Thread: Fighting Females.

Originally Posted by BBC

Only did 25yrs ARA service between SPR to MAJ...probably not really long enough to be able to form a credible view on this topic.....

Females in the front line? In the type of asymmetric wars we have been enaged in...please point me in the direction of the 'front line'.

I am welcoming of females...in fact...anyone that can be professional and do the job. The problems that are all being pointed out will disappear if people have the right attitude. If a person is fit and capable of doing the job, why discriminate based on gender?

yes asymmetric wars have blurred even elimininated the front line so we could say that all serving women are on the front line, so why extend there role? do we want to introduce anything into armoured and infantry regiments that could affect there efectiveness ?

it is good to get some input from someone with a military background on this subject.
( me 24 years british army currently enlisting into adf)

I have not read down so I don’t know what else has been said on the topic,
But,. I have spoken to the top brass, and some WOs on the topic, and media,. Because we have some exceptional females, that in many ways are fitter, better at their jobs, better shots, and a Dam sight better looking then any grunts I know.. So I have often asked why are they not on point.. I get the same answer from everyone, the Australian public is not ready to have a daughter come home in a body bag,.. Maybe that will change in time,..
The point is a grey now people dont know where the front or the back is.. But the sentiment is very clear...

Originally Posted by peewee

yes asymmetric wars have blurred even elimininated the front line so we could say that all serving women are on the front line, so why extend there role? do we want to introduce anything into armoured and infantry regiments that could affect there efectiveness ?

it is good to get some input from someone with a military background on this subject.
( me 24 years british army currently enlisting into adf)

Or.....make them more effective?

Originally Posted by Jamo

The problem usually being, my dear Scallops, is that these few men (and it only takes a few) usually won't accept that they have a problem.

'Tis an unfortunate fact of life that God gave men two heads, but only enough blood to fill one at a time!

If the system were prepared to remove those individuals that lack professional judgement, then it will work very well. But I fear that it won't remove them as retention is a big issue. MAybe I'm wrong, though, There are some very good commanders out there these days.

Even so, there should be no problems with afv crews etc (particularly as armour tend to be far more mature than other arms)

Jamo, retention IS at the heart of this issue, hence why they are opening the doors to a larger recruitment possibility. The ADF does not tend to be the first career choice amongst many of today's 'yoof'.

Been recently involved in an academic study with a Professor from Victoria Uni who is being partially funded by the ADF to look at the operational experiences of ADF individuals. An arising part of the study is looking at the base from which ADF members have been drawn from.

It is becoming apparent to the Professor that there is a significant part of the largely White Anglo Saxon base that comprises the ADF is drawn from the bush....city people have more employment options?

I come from a small NSW bush town of less than 3,000 people. In the three years that I spent at Tarin Kowt, Uruzgan Province, Afghanistan between Jan 2006-Nov 2008 I met 5 lads from my hometown serving there....Oh...and I forgot.....the Australian Ambassador to Afghanistan was also a class below me at school. Indicative of how narrow the ADF recruitment base is?

Mind you, the demographic is changing markedly, as per PeeWee here, the number of Brits discharging the UK military to migrate and serve in the ADF (and very welcome they are!) is becoming significant.

If retention and recruitment is such an issue, and selection and management can be properly effected, why be so limiting? Wake up Australia, and open your mind.

Originally Posted by Jamo

The problem usually being, my dear Scallops, is that these few men (and it only takes a few) usually won't accept that they have a problem.

'Tis an unfortunate fact of life that God gave men two heads, but only enough blood to fill one at a time!

If the system were prepared to remove those individuals that lack professional judgement, then it will work very well. But I fear that it won't remove them as retention is a big issue. MAybe I'm wrong, though, There are some very good commanders out there these days.

Even so, there should be no problems with afv crews etc (particularly as armour tend to be far more mature than other arms)

The problem with this argument, my dear Jamo (), is that it suggests we continue to allow one group to be penalised for the lack of judgment of another. Whilst I agree that some men will resist such change, I don't think we should hide from moving this issue forward because of them.

If we can train men to be cool, calculating killing machines - we can train them to accept and fight alongside women - as I said originally - it's all been done before. It's a very simple concept really - let me spell it out - tasks in all fields of human endevour should be, indeed, must be, ability based rather than gender based.

PS - 'Tis an unfortunate fact of life that God gave men two heads, but only enough blood to fill one at a time!

Again, I disagree!

Actually, Scallops, It suggests nothing of the sort. At no stage did I say that females should not be placed in the F echelon. It simply indicates a problem area.

As BBC said, retention is the big issue (and has been for many many years). For the sytem to work, it will simply need very effective and strong commanders who are prepared to weed out those few from both genders who make it through the seletion process but start to cause 'problems' once in. It will also require the system to be TOTALLY unbiased.

We are a very small population and, as such, must look at all ways to maintain our defense.

Originally Posted by Jamo

Actually, Scallops, It suggests nothing of the sort. At no stage did I say that females should not be placed in the F echelon. It simply indicates a problem area.

As BBC said, retention is the big issue (and has been for many many years). For the sytem to work, it will simply need very effective and strong commanders who are prepared to weed out those few from both genders who make it through the seletion process but start to cause 'problems' once in. It will also require the system to be TOTALLY unbiased.

We are a very small population and, as such, must look at all ways to maintain our defense.

Well Jamo - if you're saying that although the attitude of some men might cause issues, but woman should be allowed, if capable, to undertake similar tasks anyway, then we agree.

But to make a point about certain male attitudes causing problems, which is a point you made, does sound like an argument against allowing it to happen. Hence my answer that we would then be allowing one group to be penalised for the lack of judgment of another.

Frankly - if some men can't deal with capable women serving on the Fl next to them - that's their problem - it shouldn't prevent it happening.

Whilst I understand this entire issue is born from retention rates, there is this more fundamental and important issue at stake here - and that is, roles should be determined by nothing other than ability - gender is irrelevant.

Two good points here

Originally Posted by GS-ADI

the Australian public is not ready to have a daughter come home in a body bag,..

or maybe Australian politicians are not prepared to incur the wrath that would ensue ?

and

Originally Posted by Scallops

The problem with this argument, my dear Jamo (), is that it suggests we continue to allow one group to be penalised for the lack of judgment of another.

Our whole society is run on this principle. From firearm laws to buying grog in Alice Springs. Why is this issue different ?

Deano