Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

A survey was taken last summer about how Marines feel about women in combat roles.

http://hamptonroads.com/2013/02/marines ... ole-combat

the stats that get me is "About 31 percent of female respondents say they would be interested in moving into a combat position."

22% of males said they would cut their careers short if women were put in combat roles unvoluntarily
17% of females said they would leave the Corps.

If the women can hack it with the same level pack and will not slow anyone down, and they volunteer for it....well go for it girl friend! However I do not feel that the demands of the job should be lessened. It is no longer about just being physically fit, but being able to accomplish the missions being given to you that keep my children safe at night. So if a man in X position has to be able to tote a 60lb pack then a woman who wants to be in his position needs to be able to do that to. If a man is required to be able to drag his comrade 100 yards, so should a woman. I don't want my children's safety compromised because the powers that be lowered the standard and for the want of a person being able to lift 20 more pounds a key battle was lost that meant everything.

I believe that women can be warriors too, but I also know that most of the time a very very strong women is only equal in strength to a relatively modest man. That is just the facts of life and physics. Even today with all the technology we have sometimes brute force is the difference between life and death.

I'm all for it. The freaking pussification of America will be complete, everyone will be happy and rainbows and flowers will be our new motto. Once a couple of them get taken prisoner and repeatedly raped and dragged through the streets of some froeign country, maybe the e lights will come on for these idiots we are surrounded by.

I am not an 03, so I can't provide input from that field. Just my take on it. I can't retire fast enough.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

It's changes the mindset of the soldiers/marines as well. I know female MP's have been well-trained, but the males feel a slight more protective over them. It causes them to do stupid things.

And can we PLEASE talk about how many female miltary members have SENT home because they're PREGNANT!?

Gotlabs wrote:I'm all for it. The freaking pussification of America will be complete, everyone will be happy and rainbows and flowers will be our new motto. Once a couple of them get taken prisoner and repeatedly raped and dragged through the streets of some froeign country, maybe the e lights will come on for these idiots we are surrounded by.

I am not an 03, so I can't provide input from that field. Just my take on it. I can't retire fast enough.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I doubt it! The people that put forth policies like this (that encourage fairies and rainbows philosophies) have their head so far up their posteriers that nothing can shock them. In truth I don't think they give a darn if women they put in these positions are raped to death, just another number to them. I would not encourage my daughters to enter any military service though except perhaps the airforce, but that is a religious thing to me and most will probably not agree.

Reverenddel wrote:It's changes the mindset of the soldiers/marines as well. I know female MP's have been well-trained, but the males feel a slight more protective over them. It causes them to do stupid things.

And can we PLEASE talk about how many female miltary members have SENT home because they're PREGNANT!?

I was under the impression that this was a problem right now. Women getting pregnant so that they could go home and be taken out of their unit. How do they handle it right now?

when I was in 1981 - 2001, Women Marines (WM's) were normally put on light duty and given desk jobs once they became pregnant. They were kept away from anything dangerous like solvents used to clean weapons or mechanical parts. Basically they were just receiving a paycheck. They were given 6 weeks of maternity leave once they had the baby and had to decide if they would be coming back to work or getting out cause they couldn't handle working and raising a kid.

It was amazing whenever a deployment was coming up half or more of the women would pop up preggers right before we left.

If they allow females in combat, they better do away with the selective service. My daughters will NOT be forced to sign up for the draft.

Wallace wrote:If they allow females in combat, they better do away with the selective service. My daughters will NOT be forced to sign up for the draft.

See, I feel completely opposite on that aspect. In for a penny, in for a pound. If women don't want equality equally, then they don't get true equality. Time to spread the word to your like minded friends and beat up your Sen/Reps.

If they don't make the girls register for SS, then they need to remove the requirement for males.

I have a daughter also that I hope stays away from the military, but she threatens me often about joining the Suck when she is old enough. It is bittersweet, a small....very small portion of me wants her to join just to experience the Military, but the dad in me wants to break her legs everytime she mentions it.

I'm reasonably certain recruiting a few ladies from the esteemed organization "dykes on bikes" will be satisfactory in proving some women really could hack it.

Those ladies look like they could kick some serious ass.

The suck,damn gl havent heard that in 30 years lol

Kreutz wrote:I'm reasonably certain recruiting a few ladies from the esteemed organization "dykes on bikes" will be satisfactory in proving some women really could hack it.

Those ladies look like they could kick some serious ass.

Lol

It is fine. They are in combat now. Don't lower the standard for any MOS. If a person qualifies, then fine. As far as female vs male, I have seen too many sissy ass boys trying to be men to think that a woman can't do the job. If they can hang, then give them the chance.

Standards have always been different in the Suck. By that I mean CFT/PFT have seperate criteria. Total bs IMO. Lower the mail standard or raise the female standard.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

When the Marine Corps let WMs (Woman Marines) on Embassy Duty (MSG-Marine Security Guard) there was a great deal of resentment from the male Marines because of HOW the policy was implemented.
It wasn't that WMs were not capable of doing the job but rather that WMs were ONLY allowed to be assigned to specific countries and those were seen as the 'best locations" for duty. Countries such as Italy, France and other 'safe' countries which meant that those male Marines on embassy duty in less friendly nations had fewer options for their next tour as they rotate.

Semper Fi
SSgt USMC '79-'91

As long as the females can pack the gear and bring the fight, sure!
That being said didn't the first women just get dropped from the Officer Infantry Course at Quantico not too long ago?
My personal experience with this kind of thing happened in 1993 in Somalia when 1 female Marine was added to our guard roster in Mogadishu (Wash Point 1). Let's just say things didn't work out well for her to perform the duties of physical security. Since we had an odd ROE that did not permit the sensible use of force (the newly minted Clinton administration), she simply could not maintain the physical control of those attempting to enter the compound. To be objective - we also had some male Marines that demonstrated great difficulty in controlling more than 2 locals at a time at the gate.
I don't base my opinion on the one incident, but in my mind if they can do the job and do it well, then great. The psychological aspects of it are not not a good impact on male Marines - and that is part of our culture/society in the US, not a policy issue.

Even 30 years ago in the US Army there were different PT tests for males and females. Yes, different PT tests for Airborne vs. us guys that walked or road trucks to get to where we were going, too. But if you wanted to be Airborne you had to pass the Airborne PT test and if you couldn't, you washed out.

There were different work standards, too. Women who "just didn't feel good" at a certain time of the month were allowed to "sit things out" rather than participate in the humidity, heat, cold, wind, etc. They didn't have to go on sick call, they just told the squad leader they "didn't feel good today".

I'm not in favor of it. Not just the danger to the women part of it, but also the say many men allow themselves to be distracted when women are around. Anytime we took a break you could tell where the women were at, I don't know how they could breathe the way the "flies" clustered around them.

You know what hell no! I don't care how much people might nay say, no they should not be in combat PERIOD! There are lots of reasons put on here and they are valid but the main reason, you ready for this? Power trip, that's right the power trip.

Every time, without fail you have a women in charge they go on this F'd up little power trip. All because they think they can be like a man when they can't cut it. Because women somewhere in their mind think just because they have been subjegated in the past they have the right to be a B****. They want it all, to be both the women and the man and treated based on the situation. BullS***!

Wookies in a line company just won't work.

I guess I could said it in fewer words - women in combat will end up costing lives, male and female.