This question is asked just about every week, try using a search via the Advanced Search for the site up top on the page. As for combat, here is the answer:
In the end, women do not belong in ground combat, they are more of a liability than an asset, this is always ignored when it is discussed in the Media, in Congress or on here. Below is some good info for you that I have cut and pasted from my previous answers on the same topic.
From the report of the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces dated November 15, 1992, it states in part:
The average female Army recruit is 4.8 inches shorter, 31.7 pounds lighter, has 37.4 fewer pounds of muscle, and 5.7 more pounds of fat than the average male recruit. She has only 55 percent of the upper-body strength and 72 percent of the lower-body strength.
An Army study done in 1988 found that women are more than twice as likely to suffer leg injuries and nearly five times as likely to suffer fractures as men.
Further, the Commission heard an abundance of expert testimony including:
- women's aerobic capacity is significantly lower, meaning they cannot carry as much as far as fast as men, and they are more susceptible to fatigue.
- in terms of physical capability, the upper five percent of women are at the level of the male median. The average 20-to-30 year-old woman has the same aerobic capacity as a 50 year-old man.
After a study was conducted at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, one expert testified that:
- using the standard Army Physical Fitness Test, the upper quintile (top 20?of women at West point achieved scores on the test equivalent to the bottom quintile (bottom 20?of men.
- only 21 women out of the initial 623 (3.4?achieved a score equal to the male mean score of 260.
- on the push-up test, only 7?f women can meet a score of 60, while 78?f men exceed it.
- adopting a male standard of fitness at West Point would mean 70?f the women he studied would be separated as failures at the end of their junior year, only 3?ould be eligible for the Recondo badge, and not one would receive the Army Physical Fitness badge.
Also, recent studies indicate women are more at risk to getting PTSD, as documented from Iraq and Afghanistan, women who were never in direct combat but whose camps were shelled were more likely to develop PTSD than there male counter-parts. You can also look up the US Navy SPARTAN study, women were asked to complete a lot of the Damage Control Tasks that are mandatory on a ship. They performed in a rather terrible manner at the start. The women were then put on a 6 month weight training program and asked to do the test again. A lot of the test are obsolete since the P-250 pump is no longer in use but the one that will never go out is the two man litter carry up and down the ladder on a ship. None of the women passed getting the wounded man up the ladder and <2?assed going down ( a lot easier I might add). What did the Navy do in regard to this result? They changed the standard to a four man litter carry. Ever been on a ship? Good luck with 4 people fitting on that ladder! lol!
The myth that they are currently egaged in combat drives me up a wall a bit, riding in a HUMMER after the target is cleared is not going head to head. Don't ignore the truth because it does not fit your premise, I have no doubt that women can be just as brave as a man but it does me no good when she cannot get me back to my helo, hummer or foxhole because she is to weak. It does me no good when she cannot h**p the same weight I can for as long as I can because she is physically unable to do so. It does me no good when she is injured more easily than a man, etc..etc...DO NOT LOOK AT THIS AS A RIGHT, LOOK AT THIS AS A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE, do you really want the weakest person doing that job? Do not fall for the myth that if we have the same standards for all that it will be ok then, the standards will be dropped so low that someone in a wheel chair could pass them due to politics, look at the SPARTAN Study! lol! They would rather risk peoples lives than hold a standard and stick there necks out and risk there careers! (They being the Officer Corps). If you are honest in your assessment, you would say that while women may be ok to be pilots, they have no place in areas of ground combat and/or even on ships in many instances due to physical differences, a different hard wiring (being more and more proven every year) and common sense. Women and Men are not social constructs to interchange and war is not meant for a social science lab.
If they allow them to go into SOF Selection of any kind the training will be so watered down it will be a joke and then, like the regular Army, Navy and Air Force, the training will become a joke.
Answered By: Eric S - 3/15/2010 |