Women in uniform
As Bernard Keane pointed out in yesterday’s Crikey, social conservative commentators have lost their biggest support in their opposition to ending restrictions on women serving in Australian defence forces: much of the defence establishment itself is now keen for such reform:
But the push to remove the limits on female soldiers is from the brass. Former Chief of the Defence Force Chris Barrie mocked the continuing restrictions on women in the Army when Combet raised the issue. The driver is the deep concern about attracting and retaining ADF personnel when the labour market is nearing full employment and the ADF has limited flexibility to lift remuneration to make itself more attractive.
That’s why there’s a fundamental connection between the ADFA scandal and Smith’s decision on opening up frontline roles. An Army that makes itself a female-unfriendly environment, that refuses to address misogyny or tolerates a locker-room mentality, that prevents women from excelling in their chosen profession, is making itself a deeply unattractive employer for not much less than half its potential employees.
Of course, there’s also an old-guard keen to prevent change, and it’s been very interesting seeing the media outlets on which they’ve been forced to rely to push their “women just can’t do it” line (maybe they think combat involves opening a lot of stereotypical jam jars?) – since it seems that practical minds at Defence now recognise the advantages, to them, of this sort of reform. As opposed to previously:
The issue two years ago split along ideological lines. Conservatives seem to have an innate distaste for the idea of women in combat roles. Liberal MP and former Army officer Stuart Robert criticised Combet and said women weren’t cut out for combat. Arch-reactionary Jim Wallace of the Australian Christian Lobby complained that woman would disrupt the “strong mateship” of the army because the “natural attraction we have between the s-xes would invariably lead to attractions.” Funny how it’s always about s-x for Wallace, though he wasn’t alone — the head of the RSL suggested combat roles might affect female fertility. Another Liberal MP Bob Baldwin, suggested women weren’t psychological ready for combat. Eva Cox, on the other hand, suggested critics of women in the Army grow up.
There’s some childish defence of discrimination in various tabloids this morning, but I’d like to draw readers’ attention to a piece published by The Australian by an insider on the sort of culture those opposing change are defending – and that they themselves must have personally observed.
I have been castigated on another thread for suggesting that mistreatment of women, particularly rape of women in occupied counties, has been widespread in the Australian defence forces and is inadvertently promoted by military culture. Accounts of this have been subject to cover-up and censorship since before WW2.
I welcome the Australian piece, and a similar one in the SMH today by Lynda Voltz as a vindication.
Military culture brutalises people, encourages bullying and sexism, and brings out the worst tendencies towards bigotry, racism and misogyny which I am afraid are buried deep within all our male souls.
I don’t know what the answer is, as armies seem to be necessary and their job is usually to kill people, so aggression and violence seems to be a prerequisite for the job. Can this be tempered by a humane education in morality?
I’m forced to return to Plato –
“The society we have described can never grow into a reality or see the light of day, and there will be no end to the troubles of states, or indeed, my dear Glaucon, of humanity itself, till philosophers are kings in this world, or till those we now call kings and rulers really and truly become philosophers, and political power and philosophy thus come into the same hands, while the many natures now content to follow either to the exclusion of the other are forcibly debarred from doing so.”
The last line of Pemberton’s article is a killer, thanks for that. I would also like a journalist to ask Neil James and Jim Wallace why they think Australian women are less worthy than New Zealand, Canadian and Israeli women. Get to the point, and put these barking martinets in the firing line.
Someone commented on twitter this morning that Jim Wallace entering the ADF debate shows how hard it is to find people opposed to women in combat.
Susan – also the Russian army had 800,000 women in uniform in WW2. Their leading sniper was a woman.
But this does not answer the basic question. Be they women or men, military culture promotes violence, aggression and machismo.
Perhaps the only pure answer is pacifism (eg the Quakers).
But we do not live in a pure world. Hence the dilemma.
Angra, a castigation from Capt Coal is a badge of pride, such is the level of his tunnel like ignorance.
Machismo exemplified in the instinctive reaction to the mere suggestion that women might be as good at killing people as men:
But, but, chivalry! periods! the Taliban might shoot at them! Sex! Emotions! Esprit de Boys’s Club! Wah!
On this whole pacifism thing – William Wylers’ famous film ‘Friendly Persuasion’ is worth anther look – not least because it stars Gary Cooper. One of the greats (even if I you don’t believe in its portrayal of Quaker belief)
Some quotes –
Prof. Waldo Quigley: I want you to know, sir, I honor your prejudices – -um, uh, convictions.
Josh Birdwell: I don’t want to die. I don’t think I could kill anyone if I tried. But I have to try, so long as other people have to.
Jess Birdwell: I’m just his father, Eliza, not his conscience. A man’s life ain’t worth a hill of beans except he lives up to his own conscience.
Also Jess: I do not believe in violence Sir, but you are standing exactly where my firearm is about to be discharged.
Also one of Anthony Perkins earliest films.
Bolt’s piece on this yesterday was based entirely on the slippery slope argument; he had no actual criticisms of the mooted change to allow women to attempt the SAS entry, only that _obviously_ this was the first step toward lowering of standards and therefore lowering military standards generally. He used examples from fire brigades and the like to show that (particularly Labor Governments, funny that) always start with allowing women to compete and it’s just a couple more steps to cookie baking pacifism.
He makes no mention of the likely impact of deterring women from the ADF and how in a competitive labour market this is also likely to lead to a decrease in general defence force readiness. I guess he didn’t think of it, which suggests he’s not actually that good an analyst after all.
Captain Coal?
No relation.
I’m not sure bob ellis has completely thought this through:
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/56470.html
So women, it seems, are tough enough for service on any battlefront but not tough enough to be peeked at in the shower. For the latter they need compassionate leave, counselling in depth, back pay and five parliamentary enquiries.
And then goes on to offer, as evidence for his case, one of the many hillarious incidents related in the long-running documentary program M*A*S*H.
Hmm. “Peeked at the shower” isn’t quite what happened. Unwillingly and unknowingly turned into an internet porn star is more like it. But I agree that smith’s response is odd, to say the least. I’m far from convinced that the commanding officer did anything technically or ethically wrong. The fact that the minister’s attack is expanding suggests that there’s something more going on than we’ve been told.
This is just epic:
Wow. Is life really that much like the movies? Would that be covered in a montage?
South Australians will understand this best, but I think we can now assign the “beer man’s journalist” award.
Naturally, andy loves it: “A good point, well made by Bob Ellis”. I’d have to check, but I’m not sure all of AB’s commentary on Bob Ellis has been so approving.
Speaking of morally serious bloggage:
I agree. It is a mystery. I think one inquiry would do, given the amount of scuttlebutt currently being peddled in the press about previous incidents (today’s AM includes a very interesting interview, which sounds a bit like some things an ADFA tutor once related to me).
But I wonder if AB would be leaping to the department’s defense if it was a different department. The Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, perhaps?
Oh yes, only a week out and the fun and games start to heat up
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/ofarrell-over-a-barrel-as-the-shooters-take-aim-20110412-1dcpm.html
A taster of the kind of loons the NSW Coalition government is going to have to deal with.
I wonder how the ladies of the IDF are finding this debate?
I can’t find it just now, but I came across a blog posting a few years back, titled “israeli girls – are they unapproachable?”, with a photograph of three girls leaning on a bar at an eatery in army greens, each with an assault rifle slung over her shoulder.
When I went through Duntroon in more modern times female cadets were roudly referred to as squids (get through life by opening and closing their legs). Being a young lad and naive I wilfully participated, until senior officers intervened and banned the term at the college. At the time I struggled to understand the problem, it was only a name after all. Now I look back on it in shame – the offence that must have been wrested onto the female cadets would have been large, and many of them are great friends to me today. This is an example where the hierarchy intervened properly, well done to them. I hope this latest effort to create cultural change continues on the good efforts done to date. Experiencing the process of cultural change has been enlightening for me, and I am better off for it.
I visited Israel a few years ago. This is true although I expect it may be subject to criticism. You may think I am being sexist, but it is true.
If you drive a car in Israel, you have by law to stop and give a lift to anyone in Israeli army uniform (compulsory hitchhiking) to help with mobilisation.
(Tourists are apparently exempt.)
However, we gave a lift to some Israeli girl soldiers from Jerusalem to Masada. They seemed more concerned about how they looked than anything else. They asked my Mum – ‘what do you think of our uniform?” I was trying to stack their guns in the back seat of the hired Peugeot 205 at the time.
Mum said – ‘”You look great, but could maybe use a little tuck here (pointing to the bottom of their trousers)’ and maybe a bright coloured scarf around your neck.”
We dropped them off at Masada, and a while later met them at the top.
The girl my mum talked to was wearing a red scarf around her neck and looked stunning! (according to my mum)
Great piece at the Drum.
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/56400.html
In my opinion, if women can do it physically and mentally then they shouldn’t be discriminated against on the basis of their gender.
One of the anti-women in the .mil arguments is that they’re a distraction. To those who get distracted, maybe they should find another job. Soldiers do not make rules, they obey them (good soldiers).
There’s the freaking out about the prospect of women passing SASR and serving in SASR. Well I would imagine their highly trained male colleagues wouldn’t have any issues, waaaaaay too professional to be distracted by the gender of their colleagues. The wingnuts squealing from the side lines on the other hand!
If it’s good enough for other modern armies (IDF and to a lesser extent UK) why can’t we do it?
I have a female friend who passed the commando selection course no problems, she often displayed physical and mental toughness beyond my own. We’ve lived and worked in situations of great privation – without incident, I can’t even remember any issues being discussed, the situation was simply accepted. When mature adults are focussed on serious issues, many of these faux arguments are trivial. This same friend had strengths in some areas, just as I did – and we learned to draw upon each other’s strengths.
I’d like to add that military segregation for African Americans didn’t properly end until the last all black unit was disbanded in 1954. I bet the wingnuts were making similar arguments back then… OK they would’ve been racist rather than sexist arguments. Either way they’re bigoted arguments.
Oh, I read the following line at some News Ltd blog yesterday it said:
LOL- the second part of the sentence invalidating the first part.
I have competed in these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpD87gZAIQI
All teams are mixed. Anyone who thinks that females are not tough enough to fight in combat needs to go experience one of these races. Amongst other teams we beat the Navy Seals and the Foreign Legion – and not because of the females that were in those teams – but because of the failings of the blokes. Our team was strengthed by having a ‘tough chick’ (that was our term of respect), I wouldn’t have had it any other way.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/we-pity-the-brits-the-view-from-the-marines-1782093.html
So the US Marines that took over Helmand from the British were impressed that the UK has women in combat roles.
Read the rest though, it’s a good article.
GavinM, where are you, I want to know what you think.
Nice post RobJ. The loudest voices against this move are either retired officers or people that will never have to experience it for themselves. I can’t see too many of my serving officer mates having a problem bringing in these policies, and yes, plenty of them are in key positions in combat units.
That’s the impression I have, dinosaurs and other various ‘conservatives’ who are so resistant to change.
Imagine things never changed? Any perceived cowardice (like losing a battle you were supposed to win) might be punishable (collectively) by decimation, where a unit is split into groups of ten, in each group nine of them would beat to death the tenth! And then the nine would be further punished with shit food rations and no shelter, the Romans practiced this.
PTSD – The sufferers would be treated as cowards.
Deserters – Shoot ‘em!
War crimes committed in our name would go unpunished.
And on and on…
Captain Col too, I’d like to hear what you reckon Col?
Hello Rob,
I agree with you and the others here entirely this idea is nothing new, women have performed combat roles in various armies since ancient times.
As to special forces roles, provided the training to qualify isn’t eased off for female candidates I see no reason why they shouldn’t be able to fill them — I’m pretty sure there would be women out there who are capable of meeting the fitness and strength requirements that are necessary.
I really don’t get this idea that male soldiers would be more protective of female colleagues than their male ones, when you’re in combat you rely on the soldiers next to you, if one goes down and you can get to him, you go, its virtually a reflex action — I can’t believe that attitude would change because of the sex of the soldier.
thirdborn314
As an ex-Legionnaire you’ve wounded my pride, I’m going to claim the Legion was represented by soft French officers to salve my ego
Out of curiosity though, would you happen to know where the females in the Legion team came from — women aren’t allowed to serve in it so I’m just wondering where they would have got them (they must have cheated and recruited from the French olympics team I reckon )
Agreed, when I read the News Blogs it’s as if this has been proposed when it hasn’t. It is in all our interests that our military can fight and that our SASR are the best they can be.
On another related issue I was listening to an ex-SASR bloke on the radio today, I don’t think it was him that was gay but when one of his patrol came out the rest didn’t give a shit, they have their missions and they aren’t going to be distracted by the sexuality of their colleagues.
I’ve never been in combat (or the .mil) but yeah, I reckon you’re spot on.
On US female soldiers in combat –
“In 2007, author Kirsten Holmstedt released Band of Sisters: American Women at War in Iraq. The book presents twelve stories of American women on the frontlines including America’s first female pilot to be shot down and survive, the U.S. military’s first black female combat pilot, a 21-year-old turret gunner defending a convoy, two military policewomen in a firefight and a nurse struggling to save lives, including her own.”
On the other hand from Ynet magazine -
“A female combat soldier needs to prove more…a female soldier who beats up others is a serious fighter…when I arrived there was another female there with me, she was there before me…everyone spoke of how impressive she is because she humiliates Arabs without any problem. That was the indicator. You have to see her, the way she humiliates, the way she slaps them, wow, she really slapped that guy.”
“A female Seam Line Border Guard spoke of the chase after illegal aliens: “In half an hour you can catch 30 people without any effort.” Then comes the question of what should be done with those who were caught – including women, children, and elderly. “We would have them stand, and there’s the well-known Border Guard song (in Arabic): ‘One hummus, one bean, I love the Border Guard’ – they would make them sing this. Sing, and jump. Just like they do with recruits… The same thing only much worse. And if one of them would laugh, or if they would decide someone was laughing, they would punch him. Why did you laugh? Smack… It could go on for hours, depending on how bored they are. A shift is eight hours long, the times must be passed somehow.”
GavinM No offence intended, what was the chance of running into a Legionnaire on a crikey blog…I don’t know where there female team member came from, I remember that the SEALS used to hold a psuedo competition to ‘select’ a female for the ‘honour’. I am firmly of the opinion that our team did well because our female team mate was a fully respected and valued member of the team – I used to think the SEALS treated their female team member as a piece of mandatory equipment. I did not get to see much of the Legionnaire team.
The gay issue is another storm in a teacup I reckon Rob, the Legion’s policy, like most others back then was no gays allowed, (I think it still is), but to be honest, it never occurred to me to consider or question any of the troopers in the unit’s sexuality, they did their job, I did mine, we were a team and we knew we could all rely on each other — thats all that mattered.
If a soldier, any soldier, is more concerned with the sex or sexuality of the soldier standing next to him than the job he is meant to be doing, he should be looking for another career.
The relevance of IDF (a national service obligation that amounts to a universal draft) is a mystery.
As to why WE have yet to lift the ban on women in direct combat roles (a scheme floated every few years), I can help with that – at least in the armys case (my service).
Before I start, one thing must be made painfully clear
NO MEMBER OF THE AUSTRALIAN ARMY HAS EVER TAKEN BRUCE RUXTON SERIOUSLY
Nor should you
Now that I’ve got that out of the way…
I won’t get into the realm of determinism (eg. the trend of men taking stupid risks to protect the women, the fallout of reading about our nations daughters coming home in boxes, and more festive variants thereof)… these are getting flogged to death by all sides.
It goes with saying that such a policy would have to be enacted as a “no discrimination” initiative. The upshot being, that the significantly relaxed fitness benchmarks for women would have to go.
Whatever your view about wether this or that woman could meet (insert benchmark here), we’d still be firing them by the truckload (failing BFAs is a sackable offense) – and we don’t have enough women as it is.
The other obstacle (which for some reason, even Andrew Bolt won’t touch), is that from the alleged beneficiaries (women in uniform), it gets no support at all.
Female ORs bag the idea whenever it comes up (words like “bullshit”,”harebrained”,”paternalism” get quite a workout), because it always comes from some grumpy old man at the top.
Female officers (largely) show no compulsion to support it either. They don’t put up with the cesspit we call Duntroon just so they can spend 20 years teaching angry young men how to kill – that’s a job for angry old men.
They’re all aiming for places like Intelligence, Legal, Medical, Psych, MP, Attache, Engineering (be it Sappers, Spanners or Sparkies) – places where advancement is quicker, DEO entry is available, and transferrable skills abound.
And there’s the problem – the real driving force behind this proposal (anything else you hear is just an excuse) is a shortage of candidates for the top jobs (ie. above Lieutenant Colonel – a glass ceiling no matter what bits and bobs your trousers hold).
But if you’re paying surgeons and barristers $45,000pa (gross), opening up jobs that only sick f–ks like me would dream of doing (I’m a grunt) isn’t going to help.
As for using the case of a girl being unwittingly taped (and broadcast) by the bloke nailing her, as the shoehorn – give me a break.
The obvious solution to stomach-turning episodes like that is to reform s–tholes like Duntroon.
I’m taking bets on wether such a thing gets proposed by the Duntroon Class of ’58 – hello Mr Jeffrey.
Hi thirdborn,
Certainly no offence taken — Crikey’s audience reach is huge it seems
The Legion team probably did the same thing as the SEALS, its interesting, I’d never even heard of that competition until your post, do you know if it was running prior to 1995 ?
But I’m still sticking to my story that we lost because of soft French officers
Seriously though, I reckon you’re on the right track regarding the woman on your team with respect and as a valued team member, its amazing what a bit of mutual respect can achieve.
Hear hear (I think I said as much earlier
)
GavinM – you obviously have never Googled ‘Gay military sex’. Or read the recent news coverage of female sexual abuse by males in the defence forces.
Check http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-socarides/gay-power-strength-in-num_b_848281.html
Maybe 10% of the forces?
How many does that equate to – about 7,000?
Well said, Gavin! You must be as appalled as I am at the arsehattery of the ADA.
Are there any logical arguments against women on the front line? If there are I’m yet to hear them.
Well confessions, there’s Bob Ellis saying “So women, it seems, are tough enough for service on any battlefront but not tough enough to be peeked at in the shower.”
This is approvingly or ironically quoted by AB (can’t quite tell which as I don’t think even he knows).
Ellis’ story (I think) is saying the complete opposite. But then it’s so full of cleverness and irony that’s it’s hard to say where the truth lies – especially when he talks of yearning to see a Germaine Greer centrefold. (God, I’ll have to have a shower now).
I think Ellis has overdone himself in attempting to be a smart arse and having a bet both ways. He says ‘Everyone at Uni watches people having sex”. Yeah, right. I must have missed out on that one.
“It is to be deplored that these things happen. But it is ridiculous, as it was when Patton slapped a soldier, that a whole army should be hobbled for it. Or perhaps you disagree.”
Well should we or not?
Both AB and Ellis show themselves to be dickheads by this stupid display.
It is extraordinary how often the fallacy that women serve in ALL combat roles in the Israeli Defence Force is trotted out in this debate! They do not serve in “frontline” combat arms manouevre units. Why? Because the IDF has determined that it undermines combat effectiveness.
Certainly IDF servicewomen are in many combat roles. So are ADF servicewomen. However there is a major difference between employing women within combat elements that operate for short duration from relatively secure bases like airfields and warships and Army units on long duration field operations. Group cohesion is paramount for these units and if women were in them unit cohesion would invariably be complicated and probably compromised by issues like sexuality, favouritism, jealousy, and real or imagined instances of sexism; not to mention practical matters such as hygiene, health and personal privacy.
Issues about women becoming combat casualties or being maltreated if captured are red herrings in this debate. The Government already accepts these risks for women that are now in combat roles. The real question to be addressed should be the effect on combat effectiveness of those few remaining ADF units from which women are excluded. Will it degrade their combat effectiveness? If the answer is yes; are we then prepared to accept higher casualty rates for the sake of gender equity?
Hi Angra,
You’re correct, I have never googled “gay military sex” — its not one of my fetishes
Having said that — our armed forces may well contain up to 10% gay personnel, but I’m not really sure what you’re trying to get at, its only my opinion but I reckon as long as a soldier is capable of doing the job it shouldn’t matter what his/her sexuality is, the fact that it does is more the fault of the authorities who make the rules than of the rank and file.
As to sexual abuse of females (and males), within the defence forces, I have never said it doesn’t happen — what I’ve said is that tarring every serving member of our defense forces as rapists and buggerers is obscene and offensive and I believe sexual abuse, mysogyny and brutalisation is not encouraged in any way either by our military culture or tradition, as evidenced by the fact that perpetrators are prosecuted and punished when they are caught.
Hello confessions,
You’re right I am somewhat appalled, and probably even more disappointed, at the statements coming out of the ADA at the moment, I get the feeling though, that its not so much a case of them being sexist as such but that they seem to be stuck in a 1950′s style of thinking where men do the heavy work and women stay at home doing the housework — they probably need a shake-up of personnel to bring in a few modern ideas.
“Are there any logical arguments against women on the front line? If there are I’m yet to hear them.”
I can’t think of any at the moment, there may be some roles that women aren’t as well suited to as men, but I’m struggling to think of any of those either — there’s always going to be individuals who are capable of carrying out any task, so a blanket ban seems rather unfair.
GavinM – I think we have reached an amazing position for a blog in which we actually agree on the main points of our argument. Abuse happens – I believe that military culture has turned a blind eye to this sometimes, and has done so in the past.
I do not intend to tar every serving member of our defence forces with the same brush – many of whom I count as friends. But nevertheless abuse has happened -which you acknowledge. I merely wished for this not to be brushed under the carpet.
I still think there is a problem with military culture though – perhaps we can agree to disagree on this.
And I’m still thinking of my mum-in-law.
So parlé?
Gavin:
A refresh of the ADA is probably a good idea. Neil James hasn’t exactly covered himself in glory over this issue. As I said in the Open Thread, Natasha Stott-Despoya is on the board of the ADA. I wonder what she makes of the attrocious public statements by James on the organisation’s behalf?
I wonder about Natasha’s thoughts too, I daresay she wouldn’t be overly impressed — its probably not going to happen but I’d like to hear from her.
I always liked her as a politician, she always struck me as one of the few honest ones — its a great pity that she’s no longer there.
‘what I’ve said is that tarring every serving member of our defense forces as rapists’
Gavin, you need to read Angra’s post again..he never said that
Anybody who thinks that women are too soft for frontline combat action should see my wife when she gets the shits with me!!
Cheers.
Marek – I don’t if we are allowed to say this, but you are right. Think tribal warfare. I have to hide my Hagan axes.
BTW here’s the best pop song video ever made – (I use the word advisedly)
Whatever happened to Top of the Pops?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irp8CNj9qBI
Is it okay to hit women? If not, why not?
And why, when you watch the news about wars and stuff overseas, do they always speak of “women and children” being killed, as if it’s less bad to kill men than it is to kill strong, independent adult women?
If we’re gonna have consistency, let’s have consistency.
As to this whole women-in-uniform question, I have no opinion on the matter. ;p
I actually did my recruit course back in ’97 with Kelly O’Dwyer, the Member for Holt. And, yes, there were routinely females who would better me in the BFA — no problems whatsoever (upper-body strength was another matter, though; I generally redeemed myself when it came to the push-up part, which few women are able to do without doing it from their knees — though I did meet one female sergeant who would do ten “proper” push-ups with great pride). One of my colleague’s girlfriend, I was informed, had passed the commando recruit course (I think she was in intelligence, hence the loophole by which she was able to do it), something I doubt I could do. So there are certainly women who can do what the men can do (except when it comes to upper-body strength, which could prove a problem in hand-to-hand combat, rare as it may be in the modern battlefield).
But then, would it be okay to hit one of these women commandos, say if there were all together after work at the pub and, because, say, they’d had too much to drink or this and that, got into a bit of biffo with each other? Would it be given the same weight as if one were to have hit a male commando?
What about UFC? Should Dana White allow a woman to be able to go at it with the men if she’s willing to? Would it be moral?
Whether we’re prepared to be consistent is the real question.
Is it OK to hit anyone?
This OO article has to be read to be believed.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/commentary/minister-unleashes-his-inner-germaine-greer/story-e6frgd0x-1226038720101
Quantize,
This is going over old ground now, but I’ll refer you to this quote from the Open Thread, post #47
“That’s our defence forces for you. Rapists and buggers. Do this to the enemy and you get a medal, do this to your colleagues and you get immunity.”
Depends on the context, I guess. In a boxing context I guess it’s deemed okay.
But would it be okay to have a boxing context pitting a man against a woman?
And in a normal context, does society consider with eqaul regard the idea of a woman being hit by a man as it would a man being hit by a woman?
Is society consistent? If not, is it prepared to be?
Hi confessions,
I had a thought last night about wether there were any combat roles that women may not be suited for and I note that Brokr888 has touched on it as well in his/her post above.
It may be that standard extended infantry field operations and lengthy special forces operations behind enemy lines could be a problem for women due to personal health issues, so perhaps on those grounds women should be kept out of combat roles in those types of units.
I must admit I hadn’t thought of the health angle earlier, I was thinking more of the strength, stamina and technical ability side of the argument.
Just thought I’d run this past you to see what you think.
GavinM seems to haver a problem with facts.
As well as the evidence of thousands of rapes perpetrated by Australian defence forces in the WW2 occupation of Japan (as previously well documented), he now seems to thing there is no substance to claims of bastardisation and rape of recruits both male and female.
How about this evidence?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-04-03/male-rape-in-the-military-being-confronted/
http://www.aest.org.uk/survivors/male/male_on_male_rape.html
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3848/
“Why Soldiers Rape a Culture of misogyny, illegal occupation, fuel sexual violence in military”
From News Ltd – “The father of an army recruit who committed suicide after being bullied says more soldiers will kill themselves if the toxic culture within Defence isn’t changed.
Charles Williams, whose son Jeremy killed himself, said he approved of Defence Minister Stephen Smith’s efforts to overhaul the culture in the Defence Forces following recent sex scandals.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/top-brass-told-of-rapist-in-the-ranks/story-e6freuzr-1226037474092
“At least four military officers who allegedly raped and bashed fellow students at the Australian Defence Force Academy remain in uniform and in crucial jobs.”