ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2020 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, July 29, 2013

Combat Barbie wear

They still won't be able to outfight a Boy Scout troop armed with jackknives, but the important thing is wearing the right clothes will help them feel more like real soldiers.
A new combat uniform with special consideration to the female body is now available at Fort Gordon, almost a month after the Army announced plans to open all units and military jobs to women by 2016. The March debut of the Combat Uniform-Alternate is the first in a series of moves the Army hopes to make in the next three years to help female soldiers feel like more professional members, officials said.

With narrower shoulders, a slightly tapered waist and a more spacious seat, the unisex clothing line has been in the works since 2009 and is being issued to all installations – except Fort Benning in Columbus, Ga. – for men and women with a smaller or more slender body.
Enough of all the talk talk.  Let's see some war war out of our brave amazons.  Let's see the US Army form a combat division of its most formidable Combat Barbies and send it to Afghanistan.  Perhaps they can make a reality TV show of it called "Rape, Rout, or RIP?"

Labels: ,

206 Comments:

1 – 200 of 206 Newer› Newest»
Anonymous David July 29, 2013 3:05 PM  

The IDF seems to do OK

Anonymous Josh July 29, 2013 3:06 PM  

Would France still surrender to the combat Barbies?

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother July 29, 2013 3:07 PM  

Women in the IDF are used as trainers, not front line combat troops. You get the 1,000,000 award, David, for being the 1 millionth user of that erroneous example.

Blogger Eric Wilson July 29, 2013 3:07 PM  

I still remember there being a number (if not all) of combat positions that women are ineligible for in the IDF.

Blogger Eric Wilson July 29, 2013 3:09 PM  

Would France still surrender to the combat Barbies?

Yeah, I think they have cowed to the Feminazis sufficiently at this point.

Anonymous Harry July 29, 2013 3:10 PM  

One of the primary results of women in the military is prostitution by these uniformed camp followers.

Thus, one wonders if it includes a pee/f**k hole for them to do their thing.

They made a fortune during the Iraq buildup and aftermath, some being airlifted out because of impacted sand in their vaginas.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother July 29, 2013 3:15 PM  

Harry,

Along those lines of impacted sand, imagine, if you dare, the smell of rotten peanut butter. I don't have to imagine it.

Anonymous Jack Amok July 29, 2013 3:15 PM  

Broader in the seat. Well, harkens back to the origin of the word 'broad' to refer to a woman. The USMC started a women's auxiliary (waves, wacs, something like that), & the regulars started calling them 'broad-assed marines'.

Anonymous Josh July 29, 2013 3:16 PM  

Women in the IDF are used as trainers, not front line combat troops. You get the 1,000,000 award, David, for being the 1 millionth user of that erroneous example.

Women in combat also worked in the new battlestar galactica...

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother July 29, 2013 3:17 PM  

Damn! I forgot about BSG!

Blogger Old Rebel July 29, 2013 3:17 PM  

"Does this Kevlar vest make me look fat?"

Anonymous MrGreenMan July 29, 2013 3:18 PM  

Suggesting that, as sometimes a child must burn his hand to understand not to touch the stove, there should be a cessation of all protections of women soldiers, and they should be shoved out and treated exactly like any other idiot enlistee, will earn you the hatred and venom of all the usual feminist conservatives and their white knight enablers, because women are special and supposed to be protected even from what they adamantly want to do.

Anonymous AlteredFate July 29, 2013 3:19 PM  

Next we should look into modifying Apache cockpit seats to fit the plus size ass of the average combat ready lesbian warrior. We could rename the mod the AH-64 Largebow. It won't fly as fast and will only carry half the armament because of the added weight, but as long as it's for equality than no price is too high to pay.

I saw this article earlier on USAToday. The US military has become a joke, a tay payer funded social experiment. Retire, men, and let the broads take it from here. Let's speed the demise of this institution. Its best days are long behind us.

Anonymous MrGreenMan July 29, 2013 3:19 PM  

I think France would counter with their bainlieu division and mop the floor with the American Amazon brigade.

Anonymous Daniel July 29, 2013 3:20 PM  

"With narrower shoulders, a slightly tapered waist..."

Sexist U.S. Army Fat-Shames Women

Anonymous MrGreenMan July 29, 2013 3:21 PM  

And, yes, suggesting that we should just put women on the front lines and let come what may in terms of personal or national humiliation got me labeled a proponent of rape by the cult-of-the-vag bunch at Focus on the Family.

Blogger papabear July 29, 2013 3:23 PM  

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130125-women-combat-world-australia-israel-canada-norway/

Anonymous Daniel July 29, 2013 3:25 PM  

Due to the reduction in foot speed and greater natural fat ratios, a single woman on the front line will attract and absorb up to 10% more enemy ammunition, depleting their stores at a significantly higher rate. Victory can be declared as soon as they run out.

Blogger papabear July 29, 2013 3:26 PM  

Hey feminists, let's follow the example of Norway - http://www.acus.org/natosource/norway-becomes-first-nato-country-draft-women-military

Blogger Jordan179 July 29, 2013 3:29 PM  

I've heard that the Israeli turnaway from using women as combat troops came because the Arabs wouldn't surrender to women. If this is true, then the Israelis made the decision in part out of misguided humanitarianism: my attitude would have been "Ok, don't surrender, then die."

With further irony, one of the obvious problems with our using women in frontline combat roles would be our puzzling refusal to enforce the Laws of War on our enemies, either through judicial action or through a field policy of withdrawing this protection from those enemies who commit atrocities. Either or both could work: either one could try and execute enemy combatants for abuse of prisoners, or one could publicly announce that members of combatant organizations which abuse prisoners will be executed upon capture, or tortured for information, at our discretion.

Since we don't do either, our own combatants are vulnerable to abuse with no redress and no incentive given to the enemy to behave more honorably. This is a problem whether or not we have frontline female combatants, it just becomes more obvious when we do.

Anonymous CrisisEraDynamo July 29, 2013 3:35 PM  

Vox, why are you so dismissive of women in combat? And what about those 8 other nations, not including Israel?

Anonymous David July 29, 2013 3:40 PM  

Animal; Women in the IDF are used as trainers
 
When one makes a sweeping statement like this, you are guaranteed to almost always be wrong.  Either on a technicality or blatantly.  In this case, your statement is blatantly wrong because while women are used as trainers, that is not the only role open to them, in fact, most roles are open to women.  Approximately +2/3 of all roles in the IDF have female representation.  Unless 2/3 of the IDF is trainers, you are by necessity wrong.
 
I am aquainted with a lady who has seen “action” in the IDF, by “action” I mean fired her tavor at an aggressor.  But in the absence of actual numbers of women in the IDF to have engaged in combat, I’ll just leave you with the example of the Karakals.   

Anonymous TLM July 29, 2013 3:43 PM  

i'm sure our enemies are terrified at the thought of being overun by The Charge of the Dyke Brigade.

Anonymous jack July 29, 2013 3:43 PM  

@Vox: Perhaps they can make a reality TV show of it called "Rape, Rout, or RIP?"

Or, if that unit is trained and blooded, like the Amazon Legion in Tom Kratman's fictional novel of the same name, they might just be able to kick some serious butt.

Of course, the US military of today would never, ever train even their male front line troops in the way Kratman's Amazons were trained.

Anonymous juststoppingby July 29, 2013 3:44 PM  

When my husband was still in the navy, they made them use cammex? masks that were over forty years old and falling to pieces,... And yet they have specially designed women's uniforms available years in advance of the actual admission of women. WTF women's fashion trumps the men's ability to breath! Grrrr. I am going to go for a run and burn off my mad.

Anonymous VD July 29, 2013 3:48 PM  

Vox, why are you so dismissive of women in combat? And what about those 8 other nations, not including Israel?

Because the vast majority of women in the military cannot fight. They're totally incapable of it both physically and psychologically and they are a tremendously disruptive element in every unit.

Those other nations aren't engaging in any significant combat. If women ever find themselves in real combat, they're going to get absolutely slaughtered. Most won't fight, they'll either run or surrender.

Anonymous dB July 29, 2013 3:49 PM  

Did you not see that Angelina Jolie has declared that rape is no longer a valid aspect of war.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_PEOPLE_ANGELINA_JOLIE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-07-29-07-21-35

Sorry I was too lazy to h-link this story correctly.

Anonymous VD July 29, 2013 3:51 PM  

I should also mention that unlike most men, I have actually sparred with dozens of women. All trained women, many with pretty decent techniques. They're basically hopeless with regards to either attack or defense and tend to crack emotionally under even mild pressure.

Anonymous VD July 29, 2013 3:53 PM  

Or, if that unit is trained and blooded, like the Amazon Legion in Tom Kratman's fictional novel of the same name, they might just be able to kick some serious butt.

No, they wouldn't. It's fiction. GI Jane is fiction. Fantasy fiction.

Anonymous Daniel July 29, 2013 3:54 PM  

But in the absence of actual numbers of women in the IDF to have engaged in combat, I’ll just leave you with the example of the Karakals.

"After an extensive search, the female soldier who made the initial report was found hiding in a bush and was verbally disciplined by her brigade commander."

The Caracal Battalion is an argument in favor of the post's thesis, not against.

Or were you writing about badminton rackets? Because, yes, the ladies who string Karakals do an outstanding job on those.

Anonymous Krul July 29, 2013 3:55 PM  

Re: dB

Sounds like an aging actress's attempt to reqcquire some attention. In other words, typical hollywood activism.

I'm just surprised it isn't about something gay. Hopefully we can take this as a sign that pro-gay activism is about to become passe (wishful thinking, I know).

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother July 29, 2013 4:02 PM  

David,

A woman who has exchanged fire with an enemy in Israel is NOT a front line combat soldier. There are very few front lines in Israel. Any member of the IDF can find themselves in a shootout anywhere in the country.

A female IDF trainer could find herself exchanging fire on the way to her car.

Anonymous Harsh July 29, 2013 4:12 PM  

Did you not see that Angelina Jolie has declared that rape is no longer a valid aspect of war.

What kind of drugs is that woman on?

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother July 29, 2013 4:15 PM  

Did you not see that Angelina Jolie has declared that rape is no longer a valid aspect of war.

My last refuge has been taken from me. What's the world coming to when you can't even have a good raping in the middle of combat?

Blogger Kristophr July 29, 2013 4:24 PM  

I'd like to see a crew of women successfully transport and fire a 4.2" mortar.

And after they have done that, all pass the pre-1970's spec for PT for an Infantryman.

The IDF doesn't do something as stupid as lower infantry PT specs for girls. Since they don't ever pass it, they don't serve there.

Anonymous Daniel July 29, 2013 4:25 PM  

Jolie needs to watch more television. If graping is okay for kids, it is probably okay for women.

Blogger RobertT July 29, 2013 4:27 PM  

If I wasn't living here, this blog would be pretty funny. Did this kind of stupid sh*t happen when the other historical empires bit the dust, or is this special humiliation reserved just for us? We aren't even fading away, we're just sifting into the dust.

Blogger Kristophr July 29, 2013 4:28 PM  

Jack:

Yup. Fiction. Nothing but fiction.

In his book, they ended up as light infantry because they couldn't carry crew served weapons any distance, or load heavy mortars.

And Kratman's protagonist's main use of them was to sacrifice them to enrage the rest of his units.

Blogger Cinco July 29, 2013 4:31 PM  

No, they wouldn't. It's fiction. GI Jane is fiction. Fantasy fiction.

NO, you don't understand. There was this show called Alias, and that 110lbs hottie kicked some serious man ass.

As a guy with 14 years of service all in combat arms, I can only say that this experiment is going to backfire on women, and we should let it happen. Here is why. First, the combat arms specialties in the military have unofficial ratings systems for officers. In other words, if you don't have a Ranger tab or Special Forces tab, you are not going to make it past the rank of major. Also, and no body will admit this publicly; but, they can not, CAN NOT compete physically or mentally with men in stressful situations. Lastly, and most importantly the first person to release video footage of daddy's little girl getting gang raped by a pack of Muslims in a country that 98% of Americans can't point to on a map is going to change our foreign policy for the better.

This is a good thing people. Experiments in equality within the military during a time of war will result in combat Darwinism. The results will speak for themselves.

Anonymous CrisisEraDynamo July 29, 2013 4:35 PM  

@ dB

Think of it like a gun-free zone. All she has to do is wish upon a star and BOOM! No more rapes during wartime.

Anonymous Salt July 29, 2013 4:35 PM  

I wonder if Lena Dunham has ordered a set yet?

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother July 29, 2013 4:36 PM  

No one will listen to a post-mammary Jolie.

Anonymous TJIC July 29, 2013 4:36 PM  

I've got a story set in 2064 that features a US / UN armed force with some soldiers literally using canes or wheelchairs. They're called "Alternatively Abled Soldiers".

I've had two people tell me that it's unrealistic.

I agree.

2030 seems more likely.

Anonymous TJIC July 29, 2013 4:40 PM  

@VD:


They're basically hopeless with regards to either attack or defense



I have never done martial arts. I once dated a woman with a Judo black belt. She'd done judo for almost a decade and was the leader of a student group. At one point I asked for a demonstration of how to break out of a wrist hold. I grabbed her wrist, and she confidently did...something. And I was still holding her wrist.

Technique + muscle mass is unstoppable.

Technique alone isn't quite so reliable.

Anonymous Harsh July 29, 2013 4:45 PM  

If I wasn't living here, this blog would be pretty funny. Did this kind of stupid sh*t happen when the other historical empires bit the dust, or is this special humiliation reserved just for us?

Hmm, you may be on to something. Did the Roman legions ever open their rolls to women?

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother July 29, 2013 4:46 PM  

Hmm, you may be on to something. Did the Roman legions ever open their rolls to women?

They may have opened their loincloths to women.

Anonymous Laz July 29, 2013 4:46 PM  

@ Cinco: You're probably right. We're going to need something more graphic than the Jessica Lynch debacle to dissuade women from pursuing combat positions.

Blogger Jamie-R July 29, 2013 4:46 PM  

It'll be great, women on the front lines who fall in love with the men shooting at them. Wait for the Hollywood movie released by the Weinstein Company.

Anonymous Noah B. July 29, 2013 4:48 PM  

All of this movement toward equality in the military hasn't gone far enough at all. We need affirmative action to correct the longstanding historical balances between men and women in the military. Starting in 2014, the military should commit to recruiting only women to serve in deployed combat and forward operating roles for the next 20 years.

Anonymous Noah B. July 29, 2013 4:52 PM  

"It's fiction. GI Jane is fiction. Fantasy fiction."

But it felt so real, and since feelings color perception, and perception is reality, then GI Jane was real. Feelings are what matter.

Anonymous Daniel July 29, 2013 4:56 PM  

Shut up, Tad.

Blogger tz July 29, 2013 4:58 PM  

Now we just have to have our militarized police forces have lots of women on the SWAT teams.

Anonymous Noah B. July 29, 2013 5:05 PM  

It's going to be hilarious.

Oh, you don't know how to work a DVR? Here's a Javelin missile.

Anonymous Harsh July 29, 2013 5:05 PM  

I'm still waiting for Phoenician to show up with a link to a women's combat unit he just looked up and then call us all dipshits.

Anonymous Daniel July 29, 2013 5:07 PM  

Oh, you don't know how to work a DVR? Here's a Javelin missile.

Feminocracy.

Anonymous Noah B. July 29, 2013 5:07 PM  

"Would France still surrender to the combat Barbies?"

There's only one way to find out.

Anonymous Steve Canyon July 29, 2013 5:20 PM  

Based on my experience, the one thing the average female in the military needs is a more spacious seat in their uniform....

Anonymous Will Best July 29, 2013 5:29 PM  

We should start them out with something small, lets send the Amazons into Syria to see how they do.

Anonymous Anonymous July 29, 2013 5:31 PM  

Angelina Jolie's dream WARRIOR

Killing and looting OK - raping, never.

Anonymous ENthePeasant July 29, 2013 5:36 PM  

It's probably a waste of time in the big picture (it's going to happen and that's that... of course with the civil war that's coming it might be a good thing to have shit Obama infantry units), but here goes. Israel has allowed women into a lot of combat specialties lately (particularly artillery) in order to get more men in the infantry. Artillery has always been the dumping ground for zeros in the IDF. In many ways women being moved to the Artillery has improved things. However, no one should look at Israel's women as the answer to anything other than the need to fill infantry slots with men. Since the debacle against Hezbollah in the Leb the IDF realized rather quickly that their infantry units might fair well as heavily armed police in the territories, but were pathetically ill trained to sustain heavy combat. So on the surface it might look like women were getting their shot when it's anything but that.

After Israeli infantry took in dead in the ass against Hezbollah (the war was successful overall on the strategic level but taking and holding ground proved beyond their capabilities). Changes came about almost immediately with infantry units up to division going on physically grueling exercises meant to sort out their poor physical condition and lack of discipline. In essence they opened up more combat slots but removed all women from infantry battalions.

Blogger rcocean July 29, 2013 5:44 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger rcocean July 29, 2013 5:45 PM  

Outside of a few freaks women are useless in combat -not simply because of their physical limitations- but because:

1) Women don't care about being - being called - physical cowards. You can't shame them into fighting or "sticking it out" like you can with men.

2) Young women have no desire to kill/maim young men, while most young men are indifferent or even enjoy killing other men.

3) You can get men to fight by appealing to their honor and team spirit, most women are too selfish (aka realistic) to buy that load of baloney.

4) You can get young men to fight by dangling the carrot of feminine approval - it doesn't work the other way round.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein July 29, 2013 5:50 PM  

OT:

Detroit, NWA was right etc

Anonymous wcu July 29, 2013 5:51 PM  

"Kneepad inserts"...lol...for those womenz looking to get ahead in their career.

Anonymous Carlotta July 29, 2013 5:54 PM  

I wore the regular BDU's and never had a single problem in them. In fact, they had adjustable everything and I looked quite hot in them. Very comfortable as well. Of course, I was still in my teens :)

This is worded weird. Almost like they are specifically designed for pear shaped women. And that men can chose to wear them is weird as well.
What guy is shaped like this?

Anonymous Carlotta July 29, 2013 5:56 PM  

@ Noah
So funny, I can't work the DVR. My Husband just had to fix my computers. HEHE.

Of course, he can't make the best chocolate chip cookies in the world either so we just call it even :)

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein July 29, 2013 6:01 PM  

Did you not see that Angelina Jolie has declared that rape is no longer a valid aspect of war.

*That guy* from Blazing Saddles weeps.

Anonymous TJIC July 29, 2013 6:04 PM  

@ Harsh:

Did the Roman legions ever open their rolls to women?

I was a Roman history major and wrote my undergrad thesis on the evolution of the legion from the Republic to the Empire.

In the mid-late Empire there were multiple laws passed, every 20 or 30 years, stating that legionaries could not move their wives, concubines, and children into the barracks with them.

The women didn't fight, but, yes, there was a huge breakdown in military discipline and readiness.

Anonymous Anonymous July 29, 2013 6:04 PM  

Look, I serve in the US Army. This is a disgusting, horrific joke. Wide assed ACUs? Tapered waist. Hell, their waists are as large as their asses. It has become nothing more than the governments largest entitlement program. Several of my close friends are calling it quits. I give it 4-5 years before it all implodes. Luckily, that is all the time I have left until retirement.

Anonymous TJIC July 29, 2013 6:07 PM  

@ Carlotta

This is worded weird...And that men can chose to wear them is weird as well.
What guy is shaped like this?



It's Newspeak.

We can't call them "men's uniforms" and "women's uniforms", because that's sexist.

We can't call them "buff uniforms" and "pear shaped uniforms", because that's sexist.

We can't say that men wear the men's uniform and jockish women can wear the men's uniform if it fits, because that's sexist.

So we call it uniform A and uniform B, and we say that anyone can wear either.

The fact that all men will wear the real uniform and 99% of women will wear the see-I'm-a-REAL-soldier-NO-SERIOUSLY uniform is just a coincidence.

Anonymous Anonymous July 29, 2013 6:08 PM  

To be fair, there are a few smokin' young LTs! Emotional train wrecks, but still good looking. Wait, did I just commit sexual harassment against a fellow elite fighting machine?

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother July 29, 2013 6:12 PM  

What would Patton and MacArthur think of the new Army? McAuliffe? Damn, even Westmoreland? Colonel Lew Millett and every other Army CMOH recipient?

Infuriating.

Anonymous Daniel July 29, 2013 6:16 PM  

Not even Corporal Klinger would opt for uniform-A. That shortened buttonfly would chafe.

Anonymous Hammer6 July 29, 2013 6:17 PM  

We already have experience as a nation with women in stressful/command situations - it gets people killed.

AJG report - http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jag.navy.mil%2Flibrary%2Finvestigations%2FWILLIAMETTE%2520JASON%2520COLLISION%252010%2520FEB%252086.pdf&ei=oOL2UYfSCMjAyAGp2YEI&usg=AFQjCNEJB5cR-oknHqrEzeUCdzmZRKOX6g&sig2=pkSkEAnzGuDr7iDm8RyLSA&bvm=bv.49784469,d.aWc&cad=rja

What the JAG report doesn't mention - this was the vaunted ALL-FEMALE watch team on the Jason. Turns out that they weren't even all qualified to stand the watch.

It also doesn't mention that the female members of the repair teams on the Jason couldn't do the job, so the call went out for all of the other ships standing by to prepare to send their repair teams over by boat. This with us floating around a buring oil slick at night.

COs got relieved, and the dirty secrets of that night got buried.

When a bunch of goat-molesting jihadis grab up a unit of gals and make their own video, the globe will know what guys who have served for thousands of years know about women and combat.

Blogger JohnG July 29, 2013 6:21 PM  

It’s disgusting the political opportunism both with the administration, politicians and the generals involved here. All hail the mighty 6-figure retirement check along with the fancy GS rating or consulting job. Aside from the physical thing that most people get – in that women aren’t as strong, have to have a different Physical Fitness Test (PFT) than the guys do because the vast majority of them have no upper body strength and can’t lift anything heavy – they also can’t shoot either. I’ve never had a female that worked for me that scored higher than the lowest marksmanship ranking. Not even the redneck hillbilly girls that we occasionally got. Ruckmarching with a heavy pack – the females have a different standard for that on 12 milers – the women have to make the time, but carry about half the weight of the guys. I never saw a female on a 12 miler come in first or remotely close.
But I think En said that its’ a done deal. The USMC hasn’t caved yet, I’ve not heard of any more females making it through infantry boot camp yet, and the USMC hasn’t cheated them through. The scum sucking Army however will indeed cheat. And/or they’ll lower the standards for everybody so they can get a woman to pass the standard. But boot camp isn’t going to be the determining factor. Reality in field conditions and in combat will tell the truth…yah, bitch carry the 240 bravo for 12 miles, plus the ruck (the packing list for which is gender neutral), the Kevlar, the body armor and the combat load (or two) and the grenades.
The guys that quoted women in combat arms in other countries – I’ve never seen a female infantry soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan – and while other countries did provide troops to those theaters, check the ISAF webpage to see what the token contributions were – most countries’ soldiers never left the FOBs. These dopes think that having a female behind a machinegun in a turret on a convoy is the same as being in the infantry – it’s not.

Anonymous TJIC July 29, 2013 6:24 PM  

@JohnG

they also can’t shoot either. I’ve never had a female that worked for me that scored higher than the lowest marksmanship ranking. Not even the redneck hillbilly girls that we occasionally got.

My redneck hillbilly fiance can outshoot me at rifle over iron sights.

Anonymous Sam the Man July 29, 2013 6:30 PM  

With a very limited exposure as a State Guardsman what I saw was not pretty. The fact is putting young fit women in with young fit men is going to lead to all sorts of difficulties due to that fact that both sexes will be spending a lot of time thinking about copulating. The problems are as follows:

1) Comradeship: A group of young guys working together under pressure develop a lot of comradeship based on the shared experiences. Add in a few girls and suddenly the guys are competing with each other to get laid. A lot of the comradeship goes out the window when one or more of the men are vying for the same girl. Bad for unit cohesion.

2) Girl fights: Generally speaking the good looking women go for the guy with the highest status in the unit. Yes the women compete just like the guys. They will fight in quite nasty verbal ways, which does nothing for unit cohesion as they try to run down each other to everyone that will listen. Add in any number of women into a unit and there is constant background female bickering going on.

3) Relationship problems: So soon the best looking girl of the batch is an item with the squad leader, platoon NCO, some male in a postion of high status. The male has a built in tendency to take care of females they are banging, which leads to all sorts of favoritism issues, both from the females not getting the favorable treatment and the guys who have to take up the slack. If in a fighting or danger situation this attachment will result in the leader spending time thinking about protecting his woman, instead of performing his proper role of leading and assigning tasks.

4) Assessments and 201s: When the OIC/NCOIC who getting “it”, is responsible for evaluations, who do you suppose gets favorable treatment? These make or break your career. It is a form of payment in kind. What does that do to the motivation of those not in that position who see this occurring?

5) Hierarchy issues: So a good looking girl is “getting it on” with the Company SFC (E7). She does not work directly for him but a SGT (E5). She does not like the orders the E5 is giving her and basically says, I won’t do it, if you don’t like that see the SFC. Depending on the character of the individuals involved all sorts of outcomes can occur, none of them good. This sort of thing happens; many women will attempt to avail themselves of a protector when they feel threatened. These relationships have an effect of breaking down the rigid hierarchy that is required in the field to get things done.


Anonymous Sam the Man July 29, 2013 6:30 PM  

6) The whore problem: A lot of the young girls coming into the military are not 10s (look wise) but 4 and 5 rankings on a good day. They have not had that much attention prior but in skewed ratios suddenly find themselves in great demand for casual sex. The attention goes to their head and at that age cannot see the consequences of their actions. They become the victims of “Pump and Dump” and garner a reputation as easy. The results for the young ladies are not good for their long term chances of a happy stable married life.

7) Harassment charges: aggressive males will attempt to mate with available females, generally with the most attractive available. Good looking women have to fight off frequent approaches. One of the ways women can fight this is to file harassment charges, which they do. Frequently the only charge the fellow is guilty of is approaching a female who thinks the guy is insufficiently attractive or too low a rank. Ruinous for guy’s career, and the rough and tumble types are generally not exactly the most suave. So you are setting these guys up for a charge, the very type of guy that will likely be a real combat soldier. Completely stupid if the purpose of an army is to fight.

8) Female inclination to run from danger: No one wants to deal with this, but the fact is when a sudden threat appears men are hardwired to turn and attack, single women are hardwired to turn and run. That is the way we are wired and anyone who says otherwise has lived in a bubble. This inclination of single women serves a very valid purpose, after all there is plenty of sperm and a sperm producer can make it for 50 years or more. A fertile women has 20 years tops, fact is women are more valuable to the species on an individual basis. The species survives because of these inclinations. But it means when a sudden attack, or alarm or desperate situation the women are much more likely to cut and run when it is at its most desperate. Not good for a fighting army.

Some will answer relationships are against the regulations. Right……. Men are men and women are women and you are talking about 18 to 25 year olds. They will act according to their nature. The system is set up to favor the women on any contest between a man’s word and a female’s word. That is the system as it exists now. Women do not meet the same PT standards, nor the same haircut standards, nor are they held to the same standards on duty, or in PT or in work. Given the military has already adopted two sets of standards, why does anyone expect they will suddenly apply one standard to both?

The changes made to the male military have all been to allow for female proclivities, which do not seem to have any relationship with the traditional western armies’ concern with maintaining fighting power. All the great fighting armies of history have been male; the mythical amazons simply do not show up in the record anywhere.
So the idea of women in the Combat or combat support units is just plain stupid, though there may well be an argument to support their use in service support units well away from any fighting. Which is how militaries have utilized women for the last 2500 years of recorded history.

Anonymous Hyperphrenius July 29, 2013 6:31 PM  

I've seen some express the fear of martial law coming to America, but if this is the way the military is going, then it won't be much to fear.

Anonymous sprach von Teufelhunden July 29, 2013 6:40 PM  

@David July 29, 2013 3:05 PM

The IDF seems to do OK


You appear to consider yourself an expert on all things IDF. Allow me to introduce you to Roi Tov. I would call him the "real expert." Including the aspect of WiC. Why don't you drop him line. He's currently in Bolvia, under assassination orders by MOSSAD. He's a real whistle-blower. Not a whistle-squeaker like Snowden.

In the Marines we call/called Women Marines, "WMs." It stood for "Waste of Money." It was true 30+ years ago. It is even more true today.

Let's end this entire debate. Make it required viewing of The Siege of Firebase Gloria. This scene in particular.

Anonymous sprach von Teufelhunden July 29, 2013 6:48 PM  

And ...

Let's Talk About War

Anonymous Concerned Rabbit Hunter July 29, 2013 7:03 PM  

"The Caracal Battalion is an argument in favor of the post's thesis, not against."

Does pussy have the same connotations in Hebrew? Perhaps that is why it was named that way.

Anonymous civilServant July 29, 2013 7:05 PM  

I've seen some express the fear of martial law coming to America, but if this is the way the military is going, then it won't be much to fear.

Very likely a female can fly a drone as well as a male.

Blogger Tom Kratman July 29, 2013 7:07 PM  

Kristophr: Nah. Them getting butchered and the reaction (basically, "deguello") from the men who came across the bodies was a real world warning: Expect atrocity from our male soldiers when they find "their" women killed.

Vox, it is fiction but it's not all that fictive. Basically, I started writing the book as non-fiction, to keep women out of combat arms. In the course of my researches I discovered that a) what feministas had to write on the subject represented a net diminution of human understanding, myths and misconceptions where not outright lies, but that b) there was some history, even after redacting the propaganda, to indicate it could be done. As for how it's done; that's my best estimate of how to do it. It's sufficiently brutal that, for us, it would not be politically possible.

Go read this: http://www.baen.com/amazonsrightbreast.asp. After that, if you want to read the novel, send me a snail mail and I'll shoot you a copy.

David: there's a mostly female gender mixed unit, called infantry but really more in the line of border guards cum gendarmerie, called the Caracal. They hadn't fought at all until quite recently and that one small skirmish was less than glory filled. Note how little the feminists have talked it up. Why? Well, most of the killing was done by Caracal's men and at least one girl simply hid.

Anonymous sprach von Teufelhunden July 29, 2013 7:08 PM  

These are not comforting statements if you are currently an American citizen living in CONUS:

My prediction or expectation is by winter, the second downturn of the Great Recession will be in place. Unemployment will explode, more foreclosures are coming. It’s going to be worse than the Great Depression.

Polls from all over the world consistently show that Israel and the US are regarded as the two greatest threats to peace and to life on earth. Yet, these two utterly lawless governments prance around pretending to be the “world’s greatest democracies.” Neither government accepts any accountability whatsoever to international law, to human rights, to the Geneva Conventions, or to their own statutory law. The US and Israel are rogue governments, throwbacks to the Hitler and Stalin era.

-- Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy under President Reagan

Anonymous Anonymous July 29, 2013 7:14 PM  

Many years ago during my 2 semesters of ROTC, I witnessed the utter inability of females to do the simplest shit that required minimal body strength or endurance. I used to show up to the Saturday morning PT sessions drunk and/or hungover and I was still able to beat every last one of them physically.

- REMF

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother July 29, 2013 7:19 PM  

In better news, Beast Machine's maiden trip to the range was a success. Running like a scalded cat with the gas system closed on steel case, 4 to 5 with brass ammo.

Anonymous VD July 29, 2013 7:25 PM  

After that, if you want to read the novel, send me a snail mail and I'll shoot you a copy.

Please send me the epub. I would definitely like to read it. I'm overseas so I prefer electronic.

Anonymous Hyperphrenius July 29, 2013 7:28 PM  

civilServant July 29, 2013 7:05 PM

Very likely a female can fly a drone as well as a male.


How have you measured how likely it is that a female can fly a drone as well as a male? And just how likely is "very likely"?

Anonymous Carlotta July 29, 2013 7:37 PM  

@ CivilServant
It depends on the female. I would likely run it right into the wall. If I am at a special time of the month I would leave entire countries in ruin. Better in the kitchen pregnant :)

@TJIC
Are you saying that I should pay attention to the man behind the curtain? They said not to.

Anonymous Carlotta July 29, 2013 7:38 PM  

@ REMF
Sadly, this is true. And it used to get me every time because I thought I had integrity and was going to be GI Jane because I was going for the male standard. Sigh. Thank God he saved me from a life of feminisim.

Anonymous zen0 July 29, 2013 7:46 PM  

How have you measured how likely it is that a female can fly a drone as well as a male? And just how likely is "very likely"?

More importantly, how do these female drone operators respond under fire? Do they freeze for fear of their life, or what?

I heard a story from a fellow who was a gunner on a ship in WW2. His trainer was an older fellow. One time when under attack, he froze when he was supposed to fire. His trainer was killed in the attack.

This defined his life from then on.

Gee, I hope they do not piss their new uni's when the drone gets it.

Anonymous nick digger July 29, 2013 7:56 PM  

They still won't be able to outfight a Boy Scout troop armed with jackknives

Can't really say that about the New Boy Scouts.

Anonymous jack July 29, 2013 7:57 PM  

Kristophr July 29, 2013 4:28 PM

Jack:

Yup. Fiction. Nothing but fiction.

Finally back. A critical reading of the novel [and, by implication, Kratman's training methods and usage of troop assets] would indicate the Amazons did indeed inspire the men to greater efforts to kill and maim. This after an suicidal frontal assault on a fortified position. After this attack the loses were such that the Amazon legion was organized into small, guerrilla units.
But, in the beginning of the climatic counterattack, these female troops were ordered into suicide like diversionary roles to fool the enemy into thinking the main effort was someplace nowhere near the real counterattack. In the book only a few of the 40 plus guerrilla Amazon units won the day at their individual objectives. They did serve, in the book, an effective and valuable piece of the counterattack strategy.
I suppose if you had the hardness, as a commander, to utilize women in this manner then it could work. I will admit, as may Kratman, that the effective uses of women units, no matter how well trained, would be limited.

Anonymous TLM July 29, 2013 8:00 PM  

I recently had some business to do @ Ft Campbell (Home of the 101st flying chickens). A guy with me with no prior military service or general knowledge of the military asked me after we were finished why were so many "soldiers" we saw that day fat. Throw in some women to the mix and our armed services are a joke.

Anonymous GreyS July 29, 2013 8:05 PM  

I'm all for women on the front lines-- on the front lines of the US border, doing the only job the military should currently be doing.

The government wants to put stupid women into stupid situations in stupid wars? I'm barely on the US military's side as it is-- this only disconnects me more. Though I'm sure when the media gets a hold of the story of the first several "women warriors" captured and held as POWs, the govt/media will drum up enough support to do whatever it wants.

Anonymous Anonymous July 29, 2013 8:09 PM  

So how does the ilk feel about AR-15 shooter bikini women? How does this square with women soldiers? If the new gender neutral uni's were bikinis & heels would this be better? Does the ilk want women trained to kill generally, but not allowed to kill? Is the difference that women should only kill as a last resort? I'm curious if someone would outline the overall position on women and the appropriate occasions for use of deadly force/combat.

- Azimus

Blogger Celia Hayes July 29, 2013 8:16 PM  

Sigh. I was in (Air Force) 20 years, and wore the old jungle-green BDU without any particular problem. That's what belts and adjustment tabs are for. I didn't give a damn if I looked hot in it - basically, it was utility clothing and I looked like a BDU laundry bag tied in the middle. I wasn't there to look hot, I was there to do my job.

But then I was in a technical specialty and in peacetime (more or less, although there were some moments), about as far in the rear with the gear as one could get. There is military, in a lot of different shades and conditions, according to how close one is to the pointy edge of the spear, and there is direct combat specialties.

For women serving in skilled tech positions or as pilots/nav and rear-seaters, requiring no particular feats of endurance or upper body strength; likely no problem. For hardcore front-line, pointy-end-of-the-spear combat-infantry missions ... a vanishingly small tending to invisible number of women are capable of that.

OTO ... as the current wars developed, combat was likely to catch up to you, no matter how far in the rear. My daughter served two hitches as a Marine, part of one in Kuwait/Irag in 2003. She was much better prepared for incidental combat then,(which she did encounter, running convoys from Kuwait to Baghdad) than I ever had been. All I ever had to worry about from a professional POV was an AC crashing on top of the station or a hostile mob overrunning the place.

It all depends on the service, the MOS/AFSC, the mission ... and sometimes the woman involved. There were stupid young c**ts and the guys who indulged them now and again. I viewed one of my own missions as being to set all them straight and to grow up. Which most of them did, although there were some spectacular outliers.

Blogger Tom Kratman July 29, 2013 8:20 PM  

@ Vox: Shot, over.

Anonymous ENthePeasant July 29, 2013 8:34 PM  

"Very likely a female can fly a drone as well as a male."

There's a certain amount of truth to this and one thing that makes me think the Obamanation plans on waging war "internally" is they believe in drone warfare and are trying desperately to increase the number of women drone operators. However, I've contended for many years that if I open the door to your communication van and dump a thirty round mag into it the results will not be positive for the inhabitants. Of course they will try to secure them in loyalist areas far from the fighting but I doubt very much that they can escape cheap and affective missiles that are readily available and easily programmable. War comes down to a two way goat screw and even against less than technologically proficient Arabs and Afghans drones have not exactly won any wars. European on European warfare is the most devastating form known to man and always focuses on violent Death, wounds and physical exhaustion. Women will be tested just as hard as any man will be.

Anonymous realmatt July 29, 2013 8:43 PM  

I especially like the people who bring up Ali's daughter when talking about how women can fight. It's obvious they've never seen her fight..

Women fighting is boring. They can only get as big as a male lightweight, but can't move as fast as a male light weight, so it's boring and sad to watch.

Damn! I forgot about BSG!

They weren't actually human females. They were the females from a long long time ago in a galaxy far far away who mated with the male Cylons to create something not as strong as either.

Or something..

Anonymous ENthePeasant July 29, 2013 8:46 PM  

This is the kind of thing the army is scared of. Life and human nature will always ruin the day of socialists... even in uber PC Norway. "Til VALHAL"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=K5uQcU92x2o

Anonymous hardscrabble farmer July 29, 2013 8:51 PM  

"With... a more spacious seat...for men and women with a smaller or more slender body.
The trousers feature wider areas at the hips, waist and backside..."

So let me see if I understand this correctly- they had to create a spacious seat and wider areas at the hips, waist and backside in order to accomodate men and women with a smaller and slender body?

FUBAR, BABY.

Anonymous realmatt July 29, 2013 8:58 PM  

Drones do not win wars. Flying over and dropping missiles does not win wars. Superior technology utilized to do everything short of dropping an atomic bomb and obliterating absolutely everything is not going to win any war.

And Japan was defeated long before it came to that.

The war is won when the people are all dead, or demoralized to the point where they don't care what you do as long as you spare their lives.

Anonymous realmatt July 29, 2013 9:00 PM  

I wonder how they'll spin it once the first commercial airliner goes down when some idiot screws up flying a drone.

Anonymous Jack Amok July 29, 2013 9:18 PM  

And yet they have specially designed women's uniforms available years in advance of the actual admission of women. WTF women's fashion trumps the men's ability to breath!

Yes, fashion is critical to success. Perhaps they can have Hugo Boss design the next round of uniforms.

Anonymous ENthePeasant July 29, 2013 9:23 PM  

Hugo Boss would look at what he has to work with and decline.

Anonymous hardscrabble farmer July 29, 2013 9:28 PM  

Amerikwa has jumped the shark. Just when you thought your country couldn't possibly sink any lower, BLURP!, she slides another couple of inches into the primordial ooze.

They should get that tattooed chick Carlos Danger was sexting to try on a new pair of these wide in the hips/ass uniforms and send her out to the hurt locker.

I'd buy that for a dollar!

Anonymous Harry July 29, 2013 9:33 PM  

Norway probably needs the women in the military because of their really low birthrate.

Who else can they depend on to defend Norway, the Muslims? I think not.

Anonymous Carlotta July 29, 2013 9:35 PM  

I was there to look hot. Got me married mission accomplished.

Celia sounds like some of my female supervisors. I want to thank them. Real world experience slaps the fantasy out of feminism.
As an aside, I come from a long line of Marines myself. Not one would allow their daughters to be devildogs.

Anonymous Harry July 29, 2013 9:39 PM  

"They may have opened their loincloths to women."

Nah, they had Jennies for that. Everybody lined up and took their turn.

Anonymous pb July 29, 2013 9:40 PM  

"I especially like the people who bring up Ali's daughter when talking about how women can fight. It's obvious they've never seen her fight.."

I am reminded of that "reality" show she did, along with Todd Palin, Dean Cain and other celebs - they were paired with former members of the military and competed in "special missions." The winner, the wrestling diva, even boasted that the show demonstrated "women can do whatever men can do," including combat and special operations.

Anonymous Harsh July 29, 2013 10:02 PM  

The winner, the wrestling diva, even boasted that the show demonstrated "women can do whatever men can do," including combat and special operations.

I bet she can't get an erection.

Anonymous The other skeptic July 29, 2013 10:06 PM  

Kristophr: Nah. Them getting butchered and the reaction (basically, "deguello") from the men who came across the bodies was a real world warning: Expect atrocity from our male soldiers when they find "their" women killed.

I knew it wouldn't be long before Kratman chimed in.

I just finished reading Amazon Legion today and I thought that a big part of their reason for existence (there's a fancy froggy word for that) was to fight as partisans in territory occupied by enemy in ways that men would have difficulty doing and to tie down a large percentage of an enemy force that could otherwise be brought to bear on the Balboan forces and to wear down equipment so that it would be less useful later.

Anonymous scoobius dubious July 29, 2013 10:13 PM  

I think this will work out brilliantly. As proof, I cite Xena: Warrior Princess. She had that cool deadly Frisbee, just like Odd-Job but without the derby part. And that hot red-headed chick who could fight with a big stick. Bring on the Red Army, baby!

"Who else can they depend on to defend Norway, the Muslims? I think not."

Since Norway is already full of Muslims, this is prima facie evidence that they aren't even defending it now. So who cares what happens to them? They don't, why should I?

Anonymous Harry July 29, 2013 10:17 PM  

tz "Now we just have to have our militarized police forces have lots of women on the SWAT teams."

Let's pray that happens. And more affirmative action in government.

Anonymous NateM July 29, 2013 10:19 PM  

"Combat is Hard!"

I am willing to bet no "smaller framed man" would be caught dead wearing the alternative acu at risk of being pointed out wearing the 'girl uniform' by the guys in his platoon.

Anonymous (Unborn) Vera, Chuck, and Dave July 29, 2013 10:33 PM  

What did *you* do in the war, Mommy?

Anonymous The other skeptic July 29, 2013 10:37 PM  

Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior

Anonymous Inane Rambler July 29, 2013 10:38 PM  

"In the book only a few of the 40 plus guerrilla Amazon units won the day at their individual objectives."

Maybe I SHOULD read it then if this is what happens.

Anonymous The other skeptic July 29, 2013 10:45 PM  

Well, most of the killing was done by Caracal's men and at least one girl simply hid.

I am sure there are men that have done that, but we can shoot men who do that pour encourager les autres.

Anonymous meg00k July 29, 2013 10:49 PM  

Two words: Danica Patrick

Anonymous Harsh July 29, 2013 10:56 PM  

Two words: Danica Patrick

I'm pretty sure she's not in the military. Unless you're trying to be funny, in which case: ha ha, I get it. I get jokes.

Anonymous bbtp July 29, 2013 10:56 PM  

Not to go OT but Kratman is a class act. The contrast with SFWA jerks couldn't be starker.

--bbtp

Blogger JohnG July 29, 2013 10:57 PM  

@TJIC

lol, I am a redneck, I've killed one waterbed and TV too!

Blogger Celia Hayes July 29, 2013 11:07 PM  

"What did *you* do in the war, Mommy?"

My bit, you lazy, ignorant little t*ats - supporting the teeny tiny point of the spear - at a point in time when the draft had just ended, morale in the services was in the sh*tter, and just about all the overseas assignments were in f*cking dull backwaters, although some of them had at least the potential to become very hot on a moment's notice.

And yes, for the first couple of years, I had to wear male fatigues for them, and purchased out of my own pocket. Having the bag-o-laundry BDUs issued was a step up.

Blogger Bob Loblaw July 29, 2013 11:12 PM  

Women are fine in combat as long as they don't have to carry too much. Leigh Ann Hester earned a silver star for her part in reversing an ambush. Of course she's unusual, but she's not singular.

The big problem is upper body strength. Most women can't lift infantry loads let alone carry them up the side of a mountain at 7000 ft.

Anonymous A Visitor July 29, 2013 11:17 PM  

The IDF seems to do OK We're not the IDF. They also have OBLIGATORY military service for all able body men.

The Army is planning to develop gender-neutral standards to ensure all soldiers have fair access to jobs.

Although I know exactly what they mean by this, I'd love gender neutral standards; It would eradicate the majority of the women from the military in the blink of an eye.

You know, if the military ever relaxed its 4F standards, people like myself could probably get in. Then, the need for women would be moot to begin with.

Here's another idea: strategic retrenchment! We actually decide what our priorities in the world are. Nah, that'd be too easy.

The US military has become a joke, a tay payer funded social experiment. Retire, men, and let the broads take it from here. Two individuals I know that have been deployed downrange to Afghanistan and (in one of the two's case) Iraq have regaled me with tales of how much of an absolute joke our military has become. It is frightening in the truest sense of the word. If, Heaven forbid, we get in a war with a competent enemy (or even another Saddam, at this point), I truly think it will be nothing short of a miracle if the military performs its job half competently.

Did the Roman legions ever open their rolls to women? They were just full of homosexuals which also spelled their demise just as fast. I suppose we're doubly hosed since we both now have open homes and women (soon to be) serving in frontline combat.

Now we just have to have our militarized police forces have lots of women on the SWAT teams.

The Iranian government has a few police squads (at least in Tehran) that do commando stuff. It was hilarious watching them rappel down in chadors.

Oh, you don't know how to work a DVR? Here's a Javelin missile. I LOLed at that. Good stuff.

2) Young women have no desire to kill/maim young men, while most young men are indifferent or even enjoy killing other men.

Reminds me of the robot propaganda video in the Futurama episode "I Dated A Robot" when the narrator is talking about how all civilization was an attempt to impress the opposite sex (and it shows war, technology, etc.) and sometimes the same sex (drama).

My best friend who was a Guardsman in Afghanistan said #'s 1 & 3 (per Sam the Man) were the biggest problem for his (no pun intended) sister company that was at a FOB and had women in it. His company was men only and they were at an outpost. He said 6 & 7 could become a major problem too if women went to front line MOSes like infantry.

Drones do not win wars. Flying over and dropping missiles does not win wars. Superior technology utilized to do everything short of dropping an atomic bomb and obliterating absolutely everything is not going to win any war.

And Japan was defeated long before it came to that.
War is won by boots on the ground. No offense to the Air Force but after nearly a century of trying to make Douhet's ideas THE IDEA, it still comes down to boots on the ground.

Anonymous Harsh July 29, 2013 11:28 PM  

Reminds me of the robot propaganda video in the Futurama episode "I Dated A Robot" when the narrator is talking about how all civilization was an attempt to impress the opposite sex (and it shows war, technology, etc.) and sometimes the same sex (drama).

Don't Date Robots!!!

http://vimeo.com/12915013

Anonymous The other skeptic July 29, 2013 11:35 PM  

I like this one from The Assault on Firebase Gloria for the scene at 1:14. The leader shooting towards his troops is priceless.

Blogger Dystopic July 30, 2013 12:06 AM  

Brilliant. Hey, next they'll start nitpicking the shoes. I mean, she'll need some high heels to look good while slogging through the dust pits of some third world toilet, right?

As far as I'm concerned the only real reason there is a push for female soldiers is so the Left wing can take over the only remaining non-Leftist branch of the government.

Anonymous AdognamedOp July 30, 2013 12:47 AM  

Considering the type of broads that enlist, they should create a lesbian dorito
brigade. The unit emblem could be a yellow triangle with a fierce lookin cat in the center. We could use them as mine sweepers.

Anonymous Jack Amok July 30, 2013 1:07 AM  

Hugo Boss would look at what he has to work with and decline.

Well, he got a tent around Goering. Not even Carlos Danger's sexting partner is that big. I'm sure Hugo could hack it.

Blogger Frank Brady July 30, 2013 1:16 AM  

Holy crap!

Anonymous FP July 30, 2013 1:21 AM  

"Women in combat also worked in the new battlestar galactica..."

I think one of my favorite scenes in that series for sheer stupidity was when the Prez's aide dude, who is in love with the black bridge officer chick over a season or so sacrifices himself mere minutes after the gal has dumped him for the lead pilot on the ship. So cliche.

That show was such a joke.

Anonymous FP July 30, 2013 1:24 AM  

Heh, three lesbians are suing a cab company in Portland because they got booted out of two different cabs on the interstate. Apparently for getting too amorous. What will happen when the lesbian dorito brigade gets left behind by non enlightened allies? No room in the hummer/chopper.

Blogger Frank Brady July 30, 2013 1:27 AM  

Kristophr wrote:

"I'd like to see a crew of women successfully transport and fire a 4.2" mortar.

"And after they have done that, all pass the pre-1970's spec for PT for an Infantryman."


Neither of the above will happen. Somehow Washington's planned imposition of martial law seems less problematic than it did earlier.

Blogger Bosefus July 30, 2013 1:34 AM  

Ever watch the TV show Cops? The lady cops are good for carrying the extra handcuffs needed to get really big men under arrest. Otherwise they hand out parking tickets. This aint rocket science. Hell, give em a gun and let em have at it looking good in a pressed uniform and all the enemy may just surrender to their wiles. The wheels have come off America long ago so who cares about this, that, and the other. I really don't think most people care a damn about women one way or the other anymore.

Blogger Ron July 30, 2013 2:10 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Ann Morgan July 30, 2013 2:55 AM  

MrGreenMan wrote: **Suggesting that, as sometimes a child must burn his hand to understand not to touch the stove, there should be a cessation of all protections of women soldiers, and they should be shoved out and treated exactly like any other idiot enlistee, will earn you the hatred and venom of all the usual feminist conservatives and their white knight enablers, because women are special and supposed to be protected even from what they adamantly want to do.**

Mr Green Man: Well, I happen to be a woman, and I really don't understand other women who demand to be given jobs which are simultaneously physically demanding, and highly dangerous, if they cannot meet the same physical standards as men. It seems obvious to me that putting a woman who cannot meet the physical standards into such a job puts the men in greater danger for their lives than they would otherwise be, due to a combination of the men having to pick up the women's slack, and protect them from their own ineptitude.

I really can't understand what degree of obliviousness to reality, uncaring for other people's lives, hatred of men, or combination of the above, leads these women to demand to be allowed to take a course of action that puts men in greater danger, simply to bolster their own self esteem or make some sort of politically correct point.

For my own part, hatred with me is a highly personal emotion. You have to really work at it and do something to specifically piss me off, to get on my 'to destroy list'. I certainly can't envision putting anyone on that list simply because of a condition they happened to be born with, such as being male, or of a particular color. And I'd like to think that I'm more ethical than to do something so despicable as to put other people in danger to pad my own ego. Especially in a manner which would pretty much make me a fraud in my own heart, because I'm not able to engage in enough self deception to convince myself I can do something that I really can't. And those who can strike me as the epitome of scum.

So, I'm weaker than most men. That's biology and the universe, and just the way things are. Life sucks and then you die. I'm strong enough to do almost all the things I want to do, and if there is something I'm not strong enough to do, I either won't do it, or use my mind to find a tool that will allow me to do it, or ask for help. As of right now, the main thing I really want to do that I'm not strong enough to do is to make chainmail out of 12 and 14 guage stainless steel rings with a small diameter. Well, that sucks slightly, but there are plenty of other rings, either of a narrower gauge or more easily worked metals that keep me plenty busy enough. And if I really get my little heart set on the heavy gauge stainless steel rings, I can probably work out a way to do it if I invest in a pair of pliers with longer handles to give me more leverage. But either way, at least my personal frustration with the chainmail rings is not actually endangering other people's lives.

Anonymous Ann Morgan July 30, 2013 3:24 AM  

Vox Day wrote: **Those other nations aren't engaging in any significant combat. If women ever find themselves in real combat, they're going to get absolutely slaughtered. Most won't fight, they'll either run or surrender.**

Probably true. I got into a fight several years ago with 6 other women who were suffering from the unfortunate drunken delusion that I didn't have a right to get a drink of water at a public water fountain (after a long thirsty bike ride) and tried to knock me down to keep me from getting a drink .... they started out with only 1 of them trying to knock me down, and I knocked her down. When a few of them tried, I knocked those few down, and when all 6 tried, I still knocked them all down. Then I got my drink of water.

The moral here is: Do not attack people, even of your own female gender, who are 6 inches taller than you and your friends, 50 lbs heavier than you and your friends, lift 30 pound bundles of newspapers for a living, and know more about anatomy than you do. Being a drunk spoiled bitch will not help, either. Neither will the police, when they find out that you attacked first, and that I am a woman, so you can't play the sex-discrimination card with them. Instead, the police will write you a ticket, and ask me if I want to press charges.

Attacking a man in war won't go any better for most women. In fact, it will go a hell of a lot worse.

Anonymous scoobius dubious July 30, 2013 3:43 AM  

"I really don't understand other women who demand to be given jobs which are simultaneously physically demanding, and highly dangerous, if they cannot meet the same physical standards as men."

I really don't mean to be snarky, but I fear succinctness will sound like snarkiness; yet that isn't what I'm trying to do here.

You speak of "the same physical standards as men". What you don't seem to have a grip on, is that those physical standards include having a higher level of testosterone than virtually any woman has, a different set of instincts (maybe even a different brain structure), and not having a uterus or breasts. A woman who is exactly my height and weight and musculature is still not going to behave in the same fashion as me, by simple virtue of not being a man.

There's an old joke. In reply to the old feminist saw, 'If men could menstruate, then it would be a sacrament,' one is obliged to respond, 'Well if men could menstruate, then men would be women.' You see what I mean?

Vive la difference!

Anonymous ENthePeasant July 30, 2013 3:58 AM  

Ann Morgan's post remind me of something I keep meaning to talk about. Wiener has a 78 percent approval rating amongst women 18-26. http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/07/29/poll-78-percent-of-young-women-approve-of-weiner

It's not exactly a secret around here that women make the wrong choice on a regular basis. Everyone's talking about women being raped, but I'm kinda thinking that it would make their tiny little hearts flutter and there "Combat Uniform-Alternate" come flying off at the opportunity to submit to a captor. I can see the book version right now: "Torn between the savage love of the plt that captured her, and the oath she took to her country." We all know how that's going to work out.

Anonymous Ann Morgan July 30, 2013 3:59 AM  

Sam the Man - some of what you wrote about the problems in the military would apply to me, some not. I admit to not being very brave, and that being the case, would not seek out jobs (like soldier) where I would need to be brave. I have an INTP personality, pretty rare for women, and an awful lot of 'typical' female behavior isn't found in INTP females's (although an INTP would not be suitable for combat for other reasons).

For instance, your comment about 'girl fights' or women having a bitchy fight over wanting the same man... I really don't see the point to that. The man will love whom he wants to love, I can't really see how arguing with or slapping around another woman is going to make him love me, if he loves her (or someone else). So it's better to just go cry, accept that he doesn't love me, and try to find someone else.

As for the 4.2 inch mortar, I googled that. 330 pounds!? (eyes bug out). I could *probably* find a way to move it ... eventually. Most likely with a wheelbarrow, or planting my butt on the ground and shoving it with my feet. But admittedly, I would not be able to move it very quickly, or in a combat situation.

As for not being able to motivate most women into fighting by sexual enticement or calling them a coward, my best guess as to the best means of motivating most women would be to somehow convince them that the fighting was absolutely necessary 'for the children'. Utter those words, and in most cases, a woman's brain will *instantly* turn off. Don't try that with an INTP female though. (like I said, INTP's would not make good war soldiers, based on myself, they would more likely either go for assassination, or complete extermination from a safe distance)

Anonymous Ann Morgan July 30, 2013 4:09 AM  

Scoobius Dubius wrote: **You speak of "the same physical standards as men". What you don't seem to have a grip on, is that those physical standards include having a higher level of testosterone than virtually any woman has, a different set of instincts (maybe even a different brain structure), and not having a uterus or breasts. A woman who is exactly my height and weight and musculature is still not going to behave in the same fashion as me, by simple virtue of not being a man.**

Scoobius - well, that's actually two separate things. If a woman could lift as much and run as fast, etc, as you could, then she would be physically capable of doing the job. When you talk about a woman behaving differently, due to different hormones, a different brain structure, and that the different behavior might make her unsuitable for certain jobs, I would agree. But I disagree with your terminology, I would consider that to be a *psychological* difference, rather than a *physical* one.

LOL, I'm reminded a bit of a book of mine, featuring a character, 'Anita Blake' who had the magical ability of temporarily reanimating the dead (useful for asking dearly departed grandpa where he buried all those gold coins). Someone asked her in the book if she could reanimate a hundred year old body for them. Her response: "I could do it... but I won't do it."

Anonymous Jack Amok July 30, 2013 4:14 AM  

I really can't understand what degree of obliviousness to reality, uncaring for other people's lives, hatred of men, or combination of the above, leads these women to demand to be allowed to take a course of action that puts men in greater danger, simply to bolster their own self esteem or make some sort of politically correct point.

Ann, the key to understanding this stupidity is to realize these women expect someone else to make it all work for them. They're - to be blunt - spoiled rotten little brats. They're used to somebody (probably a man - daddy at first, then some poor gamma schlub, then the local government Outrage agency) making the world into a Disneyland ride for them, carefully hiding the guardrails and cleaning up any messes. They've never had to be all that responsible for themselves, and they've been told that's not just okay, but the way it should be.

For these overgrown middle school girls, consequences are just something else to be outraged about, not the natural result of making bad decisions.

Anonymous Ann Morgan July 30, 2013 4:16 AM  

ENthePeasant: I don't approve of Weiner and certainly wouldn't vote for him. But I can't help but thinking that all the publicity about his exhibitionist behavior and sexting is just the latest bi-weekly distraction from the actual important issues in this country.

Anonymous Ann Morgan July 30, 2013 4:25 AM  

Jack Amok wrote: **For these overgrown middle school girls, consequences are just something else to be outraged about, not the natural result of making bad decisions.**

Yeah, pretty much sounds like the other girls in my college class on the 4 day trip to the woods in N. Wisconsin, when I was the only one in the class (male or female) who thought to bring any food along. They were pretty much surprised and outraged when I wouldn't share it with them, because (according to them) I had 'so much' food.

Anonymous Barko ramius July 30, 2013 4:33 AM  

Ann: "And if I really get my little heart set on the heavy gauge stainless steel rings, I can probably work out a way to do it if I invest in a pair of pliers with longer handles to give me more leverage."

You can use a few scraps of steel or even some small diameter pipe to give your existant pliers more leverage, without investing in better pliers. I dont know much about modern day chainmail made of stainless. I imagine it's a tedious business; as stainless is more un-responsive than the forged iron used back in the day.
But, it's a fine art and I'd love to see some of your work.

Anonymous Ann Morgan July 30, 2013 4:52 AM  

Barko - I mainly make jewelry out of the chainmail, and use good quality saw-cut rings, and clip on magnifiers to make sure I do all the rings right. I don't thing putting pipes on the ends of my pliers would give me the degree of accuracy that I like to have.

Still, I guess I can't complain, the only other chainmailer I know personally might be a man, and might be able to do the heavy-gauge stainless steel rings, but he has retinitis pigmentosa. I can probably use leverage to make up for my lack of strength for decades to come, but there isn't much that can be done to compensate for his eyes. His chainmailling days (absent some invention of an artificial retina) are distinctly numbered.

Blogger Justthisguy July 30, 2013 4:54 AM  

@ JamieR @ 4:46: You are not kidding.

I mind a story about a bomb shelter in a German city, in WWII. There was a U-boot captain, home on leave, and a woman, and a bunch of other people. Well, the RAF came over one night, and they all went down into the shelters. This was a pretty badass raid, so the door to the shelter got warm from the fires, and the concrete dust filtered down onto the shelterers when the HE went off nearby. The U-Boot captain proceeded to cuss and swear about that particular Englishman above them who had just dropped a big one near by which really rocked the place. The gal sitting next to him said, "Do you think he's good-looking?"

Blogger Justthisguy July 30, 2013 5:21 AM  

Miss Morgan, may I gently remind you that one's comments are more likely to be taken seriously if they are few, cogent, short, and concise? Logorrhea does not become you, Ma'am.

Blogger Justthisguy July 30, 2013 5:41 AM  

Dammit, Ann, will you please stop annoying the Normals? I mean, I could appreciate the proper technique for making chain mail, if I cared about that. Hell, I could talk for hours about the proper way to make model airplanes! I don't do that, because it tends to make other peoples' eyes glaze over and think bad hurtful thoughts about me.

Ann, I beseech you from the Bowels of Christ, as somebody famously said, to STFU!

Blogger Duke of Earl July 30, 2013 6:21 AM  

David: there's a mostly female gender mixed unit, called infantry but really more in the line of border guards cum gendarmerie, called the Caracal. They hadn't fought at all until quite recently and that one small skirmish was less than glory filled. Note how little the feminists have talked it up. Why? Well, most of the killing was done by Caracal's men and at least one girl simply hid.

Although true let's be fair about it, in the First World War many male soldiers were shot because they couldn't fight any more. None of us can say for sure that we would do any better coming under fire for the first time.

That said, Vox has frequently used his own experience to show that women are not built for physical conflict. Even a woman strong enough to seriously physically injure a man would need the advantage of surprise, and she probably wouldn't get a second chance. Probably having a weapon would help. About the turn of the 19th century companies made hat pin daggers that women could use to hold their hats on, but pull out and stab an attacker with.

We have to remember that the people pushing for this are driven by their ideology. Unfortunate as it may be, we will just have to wait until reality beats their ideology into the dust. If it means America has to lose a few wars? Well, they shouldn't have been over there anyway.

Blogger Jupta July 30, 2013 6:35 AM  

Taking away the superiority and exclusivity of big strong men on the battlefield doesn’t somehow make war less honourable or more bloody or worse or any other shit, what it does do is completely fuck up the side that thinks big strong men are the biz, or did the nam “whores” who razored up, bombed, or fed bamboo shoots to the yanks not count as “combatants” because they didn’t have a dog tag and khakis?

Cue all the usual disguised white knight bullshit about how will a woman carry the 120 lbs of ammo you need up to your position yadda yadda yadda.

The bitches will do quite well in an all or mainly female(preferably heroic single mothers fighting for the freedom of their multi-racial broods) platoon deployed on US soil against US citizens in a “peacekeeping” role, with material support right up to the firezone on metalled roads by 6×6 and track laying vehicles.

Whether you shoot them up, or get shot up by them, all anyone will know or hear about is what an evil fucker you were, and it will double down, win win, more women get into that shit.

Blogger Duke of Earl July 30, 2013 6:39 AM  

Hi Ann, from what I've heard, and granted I've not tried it myself, plain steel rings make fine mail. Just wearing it will rub off the rust and make it nice and shiny.

Darn I want a mail coat.

And a buckler.

And a thirty two inch crucible steel sword.

That would be so much fun.

Anonymous robert July 30, 2013 7:15 AM  

Vox---
If your beef is with women in the military in general, then fine. I would agree with you. But consider this is the first time the modern ultra PC military has acknowledged a difference between men and women and taken steps in a meaningful way.

This isn't the same as double standards for PT or ridonkulous e/o complaints or substituting the military for a revolving maternity ward (can't deploy, got pregnant yesterday--WHOOPS).

Women have different motorcycle gear, for example, what's the big diff?

Due to the nature of the modern global battlefield anyone in uniform is a target and few people avoid the need to join a convoy. I don't need to tell you about the differences between men and women (i mean, spacebunny? WHOA---warning the road curves ahead). They are already there, they deserve good body armor. (no i'm not white knighting. Any soldier deployed deserves well fitted body armor.)

Also, a bit of topic but anyway---I doubt women will be in purely combatant roles in any significant numbers (though I wait to be proven wrong). So far they are little more than mascots, but if they deploy with soldiers then the rape that you speak of won't be at the hands of the enemy.

The military has done an abyssmal, embarrassing job of policing itself against sexual assault, even men against men. Until that's corrected we'll get some very different headlines from those you envisioned.

Even Army Times would blush...maybe.

"Female infantryman Gang-raped by her Platoon"
"Female Soldier turned Sex Slave on FOB Deacon"

Anonymous Snidely Whiplash July 30, 2013 7:27 AM  

@Hammer6, wikipedia says that collision with Jason happened in 1986 and the first women arrived on Willamette in 1989.

Blogger Tom Kratman July 30, 2013 8:10 AM  

@TOS:

The original reasons for raising the Tercio Amazona were complex, and I didn't give them all - though I did drop some hints - in the text. Militarily, they were to serve two functions, to shame men into volunteering and to serve as partisans on C's eastern flank to make an invasion from that direction a logistic impossibility for the likely invader. Politically, however, they were a way to chop off egalitarian feminism at the knees, in a place that didn't make a fetish of equality of outcome, anyway. The initial attack on Cerro Mina was something that C probably would have countermanded, had he known about it in advance, since he had a much more important use for them. (Though, literarily, the purpose was to replicate that similar mistake, the assault on Battery Wagner, 1863. Why? Because the left insists that gender and gender orientation integration is easy because, of course, it was so easy with blacks. The Battery Wagner replay is a reminder that a) no, it wasn't all that easy, b) there was a heavy price to be paid, c) it began with a bloddy defeat, not the trumpeting of an entirely illusory success.)

Blogger Tom Kratman July 30, 2013 8:17 AM  

Kristophr:

Interestingly enough, I spent a year and a half in a 4.2" platoon in Panama, 77-78. I'd like to see a crew of _men_ transport a four-deuce any distance. Frankly, any mortar above 60mm, with anything more than a fairly useless, token load of ammunition, is unlikely to get transported anywhere useful by people, male or female. That kind of equipment demands some other kind of transportation than leather personnel carrier - mule, truck, helo - if it's to do any good. That's one of the reasons why I find the upper body strength argument less than totally persuasive. Oh, it's a factor, to be sure, but a lot of the problem can be overcome with greater numbers, or animal transport, or both.

Blogger Tom Kratman July 30, 2013 8:22 AM  

Duke:

Physical, hand to hand or bayonet combat is about the least likely thing to happen. I'm more concerned about psychological factors that may be innate and universal or nearly so, that demonstrate women just don't have the right mindset for combat, or don't in enough numbers to matter. I don't know that they do or don't. I don't know that it's natural or cultural, if they don't. I do know it's a question hanging out there that would have the feminists running for their fainting couches if brought up in open conversation.

Blogger Tom Kratman July 30, 2013 8:25 AM  

Robert, do you think the military teaches people to rape to whom the idea would never have occurred but for joining the military? That's preposterous. If there's a problem, it doesn't come from the military, whose powers of change over human character are very, very limited, but from our overarching society from which the military draws its people. You want to fix it? Fix it at the source.

Blogger Tom Kratman July 30, 2013 8:27 AM  

Duke:

The point wasn't that Caracal proves women aren't up to it; that skirmish was statistically insignificant. The point was that, so far, herstory aside, Caracal proves nothing.

Anonymous Anonymous July 30, 2013 8:45 AM  

I find it funny that they call it the "alternate uniform" as if any man would wear one. So far down the genderless PC sinkhole that they can't even call a uniform designed for and by women a "women's uniform".

--Hale

Anonymous Laz July 30, 2013 8:54 AM  

@ Duke of Earl: Plain steel is fine but, stainless is stainless. lol. Stainless is extremely hard to work with, especially as the gauge gets thicker. When I used to make chain jewelry one day of working with stainless= 3 days of hand pain.

FYI: My friends who have worked in the ER say they hate stainless jewelry because it is so much harder to cut out of people who have it embedded in them.

Anonymous Harsh July 30, 2013 8:56 AM  

Although true let's be fair about it, in the First World War many male soldiers were shot because they couldn't fight any more. None of us can say for sure that we would do any better coming under fire for the first time.

Yes, but men who run from battle are usually charged for it. It's called cowardice. Does the same happen when women run from battle or does it get ignored?

Blogger Dystopic July 30, 2013 9:33 AM  

It also bears mentioning that the draft was in operation in World War I. The cowardly men were, I'm willing to bet, mostly draftees and not volunteers. They didn't ask to be there. These women are volunteers, and when the shit hits the fan and they run... they won't have the excuse of "I knew combat wasn't for me, but someone else made me do it."

Anonymous The other skeptic July 30, 2013 9:50 AM  

I keep meaning to talk about. Wiener has a 78 percent approval rating amongst women 18-26. http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/07/29/poll-78-percent-of-young-women-approve-of-weiner

Maybe they misunderstood the question.

Anonymous The other skeptic July 30, 2013 10:01 AM  

@Kratman

Thanks for the correction and the history lesson.

Blogger Kristophr July 30, 2013 11:24 AM  

Tom Kratman:

Yes, we have vehicles for heavy loads. But not always. The PT spec was there for good reason. It can be avoided with tech ... but until such tech is commonplace, such a standard is needed.


And I still think your protagonist sent that Amazon unit in ahead deliberately, although, as the author, you didn't intend that.

Sometime characters just seem to do shit without the author's permission. Heh.

Anonymous Measlomapaddycakes Fuckerbumpkin July 30, 2013 3:04 PM  

If any here wish to conclude this debate in their own mind, and can't to seem satisfy themselves, then I fully suggest reading two books:

1) Women in the Military by Brian Mitchell

and

If you still believe that a "few good women" still belong in the military, then..

2) The Kinder, Gentler Military by Stephanie Gutmann

Ah, one more note. To all those who think "upper body strength" is not/should not be an issue, then watch the Olympian women crash and burn on the first phase of American Ninja Warrior course. The culprit? Upper Body Strength.

I recall, that in my graduating class (MCRD Diego) we had a ~5 ft. Phillipino. I ask myself, how did that guy graduate? How did he scale that 6 ft. wall on the S&E course? How did he negotiate that rope on the Obstacle Course? How did he get a passing PFT? Oh yeah! Upper Body Strength ...

Blogger Tom Kratman July 30, 2013 11:55 PM  

Kristophr:

I don't think you understand. You specifically mentioned a 4.2". But nobody can transport a 4.2" any further than from the back of a truck to the ground or from the arms room, 50 meters to the parade field for crew drill. They're just past the point of being manportable by anybody. Doesn't matter how well the individual or mortar crew does on their APFT, _nobody_ is moving that bitch any useful distance. It's just way out of human capability. (Broke my foot once, rolling the goddamned baseplate down the street to crew drill. Big mistake, way big. Chilluns don't do this.) In any case, if you don't have a vehicle is doesn't matter; the 4.2" isn't going anywhere important or useful under man or woman power, however humanly strong or weak.

Nah. Note how Inez had to hunt for somebody to give her unit orders. They were just out of the battle plan beyond, "Assemble on your ammunition and equipment." It's not that he had any real issues with sacrificing women - he's got his own teenaged son on the line, after all - it's just that he had a more important use for them.

Blogger Tom Kratman July 31, 2013 12:01 AM  

The problem, Measlomapaddycakes Fuckerbumpkin, is that it really doesn't matter what the objective reality is; the PC clowns in DC and our morally cowardly flag officers ("Lord, forgive us our redundancies") are going to forcefeed this to the armed forced anyway. And there's not a goddamned thing to be done about it. I don't know how long you were in but surely, somewhere, sometime, you saw just how effective a military organization can be at making an epically shitty idea look good through sheer weight of effort and duplicity practiced on an heroic scale. This will be no different. Think: Project 100,000.

Anonymous Ann Morgan July 31, 2013 2:08 AM  

Tom Kratman: I'm not sure from the context of your comment regarding it being easy to integrate blacks, whether you meant this as a sarcasm (and that it was not easy to integrate blacks) or that for the left to compare integrating races to integrating genders is invalid. From what I know of genetics, I'd have to say it's an invalid comparison. A black man has more in common with a white man than either has with a woman. There are minor mutations that can turn an animal with all the genes for being black into something colored white (albinism, dominant white masking gene) and minor mutations that can turn an animal with the genes to be light colored into something black colored (melanism). I don't know of any minor mutations that will turn a mammal with the gene set for being male into a female, or vice versa.

Anonymous Ann Morgan July 31, 2013 2:16 AM  

Tom Kratman wrote: **And there's not a goddamned thing to be done about it.**

I wouldn't say that. At least *some* people become capable of listening to reason when their situation is bad enough. Although admittedly, some people will not listen to reason even after their own children have been killed. Unfortunately in this particular case, the situation being 'bad enough' probably means an awful lot of soldiers being killed, and things getting pretty sucky in the USA.

Blogger Tom Kratman July 31, 2013 6:11 AM  

It's really not about what we have in common, Ann, or don't. It's the left, divorced from history and especially from unpleasant history, mistaking their fantasies for facts, and with a childish belief in a kind of magic, who then see an end result and just blythely assume it can be created by fiat, without going through any of the processes and steps that led to that result. In order to get to the point we have, wrt racial integration in the military, we had to go through all kinds of problems for well over a century, and it still doesn't work especially well outside of combat arms with its peculiar strains and stresses. But they'll have none of that; oh no: "I want it NOWWWW! It's not FFFFAIR! Give it to me NNNNOOOWWW!!!" Dipshits.

That said, racial integration was probably easier than gender and gender orientation integration is going to be. Blacks and whites, after all, only disliked each other, most of which dislike was learned behavior. What was learned can be unlearned. Men and women, conversely, to include gays and lesbians, want to fuck each other, as often as possible. Moreover, they will tend to fall in love, which is much more disruptive than simple screwing. That is not learned behavior, at least for the most part, and will not be unlearned by any amount of PC-nagging, Newspeak, or UCMJ action.

Okay, you are not required to say it. It's still true. Events may unfold which would allow us to try to undo the damage, yet the damage will still have been done and will be terribly difficult to undo. The Army is still suffering from the Pentomic Division of six+ decades ago. And we didn't even have that organizational atrocity for more than a couple of years. For us right now, in any case, there is nothing we can do to prevent the ruination of the armed forces.

Anonymous Sgt. Slaughter July 31, 2013 10:37 AM  

"Men and women, conversely, to include gays and lesbians, want to fuck each other, as often as possible. Moreover, they will tend to fall in love, which is much more disruptive than simple screwing. That is not learned behavior, at least for the most part, and will not be unlearned by any amount of PC-nagging, Newspeak, or UCMJ action."

While it is true from a biological standpoint that humans as animals are inherently programmed to propagate, they LEARN how to channel those urges into more appropriate forms of behavior -and- LEARN how to control those urges. You make it seem that men and women in the armed forces overall lack the consistent discipline necessary to keep their animal instincts in check. Moreover, your Project 100000 reference is NOT an apt comparison, given the metrics used for entrance and training criteria.

The armed forces will be survive and thrive once dinosaurs like yourself are extinct.

Blogger Tom Kratman July 31, 2013 12:48 PM  

And other than taking a title of rank to which you are probably not entitled, you're qualifications would be?

You fucking moron! Can you read? Have you failed, somehow, to notice just how completely the services have failed in controlling love, lust, favoritism and de facto prostitution? Men and women in the armed forces not only lack the discipline in this area, they are completely uncontrolled and uncontrollable. Dipshit.

Anonymous Capt. Caveman July 31, 2013 3:23 PM  

"notice just how completely the services have failed in controlling love, lust, favoritism and de facto prostitution?"

Those problems have been part of the military long before women were allowed to enlist in the armed forces. Any institution will be plagued by those issues, it is a matter of how they will be addressed.


"Men and women in the armed forces not only lack the discipline in this area, they are completely uncontrolled and uncontrollable."

So they are utterly incapable of adhering to and unwilling to abide by the orders from superiors to refrain from engaging in such conduct???

Blogger Tom Kratman July 31, 2013 3:42 PM  

Yes. Why should they obey such orders when...Petraeus, and his sweetie, Duty-Honor-Blowjobs Broadwell...Hale, the Deputy IG who was using his office to effectively rape the wives of his subordinates...oh, fuck, you can practically pick your flag officer and Hale? The deputy IG? You know, the IG? The people responsible for inspecting and enforcing regulations. Puh-fucking-leeze! It is simply not controllable - or not by anything we're willing to do* - and only fantacists and fools think it is.

By the way, are you really not capable of seeing the difference between Sergeant X boffing some unnamed bimbo in a brothel, and 1st X, ensuring that his honey, who, incidentally, happens to be named PFC Honey, who will put on the kneepads on command and always swallows with a smile, and for whom the 1SG manipulates the duty schedule, ensures early promotion, deflects the captain when said captain gets annoyed because PFC missed formation, etc? Rather than any institution being plagued by them, NO institution will be plagued by them in quite the same way as it will be plagued under gender and gender orientation integration.

*Note that Botchkareva, commander of the Russians' tackily named "Women's Battalion of Death" in the Great War once caught one of her women screwing a man from a nearby regiment. Allegedly, Botch-baby pinned them to the ground, boldily, with a bayonetted rifle. We're _most_ unlikely to do anything like that.

Anonymous GI Joe July 31, 2013 5:13 PM  

Fraternization is fraternization. It is up to the CO's to take the necessary steps to address the incidents when they arise. I'm sure they are more than capable of handling those situations. Commanders must command – and be held accountable. Civilians must accurately understand the problem and not tag as sexual harassment activities or conversations that may well go on between employees in their own offices every day without anyone thinking they are being victimized.

Blogger Tom Kratman July 31, 2013 6:35 PM  

Your evidence that they are more than capable? In our society? In our military society? Your suggestion for how to overcome the damage to morale, discipline, esprit, and proficiency when it's found out by the unit that PFC Honey, mentioned above, is fast tracked to Spec 4 then sergeant, by virtue of Honey's highly pnuematic personality? What the fuck do you think adding a tautology does to solve the problem? All of the "must" bullshit makes me sick, since what "must" be done simply isn't done, and certainly not with sufficient reliablility and not in a way to forstall the damage to the organization.

Anonymous Anonymous August 01, 2013 12:59 AM  

Tom Kratman: I do know from my work experience that:

1. Someone sitting on their tushy and not pulling their weight is hell on the morale of your other workers. Telling the other workers to ignore it and just to do their own jobs doesn't work too well, you're arguing with psychology that goes all the way back to at least the chimps.

2. Someone sitting on their tushy because they are involved with the boss doesn't work too well to the point of shutting a whole building down to deal with it.

3. It's possible for someone to get involved with the boss and still do their work, and most of your other workers probably won't mind in that case. But I imagine there's a rather large difference between a boss telling his sweetie to get out and sling newspapers vs telling his sweetie to get out and get their head shot at.

Anonymous Anonymous August 01, 2013 1:12 AM  

Tom Kratman wrote: **It's really not about what we have in common, Ann, or don't.**

No, what I meant was that for the left to claim that just because blacks have been (supposedly) successfully integrated into the army, it should therefore be possible to integrate women is an invalid argument, since for among other reasons, the genetic differences of color are much smaller than the genetic differences of gender. Whether they make this invalid argument out of lack of knowledge of history and a childish belief in magic, or for whatever other reason is a seperate issue.

I do know that our esteemed leader in the white house seems to have a childish belief in magic, as he is under the distinct impression that coal and nuclear power can be replaced by a few puffs of wind. I've been inside a giant 'squirrel wheel' at the Discovery World museum. The wheel is hooked up to a generator, and by getting inside it and running as fast as I could and getting puffed out, I managed to generate enough electricity to light up 4 lightbulbs for five minutes.

And the Obamanation thinks he is going to replace the energy 200 lbs of Ann Morgan running her ass off with a few puffs of wind? Not to mention that the typical house needs more electricity than just 4 lightbulbs worth? Get real. I think everyone who lives on the left and supports the Obamanation's wind fantasies needs to have their ass put in the giant squirrel wheel.

What the equivalent of a squirrel wheel would be regarding the armed forces, to give the idiots of the world an actual idea in their gut of how things work, I've no idea.

Blogger Tom Kratman August 01, 2013 2:46 PM  

Ann:

They'll mind if there's even a hint - and in the absence of a hint they, knowing human nature in general, will make one up - that he or she (but almost always she) is receiving any kind of favorable treatment. And yes, war and the instrument of it are very different from commerce.

To educate the great unwashed on both the realities of war and the needs of the organizations that conduct it...nah; I'm a sci fi writer, not a miracle worker. I gave the weasels a fair sampling of both of those in The Amazon Legion. They don't wanna listen? Fuck 'em when their sons are slaughtered and their daughters enslaved.

Anonymous General Kong, Holy Warrior August 01, 2013 2:47 PM  

"No, what I meant was that for the left to claim that just because blacks have been (supposedly) successfully integrated into the army, it should therefore be possible to integrate women is an invalid argument, since for among other reasons, the genetic differences of color are much smaller than the genetic differences of gender."

Looks like PFC Honey is working overtime. I'm sure our dear friend Tom can provide statistics regarding the frequency of female grunts receiving ill-gotten promotions by their superiors, aka "boyfriends".

Regardless of the posturing, a decision, right or wrong, has been made to enable females more opportunities in the military. Blacks SUCCESSFULLY integrated into the military, and there is no reason to believe, after the dinosaurs are extinct, that they cannot be successful, too.

Blogger Tom Kratman August 01, 2013 10:45 PM  

Still self promoting, GK? You're absolutely right. If, indeed, we are willing to overlook the destrctive effects of love, lust, sex, fratertinzation, romance, favoritism, and de facto prostitution, protect women from any disciplinary action for indiscipline, promote them ahead of contemporaries as a quota-driven, gender-equity/affirmative action measure, restrict our combat activities to nothing more serious than Cub Scouts and orphanages, then of course they can be successful, for certain meaningless values of success.

And then the army that is led by dinosaurs, rather than fools, will stomp ours into strawberry jam.

Hmmm...statistics? That would be like getting certain demographic data from the frogs. But if you're stupid enough - well, of course _you_ are stupid enough - to believe that Duty-Honor-Blowjobs Broadwell wasn't getting access to Petraeus, hence to a shitpot of authorial money, for giving Petraeus access to her...Oh, wait, we already agreed you're a moron. Forget it.

Oddly enough, I have somewhere here in my office the investigative report from an interesting phenom in Special Operations Command, in the early 90s, from a Task Force sent to Honduras. A male first sergeant made a female sergeant an offer: good NCOERs for blowjobs. That seemed fair to her. As she was quoted in the report: "I need good NCOERs."

Anonymous Ann Morgan August 03, 2013 1:03 AM  

Tom Kratman wrote:

Well, the particular place where I work, most of the workers are route drivers (for a newspaper). Route drivers do not normally do one another's routes without being specifically asked to, (which they are not obligated to consent to) and paid for it (if they do consent). That being the case, the only was to 'favor' someone would be to tell another route driver to do part or all of the favored driver's route without being paid for it. Which they are not obligated to agree to, and a manager asking such a thing of the drivers would be quickly removed by the head office. Admittedly, it's probably an unusual situation, in most cases it's far easier to force one person to pick up the slack of a favored person, without even giving them any extra compensation.

Another thing regarding the invalidity of the liberal comparison of integrating races, vs integrating genders: I'm something of a student of nature. Human beings are far more concerned with their coloration than most other animals. The manner in which ducks or cats treat other ducks or cats does not vary at all, with the color of the duck or cat in question. But it varies a great deal, depending on the *genders* of the duck or cat. (it can also vary if with two individual animals that were raised together, or otherwise are familiar with eachother such as to have a special friendship or enmity, but that is a seperate matter, and probably mostly irrelevant to organizing people on a large scale).

Anonymous Sgt. York August 03, 2013 11:45 PM  

Are you done with your hissy fit, Tom?

Blogger Tom Kratman August 04, 2013 12:43 AM  

Busted, were you? Only appropriate. And you're still a fucking moron.

Anonymous Anonymous August 04, 2013 2:18 AM  

Tom Kratman who are you talking to? I've never been busted for anything other than speeding and 'unnecessary noise'. The latter being a BS charge, I wasn't making much noise at all at the time, but the police simply happened not to like what I was doing (which was legal), so slapped a BS charge on me in order to charge me with something.

Blogger Tom Kratman August 04, 2013 7:11 PM  

"Sgt. York," Ann, the dolt who keeps posting under different and presumptively fraudulent ranks.

Anonymous Corporal Gomer Pyle August 05, 2013 9:21 PM  

'If, indeed, we are willing to overlook the destrctive effects of love, lust, sex, fratertinzation, romance, favoritism, and de facto prostitution..."

These factors plague ANY and ALL institutions.


"protect women from any disciplinary action for indiscipline..."

Indeed, Lynndie England, Megan Ambuhl, and Sabrina Harman were exonerated.


"restrict our combat activities to nothing more serious than Cub Scouts and orphanages."

They have these things in the Iraq and Afghanistan???


"believe that Duty-Honor-Blowjobs Broadwell wasn't getting access to Petraeus..."

Like any Company CEO receiving fellatio from a secretary. Been there, done that. I do believe "Betrayas" was removed from command as a result of the scandal.


"And then the army that is led by dinosaurs, rather than fools, will stomp ours into strawberry jam."

Not placing much faith in the ability of current commanders to train and lead. Pity...

Blogger Tom Kratman August 06, 2013 5:37 AM  

That you can say "These factors plague ANY and ALL institutions" just goes to show how ignorant you are. Any and all matters not a wit because the purpose of every other insitution is not making war. The purpose of the military IS making war, and that makes it entirely different. There is no comparison between war and any other human endeavor. It is that, and your probably willful ignorance of that, that leads you astray and robs you of any right to an opinion.

Anonymous Major Payne August 07, 2013 8:48 AM  

You are being purposely obtuse. First, the purpose of the military is make preparations for the event of war. Second, while all institutions have their unique issues, these problems stem from COMMON factors as I stated.

For example, suicide is found in all institutions. The reasons for low or high rates, of course, are reflective of the structure of the institution--for police officers, it may be they are stationed in a high-crime district; for military personnel, it may because they experienced direct combat. Regardless of the situation, the COMMON factor is stress-related.

In reality, U.S. military suicide rates are lower than their U.S. civilian equivalents. Since Vietnam, we have an all-volunteer force entering the military service as a profession, rather than a need to be fulfilled because war erupted. While the military has its own laws, norms, language, values, and interests, service members represent every socio-economic demographic, all races and religions, and come from every region of the United States. If we are to correctly analyze social issues within this institution, then we must remember the institution is a reflection of our greater society. By depicting the issue of suicide amongst the military as a unique and tragic aspect of its culture through the military suicide epidemic frame, to be subsequently dealt with within the confines of its sub-cultural boundaries, then we fail to conduct social discourse of an issue that affects us all.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/02/02/but-there-isnt-an-epidemic-of-suicide-in-the-us-military/

Blogger Tom Kratman August 07, 2013 5:22 PM  

None of which goes an inch to mitigate your obvious ignorance. Really.

Anonymous Private Benjamin August 07, 2013 6:02 PM  

Given the fact that you have a law degree, and your supposed high IQ, it is surprising your response. It is incumbent upon you to provide counterarguments, not offer a flaccid statement that reeks of solipsism.

Blogger Tom Kratman August 09, 2013 1:00 AM  

No, it isn't. Sometime in the fairly recent past some morons decided to acquiesce in shifting the burden of proof away from those who wanted to change things and toward those who thought they were better off left alone. I reject this. See, for an explanation, Chesterton's Gate.

In your case, however, you're simply too ignorant, too stupid, the task is too difficult, and you're simply not worth my time and effort.

Anonymous Col. Jessup August 09, 2013 8:37 AM  

“What embitters the world is not excess of criticism, but an absence of self-criticism.”--GKC

Chesterton said one needs to understand the reasons why the gate was erected before you pass judgement. It is likely the people responsible for the gate lack the introspection necessary to seriously take into account their own purposes and motivations why the gate was erected. Therefore, as you are demonstrating, the "gatekeepers" generally find those people "ignorant" or "stupid" as to why it should be removed.

Regardless, it would appear you are too lazy to offer proof to contradict my assertions. Go smoke another 4 packs of cigarettes.

Blogger Tom Kratman August 11, 2013 2:59 AM  

No, for someone else I would likely be more amenablke to educating them out of their ignorance. But the wise man knows the impossible task when he sees it.

1 – 200 of 206 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts