Advice for women on BMQ and other courses [MERGED]

[Strike]

Freshette huh?  I need to get me one of those.  Nothing worse than having to go and having made a bad decision by wearing a one piece flight suit.

Army Rick,

I did BOTC with Taylor.  There is a prime example of what determination (and smarts) can do for you.  She's a prime example of why women (on equal footing as men) can be in the combat arms.

Unfortunately all these "attitude" and behavioural problems being brought up about the guys when they are around women is not just in the combat arms.  I have seen it in my trade and I know others have dealt with it also.  It seems to be prevalent in any trade that does not involve sitting behind a desk.  How have I dealt with it?  The support of friends and putting my foot down.  It takes alot for me to threaten to go so far as to charge someone.  Thankfully I have never had to actually go through with it.  Those concerned tend to smarten up.  And, before you all start brow beating me, it had nothing to do with dirty jokes and language and everything to do with personal attacks.  I realize that the military is not going to change for me.  I grew up with two brothers and can deal with foul language and can give it as good as anyone else.

 

[camochick]

The problem with women being a "distraction" to the men, isnt really a woman's problem. It's the attitudes of men that have to change. If they can't work beside a woman without feeling the need to hump her leg then that is their problem not a problem with women being in combat.
I'm not in the military but heck if i was and had to pee i wouldnt have a problem with going in front of a man. If i got to go, i got to go.
It's a man's world, no matter how much we don't want to believe it, so if a woman feels she has to be act tougher it's because she has to emulate a man in order to feel she is getting the respect she deserves. It's sad but that's how it is.
Kudos to all the women who are in the military and who are doing a good job. 

 

[LF(CMO)]

'Combat' is a term that is thrown around here quite loosely.  A close friend of mine called last night to fill me in on his recent trip to Cuba.  ( He is a graduate of RR and has served as an Officer in the Regs, now in the P-Res)  He emphasized two points (again).  Canada's had two situations since Korea that possibly can be classified "Combat".  Medak Pocket (how many females in that one?) and maybe the first tour in Afganistan.  It's gruesome; but if the casualities aren't there how hazardous was the situation?

My dad was an Inf Sgt in WW II.  He was twice wounded and finally the lone survivor from his original platoon.  ( They were not all KIA.  Some were WIA and others transfered for various reasons).  That's a 'Combat' situation.  The most hazardous Civ occupations have far more fatalities and disabling injuries than the military or the RCMP in any given year.  Just a little perspective.  

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Combat is a relative term. Try telling the guys doing house clearing and anti insurgent interdiction in A'ghan they are not doing combat. The "3 block war" has changed the way we do things. Our perspective has to change also. And with all respect to your RR buddy, if he hasn't BTDT, it's nothing but armchair quarterbacking on his part. You don't have to get into a running gun battle to be in "Combat".

If there weren't females at Medak, it proves them none the less capable. What about the ones that were on Apollo, as was mentioned earlier?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Quote from Camochick,
The problem with women being a "distraction" to the men, isnt really a woman's problem. It's the attitudes of men that have to change. If they can't work beside a woman without feeling the need to hump her leg then that is their problem not a problem with women being in combat.

...and visa versa.
You are doing it AGAIN. [you know]
I work in a place now with more females tham males,.......guess what? Some women get "distracted" too.

 

[LF(CMO)]

He had two tours in Bosnia.  He said the early one was exciting, but he would not call it a Combat Sit.  The second one uneventful and somewhat boring.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Exactly my point.

 

[Peter]

I agree the Term COMBAT is thrown around very loosely especially by those who have never seen it. I have picked up on 3 up to now by reading they're posts 2 were either obviously cooks or clerks and 1 is trying to make a name for himself by posing as something he never was! It is interesting though and I must admit I do feel a little sorry for them trying to be the big man when in reality they could not hack it in a situation.
I must however, disagree with your point that Canada has only been in two combat situations since Korea. You don't necessarily have to come under fire and sustain losses to qualify a combat situation, The fact that the threat is present is enough to qualify the situation. Indeed I remember one incident where the Canadian troops were present within the last 12 years, when one of our patrols sustained KIAs. We were in a Combat situation and so were the Canadian troops although they were a mile distant and did not receive any incoming.

As to women peeing in front of me I have no problem with that. Where the problem would occur and think on this, if a bloke stumbles, you automatically reach out and grab him by whatever handhold you can get. The same happens with a woman and you're up on an indecency charge and thats just for starters.

 

[Strike]

As to women peeing in front of me I have no problem with that. Where the problem would occur and think on this, if a bloke stumbles, you automatically reach out and grab him by whatever handhold you can get. The same happens with a woman and you're up on an indecency charge and thats just for starters.

That's because she's a clown.

My section was out playing floor hockey a couple of weeks ago and I got a couple elbows in some tender areas in the upper body.  We all had a few chuckles about it, especially when thinking I may have to explain the bruises if I were to pick up that night.

I take martial arts and find myself sparring with guys on a regular basis.  Getting a misplaced kick in the butt (which really hurst by the way) happens and I don't know any women in the class who would get offended by it.  Just like I would hope a guy wouldn't get offended if I did the same to him -- by accident of course.

 

[Peter]

Glad you admit that like men some women are "clowns". The point being that women can and do use the sexual discrimination act as well as sexual harassment as a weapon and 99% of the time the woman is believed. In a combat situation that extra pressure is not needed or welcomed by a PROFESSIONAL Soldier.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I have picked up on 3 up to now by reading they're posts 2 were either obviously cooks or clerks and 1 is trying to make a name for himself by posing as something he never was! It is interesting though and I must admit I do feel a little sorry for them trying to be the big man when in reality they could not hack it in a situation.

Can't find the ones your talking about. Which page, etc?

 

[48Highlander]

Glad you admit that like men some women are "clowns". The point being that women can and do use the sexual discrimination act as well as sexual harassment as a weapon and 99% of the time the woman is believed. In a combat situation that extra pressure is not needed or welcomed by a PROFESSIONAL Soldier.

Right.  How about you provide some evidence that this sort of thing has actually happened.  The only people in the CF I've seen brought up on sex-related charges were two instructors who were sleeping with the same candidate.  I have NEVER seen nor heard of a member being charged for stopping a female from falling  :

 

[ZipperHead]

I think we are going to spin around in circles, until somebody can unequivocally prove that women CAN'T be in combat. Not shouldn't, but can't. Hell, I'm too good looking and valuable to society to be placed onto the two way range, but I'll still go  8). Children shouldn't fight, but they have killed plenty of people, both kids and adults (i'm thinking child soldiers, and children within society as a whole). There were 16 year old (and youger) boys fighting in wars, probably since the dawn of man. Getting killed by a child probably doesn't feel any less painful than being shot by a man, or woman, for that matter.

I agree that women can be a distraction, and unless they are being provocative (their bits and pieces on full public display) it is more my problem than theirs. I'm sure a lot of redneck's had a problem with fighting along blacks, until of course a black soldier saved their bacon. Depending on the redness of the neck, the guy was probably still against it, but probably somewhat less so. If I am in a trench, and there is a woman next to me, and I'm focussed on her backside, and not the enemy, there is a problem, but to blame the woman for my lack of control is like blaming McDonald's for making people fat. I have seen women walking around barracks, and most are dressed modestly, but a lot of guys walk around naked, and that is probably more uncomfortable for all concerned than the modestly dressed woman.

Canada's had two situations since Korea that possibly can be classified "Combat".  Medak Pocket (how many females in that one?) and maybe the first tour in Afganistan.  It's gruesome; but if the casualities aren't there how hazardous was the situation?

To use this argument, my tour to Bosnia in 2000-2001 was more "combat like" than '97, because we had two guys die on the latter tour. Sure they were heart attacks, but the "confirmed kills" on that tour outdid the earlier tour. Yay, team!!!!! Was Korea, with less deaths than WWII, or Antietam:        
Confederate Losses         Union Losses
Killed 1,512                              Killed   2,108
Wounded 7,816                       Wounded   9,549
Captured/Missing 1,844              Captured/Missing    753
(Those are losses from one battle, in one day, BTW) any less of a war????By this logic, no. In the immortal words of Gen Patton "You don't win the war by dying for your country. You win the war by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country". I think the most successful battle would be won with no losses, but we all know that isn't going to happen.

I think that the first time that women (in the modern era) fight, and perhaps die, people will judge them (women) based on that, and if a) they perform very well, it will be written off as dumb luck, or b) if they perform very poorly, that will be all the justification needed for the naysayers. For the record, if I go to battle, I hope that I don't have anybody have a meltdown in my vicinity, be they male or female, and one golden rule to follow: never share a foxhole with someone braver than you  . By simply burying our head in the sand, and repeating that it can't, it won't, it shouldn't happen is't going to make it go away. Hopefully, with the new CDS at the helm, the military will start the swing back to the "good old days", with good training, and higher standards all around, based on realistic conditions, not social engineering eggheads spouting off about what will make people happy. I think what will make people happy is well trained soldiers able to fight, and kill if neccesary, and return home at the end of it. Well, that would make me happy anyway.

Al

 

[Peter]

Can't find the ones your talking about. Which page, etc?

I Will not name names or pages on a public Forum. I'm surprised others havent picked up on it.

 

[Cansky]

Ive been reading this thread for the past few days now.  I think some valid points have been made for both sides, but the reality is its a political decision that has already been made and there is no going back.  As for women in combat I can't speak for Medak pocket (I never got a chance to go to Bosnia) but I was in Kandahar Afghanistan.  We had 28 women on our tour.  2 infanteer's and 1 Armoured officer.  They were both on the pointy end.  I can say that they did a great job and would serve with any of them again as well as any of the guys that were over there.  Of the rest at least 6 CSS trades went on combat ops (3 of which were medics).  I speak for myself when I say I didn't ask to be there in combat but its my job and I went.  It was the scariest and hardest thing both physically and mentally.  But I went and did my job.  Funny thing was men around me dropped there rucks going up the mountain and at least 2 were heat casualties at the top.  Most of us took 3 hours to get up the mountain with 150 + lb rucks rested for about 30 minutes and then did a 6 hr ish patrol.  I by no means am butchie and wasn't in the best shape of my life(more like the worst).  In the end it comes down to do you have the intestinal fortitude to soldier on or give up.  Some just give up and it wasn't always the woman. 
    I have the ut most respect for anyone who puts there lives on the line. Male or female it doesn't matter.  In the end did the job get done if so that is what is important.  Its time to accept that women in Canada are in combat roles.  It doesn't matter if they are combat arms or CSS it has happened and we all have to learn to deal with it.  Like I said earlier, I didn't ask to be in a combat environment but found my country telling me to take my turn.  In the end I went, I left a husband a 2 small girls behind and I would do it again.  I think most soldiers would do the same when asked to go.  After all we need to ask ourselves "Why are we in the military?"  For the money, job and security, or did we join to try and do our part to protect our freedoms and rights.  For me it was the latter.

 

[sigspig]

I think that as long as a "PERSON" can do it...let them join. NO matter if they are female, male, gay, caucasian, african american, aboriginal, etc...But I will add that because some people are close minded it does make it harder for females to join combat arms. I know, I joined as Armour and I can tell you that my instructors(all armoured personnel) did not want me there. I was the first female Armour to sign up, I passed the training with flying colors and didn't give up but they made certain it wouldn't be easy. They would ask me to show everyone how do to the obstical course, no problem I thought. Then they (my wonderfull instructors) would add: "Show everyone how to do it...hummm 5 times....you want to be Armour? Do your time little girl!" I bit my tongue and did it. This was 17 years ago, I can't beleive that some of you still think the same way after so many years...especially the new generation. I understood back then that the men would fear of the unknown, that they would fear the fact that females couldnt do it, but this is 2005...wake up!!! We are still around and not going anywhere! If YOU have a problem with females been in the combat arms that is YOUR problem and not mine.
Oh, almost forgot, once I completed my training they(the close minded people) told me that they were hoping for a full platoon of females and I had to remuster, grrrr yeah.. i was not impressed. But I was glad to see that women were in with the men shortly after and made it.

 

[LF(CMO)]

Exactly my point.

Actually, what my buddy, Capt. ****** is saying is that he was in Bosnia in one of the Combat Arms in the same situation that others are calling 'Combat'.  While certainly more dangerous than a Trg Ex at Wainwright, it was not a true 'Combat' Sit in his viewpoint.

Yes, the casuality rate most certainly reflects the severity of the situation especially from a historical point of view.  If you are a logger, commercial pilot or a power lineman your chance of being killed or injured on the job is many times more than the CF.  How many females in these occupations?  They get by in the CF because it's mandated by the PC Gov't of the day.

BTW:  To introduce a bit of ironic humour into this discussion; I don't have a monopoly on my viewpoint in my family either.  One daughter and one son agree.  Two daughters disagree; the hockey/rugby player quite vehemently.  My wife agrees.  That's what males all this SO much fun!!

 

[mainerjohnthomas]

'Combat' is a term that is thrown around here quite loosely.  A close friend of mine called last night to fill me in on his recent trip to Cuba.  ( He is a graduate of RR and has served as an Officer in the Regs, now in the P-Res)  He emphasized two points (again).  Canada's had two situations since Korea that possibly can be classified "Combat".  Medak Pocket (how many females in that one?) and maybe the first tour in Afganistan.  It's gruesome; but if the casualities aren't there how hazardous was the situation?

My dad was an Inf Sgt in WW II.  He was twice wounded and finally the lone survivor from his original platoon.  ( They were not all KIA.  Some were WIA and others transfered for various reasons).  That's a 'Combat' situation.  The most hazardous Civ occupations have far more fatalities and disabling injuries than the military or the RCMP in any given year.  Just a little perspective.
    My father was with RC57 Signals in the Belgium Congo when it turned bad, he got his teeth knocked out by a rifle but (it was some weeks before reaching friendly territory, so infection took them all), his section had to shoot their way out, was out of contact long enough for my grandparents and uncle (who was serving elsewhere in the Congo) to receive the CF notification that my father was "Missing in action, presumed dead".  His actions getting back to UN controlled area's got him, and other members of his troop mentioned in dispatches. The MIA/PD telegraph was still in my grandfathers effects when we buried him.  Funny thing about war, its easy to spot.  Funny thing about combat; it can be as big as whole divisions battling for weeks or as small as two men/women in a few desperate seconds.  If the loser got bagged, it was combat.  How many peacekeepers have stood and returned fire?  If live rounds are being fired at you, with the intention of ending your life, you are in combat.  As far as can women hack combat, if they have to meet the same standards as the men in the combat arms, then yes they can.  Can every woman, or even most? No.  Take a good hard look at the men in uniform next time you are on base, and apply the same standard to them.  Can the members of the Canadian Armed Forces, in whatever trade, service, or roll, meet the same standards that you hold for the combat infantryman?  The last time I tried that little check on base the results depressed the sh*t out of me, and there weren't any women in sight...... By the same token, when I tried that same test in the field,  the results impressed me, and there were three female junior ranks in sight, that I would take in their trade, or with their personal weapon into any situation you want.

 

[48Highlander]

If you are a logger, commercial pilot or a power lineman your chance of being killed or injured on the job is many times more than the CF.   How many females in these occupations?   They get by in the CF because it's mandated by the PC Gov't of the day.

http://www.privateline.com/OSP/women.html

"In the early 1970s the Bell System began hiring, under orders, women for jobs such as lineman and splicer that were traditionally held by men. They also started hiring men for jobs usually held by women, such as operators. This was a dramatic change to AT&T's corporate culture and it met with stiff resistance by certain managers."
.....
"A privateline.com reader of 30 years experience recently e-mailed me. She was one of the first females allowed in an Outside Plant job. She started at New Jersey Bell as a cord board operator and retired after 30 years as a CXM (Construction) Splicer. She also did stints as an installer and as a business office worker. Although now retired and teaching telecommunications, she notes that "The Good-OLE-Boy mentality never retired!" This story of pioneering, perservance, and dedication is in her own words."
.....
"In the beginning, whomever I was assigned to work with, would just leave me once we got to the job site. Finally I was assigned to a minority partner and things started to work out. He explained to me I was like he was 20 years ago. Nonwhite males were not allowed in splicing, It was a closed club. I was now the minority. I have always been grateful for how the "brothers" treated me. After they realized that I was there to do the job, and not just use the job as a stepping stone to management, they were great! I spent quite a few years there, then transferred closer to home. Back to the same group that I was a lineman with! By this time I was a very good technician, and mostly worked alone."


Read the rest of the article, you might learn something and stop emberrasing yourself.

 

[LF(CMO)]

"Read the rest of the article, you might learn something and stop emberrasing yourself."

  48th,Thanks for the above comment.  Everything has it's 'culture' and part of the culture here seems to be if you can't counter the point resort to name calling or rude comments, as the above.  Further,Telephone line people are sort of like the local Cadet Corps is to 3 PPCLI.  They are not considered real linemen.  I took the liberty of copying your commemts to Powerlinemen.com so the boys could have a good chuckle.

There are aprox 1800 lineworkers in this Province.  There is 1 woman working for the Hydro.  The contracters, which are governed by the free market, have none.  'Women in Combat' is phoney if it is mandated by the PC Canadian Military sructure bowing to the corrupt Liberal PC Gov't.  How many women are there serving in combat roles in the USMC?  That should be proof enough.

Both my Dad and myself have served in the military and both made a career in the POWER line business.  My Dad was a combat Vet; I'm not.  Although, he told me many times that 'the linecrew was the same as the Inf Platoon,........ just in Combat things were happening faster!'

When I first came on this site, I sort of formed a couple of personal rules for myself.  The first I would not allow myself to reply in kind.  Second, once someone has degenerated the discussion, I would withdraw from further comment on that thread.