sammym:
Absolutely right that they can have a go if they are good enough. I’d argue Dame Kelly Holmes would knock the socks of anyone on this site in a tab or endurance run even when we were younger and fitter.
It’s not like you just rock up after phase 1 and put your hand up for it… If they are hopeless they won’t even be considered.
I’d be surprised and impressed if any females could get through selection - I don’t know a huge amount about it. But I do know that even in my fittest days I’d not have dreamed of trying.
What I will find wholly disgusting is if they lower standards selectively to say that a lady has done it. The armed forces are a total disgrace in that they have different requirements for men and women (or used to). If I’m told I need to do certain things to be able to do my job properly the standards should be the same for all.
There’s a new single standard for all, I believe.
Whether that standard is evenly enforced is another matter, mind. The first female candidate for the RAF Regiment elected to drop out, even though her and her instructors were ‘under some pressure’ for her to complete the course.
I really hope they have evened the system. And made it make sense. One of the reasons being is tarnished the good women with only being in their position “to fill quotas”. Which was out of order really.
I was a soldier for less than 4 years. I got a long term biff chit for falling of something I could now legally drive. But I had to bite my tongue really really hard when I heard blokes being abused for not being operationally capable after an injury and rehab by a women who’s scores were lower than his…
That being said freedom of oppertunity is a fantastic thing. If a girl dreams of wearing a jazzy lid or driving an artic if they are capable I wish them all the best. Most are more sensible than that though.
the maoster:
the male of the species is genetically hard wired to help a damsel in distress.
There’s something basically evil about a regime which chooses to turn someone’s daughter,wife,mother,sister into an institutionalised killer,let alone diliberately allow them to be subjected to a violent untimely death,in front line war service.
women want equality as and when it suits them and as soon as it dont,then its pc equality for the normal mans occupations.
this is yet just another pathetic pc pressured lowering of standards.
the instructors will be basically told that anything remotely better than a complete fail will result in a pass for a female so they can show the world what they want presented to them.
my mates well up in the fire service and he is one of the guys who has a say whether its a pass or a fail for new applicants where its a one try,pass or fail and dont come back.
years ago when they opened it up he was told in no uncertain terms that instead of the one attempt pass or fail,there was a woman coming to attempt and irrespective of how many attempts or stops along the way,that she was going to pass and be one of the 1st fire wifeys as the powers that be said it was to happen.
all you need to do is look at the state of the cops in general now with the abundance of porkers waddling about as women in a mans job.just a complete lowering of standards as life goes on.
the maoster:
the male of the species is genetically hard wired to help a damsel in distress.
There’s something basically evil about a regime which chooses to turn someone’s daughter,wife,mother,sister into an institutionalised killer,let alone diliberately allow them to be subjected to a violent untimely death,in front line war service.
The UK government haven’t randomly chosen to turn women into institutionalised killers. What they have done is respond to changing times and as long as women can pass the current requirements to join the SAS, then let them. If I’d have been on the Syrian-Kurdish border, I’d have been glad to see the YPJ if |I was fleeing ISIS and I suspect some men were. It’s the individual’s choice to join or not join, it’s far more evil to tell someone that they aren’t allowed to do something because some bloke thinks all women are precious little things that need caring for. Everyone is different and very few women will want to join and even less will pass, so it really is a storm in a teacup.
dieseldog999:
women want equality as and when it suits them and as soon as it dont,then its pc equality for the normal mans occupations.
this is yet just another pathetic pc pressured lowering of standards.
the instructors will be basically told that anything remotely better than a complete fail will result in a pass for a female so they can show the world what they want presented to them.
my mates well up in the fire service and he is one of the guys who has a say whether its a pass or a fail for new applicants where its a one try,pass or fail and dont come back.
years ago when they opened it up he was told in no uncertain terms that instead of the one attempt pass or fail,there was a woman coming to attempt and irrespective of how many attempts or stops along the way,that she was going to pass and be one of the 1st fire wifeys as the powers that be said it was to happen.
all you need to do is look at the state of the cops in general now with the abundance of porkers waddling about as women in a mans job.just a complete lowering of standards as life goes on.
Since I’m a woman, I’d be fascinated to know where it is that I want equality where and when it suits me. I’ve spent my life doing ‘mens’ jobs. When I say I was a forkie when I left school that really doesn’t explain the job. It was getting on the back of containers and trailers and hand balling all day, and some days topped 24 hours. I could dead lift 60 kgs, roll 45 gallon drums and I never got any rubbish from the lads I worked with because I could do the job and I didn’t go around expecting them to help me because I was a woman. The same when I was driving, I didn’t expect help because I was a woman.
I’m as much against women (or men) in roles just to make up quotas as you are, and I’m far from the only woman that thinks like that. So in the same way as I defend truck drivers when they are all described as thick, aggressive and dirty, I’ll stand up for the majority of women who think like I do and are frankly fed up of hearing the media whine on about how terrible a woman’s life is because men hold them back, when it’s essentially not true.
the maoster:
the male of the species is genetically hard wired to help a damsel in distress.
There’s something basically evil about a regime which chooses to turn someone’s daughter,wife,mother,sister into an institutionalised killer,let alone diliberately allow them to be subjected to a violent untimely death,in front line war service.
The UK government haven’t randomly chosen to turn women into institutionalised killers. What they have done is respond to changing times and as long as women can pass the current requirements to join the SAS, then let them. If I’d have been on the Syrian-Kurdish border, I’d have been glad to see the YPJ if |I was fleeing ISIS and I suspect some men were. It’s the individual’s choice to join or not join, it’s far more evil to tell someone that they aren’t allowed to do something because some bloke thinks all women are precious little things that need caring for. Everyone is different and very few women will want to join and even less will pass, so it really is a storm in a teacup.
Firstly I wasn’t specifically referring to the SAS and admittedly there are exceptions which prove rules in that women combatants such as in the Red Army possibly helped to tip the balance in defeating the Nazis for example.
However yes precious things which need caring for was a good enough mantra which has generally applied within the Brit forces for centuries and some would call it basic human compassion and decency.
Meanwhile picture the real world scene of a bereaved father,mother,brother,husband,let alone children asking their father,how their daughter,sister,wife,mother came to die on active service.With questions like did she suffer why did she have to go and leave us etc.To which the answer would be yes unfortunately she was burned alive trapped in a blazing armoured vehicle or a ship with almost every bone in her body broken so couldn’t move.Leaving few remains to bury.Or ended up with PTSD because of the unnatural act of a woman being ordered to kill people.
But look on the bright side it was all in the interests of modern equality in which it is considered as good that the father stayed at home to look after the home and family while the wife and mother went to war and being what she wanted to do.That’s even before the issue of conscription at some point is applied to the possibilities.
So yes when I think of women in the forces I automatically think of non combatitive roles like nursing etc which might make me a chauvanistic dinosoar in the eyes of the feminists but I’m proud of it and can live with that.
albion:
Since I’m a woman, I’d be fascinated to know where it is that I want equality where and when it suits me. I’ve spent my life doing ‘mens’ jobs. When I say I was a forkie when I left school that really doesn’t explain the job. It was getting on the back of containers and trailers and hand balling all day, and some days topped 24 hours. I could dead lift 60 kgs, roll 45 gallon drums and I never got any rubbish from the lads I worked with because I could do the job and I didn’t go around expecting them to help me because I was a woman. The same when I was driving, I didn’t expect help because I was a woman.
I’m as much against women (or men) in roles just to make up quotas as you are, and I’m far from the only woman that thinks like that. So in the same way as I defend truck drivers when they are all described as thick, aggressive and dirty, I’ll stand up for the majority of women who think like I do and are frankly fed up of hearing the media whine on about how terrible a woman’s life is because men hold them back, when it’s essentially not true.
Untill we accept that men & women are fundamentally different can we even begin to understand what equality really means.
Jordan Peterson has a highly developed opinion on this subject & to listen for awhile would do a few here good.
Carryfast:
However yes precious things which need caring for was a good enough mantra which has generally applied within the Brit forces for centuries and some would call it basic human compassion and decency.
Meanwhile picture the real world scene of a bereaved father,mother,brother,husband,let alone children asking their father,how their daughter,sister,wife,mother came to die on active service.With questions like did she suffer why did she have to go and leave us etc.To which the answer would be yes unfortunately she was burned alive trapped in a blazing armoured vehicle or a ship with almost every bone in her body broken so couldn’t move.Leaving few remains to bury.Or ended up with PTSD because of the unnatural act of a woman being ordered to kill people.
But look on the bright side it was all in the interests of modern equality in which it is considered as good that the father stayed at home to look after the home and family while the wife and mother went to war and being what she wanted to do.That’s even before the issue of conscription at some point is applied to the possibilities.
So yes when I think of women in the forces I automatically think of non combatitive roles like nursing etc which might make me a chauvanistic dinosoar in the eyes of the feminists but I’m proud of it and can live with that.
Compassion and decency applies wether you are male or female. And if a soldier gets killed, the questions will be the same, how did they die, where, who, we are just people, men or women, just people.
albion:
Since I’m a woman, I’d be fascinated to know where it is that I want equality where and when it suits me. I’ve spent my life doing ‘mens’ jobs. When I say I was a forkie when I left school that really doesn’t explain the job. It was getting on the back of containers and trailers and hand balling all day, and some days topped 24 hours. I could dead lift 60 kgs, roll 45 gallon drums and I never got any rubbish from the lads I worked with because I could do the job and I didn’t go around expecting them to help me because I was a woman. The same when I was driving, I didn’t expect help because I was a woman.
I’m as much against women (or men) in roles just to make up quotas as you are, and I’m far from the only woman that thinks like that. So in the same way as I defend truck drivers when they are all described as thick, aggressive and dirty, I’ll stand up for the majority of women who think like I do and are frankly fed up of hearing the media whine on about how terrible a woman’s life is because men hold them back, when it’s essentially not true.
Untill we accept that men & women are fundamentally different can we even begin to understand what equality really means.
Jordan Peterson has a highly developed opinion on this subject & to listen for awhile would do a few here good.
We are different and I wouldn’t disagree with what he says, but there are no absolutes. The difference is on a spectrum.
I’m supposed to be part of the more caring gender, but I’m not, I’m not built that way. My neighbour gave up his job to look after his wife with dementia and he has been more than amazing, hats off to him completely. I couldn’t do it with Mr A to the stage of dementia that he has. I don’t have patience or the caring gene.
I had a traditional upbringing, ,my mum was at home, my dad went out in a truck and I looked at it and even as a child, I thought well that housework lark is not for me. I don’t want to spend my life cleaning and cooking - to this day, I do not cook at all - it just looked like my Dad’s life was a whole lot better. And until I hit my late teens I never realised that there were people that thought women shouldn’t drive a forklift ( waaaay more fun than sitting in an office or listening to a howling child). Most women wouldn’t do what I wanted to do, I am unusual, but as I said it’s a spectrum.
“she was burned alive trapped … with almost every bone in her body broken so couldn’t move.”
The fate of many civilians in many wars: Polish, French, British, German, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Iranian, Iraqi, Afghani, Syrian etc in just about every war of the 20th and 21st century. Their lack of uniform was no protection.
If you don’t want this to happen, then work out how to stop wars.
Going back to the 1970s, my Dad (who had fought across Europe in 1944/5) was always complaining about the Common Market in General and the French (and their Golden Delicious apples) in particular… Come the vote on whether or not we should stay in, I was surprised that he said he was voting ‘in’.
I asked him why.
“Because I grew up knowing I would almost certainly have to fight in a European war. the Common Market means you can grow up knowing that you almost certainly won’t.”
GasGas:
“she was burned alive trapped … with almost every bone in her body broken so couldn’t move.”
The fate of many civilians in many wars: Polish, French, British, German, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Iranian, Iraqi, Afghani, Syrian etc in just about every war of the 20th and 21st century. Their lack of uniform was no protection.
If you don’t want this to happen, then work out how to stop wars.
Going back to the 1970s, my Dad (who had fought across Europe in 1944/5) was always complaining about the Common Market in General and the French (and their Golden Delicious apples) in particular… Come the vote on whether or not we should stay in, I was surprised that he said he was voting ‘in’.
I asked him why.
“Because I grew up knowing I would almost certainly have to fight in a European war. the Common Market means you can grow up knowing that you almost certainly won’t.”
How quickly we forget, don’t we?
Firstly the difference in the analogy of the knocked out tank or war ship v bombed out civilian building is that the former is designed to be put in harms way while the latter is either collateral damage.Or at worst only seen as a target from the point of view of the attacker hopefully with reservations and/or remorse in the case of anyone with any sense of humanity.On that note there’s obviously a big difference between my Grandfather certainly not wanting his wife,nor my dad his sisters,to be fighting with him in Europe as opposed to leaving them at home to take her chances through the bombing raids and V1/2 attacks happening around them.
As for the ‘Common Market’ WW2 was actually all about the defence of the idea of the self determination of the Nation State against the aggression and takeover of the ‘Federation’ in whatever form.Strange how you’d selectively over look that and the causes of the Napoleonic wars and WW1 and the casualties resulting from the aggression of the JNA during the breakup of the former Yugoslav Federation in that regard.While the EU certainly seems to be doing a good enough job in trying to drag us all into a catastrophic war with Russia.
The naive supporters of all this will all suddenly wake up to reality when the call up papers arrive sending someone’s daughter/sister/wife/mother to the eastern front in Ukraine or Poland or the Balkans.A bit like when the women’s retirement age was increased in line with men’s all in the interests of ‘equality’.
Since I’m a woman, I’d be fascinated to know where it is that I want equality where and when it suits me. I’ve spent my life doing ‘mens’ jobs. When I say I was a forkie when I left school that really doesn’t explain the job. It was getting on the back of containers and trailers and hand balling all day, and some days topped 24 hours. I could dead lift 60 kgs, roll 45 gallon drums and I never got any rubbish from the lads I worked with because I could do the job and I didn’t go around expecting them to help me because I was a woman. The same when I was driving, I didn’t expect help because I was a woman.
I’m as much against women (or men) in roles just to make up quotas as you are, and I’m far from the only woman that thinks like that. So in the same way as I defend truck drivers when they are all described as thick, aggressive and dirty, I’ll stand up for the majority of women who think like I do and are frankly fed up of hearing the media whine on about how terrible a woman’s life is because men hold them back, when it’s essentially not true.
[/quote]
^^^^^^^^^^
theres always the exception to the rule everywhere.
years ago i used to have to load 45 gall drums from shell oil in trafford park onto the back of the 40 footers.
most of the time,the drums roled me as much as i rolled them.
nowadays id have to think twice about stopping for a wifey in a broken down car whereas years ago it would be the done thing.
im old enough to hold doors open for women,and generally be mannerly in things apertaining to such interaction but its now went in such a way that if women want all the equality they demand,and topics like this plainly show why thats a croc of crap in reality,then id hold back from helping in case it turns out to be some femininst ■■■■■ taking the hump.
if it was a genuine scenario then apart from the one in a million exceptions,then there will never be a woman in the sas.
the thing is that it wont be the same standards and it will go the same way as other services where the selection standards will be bypassed so that the army ect can show women passing.
if that wasnt the case,then there would never be women in the fire brigade as i personally know the rules were bent to allow them to pass the physical.
if a soldier is down then his mates will decide how to save him without making the situation worse.
if its a woman down,then the male chivalry testrozone wil kick in and other soldiers wil try to assist her whereas if it was a male,they wouldnt be so keen and as such will lead to more casualties.
i read that in a article by some senior army dude a while ago and it makes sense to me.
if you can do the job 100% then anyone should do it no probs.
men and women are worlds apart and people should accept things for what they are,which is why if a man talks crude and vulgar to a woman then its ■■■■■■ harrassment,but if a woman talks dirty to a man,then its £2 per minute…
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
sobering enough though amaricanised pish at the same time.
i wonder what the blog type stuff would read like if the same scenario was around with the dudes coming back from ww1 and 2 ?
at least when we have a war its just not in some rag head country.
when we have one,its a proper job then every bugger joins in,
I did ask my Dad about this…him having been in the frontline for part of WW2.
What he said was pretty much the whole country had shared the experience to a certain extent. It was perfectly possible to join up and find yourself posted to some backwater where nothing much happened, while back at home your street got flattened in a raid and your family killed. So everyone ‘understood’…a bit, anyway. And some ‘civilians’ (merchant navy) had higher casualty rates than the uniformed services did overall. I recall an interview with a Battle of Britain pilot when he said he only had to be brave for a few minutes at a time…while the London fire and rescue bods had to be brave all night, night-after-night.
But there were psychological casualties, obviously. We had a few ‘twitchy teachers’ at school who we were told had sustained what was then called ‘shell-shock’ but we’d now call PTSD. I guess such people were just expected to get on with it as best they could while those around them cut them some slack. These days they’d find their condition ‘medicalised’, and that’s not always a good thing unless there’s an effective treatment.
And I knew one poor man who was mad but harmless…he’d been captured by the Japanese and tortured, but what made him the way he was was brain damage caused by long-term malnutrition.
I have 7 cousins who are sisters, 5 of them joined the army, 3 of them have served for the obligatory 25 years, 2 are still in the job. I can’t remember how many tours they have done but they were all in the thick of it.
My Uncle, their father served his time in Sharjah & Aden with the Army, tried Civvy Street and rejoined the RAF in Cyprus. All 7 of the girls were born in service married quarters.
my dad fought against the germans in normandy and the italians in the north africa campaign.
he also fought against the japs in burma,and in his later years he also fought in aden…he just couldnt get on with anyone.
a lot will try and a lot will fail,they do not have the same strength as men,it’s not being sexist it’s fact,if anyone remembers there was four women a few years ago being televised for attempting to join the commando’s,if I remember correctly they all failed,it was too tough for them,now it is said these women who apply for selection will face the same training as the men,yeah, right, don’t think so,never been a soldier myself but have read about the training they go through on selection,these women won’t have a chance in my opinion,still time will tell,Andy Mc nab and the other guy from the SAS programme[beardy bloke] on tv don’t seem happy about it either
Probably not even in the same league as getting into a proper fight with Russia in which conscription would probably be a factor within a week or two and in which the professionals who kicked it all off on the Baltic,Polish and Ukrainian borderland front would be decimated to the point of few left to even tell the story of the end of the beginning even if the survivors felt like talking about it.That’s just the male combatants.On that note this silly idea of feminist equality for front line military deployment is a case of be careful what you wish for bearing in mind that real war is nothing like the Hollywood style recruitment publicity.
Genuine question fom the guys who don’t like this. Do you think the majority of people fail these selection processes because they are not physically capable or because they are not mentally strong enough?
I have zero idea about the SAS. But I know the answer for p-coy and aacc. So why are we focussing on physical attributes and ignoring mental ones?
Finally - why has no one considered any potential benefit of the ladies being highly trained super squaddies? I’m just throwing it out there - look at the current threats our nation faces. Would it not be good to have more highly trained people who don’t look like soldiers? Does no one consider it might be a bit challenging to stick a team in a place when it’s all blokes and not stand out?
As long as the physical requirements are not weakened this is nothing but good news.
Not that long ago we banned homosexuals from serving. What a ridiculous thing that seems now. As if who someone is attracted to defines if they can soldier. And even more recently they have been pushing for it to be acceptable to talk about feelings and get help with emotional problems. When I joined the idea of saying I was feeling down/depressed to a superior would have been met with ridicule and derision. It took a lot of young guys to endlessly lose their lives for the military to start to change. Change is sometimes a good thing - and the great thing is that if it turns out to be a mistake we can always change it back.
