question that matters as far as national security is concerned: Will female presence help the mission?
In just about any case that involves combat, the answer is H-E-double hockey sticks, no.
If the answer is no, they shouldn’t be there.
So what’s the point? Are we out of men who can perform this task?
Are we out of men who can perform it BETTER?
No, and no.
“As for cohesiveness, I would hope to God that the soldiers that are defending our nation could band together under any circumstances.”
You could not be further removed from reality, Mari.
Watch Band of Brothers, and then imagine the difference a woman in the middle of that would make.
Excellent post. One minor point that God didn’t create women to be helpmeets for men, He created them to be help meets for their husband. Minor wording difference, but the impacts can be pretty important. That’s probably what you meant anyway, but ik of several men and women who get hung up on this issue so I thought it was worth pointing out.
A big issue here for me is whether or not this opens the door to drafting women. With my lyme disease restrictions, I doubt I’d make it very far in the recruitment process, but I’d hate to think of other young mothers being torn from their children. It sets a bad precedent.
It is better all around if women do not try to be men and men do not try to be women.
AnnaMS,
Your Statement:
I agree in that women were created to specifically to be help meets for their husband. In other words a woman does not have to serve every man around her.
However I think that women should have a serving attitude, in a way that is unique from the servant attitude of men.
I also believe that man is the head of woman, not just that a husband is the head of his wife.
This is why women must cover their heads or have a sign of authority when in worship, and this was not restricted to just married women. It does not mean any man can tell any woman what to do, but that women must recognize that in society men are over women. It is a matter of order.
I consistently teaching on this site that men are to lead in all major areas of society, whether it be in government, in the Church and in the home.
I have been following this blog for a while but have never felt the need to respond to any post until this one. I want to be up front that not only am I a woman but I am Jewish, Israeli, a former IDF veteran and currently in my first year of medical residency. I also want to make perfectly clear that I believe the American governments decision to allow women to join combat roles is a colossal mistake.
My problem is with the comments made by Liz. For starters, women are not 8 to 10 times more prone to injury compared to men in EVERY activity. In many activities, yes. In all, no. When I argue for why women are not built for combat, my starting point is anatomy. Take the pelvis and legs alone… Men have a pelvis that is straight across while women have a wider pelvis forcing their legs to drop in at an angle. Women’s knees touch, men’s do not. That alone puts women at a disadvantage when it comes to the physical requirements of combat that the author mentions. Outside of combat you will find women competing at the highest levels in many arenas… Crossfit, Olympians, etc. I see an almost equal number of male and female sports related injuries in my ER. While women are more prone to injury, to suggest that a woman will absolutely get injured where a male would not is ludicrous. Did you know anatomically speaking women make better fighter pilots than men? Women, being generally shorter than men, have a greater tolerance for G-forces. High G-forces cause blood to collect in the lower extremities and make it difficult for the heart to pump blood to the brain. With sufficient force, this causes a blackout… Women being smaller and shorter, do not have this problem.
Secondly, to compare Israel to America is irresponsible. Israel is in a permanent defensive posture, our soldiers are never “deployed” as Americans are, we do not travel to other countries nor do we wage our wars on giant battlefields. Women make up 3% of our combat infantry within a few co-ed units such as Caracal and Oketz with a another mixed gender unit being formed as we speak. Women also serve in our elite special forces unit 669. There isn’t an all female combat battalion as you’ve written. Because of Israel’s defensive position one could argue that ALL positions other than those behind a desk are combat positions. Israel is in a constant state of conflict and every soldier can and WILL be used in combat if necessary. As someone who served in Israel’s search and rescue unit 668, I can assure you that being in a country surrounded by those wanting to wipe you off the map, every mission is a combat mission. Your comment about women in combat bringing something upon themselves makes me fear for you. Israel has one of the most elite armies in the world… Since 33% or higher are women soldiers and 50% are officers it would stand to reason that women are a driving force to that success. Israeli women are not idiotic lieutenants as you’ve likened Americans to be. They are highly intelligent, God loving women who want to make sure their children have a safe place to grow up in and that their sons and daughters have a future.
Lastly, I need to mention that I am not a feminist. Israel requires women to serve and we simply have no other option. Our country is too small and too vulnerable. Our women serve in every capacity from combat to jobniks (desk jobs). We have women who serve and are wheelchair bound! You will see all of our female soldiers have long hair, the orthodox wear dresses… Sacrificing modesty, femininity or values is also not an option. Look at Yael, Esther, Judith, Mary… All warriors who would never have and didn’t ever think twice about stepping up to the plate to defend and protect God’s creation.
My only reason for writing this post was the uneducated responses made by Liz. To me it is completely irrelevant what you read online. Israel is my home, my people. The inaccuracies of what you’ve said strike a deep chord. I don’t believe in America that women should be in combat but I also don’t believe a comparison of Israel to America is sensical in any way.
Avital,
Thank you for that unique perspective. Let me say first and foremost as a Bible believing Christian I am a lover and defender of Israel. I may not agree with every decision Israel makes, but I believe as a nation we must continue to be Israel’s ally. I hope the next President we elect will be a better friend to Israel than the current one we have now is.
You are correct that women serve in your special forces – but according to this Washington Post report on women’s roles in the IDF even these women in special forces are not in a combat position:
Even there they serve in a support position, not in a front line position.
In fact this same article by the Washington Post revealed that an attempt to put women into tanks by the IDF was cancelled:
You are right that women may not be prone to injury more than men in all activities and I believe I had read about women being able to take the Gforces better than men as pilots. However this same report revealed what you are admitted about women being more prone to injury in many(not all) areas than men:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/25/womens-combat-roles-in-israel-defense-forces-exagg/?page=all
The book of Judith is not considered to be part of the cannon of Scripture so as a Bible based site I can’t include it here in the discussion.
‘Yael’ or ‘Jael’ as she is referred to in our Old Testament was not a warrior, rather she was the wife a man who took an opportunity to kill Sisera when she was given the chance.
No where do we see Esther in combat. Now yes she stood for her people, and risked her life to save her people. She was courageous no doubt. But she was not a combat warrior.
If by Mary you are referring to the mother of Christ – again there is no reference to her in combat.
There are no recorded instances of female Israelite soldiers in Scripture.
I think the Washington Post report I cite shows direct evidence that American proponents of full inclusion of American women in combat based on women in the IDF is a bad comparison. Even the IDF highly restricts what positions women may be in(a point you concede as well I think).
I realize that you stated full well that you think it is mistake for America to put in women in front line combat positions.
Also as I said at the beginning of my comment – I love Israel and I believe America should be her greatest defender.
However will all due respect to your service, and those of all the women who have served in the IDF I believe Israel made a mistake in this policy. I realize your nation is smaller and faces enemies on all sides. But I do not believe God wanted Israel to compromise his purpose and design for women simply to bolster Israel’s army.
In fact if you look at rules for going to war that God gave Moses in Deuteronomy 20:1-8 you will see that God was in fact very choosy about who could join the army:
My point is I respectfully disagree with Israel’s policy that forces women into the Military or even allows them to serve in the Military. Moses would never have agreed to that and neither would King David.
“You are right that women may not be prone to injury more than men in all activities and I believe I had read about women being able to take the Gforces better than men as pilots.”
They are “able to take” the G forces “better” in respect to the immediate consequences (they aren’t as likely to pass out, it’s a blood pressure thing, much like shooting a sniper rifle…which women are also good at, it’s just getting in and out of the combat zone that’s trick).
But over time, their backs and necks are toast. My husband is a fighter pilot. I know quite a few chick fighter pilots and the one here has had three back surgeries and she is barely over thirty. This stuff takes a huge toll on the female anatomy…it’s not easy on the male neck and back either, they see similar issues but far later down the line. IOW, their anatomies hold up better.
My bad “while doing the same activity” should’ve been “while doing the same athletic activity”.
Yes, this is a fact. You want a woman to jump out of a plane loaded with a bunch of kit and hit the ground it’s something to be aware of. There have been several military studies contrasting the injuries sustained by men and women in training. The site that linked to those is no longer there but I could try to find it. I’m not sure why they spent the money it they were going to ignore the results anyway.
I will try to find those if they are out, the dates were around the 1990s timeframes when the first debates around placing women in combat positions started up.
For now, there is this:
http://www.orthojournalhms.org/volume2/html/articles22.htm
I’m an avid runner (and yes, for twenty years I could run faster than most of the boys, and I can still do five full pullups, more than most any woman I know, and I’m over 40…in my twenties I could do ten, and two one handed. No, I’m not joking or embellishing I had a lot of upper body strength). I can tell you I’ve broken my foot three times at least, sprained my ankle about five times. Those were athletic injuries and I never went to the ER for that. The only athletic injury I saw the ER for was a serious compound fracture on my leg, which was not an athletic injury.
The last comment had a link and is in the mod queue. I’ll add the “holds up better” portion of the equation becomes very very important when resources are scarce. You have a person that costs the taxpayers millions just to get through the first year of pilot training. The next training portion (say, for a fighter), is six times more expensive. When my husband started out, his first plane was the F16 and by the time he finished pilot training, two years down the line, the government had invested about 9 million into him. THat was in mid-1990s dollars and fuel prices, it’s probably twice that now.
Then comes the spin up to flight lead, instructor grade, and all that…tens of millions over the course of that person’s initial commitment. If their body is weaker and they have to go off flying status (pregnancy is another thing that would bring a woman off of flying status), they’re losing a person we’ve invested a WHOLE lot of money in. Furthermore, they’re losing a person whom it will take a long time to replace. All of this has to be looked at in terms of finite resources. We don’t have the resources to fund this level of social experiment.
(sorry for the series of posts but I wanted to add something)
If you think of it anatomically, it’s pretty obvious why a woman’s neck and back wouldn’t hold up as well under G forces over time. Their body weighs five to ten times as much, and they aren’t just laying their heads back and resting and trying to stay conscious, they jolting and turning their heads around under these high forces trying to see and shoot their opponent.
BTW, having been a military spouse through all of this social transition I’ve seen the devastating impact women entering the squadrons has had on overall moral first hand.
The problems I mention, I have personally seen (and more…I am being very very kind here, the worst problems are social, I’ve seen careers ruined by false rape claims and fraternizations, women trying to use their sexuality for career gain and it usually works, the men are the only ones held accountable 9 times out of 10).
Yes, this topic gets me lit like no other.
Here is a female Marine officer who thought she could do it. She has a lot of personal experience serving in combat zones. Very athletic, top notch person. Also unusually self-aware. So her words will be ignored by all the SJW politicians. Any person who is truly interested in this issue should read the following link. It is very very good, and parcing her words with quotes here won’t do it justice:
https://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/2014/09/why-women-do-not-belong-us-infantry
Examples are ubiquitous if you look for them. Remember the RAF female recruits who sued the government because they were made to march like men?
Marching is a pretty standard military activity.
“Three female RAF recruits have each been awarded £100,000 by the Ministry of Defence after suffering injuries caused by marching in step with their male colleagues.
The women claimed that parading alongside taller male recruits caused them to over-stride, a repetitive motion which, when repeated over several weeks, led them to develop spinal and pelvic injuries.”
Last post, two in the mod queue for links. I will not post further because I like this site and don’t want BGR to ban me for so many posts. However, I thought I would bring up the I HAVE ALSO WORKED IN THE ER. I’m an RN. I’ll match your observations and one-up them. Actually, I’ve seen MORE male “activity/sports related injuries” in there than women. What does that tell us? Not a whole heck of a lot that would support any argument that men are just as prone or more prone to injury. It would indicate to ME that they are more active, and more likely to engage in risky activity.
Which actually refutes the claim more. You don’t want a person in a combat zone who is risk adverse. Reason number 500 Secretary Ash is an idiot.
Liz – no need to worry about being banned, you are fine.:)
I am actually enjoying the discussion between you experts in medical field.
Wow! So interesting! Loved reading the responses, and loved having an Israeli post here her thoughts!
This was actually the article I intended to link to before. From Capt Katie Petronio. Ignored but SJW politicians, just like all of the prior military performance and injury studies:
https://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/blog/2012/07/05/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal
I see it my practice daily. That is all i deal with is injuries, acute and chronic. If women are as equal why doesnt Israel allow women to compete in the olympics or their national sports with men?
Liz, my daughter can do pull ups as well at 20, I am 44 and can do 20-30 depending on the day. You are correct about c-spine and fighter pilots. I have seen the damage first hand from the compressive forces they incure. My daughter and I rock climb and she is a great athlete, but boys who would fall into the same physical shape she is in would make her look foolish to even attempt to compete.
There are some elite women, but its my opinion those women who passed spec ops were pushed through. They will reap what they sow.
Jeff, I would appreciate it if you could read for comprehension. Nowhere in my post did I ever imply that women are equal to men physically. The opposite could be inferred however. My words regarding women in combat were to correct negligent comments made by another user, in regards to the units that our women currently serve in. In a few separate examples I cite why women are ill-suited for combat positions.
Furthermore Israeli women can and do compete in the Olympics and have national teams in multiple sports including soccer and softball. I’m a little unclear as to why you posed a question regarding men and women serving on the exact same teams as I don’t see anywhere in my comments or in any subsequent comments where anyone suggested that Israeli men and women are equal physically. And to be perfectly honest your question is absolutely ridiculous simply for the fact that the Olympics themselves only allow a few co-ed teams… and to my knowledge those are in equestrian events and maybe tennis. (To which I concede there may be more co-ed sports.) There are no organizations in Israel that are petitioning the Olympic games for more co-ed options. Your statement “If women are as equal why doesnt Israel allow women to compete in the olympics or their national sports with men?” is ignorant. Before you pose a question, it is best to research whether that is even an option or not.
Avital,
Hou got it cupcake. Just dont get your panties in a bunch and calm down.
“My words regarding women in combat were to correct negligent comments made by another user, in regards to the units that our women currently serve in. “
My words:
”They put all of the women in combat infantry into a single battalian. So whatever problems they bring, they bring it on themselves and don’t undermine the other combat units.”
I didn’t think about a K9 unit as “combat infantry”. But, okay. The only combat infantry units after that correction, with females that I am aware of is the Caracel battalion and those who work with military dogs in another unit. I didn’t say the battalion was ONLY comprised of females, I said that put them all together.
I too would not compare the IDF with US forces (whether “irresponsible” as you call it or otherwise, I wasn’t the one to make the comparison, i was responding to the cited article). Since the article brought the IDF up, I added a fact that seems pretty telling that they put the female combat infantry into one battalian together. So I have to ask, why would they do that if there aren’t any of the problems I’ve mentioned?
Combat infantry= exactly that. Combat infantry. We have plenty of women serving in combat zones too, in noncombat positions (and yes, they bring a whole bunch of problems with them, also already described).
My husband also worked as an MQ9 instructor for a private contracting company, for a while. The drone is probably the perfect “combat” aircraft for a woman, if a woman has to serve as a combatant in some capacity.
But there was an inordinate amount of drama in that room too…
Some more statistics, for those interested:
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/01/13/data-predicts-spike-in-female-troop-injuries.html
”The paper, “Musculoskeletal Injuries in Military Women,” cites multiple Army, VA and Navy data, including a Navy study that found 1 in 367 female recruits were diagnosed with a pelvic stress fracture, versus one in 40,000 male recruits. At the same time, the Army noted that its experience with these kinds of injuries is nearly three times that of the Navy.
“Acute and chronic musculoskeletal problems associated with injuries are consistently the leading causes of outpatient visits and hospitalizations in the Army,” the report stated.
The Army also cited a May 2013 Technical Bulletin, “Prevention and Control of Musculoskeletal Injuries,” that women are more likely to be disabled than men and are about 67 percent more likely than a male soldier to be discharged for a musculoskeletal disorder. Such discharges have been as high as 140 per 10,000 female soldiers per year, the study said. For men, the number has been about 80 per 10,000 soldiers, according to the study.
Disability costs, the Army said, “are staggering.” Even before the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the VA was already paying roughly 25 percent of its annual $21 billion compensation budget to vets with musculoskeletal injuries.”
Keep in mind that the above statistics for injuries were not equal activities. Women are not required to perform equally. There standards and roles are not equivalent. There was another study from the Navy I recall that indicated 9.2 times the number of female infirmary visits to male visits when on ship.
From Alphagameplan:
Women were put to the USMC field test and the head of the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force speaks out:
“The best women in the GCEITF as a group in regard to infantry operations were equal or below, in most cases, to the lowest 5 percent of men as a group in this test study. They are slower on all accounts in almost every technical and tactical aspect and physically weaker in every aspect across the range of military operations.”
So much for the kickass female protagonist. Your science fiction and fantasy are lying to you.
“Women were put to the USMC field test and the head of the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force speaks out:”
Notice how they gave the forces “until October” to explain why women shouldn’t fill all combat rolls. Notice that the forces invested resources answering the question definitively, and the answer was ignored anyway.
Roles, not rolls. Kind of a funny pun though, considering the average weight of….cough, nevermind.
🙂
Exhibit A: http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2015/07/08/glenda-lock-fired-mcdonald-army-health-center-investigatoin/29871027/
It is extremely difficult for a woman to fail the tape test. For a man it’s pretty easy…I think the limit is 38 inch waist and if he’s over six feet tall that isn’t fat. But for women it’s different. This woman has to be absolutely swimming in lard. This is pretty standard for a lot of military women, in my experience. She must’ve gone from an O4 right to O6 because she could’ve never been a light Colonel.
Listen to Luara Ingraham’s guest this morning 12/10. Female marine vet. She said no way to women in combat. She said even the elite women have twice the injuries just in training. Said they failed 69% of 139 combat activities, were slower and had less power. She said the time and money the military puts into combat forces, with the injuries alone the costs will go up and that doesn’t include women’s plumbing issues, illness due to lowered immunity because of stress on the body and mind/emotions. I would say issues down the road with cortisol levels, adrenal fatigue is going to cause thyroid issues, issues with kidneys, reproduction and bone density long term. So we are not talking just in the short term, but VA issues after quitting or retirement…. I can actually see medical drops left and right.
She stated hand to hand has skyrocketed in middle east because of door to door searches, something women have not even been able to compare with men, even the top elite against the lower % of men who were considered less aggressive and weak for male standards.
America will blame men for not fighting or protecting them when sufficient numbers start coming home in body bags. Not to mention the male body bags just to protect or stand in the way when it shouldn’t have happened if she were competent and strong enough, of course she’ll be the hero….
I keep checking your blog for new posts BGR!
I recently did a video touching on a women’s ministry being her husband first, and then her children. The next one will go into more detail 🙂
Dragonfly,
Sorry I have not been posting much new stuff in the last couple of weeks – it has been really hectic with my two jobs(I have a full time job and a part time job) as well as shopping and stuff for the holidays. In fact I am the family “Calendar maker” so I design three different family Calendars each year using bunches of photos from over the past year and that takes me several hours to do. I have a lot of posts half written and in the oven cooking. I am going to try and finish up some and get them out shortly maybe even tonight – we will see how things go, otherwise over the weekend.
I watched your video – that was very nice and I think it could be a great encouragement to women.
“The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;
That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,
To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.” – Titus 2:3-5 (KJV)
I realize you are an not an “aged” women physically, but from what I have read on your blog you are definitely a mature woman spiritually and you should never let any older woman “despise thy youth”(I Timothy 4:12).
As I watched you video I am reminded of the reason God wants women to teach other women these things about being good wives and mothers – it is because women often will hear things better from other women than from their husbands or men in general.
When a man teaches that women should put their husbands before their children and submit to their husbands if a woman is not being spirit lead that may seem like self-serving advice on his part. But when she hears in this in the gentle spirit you have given from another woman – that can make a powerful impact.
Many of us as Christian husbands have experienced this where we try and talk to our wife about various marriage issues and they won’t hear it form us. But then one day they change and later you find out it was because some woman at church said something about it, or their mom or sister or girlfriend said something about it.
I think that is why it is SO important for women to have good godly girl friends in their lives so they can exhort one another. I definitely encourage that in my wife and my daughter.
Thank you for your ministry and may God bless you and your husband.
So glad to hear you’re still writing! Don’t want to lose your voice out here.
Yes, I do think it is incredibly different hearing these admonitions from fellow women. And part of the reason I’ve been encouraged by others to do videos is because we do have such a visibly good marriage in front of our friends and family, and this is an easier way of teaching/reading more people in giving them the gift of having a beautiful marriage. I’ve had women friends who were older than me, tell me how much they loved seeing the way my husband and I interact with each other – how we playfully flirt with each other constantly, and REALLY really love each other. Sometimes they jokingly say they are envious of the way my husband treats me, and then it’s my chance to help them understand that the way I treat him either opens the door for intimacy, or closes the door. It all boils down to looking at our families as gifts… as our ministry, and when our perspective shifts that way, our actions follow. 🙂 Thanks for your encouragement!
I know a woman who carried a fallen comrade out of harms way in Afghanistan, and shielded him from gunfire. If women were not allowed in the military, then that man would have died.
Cappy,
I am sure that the man who was saved by that woman was eternally grateful for her helping him.
But the truth is that if she was not there, a man would have been there in her place to save him.