Why are ads for the royal navy, army and air force targeting women?

Scroll to see replies

Women in Israel only make up 3% of the armed forces. All women were recruited after the 1980s when Israel had a peace treaty with Egypt and Jordan.

The article I reference 'the great illusion of women in combat' is from an Israeli military analyst who clearly states Israeli women have no role in real combat and are given special treatment. Most claims are either fabricated or greatly exagerrated similarly to how the role of women in the red army was glorified.

What evidence does your 'military analyst' use to come to his conclusion when there is a 2002-2005 study on the women in the IDF concluding that they are superior in discipline, motivation and marksmanship? If they are superior then how is this not a good thing for the military?

Reply 101

username1539513

Original post by Ali1302

What??? I would love to read that study, you know what I'll search for it myself. I'll be really disappointed if you're wrong.

Wikipedia linked an article that mentioned it but sadly it didn't cite any references. I'm trying to find it too haha

Reply 102

bardnnyc

Original post by Ali1302

I think you're in the wrong forum and No women aren't recruited to relieve mens' sexual urges. I recommend you get psychological help if your serious, if not then sexual harassment isn't something to joke about.

You need a shrink if you believed that story.

Reply 103

AmazingArry

Original post by Ali1302

No, there is the fact that the military has lower standards for women physically, equality is the state of being equal. Therefore women are given special treatment in this regard.

Those standards are for recruitment purposes only; less women would want to enlist if the standards were higher. Most women will be trained to the same standard to the their male counterparts during phase one and through out their military careers.

Reply 104

Ali1302

Yeah I did find it and it's a flawed study unfortunately. Also women only make up 3% of the military and an extremely small percentage of combat units. As with most Israeli sources similar to the ones on international law and human rights this is flawed and false.

Reply 105

username1539513

Original post by Ali1302

Flawed in what sense? Can you link me too it, please?

Also, as far as I know there is an all-female unit in the IDF, are they any less effective than the mixed gender or all male units? If they are not then does your argument here have any basis?

Reply 106

Katty3

Original post by Ali1302

I'm willing to bet my entire life savings that men are more effective on all of these roles except working as a secretary or a nurse.

That is so sexist. Women are perfectly capable of doing those things.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 107

Ali1302

It's actually part of a feminist paper so you can imagine how biased this is but in terms of combat effectiveness women still lag greatly behind men. It's cited in a American military paper. The study doesn't quantify females performance and also just states that one combat unit exhibit superior weapons use. Also the whole motivation thing is irrelevant here.

Source: http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/Issues/Summer_2013/3_Haring_Article.pdf

Reply 108

Ali1302

Original post by Katty3

That is so sexist. Women are perfectly capable of doing those things.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Interms of combat roles women are proven to be less effective. In terms of most other roles that require strength and endurance women also lag behind. Only the top 1% of female soldiers are equal to the average male soldier in combat.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 109

Macy1998

Original post by Ali1302

As I've stated most women avoid any form of combat at all costs and actually join the military for financial reasons. Most of them don't have the strength or endurance to handle most serious roles. I'd assume they are pampered and given special treatment due to these facts.

That isn't far from the truth actually. Women here in the USA have lower standards in physical assessments. I wouldn't say "pampered" but I would say advantages and easier tasks than the men. The average women is weaker than the average man so its no real surprise the most serious roles go to men. That's not sexist.
Women are capable of doing other roles than nurses and secretaries but the most serious psychical roles, probably not.

Reply 110

username1539513

Original post by Ali1302

What it's part of doesn't make any difference as long as the study itself is scientifically valid and sound. I could easily argue the same thing about naysayers in the IDF on the grounds that they are using emotion and religion in their arguments as opposed to sound facts. You still have not answered my previous questions also.

Having read through the study, it is also interesting to note that the Norwegian and Canadian military units are not any less effective or worse than with women in them than if they were not.

How is motivation irrelevant? Motivation is a strong driving force behind everything we do on a daily basis. If you have more motivation you are likely to be more committed to the task at hand and therefore ensure that it is done correctly.

Where is your evidence that combat effectiveness of woman lags behind when the units that have women in are no less effective than the units that do not have women in?

Reply 111

callum_law

They know lads will join if there are loads of fit lasses around.

Reply 112

Ali1302

2009 government study backing the 2002 government study:https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/27406/women_combat_experiences_literature.pdf

The whole motivation and discipline thing is expected of all soldiers, I'll actually be surprised if they weren't motivated or disciplined especially in close combat units.

The IDF study doesn't really prove the combat effectiveness of women, there are a number of western countries that have accepted females in close combat units but most mixed gender units don't perform as well. Also women are more likely to leave the force due to family responsibilities.

Reply 113

username1539513

Original post by Ali1302

Your source, please?

I'll address your governmental study as soon as my PDF reader stops messing about :/

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 114

Ali1302

There is a marine corps study on this, the problem is women make up a very small percentage of the military so it is tough to measure.

Source: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2394531-marine-corps-force-integration-plan-summary.html

Edit: There is also this other study this topic: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a262626.pdf

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 115

username1539513

Original post by Ali1302

Hmm... Maybe I agree with you, as much as it irks me as a woman myself.

Effectiveness and speed are the most important aspects of marines and yes, maybe we should keep it all male seeing as female physiology isn't going to change any time soon. The only way I can see around this is to give the women testosterone or growth hormone injections if they really wanted to be committed enough to their units but I can't see this getting past government tbh, can you?

Thank you for providing me with your sources however, it's nice to debate someone who speaks scientifically as opposed to not

pps: I still can't read PDF's but I agree with you anyway unless I find any other evidence otherwise

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 116

Ali1302

Good to hear, please don't take any of my statements personally I don't mean to offend any women and understand their are a number of roles which they could participate in and are really good at. It's just historically speaking women in general have been involved in far less combat than men. I believe their are reasons for this such as strength and endurance. This is really about why the military feels it has to reach out to women in a clearly male dominated profession that they may not be as physically capable at.

Reply 117

username1539513

Original post by Ali1302

I personally don't think it would be a problem that the military is reaching out to woman as long as the women in question meet the physical standards for the appropriate male age group that they are. That way at least on the physical side of things it's less deadly especially in roles like the marines and the army where a lot of physical strength and endurance is required. It becomes a problem when the standards are lowered and thus the military as a whole suffers.

I don't agree that feminism is entirely to blame for this, if a woman is physically capable enough she should be allowed to serve in these roles just in the same way a man can, but considering people's lives are on the line here (literally) she should be held to the same standard as a man is.

Reply 118

Ali1302

I agree with you here but if men were physically stronger in general than women you could argue all serious combat positions should be held by men and you would rarely have women in these roles. Why are there so many vacancies if the military isn't in decline? I believe that most western militaries are in decline as there has been less funding and less personnel since WWII and no serious wars since the fight over the Falkland islands. It would make sense for the military to target the other 50% of the population to desperately fill its vacancies.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 119

username1539513

Original post by Ali1302

I agree with you here but if men were physically stronger in general than women you could argue all serious combat positions should be held by me and you would rarely have women in these roles. Why are there so many vacancies if the military isn't in decline? I believe that most western militaries are in decline as there has been less funding and less personnel since WWII. It would make sense for the military to target the other 50% of the population to desperately fill its vacancies.

I don't know, actually, I think it is maybe the military is attracting less working class men it once did to serve considering there is no real need to have foot soldiers in most places on earth in this day and age? Most of the stuff that used to be done manually is slowly being replaced by machine power. Soon human physical strength will be unnecessary as technology advances and we could end up with biosuits or power loaders like out of Aliens?

A couple of lads who were in my year in high school went into the army; one finished after a year, one is in the process of leaving to become a truck driver, the only one left is a rifleman, judging by what he says, he doesn't spend much time fighting, just doing charity work for Africans.