Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Oct 2015 12:48

usaf has f-15 women pilot(s) for sure. remember seeing some video. so surely f-16 also. even the us navy has some hornet ones.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 26 Oct 2015 13:25

Philip wrote:Will help to an extent solve the pilot shortage. However,I would prefer to have women pilots fly ops only in Indian airspace even in times of crisis. The ability to withstand G forces,etc. has to be determined by aviation medicine.

Pilot shortage is not because of dearth of 'volunteers' male or female.

Women are just as good at facing 'g's as men. I am not aware of any studies pointing otherwise.

The induction if women in fighter combat duties is a cultural thing for the IAF. As a symbol of a nation giving equal opportunity to women (i.e. 50% of population) it is an important step and therefore another glass ceiling broken by women.

How good or bad the experience will be - this will be decided by how well IAF, its officers and training institutes gear upto face a new situation. If a 'male' only attitude sets in, it will not go well.

On the good side, right from AFA, etc, IAF has lots of women trainees and for long. Helicopter and transports have women pilot and these have worked out well (mostly

).

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 27 Oct 2015 08:04

Arun Menon wrote:^Doesn't high-G flying exacerbate bleeding and such. How would such young women function in a fighter cockpit during periods? Isn't this one of the reasons why female combat pilots in the USAF is authorized for the A-10 while not for the other fighters?

Frankly, I am ignorant in this regard. Really, just trying to find out.

Another question related to same issue..what about those crazy long endurance missions that mki pilots do?
Iirc, tampons are especially susceptible to high levels of toxicity...perhaps doctors on the forum know better.

As far as increasing competition as a means to increase skills goes, the iaf pilot force is as it is a highly competitive arena. At this point such gains are likely to be diminishing with a distinct possibility of adverse effects that are a consequence of excessive competition

I'm seeing this as a gender equality thing and as such question its value...call it a cultural thing but just because it is a thing to do in the west, doesn't mean it is good for desh...nor will it be anything more than
Symbolic ala the hijab clad fighters of certain countries.
As it stands our forces do pretty well performance wise without additional complications...we all know what the armed forces in the so called liberated countries face. With gender integration...One can imagine what an assault case will do to the image of the forces...burkha types will be all over it...

Rather see somene concrete steps taken towards handling more pressing women's issues than such lip stick..

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 27 Oct 2015 08:51

^There is nothing more sickening than gender PC. I believe that if a person is qualified, the opportunity must be given, but no special privileges, reservations or dilution of standards for "equality."

That said, a male pilot in paki hands is bad enough. I shudder to think of what can happen to a female pilot in paki hands and the consequent effect on morale, both positive and negative.

Pakis getting skinned alive by pissed off soldiers ain't going to be a very happy thing for social justice warriors.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 27 Oct 2015 09:05

Discussions increasing turning sexist here. If you are comparing psycological aspects, effects of stress, or drugs they take on long endurance missions, how they fare against the opposite sex on their fatigue,alertness or ability to do the job well that would be more constructive than discussing tampons and chances of molestation/torture behind enemy lines. What does torture/rape have to do with the sex of the individual?

When they have an ability to decide and vote for their leaders, they know the risks before signing off on a dangerous endeavor like fighting for their country. Stop patronizing or please stop these one dimensional arguments.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 27 Oct 2015 09:42

^ the tampon issue is quite real....toxic shock is nothing to scoff at. And IAF pilots on mkis do fly 11 hour missions long enough to create conditions for tss. some might not like it and consider this sexist but these are issues that should at least be open to discussion.

Similarly, indian culture is quite traditional and this is not necessarily unequal or unfair just because the west or our Anglophone education system says so. In such an environment, what Arun brought out is well worth considering...

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 27 Oct 2015 09:50

So if other air forces have decided to engage women in combat roles, may be these are the same problems they have already faced and solved.

Are we trying to solve an operational problem or a cultural one? Because if it is the cultural problem, then it is upto the individuals freewill and their sound judgement.

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 27 Oct 2015 10:03

Arun Menon wrote: That said, a male pilot in paki hands is bad enough. I shudder to think of what can happen to a female pilot in paki hands and the consequent effect on morale, both positive and negative..

Precisely my thoughts. Unlike the so called progressive bhestern countries, we have real enemies at our borders. Are we as a country ready to deal with a female pilot going down behind enemy lines, especially the western one? We should recall the media ronadhona during IC 814.

The pakis supposedly having female fighter pilots is actually a tribute to us, in a manner of speaking. They know their pilots will be treated properly by our people. A sentiment I can't even dream of reciprocating.

And, btw, what about the other ranks?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 27 Oct 2015 10:21

^Kailash, at this point, my questions are more to do with operational exigencies than anything else...but the larger culture has its role to play too...

Btw, countries such as the US have massive problems with sexual harassment cases in the armed forces....I really don't know if this gender equality thing is such a priority for India right now..

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 27 Oct 2015 11:01

Cairn Marko ji, one odd exceptional situation of a rare 11 hr sortie on one type in the livery of aircraft in IAF inventory does not make it worthwhile to exclude 50% of Indians from an opportunity to serve India as a fighter pilot.

I am sure they can even overcome even this specific hurdle. Are you aware as pilots on Chetak / Cheetahs, women have routinely undertake long 10+ day detachments in remote areas with minimal faciltiy in otherwise a men only, very hard area situation, as part of IAF?

Why is it that women can undertake challenges when flying transports and helicopters and are unfit if it is fighters? Are you aware that from the POV of hardship, helicopter and transport flying in the remote hills of NE and Leh are no less fatigue inducing then 0:45 mins of 'g' induced average fighter sortie in the IAF.

The debate in the IAF, which I found more relevant than that on BRF, was on whether training women, costs being what they are, will give returns required since women will become mothers at least once and then as per rules will leave at around 14 yrs service. So, there will be an extended break during motherhood and at the peak of their flying they will be out.

I countered (in unofficial discussions), with examples, of women who were my contemporary, who had individually delayed, in multiple separate instance a) Marriage and b) Motherhood. There are such amazingly dedicated women that denying them a chance to be a fighter pilot because they are women is criminal. Denial of opportunity because of gender is in my view unjust.

Women are doing sky diving, police duties in J&K, armed forces have women doctors in hard areas, and countless such examples are available. Denying them a chance to be a fighter pilot because of a perceived physical inability is gender bias and regressive. It is also a false glass ceiling that fighter pilots are at a higher level of human existence where women cannot reach.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Oct 2015 11:06

any atrocities will harden the resolve of the people and forces and make them lash out harder.

srin · Post by **srin** » 27 Oct 2015 11:19

I'm a bit apprehensive of sexual harassment (real/perceived) incidents/allegations

Like this: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... g-officer/

The military needs to have proper sensitisation and response mechanisms to ensure that command authority isn't eroded.

As an armchair air marshal, it'd be cleaner if the women's wing was a separate branch of the IAF, to begin with.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 27 Oct 2015 11:19

Kailash wrote:Discussions increasing turning sexist here.

Is examining the consequences of employing a female for this purpose sexist? Are women in this post-feminist world placed on so high a pedestal that no questions should ever be asked with regard to them? Are they beyond the realm of physical limitations unique to them? Is the act of questioning a woman/womankind in itself sexist by nature?

Kailash wrote: If you are comparing psycological aspects, effects of stress, or drugs they take on long endurance missions, how they fare against the opposite sex on their fatigue,alertness or ability to do the job well that would be more constructive than discussing tampons and chances of molestation/torture behind enemy lines. What does torture/rape have to do with the sex of the individual?

Are you actually asking that question after what happened in Delhi just a while ago with regard to a woman getting raped? Didn't you see and hear the mass hysteria, outrage and anger in that episode? Wouldn't a similar or worse fate befalling a woman who risked her life for sake of the nation incite much much worse? Didn't you see the hysterical reaction (and later relief and elation) and the extreme efforts made with regard to rescuing Jessica Lynch in Iraq (where she fell into capture for less than a month)? This from a more "egalitarian" western nation, do you expect any less from us? Have you considered the kind of diversion of mental energies and physical resources this can turn into? Have you considered the effect it would have on morale?

Kailash wrote:When they have an ability to decide and vote for their leaders, they know the risks before signing off on a dangerous endeavor like fighting for their country. Stop patronizing or please stop these one dimensional arguments.

Oh, so everyone who has a right to vote should have the right to do whatever job they please, regardless of their competence, and asking questions about that is patronizing? Does this apply to men too?

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 27 Oct 2015 11:24

I have to state again that I have nothing against women serving as fighter pilots if they need no special privileges, reservations or dilution of standards.

But, this name calling and shaming at the drop of a hat, whenever anything regarding women are discussed should stop. Such cheap tricks aimed at squelching debate is past their expiry.

srai · Post by **srai** » 27 Oct 2015 11:46

deejay wrote:Cairn Marko ji, one odd exceptional situation of a rare 11 hr sortie on one type in the livery of aircraft in IAF inventory does not make it worthwhile to exclude 50% of Indians from an opportunity to serve India as a fighter pilot.

I am sure they can even overcome even this specific hurdle. Are you aware as pilots on Chetak / Cheetahs, women have routinely undertake long 10+ day detachments in remote areas with minimal faciltiy in otherwise a men only, very hard area situation, as part of IAF?

Why is it that women can undertake challenges when flying transports and helicopters and are unfit if it is fighters? Are you aware that from the POV of hardship, helicopter and transport flying in the remote hills of NE and Leh are no less fatigue inducing then 0:45 mins of 'g' induced average fighter sortie in the IAF.

The debate in the IAF, which I found more relevant than that on BRF, was on whether training women, costs being what they are, will give returns required since women will become mothers at least once and then as per rules will leave at around 14 yrs service. So, there will be an extended break during motherhood and at the peak of their flying they will be out.

I countered (in unofficial discussions), with examples, of women who were my contemporary, who had individually delayed, in multiple separate instance a) Marriage and b) Motherhood. There are such amazingly dedicated women that denying them a chance to be a fighter pilot because they are women is criminal. Denial of opportunity because of gender is in my view unjust.

Women are doing sky diving, police duties in J&K, armed forces have women doctors in hard areas, and countless such examples are available. Denying them a chance to be a fighter pilot because of a perceived physical inability is gender bias and regressive. It is also a false glass ceiling that fighter pilots are at a higher level of human existence where women cannot reach.

Well said deejayji! If someone is qualified (through IAF's standardized battery of tests), then it doesn't matter what sex that candidate is. They can do the job.

The bolded part is what I read about on IAF's viewpoint a while back. I think it was one of the ACMs who stated something along the line when asked by reporters.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 27 Oct 2015 11:59

srai wrote:Well said deejayji! If someone is qualified (through IAF's standardized battery of tests), then it doesn't matter what sex that candidate is. They can do the job.

Sadly, It is not just up to the individual (frankly I am quite sure that there are women who can qualify as fighter pilots) or just up to the organization. Both may be ready to make sacrifices and face hardships, but the society at large may behave like a spoilt brat, throwing tantrums and hysterics the moment anything adverse happens.

Is the society at large (not just in India, anywhere on this planet) ready to spare a downed female pilot in enemy territory/hands only the same effort it would spare a male pilot?

Is the society at large okay with a woman sacrificing her motherhood on the altar of patriotism and passion for flying?

If not, is society okay with the extra expenditure (pulled out of civil budgets) incurred in supporting the reproductive activities of female pilots?

Asking these questions may make me seem like a bigot out to question male female equality, who is just asking questions to snuff out the hard won opportunities of women. But we need not only equality in opportunity, we need equality in accountability. We need TRUE equality.

srai · Post by **srai** » 27 Oct 2015 12:03

^^^

Those same questions can be applicable for males too.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 27 Oct 2015 12:08

Arun Menon wrote:...

If not, is society okay with the extra expenditure (pulled out of civil budgets) incurred in supporting the reproductive activities of female pilots?
...

Okay Arun Menon ji, this will be my last post on this but I feel on this point I have to say this:

- Society at large is indebted, IMO, infact owes it constantly to women for their reproductive activities. We better.

- Society at large has incurred extra expenditure for their reproductive activities

(or whatever) when they are doctors, policewomen, bureaucrats, administrators, helicopter pilots, scientists, etc. Why cannot this society do it if they are fighter pilots?

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 27 Oct 2015 12:14

But for the reproductive activities , who would have posted here or flown the plane?
If they are qualified then they are qualified. Period.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 27 Oct 2015 12:22

From my end I have another kind of objection to this step. We are not fighting people who follow civilized warfare. Just check what they did during Kargil. Can the nation keep quite if they do such things to a female pilot or officer??? If it does nothing how it will it allow a propaganda win to any islamist forces? Any future war is going to be fought in media also. In such case any weak response to barbaric things done on a female will be seen as defeat. Are we all ok with that.

It may be politically correct to support this step. But considering our possible enemies who are not going to become our friends in near of foreseeable future, this is a very bad thing.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 27 Oct 2015 12:34

That is a male centric view. Worst crimes have happened to women in this country. Have we stopped them from going out?

War is when we don't accept something from our enemy and we need to be capable to handle the kind of response we might get from them including treatment of women officers.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 27 Oct 2015 12:46

All through our history , women have fought wars side by side , wielding weapons against enemies. Even all our Devis ( even though some mods may be averse to hoary quotations) have fought against demons, no holds barred. In fact when Devas were unable to hold off Arusars , they prayed to Devi to kill them off in battle with her powers. So we have sound basis in history and culture as well as religion to allow them in all streams of forces.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 27 Oct 2015 12:51

deejay wrote:- Society at large has incurred extra expenditure for their reproductive activities (or whatever) when they are doctors, policewomen, bureaucrats, administrators, helicopter pilots, scientists, etc. Why cannot this society do it if they are fighter pilots?

Frankly, I agree with you and it is unfair to deny female pilots the same we allow to the rest of the Govt female employees. It is just that the price of this lost period is higher for the IAF, given their higher investment in their pilots and that loss should not be taken from their existing budgets, but they need to be given extra funds if it actually comes to that.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 27 Oct 2015 12:53

When we have not even taken steps on what happened in Kargil, it is wishful thinking that something will be done in future is such things happen. How far we trust our political leadership of today to deal properly on pakis when such things happen. Our failure in Kargil incidents will now allow them to do such things in the next war also.

Going to war and going out are not one and same thing. Further as I have already said any and every war will be fought in media. How such incidents will fan out in a world wherein entire media will be against the GOI ( it will be anti India just like it was during Kandhahar) we all know. There are very few leaders in India now who can give a be fitting reply in such case.

I am not against women fighting when there is no option or circumstances require. If anything they have done well every time. But is it the condition today? True that there is a long history of women fighting is there. But that is more an exception than a rule.

No one is saying women can not. The question is - is it required and proper in our conditions?

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 27 Oct 2015 13:03

chaanakya wrote:That is a male centric view.

Another instance of name calling. Asking questions about women is not male centric, sexist, misogynistic, etc. They are just questions and you can shut up the person asking them by giving appropriately satisfying answers.

chaanakya wrote:Worst crimes have happened to women in this country.

So, such a thing happening to a female fighter pilot is not a big deal?

chaanakya wrote:Have we stopped them from going out?

So you are saying that the risking having women go out of the house is the same of the risk of them falling into paki hands? That since female pilots have agreed to fight for the country, anything that happen to them in the course of that is ok? That they have agreed that being raped, tortured and mutilated is a necessary risk? Have we as a society agreed that this risk is commensurate with the reward?

chaanakya wrote:War is when we don't accept something from our enemy and we need to be capable to handle the kind of response we might get from them including treatment of women officers.

So basically, enemy is doing bad things, so this is no big deal? Are you are okay with what happened to Captain Saurabh Kalia or probably much worse happening to a woman? In your mind if it happens either to a man or a woman, it is the same thing? Does society agree with your views?

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 27 Oct 2015 13:06

chaanakya wrote:All through our history , women have fought wars side by side , wielding weapons against enemies. Even all our Devis ( even though some mods may be averse to hoary quotations) have fought against demons, no holds barred. In fact when Devas were unable to hold off Arusars , they prayed to Devi to kill them off in battle with her powers. So we have sound basis in history and culture as well as religion to allow them in all streams of forces.

This is really cheap, dragging Gods and Goddesses into stuff like this. I am not even gonna dignify this with a rebuttal.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 27 Oct 2015 13:11

We have to fight in manner suited to defeat our enemies and keeping our weaknesses covered. Our weakness is political leadership. I am not even sure we will nuke pakis back to stoneage if pakis use nukes fight on us. Can we imagine any MMS type PM doing it? I do not think so.

May be even pakis think that of our political leadership is incapable of such decisions. That is why they do what they did in Kargil and that is why they openly said just now that they will use tactical nukes on us.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 27 Oct 2015 14:20

@deejay..totally endore ur views. 200% correct.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 27 Oct 2015 14:21

Arun Menon, you are just arguing for argument sake. All I am saying is IAF as an entity is beginning to consider women for these additional roles. I am sure it was not without forethought about their physiological, logistic and psychological requirements.

Just this decision wont force someone to join IAF or abstain from it. I am not questioning anybody's choice here. I was just trying to say dont put all talented and skilled women into silly tampon brackets and multiply them by zero. That is just one dimensional.

It is a given that people need competence, skill,aptitude and talent. This is not an issue of gender or personal choice. Let us just assume that those making their choice are not fools - they do so knowingly, completely aware of the risks. Rapes happen irrespective of this decision by IAF, on both sides of the border. Decisions were not made based on rape statistics, discussions should not be around that either.

Please respect the intelligence of IAF and the intelligent women pilots of India.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 27 Oct 2015 15:05

^Well I have received no answers to the questions I have raised, from you.

A human being is not just a sum total of his positive attributes or strengths. There are negative factors and weakness in us as well. Nature and our society have a role in deciding both all of these.

In the end, I don't care so long as the risk vs reward of using women is worth it.

But, "Is it worth it?"

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 27 Oct 2015 17:25

given the extreme shortage of pilots in IAF ..why is it not worth it? as long as standards are not diluted. just think of the psychological boost to know that a bindi wearing demure woman IAF pilot shoots down a mard e momin flying ghazi of PAF !! wah wah... maza aa gaya janab...

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 27 Oct 2015 18:29

manjgu wrote:given the extreme shortage of pilots in IAF ..why is it not worth it?

There always more considerations than supply and demand when it comes to women on the battlefield.

manjgu wrote:as long as standards are not diluted.

Are you sure about that? At first they are allowed to come in, then few of them show up, fewer past muster, suddenly PC social justice warriors just don't have the thumping glass-ceiling breaking victory they have. So to save face, more women will be forced in, and they will do that primarily by diluting standards. This is how women in combat have played out in the "advanced" western countries. Are you sure it won't happen here?

manjgu wrote:just think of the psychological boost to know that a bindi wearing demure woman IAF pilot shoots down a mard e momin flying ghazi of PAF !! wah wah... maza aa gaya janab...

Think of the psychological hit when she gets shot down into paki hands, think of the drop in morale when there is no feasible way to get her out of their claws and when the inevitable horrors are boastfully paraded around by the pakis.

Also, "bindi wearing demure woman IAF pilot"? I hope you know you are not being PC with that comment. I guess you are not feminist enough.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 27 Oct 2015 19:22

arun..i trust IAF not to dilute standards. on the other aspects, i am sure it will be thought thru.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 27 Oct 2015 19:32

^I trust social justice warriors to get their way, they always have, at least initially.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 27 Oct 2015 19:57

There is a level of distrust in forces and belief that standards gets a bit diluted for women. Specially complaints that they do not take regular part in grueling physical activities (i.e. BPT) and are accorded special treatment.

Personally I think its a welcome sign and wish them best of luck. They are already performing well in transport/heli fleet (IN/IAF).

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Oct 2015 20:13

Sid, Right. Indian forces are so high caliber that US and others who have women officers cant match!!

If they had women in officer positions, some of the idiotic decisions like Operation Riddle would never have happened for they would have not been Nimrods.
Not patrolling own bunkers and rely on Pak goodwill type would not happen.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 27 Oct 2015 20:35

Thank you Deejay sir for the detailed reply, from one who has been there, done that, the perspective is enlightening as are the anecdotes, my responses are below

deejay wrote:Cairn Marko ji, one odd exceptional situation of a rare 11 hr sortie on one type in the livery of aircraft in IAF inventory does not make it worthwhile to exclude 50% of Indians from an opportunity to serve India as a fighter pilot.
so, it is possible then that iaf may have to discount the women from flying such missions, non routine as they may be

I am sure they can even overcome even this specific hurdle. Are you aware as pilots on Chetak / Cheetahs, women have routinely undertake long 10+ day detachments in remote areas with minimal faciltiy in otherwise a men only, very hard area situation, as part of IAF?
I was not aware but am hardly surprised, there are women athletes and soldiers I have known who are pretty tough

Why is it that women can undertake challenges when flying transports and helicopters and are unfit if it is fighters?
i assume that long sorties on transports can be alleviated with the help of a bathroom, and helicopter sorties are rarely, if ever going to be longer than 8 hours?
Are you aware that from the POV of hardship, helicopter and transport flying in the remote hills of NE and Leh are no less fatigue inducing then 0:45 mins of 'g' induced average fighter sortie in the IAF.
this I was not aware of, thank you.One question, are such pilots expected to fly in war zones, especially say in enemy controlled areas?

The debate in the IAF, which I found more relevant than that on BRF, was on whether training women, costs being what they are, will give returns required since women will become mothers at least once and then as per rules will leave at around 14 yrs service. So, there will be an extended break during motherhood and at the peak of their flying they will be out.

I countered (in unofficial discussions), with examples, of women who were my contemporary, who had individually delayed, in multiple separate instance a) Marriage and b) Motherhood. There are such amazingly dedicated women that denying them a chance to be a fighter pilot because they are women is criminal. Denial of opportunity because of gender is in my view unjust.
and this is the crux of the situation..no-one doubts the dedication of women, but recognizing physical differences does not automatically amount to discrimination, there are certain activities men on an average are better suited to doing, and I'm not saying that being a fighter pilot is one of these, just trying to find out if that is indeed the case for this particular activity as well. The maternity issue that you found more reasonable is again more a result of these physical differences than anything else. an occasional exceptional performance by a woman only emphasizes this difference. Can one make it a requirement then that women joining such positions n necessarily forego marital and maternity options? Would that be fair? Thing to remember is that people have a right to change their minds, and over a period of time most people do, this can often result in changing priorities.

Women are doing sky diving, police duties in J&K, armed forces have women doctors in hard areas, and countless such examples are available. Denying them a chance to be a fighter pilot because of a perceived physical inability is gender bias and regressive. It is also a false glass ceiling that fighter pilots are at a higher level of human existence where women cannot reach.
that you choose to regard physical differences and their possible effects as perceived more than real is entirely your opinion, not fact. And the conclusions that follow are also of a similar nature, the maternity example that you use actually demonstrates this, especially in matters of national security, a field where the focus needs to be clear and not diluted by secondary issues. The idea that women doing exactly the same thing as men results in some sort of just, democratic parity between the sexes is not clear to me. Just because the modern western ethos which has been so systematically ingrained within us encourages the same, does not change anything. If anything, going by the result of most of their institutions, I wonder if things wouldn't have been better otherwise. This hurry to change agree old institutions might have serious repercussions that could be borne out in the long run

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 27 Oct 2015 20:50

I want to address the experts on periods and tampons. Let women handle that. If they say they can, and they can pass every test at par with men, then they can. Doesn't matter what you think or feel!

And please stop shuddering for them if they are captured behind enemy lines. They get into it fully knowing the risks, and there is no reason to believe that they would break down before men. There is no historical proof of the same. In fact, there is historical proof that women warriors are way more gritty then their male counterparts. In modern times read about the women maoists, women Junta, and Kurdish women fighters who stood up when their men stood aside.

In short, stop being the judge. Candidates who pass the test, are selected. There is no other criteria. Not your feeling, not the western feeling, not the woman's feeling, nothing!

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 27 Oct 2015 20:54

I have only one observation regarding allowing women to fly fighters. do not reduce standards in any way to recruit women (it does happen), it is demeaning to women and a threat to the manpower (no pun intended !) standard of the IAF.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 27 Oct 2015 20:59

indranilroy wrote:I want to address the experts on periods and tampons. Let women handle that. If they say they can, and they can pass every test at par with men, then they can. Doesn't matter what you think or feel!

And please stop shuddering for them if they are captured behind enemy lines. They get into it fully knowing the risks, and there is no reason to believe that they would break down before men. There is no historical proof of the same. In fact, there is historical proof that women warriors are way more gritty then their male counterparts. In modern times read about the women maoists, women Junta, and Kurdish women fighters who stood up when their men stood aside.

In short, stop being the judge. Candidates who pass the test, are selected. There is no other criteria. Not your feeling, not the western feeling, not the woman's feeling, nothing!

+1