MOD its been 100 years why are you still stuck in 1918!

[CosmicPineapple]

Colonel Richard Kemp was interviewd on BBC news this morning talking about women on the front line, infantry/marines.
He disagrees that women should serve on the front line.

This is because the RAF have opened up every role to women.

He feels women are not fit enough, will suffer more injuries and therefore claim more compensation from the MOD and injuries suffered may result in those women being unable to have children.

Why the fuck it it assumed that every womans only goal in life is to have children!

I know many many men who have been injured while in service and they are no longer able to father children yet this is not a reason they are discouraged from joining the infantry

He also talks about how they (women) may join up when young and not realise how joining such a regiment will impact on them later in life.
So females are too thick to understand consequences and risk and should not be allowed to make such decisions and only men are capable of doing that

It has been 100 years.
Women have proved they are capable and worthy of joining the armed forces yet here we are in 2018 where the men that oversee our armed forces still want to pat little women on the head and point them in the direction of desk jobs and nursing as they are womens roles ( both good careers by the way)

Not sure want I want from this thread just felt the need to rant about it and I am home alone and the cat is showing no interest in my ranting at the TV.

He also talks about how they (women) may join up when young and not realise how joining such a regiment will impact on them later in life.

Jesus Christ - that's offensive to everyone surely - what about the men (!) and boys - you can sign up at 16. They get a fair bloody impact too, but that's OK (given his other comments - perhaps because they don't have the ability to have babies?)

He feels women are not fit enough, will suffer more injuries and therefore claim more compensation from the MOD

There is some evidence that women are more prone to injury isn't there? But is that reason enough to exclude them? They also need fewer calories, and given logistics huge importance to the frontline wouldn't that be an enormous positive? There's pros and cons to both sexes it seems to me.

Surely men can suffer injuries that leave them unable to have children too? Surely both sexes can also suffer injuries which leave them severely disabled or dead?

So is the Colonel recommending that no-one signs up to the infantry?

It doesn't matter what he says, it's a done deal. He's simply a dinosaur to be ignored. He retired 10 years ago so his comments are no longer relevant to today's military.

So is the Colonel recommending that no-one signs up to the infantry?

No just women.

Spag he gave not one pro for women joining the infantry. Just the negatives.

ex he may be retired but his dinosaur views are still held by many in the MOD who have influence.

I have the joy of meeting them daily

Well yes Cosmic, you are right, but it is already a done deal, women are going into Ground Force Combat roles, so they can be the 'proof'

There have always been dinosaurs. When I joined up I was told I 'had' to wear a skirt if working in HQ - not the Lightweights I wore otherwise (and the men wore). If working in civvies I was told I 'had' to wear make-up. I ignored them and continued to do my job without it.

As late as 2006 I was told by my Brigade Commander (at my arrival interview) that he was "pretty much ok with working mothers, but you'll need to prove that you aren't pining for your baby when you are at work if you want me to take you seriously" - I just raised an eyebrow and got on with my job.

The first GFC women will have a lot to prove, and that's shite, but it's the only way. As the old guard die out things should get better, but it could be a while yet . Those that just get on with it quietly and confidently will flourish, they've fought for it long enough, now they can enjoy it.

Well yes Cosmic, you are right, but it is already a done deal, women are going into Ground Force Combat roles, so they can be the 'proof

I hope so.

I hear this shit daily so no idea why it riled me so much this morning.

On Vic Derb show later the commander of the RAF Regiment is on. Perhaps he will give a more balanced view! My BiL is the dept commander!!

When my MIL married she had to leave the WAF because she outranked my FIL.

injuries suffered may result in those women being unable to have children.

But your cock being clean blown off won't affect anyone's chances of getting pregnant?

By the same logic married men shouldn't be allowed in the army as they're potentially losing these poor child desperate women their potential future children.

In theory, I am not a huge fan of women dying in patriarchal wars for the benefit of men.

But in reality, it is an employment option, and women should have a right to all employment options that men get.
(And also, the military needs to do something about the rapist males in there.)

By the same logic married men shouldn't be allowed in the army as they're potentially losing these poor child desperate women their potential future children.

Now that's an idea.
I am pretty sure lots of women who lived through WW2 would have totally agreed with that. At least the ones who were happily married. Or whose sons were married.

It is laughable isn't it? In World War II women were often assigned the most dangerous jobs. Think of the women parachuted behind enemy lines as agents? No Geneva convention protection for them - more like torture, concentration camps and execution.

Think of the female pilots who ferried fighters and bombers from the factories to the air bases. No guns on the planes so no way a female pilot could fight back if attacked by enemy aircraft.

Think of the women blown up in munitions factories in both world wars.

I fail to see the logic of Kemp's position.

Equality should mean the best person for the job and I support that (if anyone cares). If women want to serve 'frontline' they should be able to on equal footing.
There appear to be so many things 'wrong' about the armed forces and there always have been but they are an unfortunate necessity for defence.

It's fair to say that 99% of the reasons why women supposedly can't serve in a frontline unit will be bollocks. Mainly because 99% of what a frontline unit does is pretty standard stuff.

That said, these units exist and train for what they need to do 1% of the time. For all the hot air from both sides on this issue, the real question is whether a fighting force that is required to 'close with and kill the enemy’ is strengthened or weakened by having a mix of sexes within it.

Sure, there are smaller questions - such as whether female members of a unit will be equally happy shitting in plastic bags in front of their work colleagues - but really it comes down to this: will women be as capable as men when it comes to killing?