- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: There’s about to be a female Green Beret
Posted on 3/11/20 at 11:57 am to DownSouthCrawfish
Posted on 3/11/20 at 11:57 am to DownSouthCrawfish
quote:
Meh. A PT test is a very very small part of the selection process
1
Posted on 3/11/20 at 11:58 am to Darth_Vader
What's funny? You think some 300 PT score is going to carry you to a green beret? 
The biggest thing I'm impressed with is her getting through team week. Her peers could have easily gotten her enough bad marks to get her dropped.
The biggest thing I'm impressed with is her getting through team week. Her peers could have easily gotten her enough bad marks to get her dropped.
This post was edited on 3/11/20 at 12:02 pm
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:01 pm to DeltaDoc
For those that aren’t aware the “reasoning” behind not having women in “combat specialties” is a lot deeper than you may think:
1. Inherit male vs. female “protective instinct”: Where males are biologically programmed to keep women safe, thusly, possibly making bad decisions in combat instinctively for the wrong reasons.
2. Physical limitations based on literal physiology: I’m a pretty big dude, 6’ tall and 215 lbs... I don’t know if I’ve ever known/met a girl/woman who could deadweight life my unconscious body out of harms way
3. Relationships develop: Inherently creates bias for men *AND* women in a combat scenario and decision making is clouded by any feelings and priorities may be clouded.
The decision to limit the combat specialty access to women was far more than only “physical”...
Every dude here who considers himself a gentlemen *KNOWS* that he MAY make decisions, instinctively, regarding the safety of a woman... same team or not.
It’s better to just acknowledge the differences and move the frick on... these whiny bitches who claim “they’re capable” aren’t thinking about the big picture and the grand scheme... because they just “want it fair, dammit
1. Inherit male vs. female “protective instinct”: Where males are biologically programmed to keep women safe, thusly, possibly making bad decisions in combat instinctively for the wrong reasons.
2. Physical limitations based on literal physiology: I’m a pretty big dude, 6’ tall and 215 lbs... I don’t know if I’ve ever known/met a girl/woman who could deadweight life my unconscious body out of harms way
3. Relationships develop: Inherently creates bias for men *AND* women in a combat scenario and decision making is clouded by any feelings and priorities may be clouded.
The decision to limit the combat specialty access to women was far more than only “physical”...
Every dude here who considers himself a gentlemen *KNOWS* that he MAY make decisions, instinctively, regarding the safety of a woman... same team or not.
It’s better to just acknowledge the differences and move the frick on... these whiny bitches who claim “they’re capable” aren’t thinking about the big picture and the grand scheme... because they just “want it fair, dammit
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:02 pm to blueboy
quote:
Your claim is that these women will naturally not be hot enough for the men to want to frick because their ability to make it through the training program means they are too butch.
Yeah, you're stupid.
I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption that a girl who passes the same standards as males do would more likely be butch than dainty.
But by all means, continue this weird melt over a simple opinion/assumption. You're clearly a Harvard grad. I'm impressed.
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:04 pm to TH03
quote:
I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption that a girl who passes the same standards as males do would more likely be butch than dainty.
Weeks of isolation from the fairer sex makes your standards plummet.
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:04 pm to DownSouthCrawfish
Anyone who has been through a Selection course (not Basic but a more demanding specific selection process) knows that there is a shite ton of PT. But it isn't solely to determine if you are in good shape. Because the ones I went through everyone, regardless of condition, got smoked. It is a way for the cadre to determine your mental toughness. Do you really want to be there and are you capable of hacking it when the suck is real.
I had to make that decision on a midnight run when my left arm started going numb and I was stumbling from exhaustion and lack of sleep. Every time someone got on the follow vehicle, it made me want to do the same but I didn't. I learned a lot about myself over those weeks. THAT is what they are doing when they PT you. So saying PT isn't a big part of Selection is wrong. Saying that the PT isn't necessarily about being a physical stud is correct.
I had to make that decision on a midnight run when my left arm started going numb and I was stumbling from exhaustion and lack of sleep. Every time someone got on the follow vehicle, it made me want to do the same but I didn't. I learned a lot about myself over those weeks. THAT is what they are doing when they PT you. So saying PT isn't a big part of Selection is wrong. Saying that the PT isn't necessarily about being a physical stud is correct.
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:05 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
But “they might have sex” isn’t a reason to prevent them from serving in the military
Yes it is.
Separation is the only effective means we have of ensuring those pregnancies don't happen.
The military is about fighting and killing enemies of the United States of America, it's not a summer boot camp and anything that undermines that goal needs to be removed, including women being in situations where they are a fraternization risk to the male dominated environment.
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:05 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
I will note that women have been integrating with SOF outside the wire for quite a while now, the most notable example being Shannon Kent, who everybody seems to acknowledge was a stud.
Absolutely, because there are times when having a female adds to the chances of operational success. Just adding a woman to a team for the sake of equality is stupid and degrades mission effectiveness.
Look at it from the opposite angle: let's say a SOF team comes to their commander and says "Look, we need a honey pot trap, and we need an attractive female willing to put herself out there". Or "Hey, we're dealing with a lot of local females who know things but they won't talk to us. We need a female who speaks Pashtun who doesn't mind operating in our kind of conditions."
Now imagine the commander saying "Muh equality, here's a man, there's no reason he can't do the job just as well". That would be really, really stupid, wouldn't it?
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:07 pm to DownSouthCrawfish
quote:
What's funny? You think some 300 PT score is going to carry you to a green beret?
By itself? No. But if you think PT score consideration isn’t an important factor you’ve lost your mind. The Army looks at PT score when considering just about anything from PLDC to Jump School. Your PT score on the army is VERY important.
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:08 pm to Darth_Vader
Will you assholes championing “equality based on PT” scroll up and read my post above?!
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:09 pm to TH03
quote:I doubt she passed the same standards although that's just speculation but my experience doesn't mirror that. The female 'pt studs' I knew in the army tended to be more feminine and attractive than the average. The butch types were mostly overweight and out of shape. Maybe because attractive girls are more likely to make an effort to be fit, who knows?
I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption that a girl who passes the same standards as males do would more likely be butch than dainty.
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:10 pm to yankeeundercover
I’m not championing equality based on PT score.
And for the record, I agree 100% with you on your post. It’s dead on target why women should not serve in combat arms. Period.
And for the record, I agree 100% with you on your post. It’s dead on target why women should not serve in combat arms. Period.
This post was edited on 3/11/20 at 12:12 pm
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:12 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:You're showing your age, Darth.
PLDC
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:13 pm to DownSouthCrawfish
quote:
The biggest thing I'm impressed with is her getting through team week. Her peers could have easily gotten her enough bad marks to get her dropped.
I’m sure the higher ups took that into consideration.
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:15 pm to Nado Jenkins83
Id frick him
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:16 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
PLDC
You're showing your age, Darth.
What do they call it now?
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:16 pm to DeltaDoc
You jealous?
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:18 pm to Darth_Vader
It was changed to wlc about 15 years ago and I think they already changed it again.
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:18 pm to DeltaDoc
I'll say what everyone else is thinking:
Political correctness can kiss my arse if we are talking about who is standing next to me in combat.
I want motherfricking Rambo fighting beside me. Not a female.
Sorry not sorry.
Political correctness can kiss my arse if we are talking about who is standing next to me in combat.
I want motherfricking Rambo fighting beside me. Not a female.
Sorry not sorry.
Posted on 3/11/20 at 12:19 pm to Darth_Vader
WLC / PLDC
ALC / BNCOC
SLC / ANCOC
ALC / BNCOC
SLC / ANCOC
This post was edited on 3/11/20 at 12:20 pm
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News