On military preparedness

Introduction:

There has been some backlash across the internet recently concerning some comments that Rick Santorum made about the use of women in frontline combat units.  His original reasoning was not just an argument of physical prowess, but also one of men’s emotional issues.  His explanation of that is as follows:

“So my concern is being in combat in that situation instead of being focused on the mission, they may be more concerned with protecting someone who may be in a vulnerable position, a woman in a vulnerable position.”

I call bullshit.  He kicked the ball into typical Social Conservative territory, and placed the onus of the argument on men.  There are a number of things I am going to point out here that really define the argument, away from the sound of the sharpening blades of the Feminist PC Police.  It’s time to say what Rick Santorum was too afraid to say, and place the entire argument in full context.  I will break it down the same way you break it down to a new recruit.

Tasks, Conditions, and Standards:

Task: Shape the Red Pill argument for not placing women into front-line combat units.

Conditions:  One PC with an internet connection, half a brain, and a set of virtual balls.

Standards:  To be able to take this argument anywhere, that we can keep some form of military preparedness.

Physical Readiness:

In the U.S. there are two different standards to meet the Physical Requirements to pass any of the Armed Forces PFTs (Physical Fitness Tests). These tests are set up by the sex of the individual. There is one standard for males, and another one for females. For our purposes, we will use the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). The minimum scoring for each event (push-up, sit-up, and run) is 60 to pass. Failure to score at least 60 points in each event counts as a failed APFT. Administrative action can be taken against those that fail the APFT, flagging them against future promotions, or even for military discharge.

Keep in mind the minimum amount of points required to pass each event is 60.

Here are the standards to pass each test for males:

Push Ups

2 Mile Run

And for Females:

Push ups

2 Mile Run

As you can see, the women’s minimum standard for the Run fall off the chart after the age of 31.

The Sit-Ups are the same regardless of sex.

Sit-Ups

These are the minimum standards required in order to pass each event, regardless of your occupation in the military.

There are certain standards that individual units have that may exceed the regulation for purposes of consideration for privilege or promotion in any unit. It is up to the Commander’s discretion as to how to implement an “above regulation” standard for the APFT, and usually it depends on the function of the unit to which one is assigned.

For example:

Fort Bragg, N.C. is the home of the 82nd Airborne and the 18th Airborne Corps. These units are comprised of their own types of units. 18th Airborne is comprised a lot more of MP’s, logistics, intelligence, and some special operations units. 82nd Airborne is comprised a lot more of infantry, artillery, and mechanized infantry.  These Corps units write their own standards that meet or exceed the Department of the Army’s standards for physical fitness. Usually, 18th Airborne will leave the standard as is, and allow the alterations in unit regulation to be made at a brigade level or lower. 82nd Airborne does the same thing for the most part.

Do you think a Commander of a military intelligence unit is going to alter the expectations for passing an APFT?

No. Chances are that commander will not worry about it. These soldiers rarely see frontline combat, and are trained to provide information assets that serve battlefield commanders and logistics commanders at a moment’s notice.

Do you think a Commander of an infantry unit will change the expectations for the soldiers when it comes to passing the APFT?

ABSO-FUCKIN’-LUTELY! This commander knows that the minimum requirement to pass the APFT is not nearly good enough to be an effective frontline combatant. More than likely, he will commit his soldiers to a minimum standard of 75-85 points to score on each event.  Failing to meet those requirements by regulation may not land you in for administrative action, but it sure will affect how you are viewed by your team. It will also affect your likelihood of promotion (scoring on the APFT counts toward promotion points), and those with the highest promotion points get promoted first for the ranks of Sergeant and above. You will likely have fewer privileges, and also be placed on a remedial PT program until you meet or exceed the standards of the unit.

Take this time to compare the minimum men’s standards of 60 points to the minimum infantrymen’s standard of 75-85 points.

Now…compare that infantryman to the minimum female standards.

Do you notice quite a difference? You bet your ass.

Keep in mind that these events are done back to back in the order listed. The energy you have to perform one action is not restored before moving to the next, excepting about 10 minutes in between each event.  If you really want, you can look at the application of the APFT in Chapter14 of the Army Field Manual 21-20 (FM 21-20).

I consider myself a pretty in shape guy. I can still pass an APFT with the same standard as when I got out…and I even switched age categories in the last couple of years. Let’s look at what an average veteran like me can do:

I’ll use my current age category for scoring: 37-41

Push-Ups in 2 minutes: 57 Score: 84

Sit-Ups in 2 minutes: 72 Score: 96

2 Mile Run-Time: 16:30 Score: 75

Total Score on APFT: 255/300

I might still fare well in an infantry unit for my age.

Indeed

Chances are, if I would have entered the military at 18 and gone into an infantry unit, I would now be a Sergeant First Class trying to keep up with the young bucks, with only my will to keep me going…considering the years of abuse to my body.  Ever see a combat infantryman after 20 years on the job? Do you have any idea of the pain these guys have learned to live with every day as their knees, backs, shoulders, and feet break down under the constant stresses of the job?

Now, place your standard female in those positions. Let’s see her carry around not just herself and her gear (about 70lbs or 31Kg worth) for 10-12 miles, but also carry 160-210 lbs. of her fallen comrade – perhaps with his gear – for a few hundred yards.

The Argument against using Feminism against itself:

It has been argued that perhaps we should allow females into frontline combat positions off the misguided notion this will either teach these feminists a lesson or end wars as women come home in body bags.  I find that argument abhorrent for a few reasons and I will outline them below.

While I sympathize with the idea that we should be teaching society better than to go to war for a country that uses and abuses half the population, the fact remains that the circumstances under which many men find themselves makes the Armed Forces a more viable way to stay alive than living on the streets. I have seen assholes turn into fine and responsible men.

Compare the stats. There are more men dying in our prisons and on our inner-city streets than in our wars (U.S.). Many young men turn to the military for both financial and physical survival when the chips are down.  In this case, we are talking about individual choice. I do not condone propagandistic action on a societal level, but pragmatism overcomes idealism when your business tanks, you sell what you have to stay alive, and then realize that the only way you are going to get three hots and a cot is either go to prison or go into the Army.

Where else men are going to get the resources they need?  There are few shelters worth a damn. Those that do exist provide little training or hope for advancement in society. Those that do provide job training are filled with the worst of misandric crap talk and no sense of camaraderie or belonging.

What I am saying is this. The Armed Forces have always been used as social institution for men to be able to make a living. It provides benefits, meals, clothing, and training in a variety of tasks. It provides job security. It provides meaning to many men (even if you don’t agree with the meaning). It also provides the opportunity to look oneself in the mirror.  I should know.  That’s how I found myself re-enlisting after nine years of being in the private sector.

The Armed Forces have provided a means for young men from some really fucked up backgrounds to rise above the level of homelessness or drug dealing and make something of their lives. It has broken cycles of poverty in numerous families, and has allowed men to perform at a standard they did not know they could.  It has provided millions of men with a “second chance” while the rest of society would have fucked them with spiked dildos and no lube. It is not just about going to war, or playing some fucked up game on a politician’s chessboard. To many of the men in the military, it is simply a means to an end – a means you will not find anywhere else in society.

Not all these men are indoctrinated fools. Many of them know that they are simple mercenaries, and are just trying to bide their time long enough to get their foot in the door of the private sector long enough to allow that free training they received to be worth something.  In today’s age of entitlement culture, it also offers these men something that a lot of civilian sector men lack – self-worth and a sense of accomplishment.

I don’t care how much spitting and sputtering anyone does about some idealistic bullshit concerning fighting wars for all the wrong reasons…the truth of what I say about these individual choices weighs more heavily than any anti-war argument.  Within the context of this article, an anti-war sentiment means jack shit.  Wars are not going to end anytime soon.

Now…when we solve the problems of institutionalized misandry in the private sector, free men up for the same opportunities (note: not the same “results”) that all these women have, and see some real progress, then come back to me with some ideologically based argument for men not going off to fight wars. I assure you I will be in perfect agreement.

Until then, if we start placing women in front line battle units because of some fucked up idea of equality…or trying to teach a “lesson” to these ignorant feminists, ideologues are consigning more men to die. It’s twice the damn risk for the same fucked up causes. It makes them no different than the politicians who already do such things over oil or land by using men’s lives to further a political or ideological agenda.

We are NOT disposable. That means protecting our assets. I refuse to go along with a plan that would place thousands in danger for truths we already know to be self-evident.

Onto the REAL psychological effect on men:

There are a few things that commanders have to keep in mind in order to have effective units. Two of the most important are supply and morale. In our argument we will focus on morale.

Take a unit of heavily trained combat soldiers. They have worked together in training for some time, usually 4-6 months before being deployed. They probably have two months of field time, a couple of months of garrison time, and maybe a little leave. These soldiers have learned to depend on each other for almost everything. From toilet paper and digging foxholes to live fire training operations and obstacle courses that require creative thinking and teamwork in order to cross.

Each of them has a role. They know their own strengths and weaknesses. They live, breathe, and sleep in the same close quarters for days and weeks at a time. These guys also realize that they all have to meet a minimum standard set by the unit in order to be part of the group…in order to be trusted, respected, and sometimes even befriended. They have gone through some seriously fucked up shit in training, and they have come through better for it.  They have been trained to be cohesive unit capable of performing maneuvers, taking risks together, and respecting each other.

Let’s place some women into the unit. These women are not expected to conform to the same high physical standards that the men have to conform to. Most of them are placed there “by quota”, and even if they can score well on the women’s version of the APFT, the fact of the matter is that it does not take as much for them to make the same scores.

They are placed there by a system that perpetuates this notion of equality…and forces it into the unit.

How will the commander handle this? Will he make only the men carry the heavy weaponry in the unit, and only use the women as riflemen? Who will carry the extra ammo stores? Will these women be able to carry 70lbs. of equipment and an injured buddy for half a mile? Will you let the women only fill the role of radio carriers, or medics?

Ask yourself how that builds resentment in the unit. All these guys are pulling not just the stuff they have to deal with but the extra that is needed because these women cannot handle it. The unit is allocated a certain number of personnel to perform the necessary task, male or female.  How will they get over the worst part of an obstacle course that was set up to test the endurance of bodily strength in men? How will their “teamwork” change in order to get the women across the course in a training scenario?

Morale will drop. Unit cohesion will suffer. The men will not trust these women to meet or exceed their own physical capabilities, and the women will get pissed because they know this.

Let’s look at it form a slightly different perspective. Have you ever been around an infantry combat unit and seen their speaking tact? Ever see them at rest in the field? Do you have any idea of the things they say or do to each other?  I assure you, I could regale you with all kinds of sick, twisted, and supremely funny things these guys do to each other. It’s our version of play when the veneer of civilization is stripped away. Like it or not, it is also a method to release the day into memory, and it creates a bonding experience with the others.

Let’s place a bunch of women in there. These guys all of a sudden have no outlet. The “male” space they have to bond and work together in their own way is, all of a sudden, disrupted. They have to become cautious and conscious of every little detail, repressing that play, for fear of a cry of sexual harassment.

Believe me, when it comes to shit like that, the military is pretty damned misandric. Try bullshit seminars every quarter of the year to listen to yet another speech by some government funded Women’s Representative telling them what pieces of shit they are. Place that crap into the middle of a combat zone with the fear of reprisal for normal male play. I guarantee you that unit morale and cohesion will plummet.

This is the effect on the psychology of men…without even accounting for that “protective instinct” crap that social conservatives like to bandy about.

More on the Standards of Excellence Quotas:

Within the Armed Forces there are similar quotas in place for women as there are in the policing and fire-fighting fields.  These quotas effectively force a lower standard to be required in order to be recognized by promotion boards, and for awards and merits.

The ultimate price of PC

We have already seen the double standard that exists within the U.S. Army in relation to the APFT, and how it relates to effective combat units.  Other military occupations do not usually require the same level of physical prowess that a combat unit requires, and many of their functions can be performed in relative safety behind the wires of a Forward Operating Base (barring checkpoint incursions and the occasional mortar round).  This is not to say that there are not supply vehicles that are manned by women on mounted .50 caliber machine guns or the occasional M240B machine gun in a turret that do not come under sniper fire or IED attack..  However, all these areas are scanned and patrolled regularly by scouts and infantry.

The Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures of moving through the areas require our soldiers to look for newly dug holes, wires, or even rocks that are out of place.  They come to know the territory like the back of their hand, and become increasingly adept at discovering suspicious behaviors or suspicious areas.  These roads are in essence relatively secure, as compared to the new paths that are forged by our fighting men everyday.  These positions of relative safety come at the cost of a much greater amount of combat deaths to men than to women.

While there are many female soldiers that are capable using the same techniques in a supply convoy trundling along a dusty road, this is not the entirety of the infantry and scout functions.  They actually take the fight to the enemy, and this requires a physical prowess and physical training that most women cannot perform.

Unfortunately, placing women into combat units will not alter the military policies concerning double standards and quotas.  The powers that be in the sexual grievance industry and various “women’s superiority” groups have already infiltrated the military machinations on a very deep level.  They will continue to purport lowering the physical requirements for women, when the fact is that there are many men who cannot meet the standard, even with a biological advantage.  They will also push these women into leadership positions, and further their own agenda at the cost of lives.

Selection for promotion boards works off of quotas.  Let’s say that several positions for the rank of Sergeant open up within a battalion.  The units within may submit 5 personnel files each.  These people represent those with enough promotion points to go to the board.  From these, perhaps 10 are selected.  What they do in order to fulfill the “quota” (though they won’t call it that) as guide-lined by the military’s equal opportunity program is knock of the bottom ranks of the files and fill them with women and minorities who have the requisite promotion points (with women minorities usually given a double whammy), and then proceed with the board.

We have seen successful integration of minority males into combat related military professions, and these men are expected to uphold the exact same standards that every other man is expected to uphold.  No pass there; discounting a couple promotion points (which is what it usually comes down to).  What happens when we do that for women who are not required to meet the same standard?

We suddenly have an influx of substandard leaders in one of the most dangerous professions in the world.  Talk about having a crappy effect on morale, unit readiness, and unit survivability.

Do you want a lowered standard for combat troops when your ass is on the line?  Will elements of the MRM still try to push for this so-called equality?

I say we don’t throw grease on this particular fire in an attempt to put it out. We will have blood on our hands for doing so.

 

Recommended Content

Skip to toolbar