Conversation
Notices
-
>“It is important for the military to have a gender equal profile,” he added.
why is that actually important. pretty sure it is not.- RDN's Lucifer likes this.
-
@moonman PR reasons, I guess.
-
@moonman Military shouldnt care about anything but how well you can shoot and follow orders under fire. Anything else is inconsequential.
-
@moonman Gotta get that PR, lowering the strength of your country's bulwark is irrelevant.
moonman likes this. -
@moonman The discipline part is what a lot of women have problems with, for complex psychological reasons that come down to predominant personality types in the female sex having problems with authority.
-
@moonman it's always important in sweden
we have voluntary military service for women here, while men get conscripted, I'm not exactly convinced that having women on the field is much of a benefit for the overall performance of the platoon. in my platoon we had 1 woman who was also a squad leader, it was fine, she did her job well as told without extra fuss or drama, but before that in training they were bringing morale and overall performance down more than anything. having lower standard to enter hard stuff, not being able to keep up with the rest, causing betacucks to orbit around themRDN's Lucifer likes this. -
@shpuld I don't care if women serve if they are able, I just don't think it's actually important for military readiness or that military should be a jobs program or that normal expectations of gender equality in other social spheres should apply.
-
@maiyannah @shpuld in the US they are just lowering standards and pretending its because the previous standards were unnecessarily strict and not because 80% of women couldn't do them.
RDN's Lucifer likes this. -
@maiyannah @moonman personally I think the best solution is to put women and men in different jobs, it's not only the different standards that cause issues, men tend to get distracted by women nearby and tend to act overly protective around them and it's no secret, and when you're actually training people to go FIGHT A WAR, you really don't want to add any extra risks like that
-
@moonman @shpuld In case you're curious, here's the FORCE standards for the Canadian Armed Forces, 100% practical and you have to retake it every year while in active service unless you have a medical reason you're unable to at which point you must take it as soon as you're returned to active duty:
https://www.cfmws.com/en/AboutUs/PSP/DFIT/Fitness/FORCEprogram/Pages/FAQs.aspx
It is the same for both men and women.
You may be given some accomodations for certain roles that do not see active duty however, such as chaplains or legal officers. -
@moonman The US's last standard review was hit and miss really. It lowered some in this regard which is stupid, but also established a threshold of performance well above the minumum requirement past which a soldier's weight is irrelevant, so as long as you can pass those tests and prove you're fit for duty you can weight 150kg of muscle or fat without issue.
-
@takebananaakenji @moonman US Army Inc.
-
@maiyannah @moonman yes, mixed units can work just fine, I know I've been in them, but I've seen studies that show that all male units still perform better, and if it's actual life/death situations we're talking about, I'll take whatever's the best and not just fine
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2394531-marine-corps-force-integration-plan-summary.html -
@nerthos @moonman One of the problems with the previous standard (at least with the USMC but I assume elsewhere, but the US military people I know are Army Rangers and USMC so those are the two I have good knowledge of) was the weight standard didn't take in to account you can be "overweight" without being unhealthy if you're a very active weight-train-y sort of person.
Hell I've been overweight a couple times in my life for that kind of reason, not that it takes much at my height, the margin between underweight and overweight is like 20 pounds. -
@maiyannah @moonman Basically, yeah. It was to avoid having people being deemed unfit for duty for weight when they in fact far exceeded the requirements.
I mean, I weight about 80kg with an average lifestyle, if I did exercise to bulk up I'd probably be around 100kg or so which is generally considered overweight. -
@maiyannah @moonman we already had Simo "White Death" Häyhä, I don't think we need to show off in sniping any further ;---) https://mangoposter.club/attachment/495810
RDN's Lucifer likes this. -
@nerthos As an aside, Canada is so weird about that - we use feet and inches and then pounds, the imperial height and weight measurements, and literally everything else in metric.
-
@moonman @maiyannah @shpuld world police https://social.heldscal.la/attachment/275693
-
@nerthos More so considering my uncle and grandfather when they did very manual labour were outright buff, to the point my uncle got a bad cut on an arm once and the muscle ripped in two swole "lips"
-
@nerthos When I first got clean from cigarettes and that, I basically turned that addiction into a working out addiction. 100% healthier for me anyways.
-
@maiyannah I could never understand addiction really. I generally can't do anything religiously, even if I enjoy it.
-
@maiyannah Funny thing would be if they went the extra mile and sent political commissars, and those were the ones fragged.
-
@nerthos When you have adverse medical effects for not doing it, it tends to reinforce the behaviour, but certain forms of exercise released the same body chemicals as the smoking, so it was a good and healthy way to wean myself off of it.
-
@moonman @maiyannah From what I've read of military communities (comics and social media comments for stuff aimed specifically at servicemen) past boot camp most will stop seeing servicemen of the opposite sex as date material knowing they're FrankerZ tier for that as they're just as bad as them in relationships and just make everything harder, so they'll behave mostly as if they were the same gender.
-
@maiyannah Funny how the best of the best is mostly guys fresh from highschool that draw more dicks than they shoot bullets
-
@maiyannah What I really don't get is why they're called marines if nowadays they're mostly a land-based force rather than actual marines.
monsutaa kaado! likes this. -
@nerthos Oh USMC has a well-deserved reputation, honestly, they are among the most effective fighting units in the world. But the last .... I want to say five years? have seen quite a downturn in quality due to the lowering of standards to shoehorn in women. Moon ain't wrong that it's had negative effects.
-
@maiyannah I suppose. It's pretty counter intuitive though, as one would expect marines to be... well, ship-based infantry for sea-to-land engagements.
-
@nerthos Tradition, mostly.
-
-
@nerthos well that is how they started out and military with traditions always has been the perfect mix.
-
@cyberpotato @nerthos Well, the marine tradition actually comes out of the British Navy deciding the army was mango at actions from a ship and making their own specialized elite fighting force, so it's not entirely an inaccurate descriptor.
-
@awl I suppose. I actually wonder how well the USMC would perform nowadays in their original role after being in the desert for the last 15 years.
-
@nerthos or the jungles for the last 50, but hey, I'm sure they get their sea legs in the landing craft.
-
@nerthos Nowadays the Navy has another-another specialized elite unit for that (the Navy Seals)
Why they needed that when they had the USMC originally, is anyone's guess, but it's why the USMC has kind of migrated to another role. -
@maiyannah I thought the navy seals was a tactical force for boarding or mostly water based engagements, while the marines was a mid point between that and army, mostly to make beachheads and such from warships with naval support as they operated in land.
Basically navy-swat vs ship-based army -
@maiyannah Haha, good point.
-
@nerthos Well that would be the _sensible_ thing yes, but we're talking about the USA here.
