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.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Lalmohan » 26 Dec 2009 22:56

shiv ji, happy with monkey analogy - however if the male is not present and the female has to fight or protect the infant, she will be quite aggressive. similarly, many seemingly doclie females (e.g. oryx) will become ferocious killers when required

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Women in Combat

Postby shiv » 27 Dec 2009 06:53

Lalmohan wrote:shiv ji, happy with monkey analogy - however if the male is not present and the female has to fight or protect the infant, she will be quite aggressive. similarly, many seemingly doclie females (e.g. oryx) will become ferocious killers when required


Well in fact it turns out that its always the lionesses or the tigress thats doing the hunting for the cubs. The lion just joins the party. But biologically there is gender role playing going on. One of the silliest things that has happened in Western society is mockery of the female role (a la "What's this Sheilagh doin' outside the kitchen?") leading to a reaction in which females resent a female role.

Gender roles are not rigid, but they khappay and not na khappay

VijayKumarSinha
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 21:22

Re: Women in Combat

Postby VijayKumarSinha » 27 Dec 2009 08:14

RayC wrote:To be frank, I do not know the ethos of the SL Tamils or Nepalis. However, when the going gets tough, everything is fine. I, IMHO, are not in such a desperate situation. or are we?



Over here in Khan adda, I have many Sri Lankan Tamil friends, who are indistinguishable from Indians in terms of Tamil/English accent, culture and values.

All I am saying is that we don’t have to wait to be in a desperate situation in order to start recruiting women into traditional military roles. If the Rajput women were also taught to fight just like the men were then may be they wouldn't have to commit Johar.

Indian military is a voluntary organization, I believe that it is mostly those who ‘have it in them’ (like you :mrgreen: ) who choose to join the services. So, the well qualified women who want to join the fighter aircraft fleet, should be allowed to do so anyway. After which, given the plethora of deployment possibilities that are available in the huge Indian landscape, a number of roles and bases could be found where they could be deployed. Once again, it is not our every day Sita and Gita who would want to fly a fighter jet, but someone who has it them to go the whole 9 yards and make the compromise of being deployed to fewer- yet still very challenging places.



I was reading bharat rakshak monitor :mrgreen: and found this picture of two diminutive Bangladeshi woman carrying rifles. Looks like she would shoot my eye out even before I get within 200 yards of her. You don't need to be 6 foot 6 to carry or fire a gun accurately. Besides, the whole point of modern warfare is avoiding hand to hand fighting in which -all things being equal- a bigger person might have an advantage.

And as, the privileged few who have studied in any government school in India would know, you don’t need to be big in order to fight, you just need to have a fatalistic attitude in order to fight and win – just like a soldier.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/I ... achin9.jpg

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby RayC » 28 Dec 2009 14:20

Women in the Army had opportunities equal to men to receive defensive weapons training, but could not be assigned to direct combat positions......

Women worked as pilots, intelligence officers, logistic specialists, support roles for the infantry, paratroopers, mechanics, and virtually in every role except direct combat.

Women in the the US Army

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Lalmohan » 29 Dec 2009 03:54

perhaps women could be considered for defensive combat roles (potentially slightly less physically demanding) but not for offensive combat roles. therefore could be on base/hq security, etc., but not on forward recon patrols?

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: Women in Combat

Postby AdityaM » 29 Dec 2009 09:25


Natt
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 17 Jan 2010 01:26
Location: Where eagles dare

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Natt » 05 Feb 2010 13:01

The paramilitary seems to have no problem with having women in combat duties. BSF being the front runner also CRPF Not sure how much of their 'combat' training is being utilized though. IA on the other hand has not even enrolled women in combat units.
Vice chief IAF had some interesting comments to make a while ago..

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby RayC » 05 Feb 2010 13:02

Natt wrote:The paramilitary seems to have no problem with having women in combat duties. BSF being the front runner also CRPF Not sure how much of their 'combat' training is being utilized though. IA on the other hand has not even enrolled women in combat units.
Vice chief IAF had some interesting comments to make a while ago..


Could you give the numbers and where they employ them and what is their ranks?

I would only draw examples to ''Comfort Women" of WWII.

What will happen to women in combat arms captured.

If Indians are ready as a whole ready to have their wives and sisters held as ''comfort women'', then who cares?

Anyone ready?

The IA hijack still haunts the nation and here we have who don't have any qualms about ''comfort women''.

Politician Correctness is not all. If they are employed then they will have to fight and not be cosmetic flowers in peacetime just to please the govt hoo hah!

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Women in Combat

Postby shiv » 05 Feb 2010 14:09

Natt wrote:The paramilitary seems to have no problem with having women in combat duties. BSF being the front runner also CRPF Not sure how much of their 'combat' training is being utilized though.


Well if a "combat arm" does no combat, employing women should not be an issue. Neither the men nor women are going into combat. Are you sure your judgement is not being reached by the recent pictures of BSF women? How many women does the BSF employ in relation to its total strength?

Natt
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 17 Jan 2010 01:26
Location: Where eagles dare

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Natt » 05 Feb 2010 15:05

shiv wrote:
Natt wrote:The paramilitary seems to have no problem with having women in combat duties. BSF being the front runner also CRPF Not sure how much of their 'combat' training is being utilized though.


Well if a "combat arm" does no combat, employing women should not be an issue. Neither the men nor women are going into combat. Are you sure your judgement is not being reached by the recent pictures of BSF women? How many women does the BSF employ in relation to its total strength?

I agree and yes the BSF women news recently was what I was reflecting upon. Their number, although not exactly, is less than a percent.
Another thing that comes to mind i,s since the forces have no issue about women in medicine, and they seem to have field postings too. So, those women could find themselves or rather be caught in a combat situation.
Last edited by Natt on 05 Feb 2010 15:23, edited 1 time in total.

Natt
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 17 Jan 2010 01:26
Location: Where eagles dare

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Natt » 05 Feb 2010 15:22

Well the BSF has 178 in total,118 are on indo-pak border and 60 on indo-bangla border and I have seen myself they patrol near the attari-wagah border. Their main job,or atleast a major one, is to frisk the women who cross borders to work everyday. I dont know their exact ranks but none to my knowledge are officers.
CRPF has even larger number,3 units to be exact and I know atleast one of rank Ass commadant, sure there are more.Interestingly the 3rd unit comprising of 102 women and 23 logistic staff is in Libreia these days on UNPKF.
Therefore, by and large without sounding sexist I think I should say they are doing their bit.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Gaur » 05 Feb 2010 15:51

Natt wrote:The paramilitary seems to have no problem with having women in combat duties. BSF being the front runner also CRPF Not sure how much of their 'combat' training is being utilized though.

Natt wrote:Well the BSF has 178 in total,118 are on indo-pak border and 60 on indo-bangla border and I have seen myself they patrol near the attari-wagah border. Their main job,or atleast a major one, is to frisk the women who cross borders to work everyday. I dont know their exact ranks but none to my knowledge are officers.
CRPF has even larger number,3 units to be exact and I know atleast one of rank Ass commadant, sure there are more.Interestingly the 3rd unit comprising of 102 women and 23 logistic staff is in Libreia these days on UNPKF.
Therefore, by and large without sounding sexist I think I should say they are doing their bit.

BSF and CRPF operating conditions cannot be compared to that of IA. Even so, how many women in CRPF are actively deployed to combat Naxals? How many are used in CT operations in J&K? At most they may be used to man outer perimeters but I personally doubt even that. Now consider that the operating conditions of IA during wartime are "far" worse.
Also if you take a look at the army training, you will find that their ability to cope up with infantry training may be doubtful. I am not being sexist. I am all for women fighter pilots. But one has to acknowledge that women muscle mass and bone density is lower. This is a fact.
Consider this. There are women Engineers in IA. That is a combat arm. If you were to see the physical training the engineering cadets have to go through, you would be amazed. Women do not go through those physical regimens. That is for a reason.
Natt wrote:Another thing that comes to mind i,s since the forces have no issue about women in medicine, and they seem to have field postings too. So, those women could find themselves or rather be caught in a combat situation.

Yes, there are women officers in AMC (Army Medical Core). And they do get fielded in field areas. But field area does not automatically mean that it is hazardous. And AFAIK, women are never posted in overly hazardous environment.
Eg; They are not posted in Siachen.
I have also never seen women doctors being posted in hazardous areas of Kashmir, but others more knowing can shed more light on this.

Natt
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 17 Jan 2010 01:26
Location: Where eagles dare

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Natt » 05 Feb 2010 15:58

Gaur wrote:
Natt wrote:The paramilitary seems to have no problem with having women in combat duties. BSF being the front runner also CRPF Not sure how much of their 'combat' training is being utilized though.

Natt wrote:Well the BSF has 178 in total,118 are on indo-pak border and 60 on indo-bangla border and I have seen myself they patrol near the attari-wagah border. Their main job,or atleast a major one, is to frisk the women who cross borders to work everyday. I dont know their exact ranks but none to my knowledge are officers.
CRPF has even larger number,3 units to be exact and I know atleast one of rank Ass commadant, sure there are more.Interestingly the 3rd unit comprising of 102 women and 23 logistic staff is in Libreia these days on UNPKF.
Therefore, by and large without sounding sexist I think I should say they are doing their bit.

BSF and CRPF operating conditions cannot be compared to that of IA. Even so, how many women in CRPF are actively deployed to combat Naxals? How many are used in CT operations in J&K? At most they may be used to man outer perimeters but I personally doubt even that. Now consider that the operating conditions of IA during wartime are "far" worse.
Also if you take a look at the army training, you will find that their ability to cope up with infantry training may be doubtful. I am not being sexist. I am all for women fighter pilots. But one has to acknowledge that women muscle mass and bone density is lower. This is a fact.
Consider this. There are women Engineers in IA. That is a combat arm. If you were to see the physical training the engineering cadets have to go through, you would be amazed. Women do not go through those physical regimens. That is for a reason.
Natt wrote:Another thing that comes to mind i,s since the forces have no issue about women in medicine, and they seem to have field postings too. So, those women could find themselves or rather be caught in a combat situation.

Yes, there are women officers in AMC (Army Medical Core). And they do get fielded in field areas. But field area does not automatically mean that it is hazardous. And AFAIK, women are never posted in overly hazardous environment.
Eg; They are not posted in Siachen.
I have also never seen women doctors being posted in hazardous areas of Kashmir, but others more knowing can shed more light on this.

I dont know what I am coming across as, but looks like we are on the same side. I strongly feel that a man needs to a man's job.
I still however say, lets not dismiss the whatever little the women are doing.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Surya » 05 Feb 2010 19:50

A little red herring here huh??

Comfort women were not women in combat captured and used for military brothels. They were women forcibly recruited for that role.

So whats the comparison being brought here for???

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby RayC » 05 Feb 2010 21:16

Surya wrote:A little red herring here huh??

Comfort women were not women in combat captured and used for military brothels. They were women forcibly recruited for that role.

So whats the comparison being brought here for???


Another red herring.

Who stops women soldiers captured from being comfort women by the enemy?

And then be forgotten by the world as so many of Indian soldiers and airmen have been as is reported in the press regularly.

Damayanti Tambe is one who is battling on to find her husband in a Pak prison!

Let us not be PC. On one side we sing hallelujah of Indicism and on the other hand we are ready that our women are OK to be raped by the same ones who we feel has raped our nation!

Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1383
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Kersi D » 05 Feb 2010 22:01

Lalmohan wrote:perhaps women could be considered for defensive combat roles (potentially slightly less physically demanding) but not for offensive combat roles. therefore could be on base/hq security, etc., but not on forward recon patrols?


I think it is rather difficult to distinguish between "offensive" and "defensive". By defensivde do you mean like guarding the bases, camps etc ? I think our women are capable to doing more than that.

Why are we bringing this gender in the picture ? Let us take the best available person, man or woman.

Each country has its own norms. let us study what the other countries do but there is no need to ape them completely. Let IA, IAF and IN do what they think is the best. Why this controversy ?

K

PS. This controversy is a fairly good time pass !!!!

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22265
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Women in Combat

Postby chetak » 05 Feb 2010 22:07

RayC wrote:
Surya wrote:A little red herring here huh??

Comfort women were not women in combat captured and used for military brothels. They were women forcibly recruited for that role.

So whats the comparison being brought here for???


Another red herring.

Who stops women soldiers captured from being comfort women by the enemy?

And then be forgotten by the world as so many of Indian soldiers and airmen have been as is reported in the press regularly.

Damayanti Tambe is one who is battling on to find her husband in a Pak prison!

Let us not be PC. On one side we sing hallelujah of Indicism and on the other hand we are ready that our women are OK to be raped by the same ones who we feel has raped our nation!



RayC

If there are women who are willing to take that risk and still want to serve in combat roles, why should why should anyone object.

Let them find out the hard way.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Surya » 06 Feb 2010 00:05

Lets stay focussed on the women - thats the title of this thread and debate

Well then you can just say what if they are raped, assaulted, brutalised etc.



And to that I can say - it could ALSO happen if your cities and villages are overun by the enemy as it has been in the past

The term Comfort women has a whole different context and is a more systematic policy issue pursued by a certain country\countries.

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby RayC » 06 Feb 2010 06:49

Surya wrote:Lets stay focussed on the women - thats the title of this thread and debate

Well then you can just say what if they are raped, assaulted, brutalised etc.



And to that I can say - it could ALSO happen if your cities and villages are overun by the enemy as it has been in the past

The term Comfort women has a whole different context and is a more systematic policy issue pursued by a certain country\countries.


It happens in cities without being overrun by the enemy. If overrun by the enemy, it is not willing coming in harm's way. By going in for combat, one is willingly coming in harm's way.

I wonder if one saw the outrage when Capt Kalia was brutalised by the Pakistanis. What would be the national reaction if there were women subjected to those conditions and worse?

I am aware as to what is a Comfort Woman. I was merely trying to be PC.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Surya » 06 Feb 2010 07:05

ok and the outrage would be the same as for poor Capt Kalia.



now its a diff issue that we as a nation did not hunt those animals down

But the fear of that happening should not let us prevent women from joining as long as they understand the risks.

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby RayC » 06 Feb 2010 09:10

Surya wrote:ok and the outrage would be the same as for poor Capt Kalia.



now its a diff issue that we as a nation did not hunt those animals down

But the fear of that happening should not let us prevent women from joining as long as they understand the risks.


You have your views and one can't comment on that.

I am only stating what is felt by the rank and file of the armed forces.

I, for one, and many others in uniform would be outraged if a woman was treated the same way as Captain Kalia. And in war rage is the first enemy to prevent winning battles and thus, the war. Precisely the sentiment that you have expressed 'hunt the animals down'! Rage would only add to greater miseries and more death due to faulty planning of battles since anger is paramount. Unlike what one sees in films, in actual combat, when there is shot and shell, he who is calm can perceive the situation best and thus wins!

It is like this: people are outraged when there is violation of a woman. But if one's own is violated, one goes berserk.

Women should be in the Armed Forces, but not put in harm's way. There are many avenues in the Armed Forces where they can be put to good use professionally.

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby RayC » 06 Feb 2010 14:30

However, it is the GOI's call.

Let them induct women in combat arms and let them take the flak and not pass it on as they always do!

To me it is another helping hand, but it must be clear that they should not expect extra privileges!

I agree with Chetak.

Kati
BRFite
Posts: 1361
Joined: 27 Jun 1999 11:31
Location: The planet Earth

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Kati » 06 Feb 2010 18:35

We are discussing women in armed forces, yet it doesn't appear that
there are not even a few in this BRF. .....


Anyway, ITBP has inducted its first batch of Lakshmibais.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100130/j ... 045812.jsp

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Surya » 06 Feb 2010 19:12

no one on BRF will argue about standards

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby RayC » 15 Feb 2010 12:08

Isn't it interesting that there are people who want women in combat and yet in the Telengana demonstration, since women have been lathi charged there is so much of brouhaha.

Now, compare a lathi charge to violation of body of women who are captured by the enemy!

If a lathi charge can make so much of indignation and news, then what about bodily violation of women in war?

Any comments?

Natt
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 17 Jan 2010 01:26
Location: Where eagles dare

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Natt » 15 Feb 2010 12:59

Physical violation is perhaps one of the biggest concerns for the induction of women in combat roles. Women soldiers are seen more as a 'woman' than a 'soldier'.

Natt
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 17 Jan 2010 01:26
Location: Where eagles dare

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Natt » 15 Feb 2010 13:02

Also interesting to note that when women police (wo)manhadle females it seems ok...but absolutely not when done by (men) police. why's that. Our culture apart, even in US a female officer is called when available to handle unruly women.

abhishekm
BRFite
Posts: 111
Joined: 23 Jun 2009 23:28

Re: Women in Combat

Postby abhishekm » 15 Feb 2010 18:10

Hello

Bhavna Chauhan, a Lady Cadet at OTA in Chennai, has written a book titled "Where Girls Dare" which follows the antics of 52 lady cadets or LCs, who train alongside 400 gentleman cadets (GCs), some of whom believe that girls in the armed forces is a bad idea. An excerpt from the book is below.

http://getahead.rediff.com/report/2010/ ... n-life.htm

Hope the book is good, wouldn't mind reading it as I think (correct me if I'm wrong) it's the first time a female combatant has written about training/life in the IA.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1160
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Women in Combat

Postby rkhanna » 15 Feb 2010 18:35

Some years ago i was talkng to a friend of my father's .. a retired Brit Offcer. who had a very interesting view on the issue of women in combat. His point was that at the most basic and primal level the success of any military unit is dependent on Unit Cohesion. Adding a bunch of women to a Male unit WILL break unit cohesion ..its just the natural order of things..Other than the obvious sexual tension that may prevail a woman in combat in have different impact on the psyche of their male counterparts. Men may feel the need to overprotect female soldiers. dead female soldiers can further damage morale in a unit , Being captured by the enemy with women in the unit..it could probably be easier to break a male soldier during interrogatin by using the female as leverage (he cited some cases in the Israeli army),etc. Ie. Mission readines and effectiveness could deviate. Something as petty and silly as relieving yourself i front ofyour unit (or opsec) could potentially cause issues.
Specially in conservative countries where social customs are more rigid.

The only solution is that if you want women inthe armed forces (specially army/infantry)..Have women ONLY units.. Retain all latitute over unit cohesion.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9789
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Yagnasri » 15 Feb 2010 19:42

We have to keep in mind that we may not be fighting any war in near future with a country which respects internationally recoginsed rules of war. The war in Pak will involve lot of Taliban fighters freelancing for their army. What kind of conduct you expect against India (Hindu) women. I dont think even Pak army men will be no different from Taliban in this regard.

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby RayC » 15 Feb 2010 21:58

Women should be in the Armed Forces but away from harm's way.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22265
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Women in Combat

Postby chetak » 15 Feb 2010 22:32

RayC wrote:Isn't it interesting that there are people who want women in combat and yet in the Telengana demonstration, since women have been lathi charged there is so much of brouhaha.

Now, compare a lathi charge to violation of body of women who are captured by the enemy!

If a lathi charge can make so much of indignation and news, then what about bodily violation of women in war?

Any comments?



RayC,

In every city in India there are buses and trains that have separate seats for women. This is government policy and will not change.

Why are we talking about women in combat?

Why is this so important? Are any of these women fighting for combat postings raising their voices about the segregation of men and women in buses and trains?, separate queues for reservation or separate entry in many places? cinema halls, temples and suchlike.

Why do we pay so much attention to the minuscule minority of loudmouthed women?

What about the the vast majority who definitely prefer to remain segregated from physical contact and go about their normal lives? The same outspoken and hep women in Bombay's trains who travel in women's only compartments suddenly become vociferously vocal in front of cameras pushing for women fighter pilots!!!

Why women only in officer's cadres? Why not in other ranks too?
Women in other ranks will accelerate the change in mindset in the Army. Do we not trust our men? If you can't piss with the guys, can you fight alongside them?

Do these wannabe poster girls imagine that combat is politely segregated too? With some occasional genteel perspiring and the rare cultured bleeding?

You need to crawl before you can walk and walk before you can run. All things will happen in good time and last of all in asia.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4293
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Cain Marko » 15 Feb 2010 23:48

Aside from the impracticality of it all (as pointed out by Ray and Chetak),

What a shame! Can the men not fight well enough that now we need our women to do this work? This agenda is the perfect example of modernism at its very worst. It prevents women from excelling in those areas that they naturally do - compassion, beauty, purity. And prevents men from excelling in virtues that they naturally do - strength, nobility and chivalry.

The rare exceptions of Joan of Arc or the Rani of Jhansi only proves the point. It is not for nothing that the greatest examples of humanity (scriptural examples at that) show the wars being fought by men almost exclusively. In the war of the Mahabharata for example, Draupadi or Kunti despite their obviously central roles in the unfolding events, did not train themselves in the martial arts. No, their talents and innate strengths were better utilized elsewhere. What is a Sita or Mary or Fatima, if not a paragon of beauty and purity? These are qualities that even the most depraved men, naturally bow to and worship!

As a man, turning a woman into a man does not make her any more attractive or respect worthy; if I need some physical labor, I'd rather just find a man. IOWs, it is their innate femininity that gives value to women and vice versa for men.

Contrary to this novel (and rather backwards) idea, women don't need to prove themselves by becoming manly, we have plenty of men to do that. And nor do men need to start nursing so as to bring out their "sensitive" side! We have plenty of women to do that.

What a kaliyug, the whole world is turned upside down!

CM.
Last edited by Cain Marko on 15 Feb 2010 23:52, edited 1 time in total.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5337
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Women in Combat

Postby SBajwa » 15 Feb 2010 23:49

Women should at least train to be part of the reserve forces when need arises in all roles. that means we need

1. Women Combat Soldiers.
2. Women Combat pilots.
3. Women leading the units.
4. Women making decisions on the movement of the forces.
5. Women in all forms of logistics, supplies and medicine during comabt.

So! training must be imparted to young women to be ready when need arises.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4293
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Cain Marko » 15 Feb 2010 23:55

SBajwa wrote:Women should at least train to be part of the reserve forces when need arises in all roles. that means we need

1. Women Combat Soldiers.
2. Women Combat pilots.
3. Women leading the units.
4. Women making decisions on the movement of the forces.
5. Women in all forms of logistics, supplies and medicine during comabt.

So! training must be imparted to young women to be ready when need arises.


Hmm, I'd agree - as a last resort only though. Training women in self defence in schools is probably a good idea too.

CM.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22265
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Women in Combat

Postby chetak » 16 Feb 2010 20:05

SBajwa wrote:Women should at least train to be part of the reserve forces when need arises in all roles. that means we need

1. Women Combat Soldiers.
2. Women Combat pilots.
3. Women leading the units.
4. Women making decisions on the movement of the forces.
5. Women in all forms of logistics, supplies and medicine during comabt.

So! training must be imparted to young women to be ready when need arises.


SBajwa ji,

In this scenario, where have all the men gone? :)

By the way, ladies in the Medical branch have always and without exception done a very commendable job and continue to do so even now. No body even seems to notice them anymore, such is their silent and efficient integration. They are well regarded by their colleagues as well as the other ranks.

As always, they still continue to wear the ubiquitous saree. :D

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Craig Alpert » 16 Feb 2010 20:10

Women at war: Sexual violence in the US military
................
In 2006 she was in Afghanistan.

"You're supposed to carry your weapon at all times in a combat zone," she said.

"But I put my weapon down and walked away to smoke a cigarette and that was when I was attacked."

She was then dragged behind some power generators and raped.

"If I had kept my weapon maybe I would have been able to prevent it," she says.

"But if I had used it I would probably have ended up in jail."
..........

just some snippets!!!! Click to read the entire article!!

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Surya » 16 Feb 2010 20:59

Aside from the impracticality of it all (as pointed out by Ray and Chetak),

What a shame! Can the men not fight well enough that now we need our women to do this work? This agenda is the perfect example of modernism at its very worst. It prevents women from excelling in those areas that they naturally do - compassion, beauty, purity. And prevents men from excelling in virtues that they naturally do - strength, nobility and chivalry.
:eek: :eek:

Oh boy - This is where some woman jingo needs to jump in.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Women in Combat

Postby shiv » 16 Feb 2010 21:49

Fighting and war is about aggression. There is a link between aggression and the Y chromosome and testosterone. And there is a link between testosterone and being male. Stories abound from WW 2 about the fear and tension of war leading to innumerable sexual encounters between random women and allied soldiers in France, apart from the usual and age old stories of rape of women in enemy territory.

I have heard that morale of fighting men can take a beating if you dangle a woman (==sexual object) in front of them and ask them to control their testosterone and then release that control just for fighting.

I don't know what young girls may think about boys but males from 15 to 25 (and older in fact) will see anything in a skirt/sari as a sexual object. Sex is all that is necessary, nothing else. Not companionship. Not support.Your male mates can give you everything but the dame is needed for sex. That is part and parcel of being male whether anyone finds this offensive or not. This urge is controlled in normal society. But a frontline fighting unit is hardly "normal society".

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Women in Combat

Postby Surya » 16 Feb 2010 22:21

Hmm so how come whether it was partisans or resistance in WW2 or LTTE or Naxalites in India or Nepalese rebels - women seem to have no problem in being ruthless or brutal??? What causes that adjustment??


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cain Marko, srin, Vamsee and 60 guests