Women in Combat

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4407
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Women in Combat

Postby putnanja » 15 Aug 2012 23:01


sudhan
BRFite
Posts: 920
Joined: 01 Jul 2009 17:53
Location: Timbuktoo..

Re: Women in Combat

Postby sudhan » 16 Aug 2012 14:29

^ That was fun to read :) Thanks for posting!

nelson
BRFite
Posts: 988
Joined: 02 Mar 2008 21:10

Re: Women in Combat

Postby nelson » 19 Sep 2012 09:13

Indian Army against granting permanent commission to women in combat roles


Read more at: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indi ... 17587.html


ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5221
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Women in Combat

Postby ShauryaT » 09 Mar 2013 08:24

Should women be allowed in combat roles?I was watching this show and could not help asking, this fetish for equality is hiding an underlying issue, which is one of economics and its value even within relationships.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18370
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Women in Combat

Postby chetak » 10 Mar 2013 12:39

ShauryaT wrote:Should women be allowed in combat roles?I was watching this show and could not help asking, this fetish for equality is hiding an underlying issue, which is one of economics and its value even within relationships.



VERY VERY surprising that all of them talk of of combat roles and commanding men but not a single one talks about joining the forces at the below officer rank and serving in the trenches along with all the other grunts. Combat is combat, why differentiate or is there something else that these delicate darlings are not telling??

Other countries armed forces have females at all ranks but the undietv female studio audience seem to have no wish to serve in the other ranks.

The Indian armed forces can do without such elitist recruits.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5221
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Women in Combat

Postby ShauryaT » 27 Mar 2013 02:01

The Truth About Women in Combat - by David Frum

Over the past two decades, the United States has moved steadily to open all military roles to women. Last month, departing Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta removed the last barriers. Women may henceforward qualify for every duty, including combat infantry. The few - very few - public objections raised to this decision were met with derision rather than argument, well represented by this sneering item from the Daily Show.

Yet to deny the highly combat-relevant differences between the sexes is to deny reality as blatantly as ever done by any anti-evolutionist - and with potentially much more lethal consequence.

In 2007, Kingsley Browne gathered the evidence in a clear and concise book, Co-ed Combat: The New Evidence That Women Shouldn't Fight the Nation's Wars. The case presented by Browne won't come as news to any military decision-maker. But it will and should jolt those who have relied on too credulous media sources for their information about what soldiers do and how they do it.


The case for women in combat runs more or less as follows:

1) We have entered an era of push-button war in which purely physical strength has lost much if not all of its military relevance.

2) To the extent that strength continues to matter, some women can meet requirements and should be given a chance to qualify.

3) Other than physical strength, there are no militarily relevant differences between men and women.

4) To exclude willing women from military service is unfair and unjust.

Browne demolishes these four claims, step by remorseless step, with studies and examples drawn from military experience.

1) Physical strength continues to matter in warfare. Soldiers still must hoist heavy packs and march for miles. Soldiers still must be prepared to function with reduced food and water. Soldiers must still sometimes fight and kill their enemies hand to hand. And even in other contexts where strength seems obsolete, the mischances of war can suddenly thrust soldiers into situations where strength determines who lives and who dies. Browne reminds us of the 2001 encounter between an American EP-3E surveillance aircraft and a Chinese "Finback" fighter jet. The EP-3E is a big plane, powered by four turboprop engines and carrying a crew of 24. The much faster Finback harassed the EP-3E with mock interceptions.

On his last approach, [the Chinese pilot] comes too close. He pitches up to maintain his slow speed, and one of the EP-3E's propellers strikes his plane at the junction of the vertical stabilizer and the fuselage, sounding "like a monster chain saw hacking metal." The propeller cuts the Finback in two. The fighter's nose flips up and strikes the nose of the American plane, knocking off the large fiberglass nose cone containing the weather radar. The immediate decompression of the cabin is deafening.

The EP-3E immediately flips over into a nearly completely inverted dive. "This guy just ****** killed us," [Captain Shane Osborn] thinks, as he is looking up at the sea below and observing that his plane is falling almost as fast as the wreckage of the Finback. The lumbering EP-3E, which is a converted Lockheed L-188 Electra passenger airliner, has never been rolled and never recovered from an inverted dive.

Using "every ounce of strength" in his muscular frame, Osborn struggles to bring the wings level. Gradually, he is able to gain airspeed and recover from the roll. The plane has fallen almost 8,000 feet from its original altitude of 22,500 feet in about thirty seconds and is still losing altitude.

Osborn eventually brought the plane to an emergency landing on Hainan Island and succeeded in destroying the plane's computers before Chinese forces arrived. He won the Distinguished Flying Cross for saving his plane and crew.

As Shane Osborn's experience reveals, strength is not irrelevant to modern aviation. Although it is not usually an issue in flying modern airplanes under ordinary circumstances, when things go wrong the situation can change dramatically. In the words of the principal investigator of a study of strength requirements of aviators, "If they lose hydraulics or an engine or two engines, it gets really tough to fly the plane."

Strength matters too for a grounded helicopter pilot or a captured aircrew. Browne notes that about 90% of the prisoners of war held by North Vietnam were downed pilots and aircrew.

The United States is planning its future air force on the assumption that future aircrews need not worry much about enemy fire. That's a very dangerous assumption.

2) One might answer: "Fine. Strength matters. But why should gender matter? Set strength requirements, run the tests. If the women pass, they pass. If not, not."

But that answer ignores the bureaucratic realities. The record shows that the military does not and will not enforce gender-neutral standards.
“The record shows that the military does not and will not enforce gender-neutral standards.”

[A]t the time of enlistment, a seventeen-year-old female is expected to do thirteen push-ups, compared to thirty-five for males, while for forty-one-year-olds, the numbers are six and twenty-four, respectively. A seventeen year-old girl is expected to run two miles in nineteen minutes, forty-two seconds or less, which is twelve seconds more than a forty-one year old man gets. A forty-one-year-old woman has to "run" two miles in twenty-four minus and six seconds, almost five minutes more than a man receives. Only in combat, it seems, will demands on the sexes be equal ….

The military executes missions, and the generals and admirals understand that one of their most important missions - from the point of view of their personal advancement - is to recruit sufficient numbers of women to please their political masters. The only way to achieve that mission is to operate very unequal standards. Browne again:

The probability that a randomly selected man will have greater upper-body strength than a randomly selected woman is well over 95 percent.

The army's standard fragmentation grenade has a blast radius of 15 meters. Infantrymen are required to demonstrate the ability to throw a grenade 35 meters; military women, only 25 meters. In practice, many military women cannot throw even that far. Browne tells the story of a Sergeant Leigh Ann Hester and squad leader Timothy Nein who came under attack in Iraq. Both won the Silver Star.

Hester gave her grenade to Nein because he "had the better arm." She did, however, throw one about fifteen yards, which, depending upon cover, may be a little close for comfort …. Even if two men had been involved, of course, one might have given a grenade to a comrade with a better arm, but the soldier with the better arm in a mixed-sex pair will almost always be the man. If both members of the pair are women, their ability to throw a grenade where it is needed will be substantially limited.

The sexes differ psychologically as well as physiologically. Women react to threat very differently from men. It seems painfully obvious to say this, but the sex hormones testerone and estrogen push the sexes to behave radically differently. Many young men will risk death rather than be seen by their peers to flinch from a fight. Women's courage takes very different forms. Browne amasses a battery of stories of military women behaving in ways that, had they been men, would have brought accusations of dereliction of duty - or worse.

During the 1989 invasion of Panama,

CBS News reported that two female truck drivers had tearfully refused to drive troops to the scene of fighting, prompting an Army investigation. Two days into the investigation - and several days before it was completed - the Army announced that the women had acted appropriately. According to Army spokesmen, the two women were "exhausted" after driving under fire for nine hours …. According to officers of the infantry battalion whose soldiers were supposed to be transported, however, the women had not been driving under fire for nine hours. They had come under fire briefly in the first hour of the invasion and then spent eight hours waiting for their next mission, at one point having to be rousted from their barracks and made to stay with the trucks. ... [Quoting another author, Browne adds] "The men at the scene had no doubt but that the women were afraid, not tired."

Sex integration has tangled the military in double standards and collective denial. The Army, Browne reports, maintains an unofficial policy whereby women - but not men - showers in the field every 72 hours. This practice is not written down, but it's observed by the troops as another example of a demoralizing military culture of denial and lying. Browne quotes interviews of enlisted men by military sociologist Laura Miller:

"Today all you hear in the Army is that we are equal, but men do all the hard and heavy work whether it's combat or not."

"The majority of females I know are not soldiers. They are employed. Anything strenuous is avoided with a passion. I would hate to serve with them during combat! I would end up doing my job and 2/3 of theirs just to stay alive."

More cutting still, Browne repeats a bitter military joke that true equality will arrive - not when women receive Medals of Honor (since it will be suspected that the standards were bent in their favor) - but when women "can be subject to a court-martial for cowardly conduct."

3) The most fundamental differentiator between men and women of course is mutual sexual attraction. That fact has become an increasing source of weakness to US military units, and will weaken them still further when full combat integration is achieved. Where men and women are put together, sex will follow. So will pregnancy - which is of course grounds for removing women from active duty. Sex is sometimes consensual. It is is sometimes coerced. And it is sometimes sold.

[P]rostitution by female personnel appears to be a widespread phenomenon, although the Pentagon's reticence on the subject makes it difficult to ascertain just how widespread. I have heard from numerous sources claiming personal knowledge (not as customers, they all assure me) of prostitution rings in the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines. I have heard it from officers who were responsible for discipline and from enlisted men who were aware of the women to go to.

The most dangerous consequence of sexual attraction, however, is the corrosion of unit cohesion. A "band of brothers" pretty quickly degenerates into a snarling pack of primates when the brothers begin to compete amongst themselves for the sexual attention of a much smaller number of women.
“Is the unwillingness of men to follow women into battle "unfair"? What does that question even mean?”

4) It is on the point of "fairness" that Browne expresses himself most scathingly. It's not the military's job to be "fair." It is the military's job to win wars. Our society values freedom of speech. It values the right to elect leaders. It values individual choice and market competition. All of those values are suspended in the military, sacrificed to the paramount need for military effectiveness. Yet on gender issues, the military seems to have decided that the desire of a relatively very small number of female officers to reach the highest levels of command trumps the necessities of national defense.

Ironically, the motive that most impels women into combat - the eagerness of some female officers to ascend to higher levels of leadership - is precisely the end that may be most unobtainable. A battery of studies cited by Browne confirms the reluctance of men to accept female leadership when the shooting starts. This reluctance actually increases the more that male soldiers experience female leadership, for reasons hard-wired into the male brain. Psychologists find that women's leadership is accepted by men (and women!) to the extent that it is warm, nurturing, and participatory: in other words, maternal. It is least accepted when it is cold, challenging, and hierarchical: in other words, paternal - or in other other words, military. Which means:

Military women may be in a bind. The leadership role calls for an authoritarian style, but when women act accordingly, they tend to be negatively evaluated and therefore less effective.

Is the unwillingness of men to follow women into battle "unfair"? What does that question even mean?

[T]he measure of a leader lies not in the leader's behavior but in the behavior of his subordinates. If potential followers will not follow a leader for whatever reason, the leader cannot be effective. Whether blame is assigned to the failed follower or the failed leader is immaterial. If the mission is not being accomplished, the unit is ineffective.

Browne stresses: "one may challenge the policy of sexual integration without disparaging the service of military women. Those who are serving now, and those who served in the past - not to mention those who will do so in the future - deserve the thanks of a grateful nation."

Too many draw an analogy between sex distinctions and the military's discredited history of racial discrimination. Browne urges us to think of sex as a distinction more like age.

[W]hat would happen if the United States had fifteen thousand sixty-year-old men in Iraq and Afghanistan instead of fifteen thousand women. If it did, many of these older men would undoubtedly behave bravely. Would these stories be persuasive evidence that the military should allow sixty-year-olds to enlist? Not at all. The relevant question is whether the sixty-year-old men are as effective in combat as twenty-year-old mean, and few would be (or be expected to be).

Co-ed Combat depicts a country that seems to have made up its collective mind that it need not worry about ever again fighting a major war against a capable enemy - A country so confident in its margin of superiority that it can afford deliberately to weaken its own military performance for reasons of pure ideology. And this time it is the so-called progressive side that treats facts as unwelcome intruders.

Sara Lister, [the Clinton-era] Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, candidly stated that the Army does not publicly discuss strength and pregnancy issues because "those subjects quickly become fodder for conservatives seeking to limit women's role in the Army."

Well, yeah. But if your preferred policy can only be advanced by concealing relevant facts, isn't that a blaring warning of a bad policy? A big, rich country like the United States can afford many mistakes. But in this case, the mistakes will exact a cost in lives sacrificed and - very conceivably - future battles lost.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9662
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Women in Combat

Postby abhishek_sharma » 24 Apr 2013 06:02

Natural Born Killers

Women get flustered under fire. They're too fragile, too emotional. They lack the ferocity required to take a life. They can't handle pain. They're a distraction, a threat to cohesion, a provocative tease to close-quartered men. These are the sort of myths you hear from people who oppose the U.S. military's evolving new rules about women in combat. But for women who have already been in combat, who have earned medals fighting alongside men, the war stories they tell don't sound a thing like myths

ranjbe
BRFite
Posts: 262
Joined: 12 Apr 2011 21:25

Re: Women in Combat

Postby ranjbe » 25 May 2013 18:18

Article in Washington Post by Anu Bhagwati, who served in the US Marines as a Captain. The usual issues of harassment, predatory sexual behavior, etc. Her father is the famous economist Jagdish Bhagwati of Columbia University, and one of her uncles was the Chief Justice of the Indian Supreme Court.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-the-military-needs-to-recruit-and-promote-more-women/2013/05/24/27b867a4-c259-11e2-914f-a7aba60512a7_story.html


rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7572
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Women in Combat

Postby rohitvats » 07 Jun 2013 16:03



Another case of a bleeding heart liberal who does not understand jack-sh1t about IA but feels confident to spew diatribe and nonsense on the institution.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2203
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby VinodTK » 02 Jul 2013 03:30

Indian Army appoints first woman ADC to a Commander
A third generation Army officer, Lt Ganeve Lalji was commissioned in the Corps of Military intelligence in 2011 and has recorded several achievements during here Young Officers' course in Pune.

Lieutenant Ganeve Lalji — a young intelligence officer — is set to create history by becoming the first woman to be appointed as a key aide to an Army Commander as part of Indian Army Chief Gen Bikram Singh's efforts to provide more avenues to women in the force.
:
:
:

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16547
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Rahul M » 22 Nov 2013 23:46

http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/fi ... ign=Buffer

First IAF woman to graduate as Flying Instructor


Last Updated: Thursday, November 21, 2013, 17:57
Chennai: Squadron leader Shalija Dhami will become the first woman from the Indian Air Force (IAF) to qualify as a Flying Instructor from the Flying Instructors' School here on Saturday.

Dhami will be among the 44 officers, including 40 from the IAF, three from the Indian Navy and one from the Army, who will graduate from the school, a defence release said here on Thursday.

Air Marshal J Chauhan, Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Central Air Command would preside over Saturday's valedictory function, being organised at the Air Force station Tambaram.

The training of these officers from the 135th Qualified Flying Instructors Course (QFIC) commenced on June 3 2013.

The Tambaram school trains operational pilots of defence services, para military forces and friendly foreign countries to be flying instructors, who are trained to impart Air and Ground Instructions to trainee pilots.

Leo.Davidson
BRFite
Posts: 119
Joined: 09 Aug 2011 05:34
Location: Boston, USA

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Leo.Davidson » 23 Nov 2013 05:09

You look around the world and see countries with good human rights record FALTERING when it comes to integrating women in the military. And we have INDIA where women are completely objectified, pushing for integrating them.

And you think what will the outcome of this possibly be? I'll leave it to your imagination...

member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Women in Combat

Postby member_23455 » 23 Nov 2013 07:58

Leo.Davidson wrote:You look around the world and see countries with good human rights record FALTERING when it comes to integrating women in the military. And we have INDIA where women are completely objectified, pushing for integrating them.

And you think what will the outcome of this possibly be? I'll leave it to your imagination...


What is this INDIA that you speak of which is pushing for them? It is women who want the opportunity to serve in the armed forces who are pushing for them.

It is at best a lazy intellectual argument and at worst a spurious one to suggest that because perfection has not been achieved, we should not pursue a course of action. Would you abandon Democracy because as we have seen, it has also faltered in countries with a longer history and better implementation than ours?

raj.devan
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Women in Combat

Postby raj.devan » 25 Jan 2014 20:09

IMHO, the argument that wo.en are not fit to join the armed forces, or that they need to relegated to non combat roles is specious. Its like saying that only Punjabi and Rajput men make good fighters and that there is no need to consider inducting Malayalees and Bengalis. While such arguments achieve nothing, they do manage to deprive the armed forces of the potential inherent in large sections of our society.

That said, if the armed forces do not discriminate on religion, ethnicity, caste or race, they need not do so on grounds of gender. If the recruitment standards are the same for Rajputs and Bengalis, for Sikhs and Christians, for Kashmiris and Manipuris, it *should* be the same for men and women. If anyone, man or woman cannot carry 50kg over 20km, or scale a wall, or jump out an aircraft, he or she should not make it. Physical and endurance standards cannot be different for men and women.

After being inducted, the treatment and facilities handed out to men and women cannot be different. Apart from possibly a seperate toilet, men and women should share the same dormitories, the same mess, the same training regimen and the same oportunities. The standards for promotion and advancement should be the same. Sexual harassment should be treated in the same manner as a male soldier who gets bullied, and any insubordination to a woman officer should be dealt with in the same manner as insubordination to a male officer.

In the field there can be no differences. If a woman officer feels apprehensive about commanding a platoon of men, she should be handled in the same way as a male officer who behaved in that manner. If she is unable to effectively command her troops, or makes mistakes, or shows weakness, she should be dealt with in the same way as if she were a man. If she expresses concern that she may be taken prisoner by enemy forces and raped, then she has no greater justification for fear than a male soldier who is afraid of being tortured and mutilated.

In other words, the doors of the armed forces should be thrown open to women at all levels with no special treatment or allowances.

If inspite of being treated no different from men, women still manage to get in and work their way up in the armed forces, then it is nobody's business to argue otherwise.

raj.devan
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Women in Combat

Postby raj.devan » 25 Jan 2014 20:14

On the other hand if women are unable to do the number of push ups that men are required to do, or if they cannot match up to any similar performance standard, then they should not be allowed to join. If as a result of this, no women manage to join the army's fighting units, then so be it.

member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Women in Combat

Postby member_23694 » 04 Apr 2014 19:53

Indian warrior princess Noor Inayat Khan becomes a sensation in Britain

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 241116.cms

Her achievement has been truly amazing

It is rare — Noor was awarded military honours by France and Britain — the Croix De Guerre and the George Cross, an expert said.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2203
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby VinodTK » 17 Nov 2014 05:45

Women commandos to man Maoist areas
For the first time in the country’s history, a special squad of women troops has been deployed deep inside jungles to undertake active and prolonged operations against Maoists.

With the induction of these Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) commandos in their trademark camouflaged “Khaki” uniform, India has become one of the few countries to deploy women personnel in live combat situations in one of the most violent and high threat zones of conflict.

The country’s largest paramilitary force CRPF, sources said, recently has sent two small squads of its women commandos to fight the red ultras shoulder-to-shoulder with their male colleagues by not only living at the ground locations but also carrying out patrols.
While one contingent is undertaking operations in the worst Maoist-affected area of Bastar in Chhattisgarh, the other has been based at an undisclosed location in Jharkhand.

Sources privy to the development said the CRPF deployed these two women contingents, of a ‘platoon’ (about 35 women in each) strength, after creating basic living facilities for them at its locations in these two Maoist violence affected states.

“This is for the first time that women have been deployed in active operations in a high-risk and sensitive area where contact with the enemy is regular and very dynamic. The squads were placed at two locations about a fortnight ago and they have begun operating,” a source said.

The exact location of these women squads is only known to a handful of commanders and personnel keeping in mind the early days of their induction, the sources said.
Officials say there are specific reasons and operational benefits for deploying these women personnel in Left Wing Extremism areas.

While they can interact with the local women folk which not only helps in gathering good intelligence, it also helps in bringing forces closer to the villagers. A similar model of has been found successful in West Bengal where the Maoist movement is at an all-time low.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2203
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby VinodTK » 08 Mar 2015 17:49

‘I’m an officer, not a lady officer’
So what made you join the forces? I ask and then wince at the trite question. I can almost see her roll her eyes over the crackling of the terrible phone connection. “Well,” she says in a tone she would use to explain a simple concept to an obtuse two-year-old, “I am a fauji kid, it was kind of a given.” Yes, I persist, but why the Army? Your father was in the Navy. Don’t all children inclined towards a career in the defence forces usually want to join their father’s fauj? She ponders for a bit and then replies slowly, “I suppose it’s because I wanted to travel — a lot. That’s something the Army gives you in spades. You get posted to and discover remote places people have not even heard of… you get what I’m saying?”

I do. Memories of my Army officer father’s tenures in places as remote as Champhai and Phailing in Mizoram rise up. Ashmi*, the young lieutenant I’m talking to, is less than five years into her service and, despite being a childhood friend, regretfully informs me that she cannot divulge exactly where she is and what she is doing. “Then I’d have to kill you,” she laughs. I don’t take her threat lightly; she has been a champion shooter since before we turned 10.

Coincidentally, Suhasini*, the Naval officer I speak to next, gives me exactly the same reason for not joining the Army though her father was an officer in that force. “I was selected for both the Army and Navy after clearing the SSB, but my mother reminded me of the Army’s remote postings. It would be better, she said, for you to join the Navy. At least you would have the company of other lady officers at the base.”

“Yes,” laments Ashmi, “The Army may have a larger number of lady officers but the female to male ratio is terrible. In fact, I’m the only lady officer in my unit right now.” The only lady officer? I am mildly concerned. How do you get the jawans to listen to and respect you? “You have to be pakka officer material,” she says. “Understand their psyche, and you will understand how to lead. Yes, most are from a background where women wear ghoonghats and sit at home, so they do resent you a bit. Nevertheless, they understand that they don’t have a choice but to follow your command. However, to truly earn their respect, you need to show them that you are every bit as competent as a gentleman officer or, at some point, there will be a rebellion in the ranks.”

Roshni*, an Air Force officer married to a fellow officer, agrees with Ashmi. “But, women are so ingrained in the Air Force now, that there really is no resentment on the men’s part. At least, not that I have seen or felt.”

“I have had rousing arguments with fellow officers,” says Suhasini. “Not that all men resent women in the forces, but those who do… their feelings usually stem from stereotyping, not personal experience.” I ask her to explain that. “They feel that if you are a woman, you are weak, that you’ll sham it or make excuses when it comes to work. Most of us are overworked and exhausted all the time because of the lack of manpower. We don’t even report sick when we really are!”

Is this attitude reflected among the sailors? “You have to be careful,” she says, measuring her words and unconsciously echoing Ashmi. “You have to treat them like you would a younger brother. Earn their respect. Don’t be a lady officer. Be an officer.”

What about the gentlemen officers in the Army? The casual sexism must exist there as well? “It does,” says Ashmi. “But lady officers have been around for a while in corps like Medical, Engineering, Education, Signals; not so much in the Infantry. So, it’s going to take a while for the officers to get used to us. They’ll have to learn — the quicker the better — that we’re here and not going anywhere; That, sooner or later, we’ll have to get into the trenches.”

How long are you commissioned for? “Ten years with an option to extend it to 14.” So you’d be able to go up to being a lieutenant colonel? “Yes, although to become a colonel and the commanding officer (C.O.) of a regiment seems like a pipe dream.” Why? I thought you said women were moving further up the ranks these days? “Yes, but to lead a regiment, you need to go to the Staff College in Wellington. Lady officers cannot.” I am aghast. I didn’t know that! “For a fauji kid, you’re woefully uninformed.” Her patronising tone is back.

The Navy scene is similar. “Lady officers stick to the base. We do receive a month of training aboard a ship, but we’re not allowed on. Government rules,” Suhasini says. So if a war via sea is declared, she would still be on base. Why? She is amused at my indignation. “Have you seen G.I. Jane? It’s kind of like that. I don’t think India is ready to wilfully send a lady officer to her death.”

“I’m not sure that it has anything do with being a woman per se, but no, we don’t have lady officers in the fighter fleets. Women don’t fly twin engine aircrafts or combat helicopters either,” says Roshni. “A few years ago, two women were commissioned as observers (those who sit behind the fighter pilots). Did you know Pakistan actually has a few female fighter pilots? They fly wearing headscarves. Cool, eh?”

What about lady officers moving up the ranks? “We’ve had a lady rear admiral, Surgeon Rear Admiral Nirmala Kannan,” Suhasini informs me. “But she belongs to the Medical corps. We’re fighting. It’ll take time but I know we’re going to move further up.”

“Medical has been around the longest, you see,” Roshni explains. “So we have even had women Air Marshals.”

What’s the difference between being a lady officer and a gentleman officer’s wife? “The wives, I tell you,” says Ashmi in a long-suffering voice. “I’d gladly do another six months at OTA (Officers’ Training Academy) than be around them when someone screws up their nimbu paani and their carrot-spinach juice.” I laugh. What’s it like at parties? The ladies sit; the officers stand. Where do these women do? “We’re officers, aren’t we?” Ashmi is amused. “We stand. The approach to food is the same. Ladies first, followed by the C.O., and then the officers in descending order of rank.” So you go last? “Yeah. In fact, we’re at the mess, if there is one chair lacking, as the most junior, I remain standing. No gentleman officer is supposed to give me his seat. I’m an officer first.”

What do lady officers bring to the table that men do not? “Empathy. Sensitivity,” is a common refrain. “We are in a better position to understand the home environment and how that affects the psyche of the personnel,” says Suhasini. “Women, I think, are more sincere and dedicated than they are given credit for because they feel a subtle, yet constant, need to prove themselves.”

I ask about their best experience ever. “Every day is a blessing,” Suhasini says emphatically. “I cannot imagine myself doing anything else but serving the nation. I was placed in a good IT firm after engineering, but I thank God I decided to take the SSB instead. Yes, women have a long way to go in the forces, and we face sexism every day but just the knowledge that I am not the average girl next door is quite enough. Plus,” she adds, chuckling, “You know us fauji kids; we were born with the patriotism ka keeda.”

“When I joined, I had no idea what life would be like. I had seen my neighbours going to the National Defence Academy (NDA), Indian Military Academy (IMA) and the Air Force, so that fascination with the blue uniform was my inspiration. These five plus years of numerous postings, meeting so many faujis and civilians, travelling through the length and breadth of the country are the definite highlights of being in the Air Force,” Roshni pauses for a breath. “I bunked a lot of classes in college. Now I have to juggle long working hours, maintain excellent physical standards, exams, training, not to mention a home and family … it’s all very challenging. Looks like Karma’s having a ball at my expense,” she laughs.

“The Army’s given me a lot,” Ashmi says. More than physical endurance, it helped me build my mental strength. You know, during our training, we’re supposed to run 35 km with a 20kg kit plus a rifle. You use your physicality only for two-three km of that stretch. The rest of the 32-odd km, you push yourself mentally. It’s amazing and insane at the same time.”

Hold on, I exclaim, you were part of the Republic Day parade too! “Oh yes! It was brilliant! How many people can claim to have saluted the President at such close quarters? Heck, how many Indians can say they’ve marched past Obama just 30 metres away?”

*Names changed to protect privacy.

K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 927
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

Re: Women in Combat

Postby K Mehta » 28 Oct 2015 11:54

^bump

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16662
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Karan M » 12 Dec 2015 20:32

Ouch

US commandos say no to women in special operations jobs
http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/ ... tions-jobs

Bob V
BRFite
Posts: 390
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 04:29
Location: Out at the sea
Contact:

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Bob V » 15 Dec 2015 15:35


member_19686
BRFite
Posts: 1330
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Women in Combat

Postby member_19686 » 05 Jan 2016 22:26

Indian Police Force to have more women: Rajnath Singh approves 33% reservation for women at Constable level
By India.com News Desk @indiacom | January 05, 2016 12:50 PM

New Delhi, January 5: It seems like 2016 will be a good year for women empowerment in India. In a move that will enhance the representation of women in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF), Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh on Tuesday, approved 33% of posts at the Constable level, to be filled up by women. The reservation will be applicable immediately and would in a horizontal manner.

The move came after a pressure was created by the Committee of Empowerment of Women, which had suggested in its sixth report that representation of women in paramilitary forces be increased. There will be 33% reservation for women in Constable level posts in Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) & Central Industrial Security Force (CISF). Meanwhile, 14-15% posts at Constable level in border guarding forces i.e. Border Security Forces, Sashastra Seema Bal & Indo Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) will be reserved for women. Also Read: Indian Air Force to induct women as fighter pilots from 2016, Defence Ministry approves proposal

In 2015, the Air Force had agreed to induct women pilots in combat roles, in effect from 2016. The first batch will start training at Air Force Academy from this year. In March 2015, center had also approved induction of women in Delhi police for 33% posts. The move was also approved for six other union territories, for constable to sub inspector level posts. In Delhi Police, the move had opened up avenues for recruitment of nearly 8,000-9,000 women, given that there is an existing backlog of 26,000-27,000 vacancies in the force.

http://www.india.com/news/india/rajnath ... el-836277/

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Women in Combat

Postby shiv » 03 Feb 2017 20:19

Posting in phool
http://usdefensewatch.com/2016/06/women ... y-history/
Women in the Combat Arms: The Greatest Disaster in US Military History

Operation You Go Girl is destined to fail; failure defined not as a NO GO, or an F, but as the nation’s young women flown home in flag draped Glad Bags when the nation loses the next war(s). When this happens, the Hollywood producers, the feminists and the cultural Marxists who were responsible for forcing the nation’s women to experience the horrors of ground combat will scratch their heads and wonder why reality is so much different from their imaginary ideas of women in combat.

Think about this: US defense policy is now being run on a fantasy propagated by Hollywood, feminists and cultural Marxists.

Hollywood created the fantasy of the rough and tough, hard charging female cop. On any given night, on any given network, you can watch an anorexic 95 pound model, turned NYPD detective brandish a pistol larger than her waist and proceed to karate chop and cuff and stuff a myriad of male heavyweight thugs with the imaginary aplomb of Chuck Norris on all night POW camp raid.

Goodbye Popeye Doyle…

Unfortunately, real war is much different than a Demi Moore movie. A battlefield is not gender neutral. On a battlefield the roughest, toughest sons of bitches win the fight. What remains of the losers are picked at by ravens or fade away like dust in the wind.

Unfortunately, the Pentagon, the White House and Congress are no longer living in reality.

Simply put, the authorization in December 2015 to allow women to serve in the combat arms (infantry, armor, cavalry, artillery) and special operations forces (SEALs, Green Berets, Rangers, Delta Force, Marine Raiders) of the US armed forces is the greatest disaster in US military history.

The defenders of this insanity will say that women have been in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan so what’s the big deal? Returning fire when your convoy is attacked or defending yourself during a military police security operation is different than being in a unit with the sole mission of killing the enemy and seizing and holding ground. It’s like comparing peddling a beach cruiser to racing in the Tour de France.

The social engineers will cry that the standards will remain the same. Horse dung and hay: the standards were already warped so that the three females could graduate from Ranger School. They had months of special training, nutritionists, endless chances to repeat the course, etc. Ninety-nine percent of the women in the world simply cannot meet the male physical standards of the combat arms and special operations units. No amount of estrogen charged You Go Girl battle cries, or Universal Studios light and magic shows can stop reality. Reality says a million times over that women simply don’t have the physical strength, aerobic lung capacity or aggressiveness to withstand life in the combat arms and special operations. They are also more prone to stress fractures and other injuries.

Has anyone in the Pentagon wondered why they’re authorizing women for ground combat duty, yet the PGA won’t allow women to play with Jordan Spieth and Dustin Johnson in any tournament. Why, because women don’t have the physical strength to hit a golf ball as far as men, that’s why.

So, the Masters is out for women, but the Green Berets are in. Are you kidding me?

Either there will be double standards or the standards will be made gender neutral and so weak that the fat ladies driving around Walmart in two horsepower electric carts will become Navy SEALs.

Another factor dooming Operation You Go Girl are the emotional issues surrounding young men and women living together in garrison and more importantly, in the field.

The military says that good leadership will put a damper on human sex drive. Newsflash social engineers, no amount of ROTC Leadership 101 is going to stop an 18 year old with an erection in a movement to contact with a 36-24-36 cheerleader, Private Babs Horny. Get a grip; the Army and the Marines are about to become nothing more than a high school summer camp with guns and high explosives.

You have to wonder if the social engineers who are throwing a wrecking ball into the US military have any knowledge at all about combat, the military and war itself. People like Obama, Joe Biden, Ash Carter, Ray Mabus, Eric Fanning and the rest of the military’s executioners should study battles like The Wilderness, Verdun, Tarawa, Peleliu, Okinawa, Iwo Jima, Normandy, the Bulge, Khe Sanh and Tet. Think modern war can be won by diversity and technology; just ask the Marines who fought at Fallujah, or the soldiers from the Big Red One in Desert Storm who got into hand to hand fighting with the Republican Guard during the Battle of Norfolk, on the night of 26 February 1991.

War is about one thing; killing the enemy before he can kill you. It has nothing to do with equal opportunity, diversity, LGBT rights, transgender expression and ludicrous fantasies emanating from Professor Birkenstock’s women’s studies class.

Call me a cynic, but I think the subject is such a third rail in American politics that even a PC bashing behemoth like Trump won’t touch the issue. If elected, Trump would rebuild the military, but I don’t believe he has the knowledge nor will he have any generals with the stones to tell him to amend this debacle. If Trump utilizes the same school of Pentagon jellyfish trolling the hallways of the E-Ring, it’s game, set and match bad guys.

And, of course if Madame Secretary is elected it really is End Times, not only for the military, but for the nation itself.

Nope, it will take a colossal military disaster for this fiasco to end once and for all. Colossal military disaster defined as Putin’s Boys leaving the wreckage of the New US Army on the Ukrainian steppes; M1 tanks, red high heels and breast milk coolers. Or, the Chinese leaving a trail of tampons, mascara, lipstick and dead coed Marines throughout the tiny atolls of the South China Sea.

The true victims of this impending disaster are America’s young women in uniform. Well over ninety percent of women in the US military want nothing to do with ground combat, the combat arms and special operations. They are happy serving their country in the hundreds and hundreds of different jobs open to them. They know more than anyone what they are physically capable of doing in the military. It is a small minority of self-serving women in the military and leftist civilians who are pushing this nightmare agenda down the throat of the military.

The US military is on a collision course to defeat, disaster and perhaps complete destruction in war. The forced integration of women in the combat arms is not a civil rights victory, but rather the single greatest disaster in US military history.


shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Women in Combat

Postby shiv » 23 May 2017 09:08

Just listen to how these girls react to questions about the heat of Rajasthan summer. Brilliant.

watch from the point linked below
https://youtu.be/1_6bfy5v0Sc?t=659

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7967
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Pratyush » 24 May 2017 11:26

Having seen the clip, I must say that I am impressed by the standards being maintained by BSF. this is the way to being women in armed forces. Set the standards and make sure that everyone meets them without exception. Man or woman.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Women in Combat

Postby shiv » 24 May 2017 14:28

Pratyush wrote:Having seen the clip, I must say that I am impressed by the standards being maintained by BSF. this is the way to being women in armed forces. Set the standards and make sure that everyone meets them without exception. Man or woman.

That girl is so cocky and sure the TV interviewer ends up looking like a wimp.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2203
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby VinodTK » 09 Mar 2018 02:08

Meet Seema Rao — The Only Woman Commando Trainer Serving Indian Armed Forces For 20 Years
On this #WomensDay, the United Nations is emphasizing the need to #PressForProgress. But a woman from Mumbai has been doing just that as well as changing perspectives for the last two decades.

Seema Rao, India’s first-ever and only commando trainer as well as a 7th-degree black belt holder in military martial arts, has been training the Indian Armed Forces for more than 20 years without charging for her services. Being a master in Jeet Kune Do and trained to be a firefighter and scuba-diver, she has earned the titles like ‘Wonder Woman’, ‘Iron Woman’, ‘Super Woman’ etc.

Daughter of a freedom fighter, Rao is a certified doctor in conventional medicine. Not only is she a combat shooting instructor, she was also once a Miss India World finalist.

inspired by her father’s freedom struggle stories, Seema was determined to serve the nation in whatsoever capacity. According to several reports, Seema met a senior police official a few years ago who was keen to explore Seema’s unarmed combat skills. He asked her to conduct a demo with his force and later, to train them as well.

Seema trains for free as she believes that ‘honour and duty come above money’. In an interview with the Hindustan Times, she said,

“There was a time when I went totally bankrupt. I had to sell my jewellery and dissolve the fixed deposits in order to run the livelihood. For me, money comes after duty and honour.”
Here are some of her achievements:

Here are some of her achievements:

World Peace Award by World Peace Congress, Malaysia, awarded by the Prime Minister of Malaysia for contribution to the country in 2008
US President’s Volunteer Service Award
Three Army Chief Citations
Home Minister of India Letter of Commendation in 2009 placing on record the selfless National service in the field of close quarters battle training
A 1000 felicitations from the Indian government.


The site has pictures and a vido

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5221
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Women in Combat

Postby ShauryaT » 09 Mar 2018 08:26

Meet Indian Air Force's Women Heroes
https://www.ndtv.com/video/shows/trendi ... o-featured

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6985
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Rakesh » 10 Mar 2018 01:21

Link below has youtube video as well....

‘Fighter Jet A Machine, Doesn’t Care If Pilot A Man Or Woman’
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/03 ... pilot.html

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6985
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Rakesh » 11 Mar 2018 21:43

https://twitter.com/chopsyturvey/status ... 3305413632 ---> Indian Air Force's Women Achievers

Image

Varoon Shekhar
BRFite
Posts: 1755
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Varoon Shekhar » 11 Mar 2018 21:53

Women should be allowed in the armed forces if they really want to, and if they qualify. But there could be a sickening situation where a female group from one country faces a female regiment in another country, and the two engage in a fierce and brutal battle. That's mainly my issue. War of course should be avoided as far as possible, but if it has to be done, let males do it! I'm 'chauvinistic' on this one point, but I also feel women, at least educated women, have an important role to play in creating peace and amiability between countries. JMTC

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6985
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Rakesh » 13 Jan 2019 00:31

VIDEO ---> https://twitter.com/strategic_front/sta ... 2861494272 ---> For the first time in the history of Indian Armed Forces, an all women contingent comprising of Mahila Riflemen, Mahila JCOs of Assam Rifles is participating in Republic Day parade.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6985
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Rakesh » 15 Jan 2019 04:25

https://twitter.com/indian_link/status/ ... 6097139712 -----> Lieutenant Bhavana Kasturi will be the first lady officer in the history of Indian Army to lead the 71st Army Day Parade today in India. She'll be leading the Indian Army's Service Corps (ASC) contingent, comprising 144 male personnel.

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6985
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Rakesh » 31 Jan 2019 05:26

VIDEO

https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1089577410041794560 ---> Lieutenant Bhavana Kasturi, first woman officer to lead an all-men Army contingent at Republic Day parade, says, "The moment when I saluted the Supreme Commander of the Indian Armed Forces, the President, that was the most memorable moment of my life."

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6985
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Rakesh » 31 Jan 2019 05:28

https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1089187487358939136 ---> Major Khusboo Kanwar who led all women contingent of Assam Rifles at Republic Day 2019 parade: My father was a bus conductor. I feel extremely proud and he feels the same. It’s a small gift for him to the struggles he has seen in life. I would tell other women, there's no shortcut to success.

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6985
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Rakesh » 31 Jan 2019 06:36


Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6985
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Rakesh » 01 Feb 2019 04:59

VIDEO

https://twitter.com/SSBCrack/status/1088340378716114945 ---> Major Khushboo Kanwar, who will lead Assam Rifles Women Contingent at Republic Day Parade - 2019.

Arun.prabhu
BRFite
Posts: 143
Joined: 28 Aug 2016 19:26

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Arun.prabhu » 01 Feb 2019 09:51

Women in combat done right in prose. Looks at the pros and cons of building an all women infantry unit from scratch and using them up - literally - in war.

https://www.amazon.com/Lotus-Eaters-Car ... B00IGBRY4A


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Jayram, komal, Rakesh, shyamal and 81 guests