A One-Time SEAL on Those Female SEAL-Wannabes

  • Share
  • Read Later
Navy photo / Blake Midnight / via Getty Images

All-male Navy SEALs training along the southern California coast.

The decision to scrap the Direct Ground Combat Definition and Assignment Rule of 1994 by then-defense secretary Leon Panetta earlier this year did not immediately put women into combat.

But it has led to Pentagon review of how best to open up the military to women without watering down its readiness to fight. Regarding the future role of women in the the Navy SEALs and other special-operations roles, it simply directed commanders to “proceed in a deliberate, measured, and responsible way to provide women the opportunity to qualify for currently closed (ground combat) positions.”

The services have to come up with plans to integrate females by October 2015. Recent directives have spelled out how this is going to take place.

A ground-breaking directive like this back in the 1990s might have caught the Navy SEALs, and those who train Navy SEALs, off guard.

Before 9/11, SEAL training was difficult and highly-selective by any standard. But it also was tradition-bound and lacked the wartime-driven imperatives that today mark SEAL training.

The last decade-plus of continuous combat operations and the current train-like-you-fight/fight-like-you-train approach have greatly improved the SEAL training pipeline. In Basic Underwater SEAL demolition/SEAL training (BUD/S) and SEAL qualification training (SQT) and subsequent SEAL training, the focus has been on what works and what doesn’t work–what is needed in the battlespace and what can be discarded because there’s a better way.

So what is essential to them in the making of a Navy SEAL in the Global War on Terror is in place. Furthermore, it’s been codified in blood.

The standard is in place. Meet this standard and you can qualify to be a Navy SEAL.

So in this way the Navy SEALs (as with the Army Special Forces, 75th Rangers, and Marine Special Operators) have made their warrior standard very clear. Tactically, technically, physically, and professionally, this is what it takes. Do this, sir or ma’am, and you can be one of us.

Yet, there may be more to it than this. I’ll not go into the particulars of upper body strength, hygiene, lack of privacy, sexual tensions, reproductive biology, etc., etc. These will sort themselves out in the sorting process that is BUD/S and SQT.

In my opinion, there are but three issues:

— First, the standards in place are combat-proven standards – there can be no slackening of standards. The run times and pull-up minimums are the same for all. On the 100-yard buddy-carry sprint–I carry you and your combat load and you carry me; it doesn’t matter if I’m a 150-pound SEAL (which I was) or a 220-pound SEAL, as many are today. Your life and mine depend on my ability to get you out of a kill zone and safely to cover. There can be no compromise.
— Second, those women who can meet this standard have to do so in more than ones or twos. It is unreasonable to open training to 200 women to find two who can meet standard.
— Third, and finally, there is the cultural issue. Do we as a nation, and an American culture, want our mothers, sisters, and daughters in the business of sustained, direct, mortal, combat?

Is this the will of the people?

If we, as a nation and a culture, do, then so be it. Let the women in the fight.

Dick Couch is a leading authority on U.S. military special-operations training.  His books include The Warrior Elite: The Forging of SEAL Class 228 and Sua Sponte, Army Ranger Training.

101 comments
DavidAuCoin
DavidAuCoin

1. In order to kill one must hate the enemy. This involves vilifying, and demonizeing the enemy. Since as militaries are now constituted the vast majority of the enemy women will face will be men. Thus when a woman returns from combat she is exspected to form loving relations with the gender she demonized and vilified and killed on the battle field. Her subconcious will have been programed to want to do violence to men. Why do you suspose most doemestic violence is  committed by men aganist men it is because men are constantly at war. It is no accident that the the U.S being the most at war nation also has the most  violent society. You can be sure that as more women go to war you can exspect to see more doemestic violence being  

commited by women.

2. The most noble human instinct is the female  neurturing instinct. This instinct will have to be surpressed when women go into combat.

3. The second most nobel human instinct is the paternal instinct of men This also will have to be surpressed when women go to war. Thus the two most nobel of human instincts that of the neurturing instinct of the female and the paternal instinct of males will both have to be surpressed. Is this progress?

When savages went to war they sent men aganist men.Now that the savages have been  civilized we are sending men and women to kill each other. Is this progress? 

cicerovicious
cicerovicious

@DavidAuCoin "In order to kill one must hate the enemy" - seriously???  You really believe that???  While it may be true that YOU need hate to kill an enemy, trust me when I say that the VAST MAJORITY of humans need no such motivation - fear of being killed is pretty much all that most folks require.  And while I agree that many do hate their chosen enemy, they are surely a minority.  That aside, you need to understand that if you really do require hate to kill, then you will quickly become fodder for the masses when you find yourself in the unenviable position of being caught by those who just want your stuff.  Your only hope in such a situation will be to have in your company someone like me who feels the need to protect the innocents.  The rest of your post is similarly ridiculous and in actuality, I suspect you don't really believe most or all of what you have written.  Rather it's more likely you are presenting what you think is erudition in an attempt to present yourself as some new-age Ghandi...please God please try again...or just stop posting...

MarisaOates
MarisaOates

@DocMcFoody I have read many comments and it takes a lot to offend me but your comment is so vile and offensive, I will address your alleged statement. I am far from a pampered princess/kept woman waiting for my "hubby" to get home. I DO NOT take Freedom lightly nor the men and women who have defended it for me and paid that price with blood. You are out of line and never disrespect me or misrepresent my comments to fit your own duplicitous points of view. That is all.

abe.loewy
abe.loewy

On a very basic biological level, women are much more valuable than men since fewer men are needed to proliferate the species. A group of 10 men and 100 women can procreate and survive with good genetic diversity. A group of 10 women and 100 men, very much less so. It's hard wired into our DNA to protect women because of this.

JanSazkar
JanSazkar

Gender differences are no different from cultural differences and the military tolerates that just fine. Training hones skill, weeds out the weak and forges a team. A team of all female SEALs is ridiculous. Lets do that and then watch the rest of the world laugh at us.http://bonus-pariuri.com/winmasters/

aroram17
aroram17

Wow this is stupid I don't know why this is even as issue in today's age. I don't understand why people think they have the right to limit anyone based on things that don't even relate to the job at hand. There are certain physical and mental qualifications one must have to be a SEAL and whoever meets those qualifications should be able to join the force, regardless of who they are. Of course as a whole, it will be mostly men that meet the physical qualifications, and the standards should not be lowered just to accommodate more women. But there are some women that can physically qualify, and these women shouldn't be limited from the opportunity to serve their country just because they have two x chromosomes. In addition, women as a whole are mentally stronger than men (in regard to "never quitting" etc), believe me I have done research in this area. And what is this bull about "do we really want our mothers, sisters, daughters in combat". That comment in itself is horribly sexist, in that it labels women as these feeble dependents who need men to look out for them. Comments like this almost make me embarrassed to be an American- in a country that leads the world as a superpower, it is so so sad to see how backwards our view on women is. Women are equal citizens of this country, and that gives them the right to decide their fate. If we want to think about it that way, it sees men as disposable pawns to be thrown in the line of fire. We should have equal concern for anyone that goes into combat, regardless of whether they are a woman or man. I know things take time, and hopefully this will be overcome someday soon,

yodave
yodave

@aroram17 I disagree when it comes to combat, I think men on average are tougher fighters

cicerovicious
cicerovicious

@yodave Men as a rule are without exception tougher as fighters in a MELEE CONTEST - any argument to the contrary is irrational.  Part of the reason this is even up for debate is because the melee aspect of warfare is now almost gone.  True, there will be situations where SEALs will be caught in a situation where they need to go hand-to-hand to fight their way out but I suspect, in more cases than not, women caught in those situations will die unless they have a comrade nearby.   Has zero to do with mental stamina or martial art tactics - sometimes in hard-core combat, man vs. woman just doesn't end well.  HOWEVER, if the standards to make the grade are NOT sacrificed, then we given the female operator the BEST CHANCE of survival regardless of the situation.  All that said, the real issue IMHO with women serving in this role is rape being used as a weapon both directly against the operator herself and then indirectly against the male operators.  Rape is not traditionally directly used against male operators but with women entering this arena, coupled with adversary cultures that have high levels of rape in combat, then this will be a serious issue in the future...

cicerovicious
cicerovicious

@aroram17 True women have the right to determine their fate but not at the expense of others nor at the expense of the quality of our military.  And they certainly do not have the right to determine how we defend this Nation.  Further, given that warfare has been conducted primarily by men - and that our adversaries going forward will surely almost always be men - then the women's voice OVERALL in terms of how to craft the military and fight the wars will understandably be taken with lower value than that of men.  It's no different than saying you trust a doctor, lawyer, or engineer with more experience than you would (or should) trust one with very little or no experience.  Should a women's voice be discounted out of hand due to her gender???  Of course not BUT we must NEVER say listen to her because she's female.  None of this is misogyny - it's not sexist - it's real common sense.  All that said, that was not at all what the author meant by the question asking if we want our women in the combat arena.

Both women and men have no right to serve as SEALs - they all have a right to the opportunity - THAT'S IT - no more and no less.

Your response is ignorant...

EMcG
EMcG

Your strength and muscle mass are not solely determined by your gender. If you work muscles, the will get bigger and stronger. Having woman parts does not render you incapable of developing upper body strength. Lifting ten pound dumbbells and power walking is not going to increase your upper body strength. I have no trouble doing pull ups. Why? Because I work on them. Some things are going to be harder for you. Not because you're a woman, but because you're human. Train  harder, work harder, and when you feel like you are going to die, keep going. Stop using your Anatomy as an excuse. Having female anatomy is not a disability. 

m85
m85

@EMcG Testosterone and Estrogen are completely different , those chemicals in the body cause women and men to have different emotions, thoughts and physical abilities, it is not just about human anatomy and muscle mass.

cicerovicious
cicerovicious

@EMcG "Having female anatomy is not a libility" - LAUGHABLE - tell that to the first female SEAL who gets captured and is raped on film for the whole World to see.  These people capture completely innocent folks and cut their heads off as a war tactic.  They know how much we cherish our women - you think they're not gonna figure out how much seeing a female operator raped will affect the consciousness of the Western World???  Am I saying women shouldn't be SEALs???  Not at all - what I am saying is 1) Don't use BS to justify women getting the shot at making the grade; 2) Don't trivialize the considerations and debate prior to the inclusion of women in combat and especially in Special Forces - that move is not trivial in the least; 3) Be careful what you ask for - you thought seeing a dude's head get whacked off was bad - just consider for a moment how much worse 21st century YouTube Internet era warfare can really get; and 4) The only valid argument for women getting an opportunity is that they wanna serve - PERIOD - no more need be said.

Please stop with the ignorant comments...


JoshSterling
JoshSterling

@cicerovicious @EMcG Come back at me when you have to sign up for the draft when you are 18 am I right? Women treat the special forces like its a boys club to be conquered. I vote that they should pass conscription first and then entry. I watched a video of a women dedicated herself to combat training and now she is sterile. Her body was so stressed that her ovaries and cycles just stopped functioning.She was devastated but dedicated to her cause and she wanted to warn women of the potential consequences. No standard should be lowered and women should be advised of the increased health risks involved with joining the elite organizations in our military. I believe between 5-7 percent all all women are currently capable physically passing,....I know at least one that could make a good run at it... and just like men there is also the psychological aspect that are basically ghosts in the machine and you really don't know how someone will respond the the stress until they actually go through that fire. 

EMcG
EMcG

I am a female, and I have been kicking and screaming, and beating the door down about this issue. It is my dream to be part of a special operations team. Many say that they had a calling to be a SEAL or a Ranger. I have that same calling. However, I do not like the direction that many of the discussions about integration have gone in. All I want is opportunity. I would not feel like I was capable if standards had to be changed or lowered for me to pass a school. Put the women in with the men that they will have to fight beside during training. Only take the best, even if there are only a few. If a female just so happens to pass, give her the title that she has earned. We should not be limited by our gender, but by our ability to get the job done. Until then, there is no gender equality. Ladies, we are not entitled to different standards for the same job. If we want to be equals, we must demand to be treated as such.

TJoRo15
TJoRo15

@EMcG I feel you girl. I'm also a young female who one day wants to serve in combat or special forces. Most men would just laugh in my face since I'm only 14 and most would say I don't know what I want. Just give me a chance to train with the current standards when I'm old enough. Like you say it seems no one wants to give women an opportunity to go head to head with the men.

roadknight25
roadknight25

@EMcG This is a mistake.Seals,Rangers, and Delta are elite units. Not an exercise in political correctness. Lives will be lost due to the ineffectiveness of these units. Whats next a Mr America pageant with a bikini competition?

TonyLeding
TonyLeding

@EMcG The most intelligent and well stated comment about this issue to date - BRAVO - HOOAHH - go git em...if you can...

DocMcFoody
DocMcFoody

I want to clarify my statement, "...then the standards must remain exactly where they are while only making changes to accommodate our different physiology and anatomy."  Women have more lower body muscle mass than men and men have more upper body muscle mass than women. There will have to be changes in training to address a woman 's anatomy without sacrificing the standard.


Albert
Albert

@DocMcFoody  


It's interesting you don't mention the other option to "changing the training".  How about this idea - only women who can meet the combat proven training standards, as THEY ARE NOW IN PLACE, will become SEALS and Rangers?   Even if only one in 10000 females can get through BUDS and SQT?  But,  you instead offer what really has to be a contradiction in terms.   "Change training but don't sacrifice the standard".  

Then throw in the inevitable political intrigue and calumny surrounding the inevitable QUOTA system imposed, and it will be absolutely unavoidable that the standard will be sacrificed.

m85
m85

@DocMcFoody Its actually a misconception that woman have more lower body muscle mass than men, even if they did men still have alot more lower body strength then woman do, just watch any power lifting tournament on youtube.

DocMcFoody
DocMcFoody

I was born and raised in the military and called it home for most of my life and I'm a woman. If females want to engage in SEAL training, then the standards must remain exactly where they are while only making changes to accommodate our different physiology and anatomy. Our military is the finest fighting force on the face of the Earth for one reason. It is a strong chain. You can not put weak links into a chain and expect it to remain the same.


I'm all for women doing any job in the military as long as she can do the job. You wouldn't expect someone with no computer training or aptitude to be in intel or someone with bad eye sight and a fear of heights to fly Black Hawks. As for the male and female thought process being different, why is that automatically a detriment? Gender differences are no different from cultural differences and the military tolerates that just fine. Training hones skill, weeds out the weak and forges a team. A team of all female SEALs is ridiculous. Lets do that and then watch the rest of the world laugh at us. -.-

I doubt there will be every female signing up but there will be a few and out of that, some will make it. At that point, she'll be a team member and not a walking vagina. To think that introducing females into male units will create a sexual disaster, undermines the maturity and mental toughness that SEALs possess. Granted, there will be a few males who are resistant to change but they will adapt. Just as racists had to adapt to people of colour watching their six.

Our military is still evolving and I believe there will be many positive changes in it in the future. So I am against changing the physical and mental standards. To all of you women who throw the word "misogynist" around as if you use it in everyday conversation, stop it. Most men are not out to get you or hold you back. Maybe if you saw men as equals, you wouldn't be so insecure about your own abilities.

TonyLeding
TonyLeding

@DocMcFoody I suspect there will be a large influx of female candidates in the early stages and then for it to taper sharply after a few months.  The worst thing would be if the standards are lowered because I guarantee that will have the direct effect of many otherwise capable men simply choosing to not become SEALs...this obviously hurts America and should never happen.  The more we embrace gender and race equality, as an attempt to eradicate very natural but run amok xenophobia, we often degrade ourselves as a society and a nation by sacrificing the strength of not just our military, but also our laws and justice.  Do not misunderstand - these things must be addressed but never at the expense of the Country.  I fear the same may happen here yet I remain hopeful it will not...

MarisaOates
MarisaOates

First to DanielCMalloy-my apologies for misquoting. ..you were joking about the Demi Moore comment and I totally agree with you and I agree with most of the posts on here except for Mcoopa's hurt feelings re: the the libtard phrase used...would liberal idiot full of ignorance hurt your feelings less? Funny how your posting your opinions about NAVY SEALS and you get hurt over a name you were called. Moving on to the evil.aaron--I'm a female and we get epidurals (unless you're an idiot and go natural) for childbirth. I've never served in the military but I'm pretty sure that you can't ask for an epidural when you feel pain. In fact your statements are so ridiculous It's too annoying to respond so please, just shut her down. And to whomever suggested there be a separate team of female "seals?" Why in a 17 trillion deficit us minute would we pay to have a team of female seals go do a job the REAL seals can do 100x better and faster? Not to mention that being around a bunch of women all day, every day is a ridiculous proposal. We'd kill eachother before we even started a mission. Lastly, Podscorb, since I am a girl and I'm allowed to get my feelings hurt on here..or rather take offense to a comment, your comment about women quitting when we think we at the end of our rope? Sir, you are wrong. I'm not a quitter. My Father raised to be a Lady but not a Quitter. That being said, again let me state that I don't believe women have the physical or mental toughness to be a Seal or in Frontline Combat. The United States Military is the best in the world...why are we trying to muck things up? I forgot, Obama is POTUS.

MarisaOates
MarisaOates

I have read the article and the comments and I want to state my opinion. To the girl who referenced Demi Moore making the seals in "Gi Jane" that was a movie. Second, Feminists say what you want but Feminism is hurting our Country Morally and now it's jeapordizing our Security and so I'm going to be blunt, very blunt. A gentleman above made a great point; can we women carry a 250 lb man out of the kill zone ("as fast" (for feminist who argue they can carry a 250+ lb man) and that's dead weight so you will be carrying what will feel like 350lbs. I'm going to say not a chance ladies.

You claim that women should be allowed to serve their Country and try out for BUDS training (which sorry but you would all ring out within 5 minutes) yet you contradict yourselves. If you cared about your Country you would never jeapordize what makes our seals great, safe, and the best by ignoring what they have stated--we jeapordize their framework because we are women. Death is hard enough, and the feminist who suggest we be allowed to pass training(no women ever could) and then have them see us blown to pieces while they drag our bodies out of the kill zone hits them on a mental level. They pride themselves on the brotherhood that they have worked hard for and built throughout the years.

So ladies, We will Never be Seals. We don't have the strength, muscle mass, particularly upper body strength, we get emotional(even feminist) and we jeapordize the Safety of all those who have earned the title of Navy Seal. It's time to end this selfish campaign of feminism and realize that life is fair. We can't go into their locker rooms, and they can't come into ours. Sounds fair to me?

Albert
Albert

@DocMcFoody


Spoken like a true feminazi, with all the ingrained Marxian ideological platforms covered in standard form.    Women like you, unfortunately, would pose the greatest risk imaginable to the SEAL ethos and mission.  Irregardless of your physical capabilities.

DocMcFoody
DocMcFoody

@MarisaOates You do not speak for any woman who isn't exactly like you but I'll tell you what. I'll defend your right to a pampered life and vapid intellect while you wait for your hubby to get home so your life can begin and you leave every other woman on Earth out of your so called argument. 

SilverStrings
SilverStrings

@Albert @DocMcFoody
"Feminazi" and "Marxian"? Spoken like a true conspiracy-theorist, MRA chickenhawk.
Too bad female combatants have already proven effective in the IDF, Finnish Defense Forces, and the Soviet military (and that one was decades ago).
Tell me, Internet Tough Guy, have you served in the military? I'm guessing not, because macho-posturing types like you are usually too cowardly (and too busy overcompensating for their many inadequacies).

By the way, "Marxian" and "irregardless" are not words. If you're going to pretend to be better than other people, you could at least try to make yourself seem literate.

RobinMarieMoore
RobinMarieMoore

@MarisaOates You Ms. Oates are so badly mistaken and ignorant in your one sided view.  Women can and will pass these challenges when finally given the opportunity to do so. You don't speak for anyone but yourself.  You sound like you are more afraid of having a man in the same combat unit with a female because of the "sexual" innuendo's than because she can't do the job. The men, and yes eventually women, form a strong bond, a brotherhood with each other. Are you telling me that to watch a female team member wounded, killed, "blown up" as you state would be harder than watching the same thing happen to one of the men in their unit? When they lose one of their own it devastates them, but they pick themselves up and forge forward.   As a former USAF flight nurse, 29 years as an ER nurse I have seen horrors to beat horrors and have seen the strongest of men buckle under this and have seen females become stronger than you can possibly imagine,  physically, mentally and emotionally.  You are entitled to your opinion as we all are but you DO NOT speak for all women. SO, please continue with your pampered, please protect me as I am a poor dainty little female who can't do anything without having a man do it for me life. I for one am proud to have served and if I was younger and this had been open for me during my time I would have jumped at the chance. And yes I am a mother of 3. was born, raised and married into the military life. If my daughter was to come to me and inform me that she chose to pursue this then I would encourage her to follow her dream and be supportive and very proud of her.

abucket9
abucket9

@MarisaOates I know this is old but I had to comment. I'm very lucky to have served in a country where females have been allowed into what we call the "combat arms" trades for a while now (combat engineers, infantry, artillery and armoured). In Canada, everyone in the "land" element (army) goes through Soldier Qualification and as a 6'0" tall, 160 lb female I fit right in with the guys. Under those conditions, there isn't sexual tension and I honestly don't think anyone even noticed I was a female beyond the fact I went to a separate barracks. I know that Canada's SF (JTF2) would be open to me but I also know that many women do not apply to the combat arms and, even rarer, go SF. There's no harm in giving women the option because you will find that at the end of the day, most just aren't interested in going combat arms and those that do may not have an interest in SF. The small percentage (and I'm talking SMALL) have high standards to meet and an even smaller percentage would make it through. And if a woman has the physical and mental prowess to not only make it through SEAL training but make it through with that much scrutiny, then I would say she is ANYTHING but a "weak link" in that chain.

JoshSterling
JoshSterling

Have you ever actually watched women do a simple obstacle course. I assure you its not what it looks like in your self empowered movies. That being said I will say that some women will pass, this is obvious as generalizations are what they are for a reason. I think its important nay paramount to make no allowances and that all women and when they turn 18 are signed up for the draft. There is no women in the United States that knows what its like to have to sign up for the draft to be able to have basic citizens rights and be counted on as a potential defensive/offensive asset by default..Then everything will be fair and many of the valid contentions that male military members have will be taken care of..... If I where to sum up my personal experiences of women in a forward deployment setting it would be 40/60.... 60 being positive...

SonjaSharp
SonjaSharp

I consider myself an educated, open-minded, and objective female. I firmly agree that there are limitations on both genders, however, this article really made me realise the extent of the limitations of those that suffer from misogyny to take an objective stance and their ability to reason coherently when it comes to arguing gender issues.The first point bears merit in that standards must be kept. However, should a female meet these standards, would she not have to go through the same selection and training process as a male? Are there not many males that apply for seals (say for argument sake 200) and is it not the case that there are few that make it? Which brings me to the second point. As far as I understand, from my readings and brief research into the process, there is stringent training involved from which you either make it or don't. Is it not the case that despite the rigorous selection process the attrition rate is relatively high? If this is correct, which is reported to be the case in a variety of valid and authentic resources, then surely the comment about one or two females from 200 meeting the standards is not justifiable??? Especially since there is no valid, empirical data to support such a hypothesis/statement. Finally, the third comment, "Do we as a nation (is the US so different to other countries where life is valued??? Are Americans so different to say Icelandic, British or South African people???) and an American culture, want our mothers, sisters, and daughters in the business of sustained, direct, mortal, combat?", is a misguided notion that only males should be allowed the right to protect, and that only males have a say in this dialogue. No one wants war, no one wants their child or spouse or parent to be in the line of fire, but who says it is the right of males only to protect their family, home or country??? Women are equally ferocious in wanting to protect, so why should they be denied the right to be given the right training and skills to do so, provided they meet the requirements so as not to jeopardize the team. Unfortunately there are those that just cannot be helped in their myopic perspective of the world, and one can only hope that with time maturity may improve such tendencies...although this may be optimistic.

Albert
Albert

@SonjaSharp    


You tell me.... does it sound reasonable to you to assume that the pass/fail ratio for men and for women will be the same going through BUDS?    There's no valid empirical evidence to support THAT statement?  What?  

And why do you HAVE to classify this man speaking from experience as a misogynist? That's definitely an  ideological bias, not open-minded objectivism.  

SilverStrings
SilverStrings

@Albert Women can & have passed stricter standards than the ones described here. Israel's military goes through even harsher training than Navy SEALs, with the same standards regardless of gender. Yet they have over 100,000 female members, many in combat roles. Their military is also more effective & efficient than America's.
Next you'll be tossing out the old canards about how blacks, Jews & gays weaken the military, right?

ISIS
ISIS

NADIE  DIJO QUE BAJARAN LOS ESTANDARES PARA LAS MUJERES  EN UNA CARRERA MILITAR NOS ESTAN DANDO LA OPORTUDIDAD Y BIEN ECHO QUE  LO HACE . SI UNA MUJER QUIERE Y TIENE LA VOLUNTAD  PARA HACER Y LOGRARLO QUE LA DEJEN NO TIENEN QUE ESTAR CRITICANDO SI VA HACER CON UNAS VACACIONES EN EL INFIERNO PERO SI  CUAL QUIER  MUJER  SE LO PROPONE  Y NO RENUNCIAN  LO LOGRA  SOLO QUE TIENE QUE ESTAR PREPARADA PARA LO QUE LE TIREN. ESO SI SI LO LOGRAN QUE  TENGAN UN EQUIPO COMPUESTO DE MUJERES ... YO  LAS APOYO A TODA MUJER EN UNA CARRERA MILITAR  QUE TENGA  EL DESEO  PARA DEMOSTRAR QUE SI LO PUEDE HACER QUE NO SE DE POR VENCIDA 

POSDCORB
POSDCORB

Well as a man (and an old one) I have no sense of how  a woman "works"  but my experience suggest that she "quits"  when she thinks shes at the end of a rope.  (it is an experience we have).  A well motivated man does not quit if he still has a pulse.  He can't quit (who can he turn to?) So he goes on. You enemy is also like that (he does not quit until he has no pulse).  Can you "get" this?  Men geneally can.  Women generally cannot.

debussy0
debussy0

@POSDCORB Perhaps, Old Man, you'll quit trying to be glib soon; you failed miserably at critical thinking skills and intellect, not to mention spelling and grammar.  My, you certainly do dislike and disrespect women; is that how you treated your own Mother? Surely, you must have had one at some point, unless she decided to "quit" after birthing your misogynistic butt. I feel sorry for the females who must endure your company. BTW, many women never quit, either. They'd rather die trying, especially where their progeny are concerned. Just so your limited "experience" has a bit more balance....

Albert
Albert

@debussy0

I wonder if he was raised by a woman?  You have a deeply ingrained ideological perspective festering inside you.  Do you even realize how radicalized you are?

SilverStrings
SilverStrings

@Albert

"Do you even realize how radicalized you are?"
Do you??
I'm sure you think you speak for the majority, but you do not. This is not the 1950s, and reality is not (and never has been) like an episode of Leave It To Beaver.

emeraldseatown
emeraldseatown

Unlike computer games, most of combat is spent getting to the fight.  Even today, lots of that movement is on foot, generally carrying a heavy pack.  Sometimes it involves running, again with the heavy pack.  Some units require swimming to get into battle.

After a long an exhausting transit, you might get to shoot someone, or you might get to hang out in a abandoned building or foxhole for a few days, waiting.  After all this, you get the same long walk or swim back to wherever you came from.

If you can't hack the physical fitness, nobody cares how good a shot you are.

Unfortunately, the history of human evolution is working against women, and no legislation can change that.

SilverStrings
SilverStrings

@emeraldseatown Scientifically-speaking, women generally have better endurance than men. Men have more upper body strength on average (but not across the board), but woman have higher pain tolerance & endurance. Possibly due to the way humans evolved to give birth.
If you're going to use evolution, don't misrepresent it.

debussy0
debussy0

First two points are valid -- if the women qualify, they qualify according to existing standards. NO room for "affirmative action" here. But.... your third point reveals your ingrained misogny. Answer this:  Do we as a nation, and an American culture, want our fathers, brothers and sons in the business of sustained, direct, mortal, combat?

    Didn't think so.... Crickets chirping?


hank.terrebrood
hank.terrebrood

@debussy0

I would argue that you are a sweetheart to all of those that went forward in defense of your country.

Keep enjoying freedoms and sleeping under that blanket of protection that others provide you.  The actions of those that went before you also give you the right to show your p*ssy in public.

hank.terrebrood
hank.terrebrood

@debussy0

And, my little chickadee, there was nothing testosterone based, nor boastful, about my statements.

debussy0
debussy0

@hank.terrebrood You just showed how truly ignorant you are!! Honey, my D*ick wouldn't come within 10 feet of your well-worn crotch. But your Mother was Soooo goood!!  LMAO!! 

hank.terrebrood
hank.terrebrood

@debussy0 

Go ahead and lay down now, like our forefathers did before us. *NOT*

Let those that have the will take what is yours, your neighbor's and your family's. The world has already seen a few times where, if it was not for the blood and spine of our forefathers, there wouldn't be a place called the United States of America today.

I wrote that one-way check to the United States Government once which gave them the right to trade my life in the protection of those in the country that could not, nor wanted not, to take part in the protection of the country. As did my father and most of my male relatives.

None of us would have expected our mothers, daughters, nieces, aunts, etc. to drag another male member of the team out of harm's way, pick up a weapon and defend the nation in a fighting unit.

There are your crickets sweetheart.


debussy0
debussy0

@hank.terrebrood @debussy0 First, as*hole, I'm not your "sweetheart"; get the stick out of your butt and get used to it: there are MANY people can do exactly the same grunt job you do or did, do it faster, better, more-accurately and without whiny testosterone-infused rants that reveal your tenuous grasp on manhood and modern social mores. I have no doubt your mother is SOOO proud of having whelped such a bitter, resentful and misogynist son. Do us ALL a favor and belly crawl back into your medieval man-cave and stew there for a while. Women and enlightened men who truly love and respect women will bring you your lease when you need a walk and to show off our trophy. 

hank.terrebrood
hank.terrebrood

@debussy0 Go ahead and lay down now, like our forefathers did before us. *NOT*

Let those that have the will take what is yours, your neighbor's and your family's. The world has already seen a few times where, if it was not for the blood and spine of our forefathers, there wouldn't be a place called the United States of America today.

I wrote that one-way check to the United States Government once which gave them the right to trade my life in the protection of those in the country that could not, nor wanted not, to take part in the protection of the country. As did my father and most of my male relatives.

There is your damned cricket sweetheart.

SilverStrings
SilverStrings

@Albert @debussy0Wow, now you're lying about posts that are still visible above yours. (Where did debussy0 call names before hank called them "sweetheart"?)
Petty name-calling, trolling, MRA talking points & outright bearing false witness.

Real nice.

SilverStrings
SilverStrings

@hank.terrebrood
So what about all the women who have fought & died in defense of their country? While not many have done so in the US due to bans against them, other countries have had female combatants for years. Countries with stricter, harsher, and more tempered militaries than ours, I might add.

Go ahead & pretend that all women are weaker than you. That's standard rhetoric for inadequate, insecure, weak & cowardly men. It's the only way they can feel "manly": to denigrate & tear down others from behind the safety of the internet. I guarantee that if you ever came face-to-face with a female IDF soldier, you'd flee with your tail between your legs rather than repeat what you've said here.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,122 other followers