A female Navy Seal? not yet.

reply to post by The Old American


sorry but you ain't delt with some of the gals i have.

lol!

there is no need, if they can do it fine!

my sis in law was navy intell, commander, retired now.

stationed in kansas? no where near the ocean.

very high security level.

whatever, what it means is that you guys want a bad vasquez, you might get it or not.

Who would you rather have to assist you if you get shot, cant move and are in the line of fire, while wearing 80 lbs of stuff on? Dollars to donuts says the gal would not be able to get you to safety quickly and without getting shot herself.

Well the real reality is this:

Even if women were allowed to take the test, she would have to finish top in everything, to even be considered. The spots will be filled with men, because that is how it has been done. The military tend to think that if something isn't broken, then don't go trying to fix it.

I can definitively answer why women cant be combat arms or even special ops being a career military leader myself. It because during the physical training the majority of men drop there fat content to extremely low levels 3-4 percent. Now if a women were to do that she would start producing testosterone in dangerous levels and in a scene no longer be able to function as a women and in some test ive seen it can even lead to death.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by armtx

 

How long have women been allowed to participate in sports? How long have been been allowed to participate in sports? How much is the athletic industry focused on women, and how long on men? Which sex is geared from birth to participate in sports?
Fact is, from the moment a woman is born, she is already at a disadvantage in the athletic field. Men have already had thousands of years of training and encouragement and science, while women have only had a few decades. Who gets the most funding?

If you took a new breed of horse and raced them against a thorobred, of course the thorobred will win, they have been bred for centuries to be runners.

Now that women sports are getting more attention in sports, the gap will lessen. Since female runners are now allowed to compete, the race times for female runners has been steadily increasing. And in a few decades will catch up to men.

I have experienced this kind of athletic discrimination myself. We had a fundraising in highschool for new weight room equipment. The women's class raised twice as much money as the mens class and requested a piece of leg machinery. All the money went to equipment for the football team.

So when all things are created equal, and it will be a long time before they are, you will see the fitness gap close.

You sound to me like you have a problem with men!
And this thread was your way of getting a heated debate going on..

reply to post by gallopinghordes


Drive and desire to excel? this isn't a holiday camp. How about drive and desire to kill without remorse. even at close range? and to keep on doing it until everyone is dead.

I really don't see why women would want that, when they are designed to create life. Taking it, just destroys the soul.

Women are only weak because we, as a society, allow them to become weak. In gym class they are allowed to do push-ups where their knees are on the ground (seriously what's the point?), less pull ups, sit-ups, squats ect are expected not because of a womans general fitness but just because she is a woman. We tell them all the time that men are just stronger and there is no reason for them to even try to compete because they'll just lose. You tell someone they can't do something all their life it's only natural they'll start to believe it.

So with that mindset is it any wonder why women in the west are profoundly weaker than women from other parts of the globe that aren't treated like they'll melt in heavy rain.

I know women produce less testosterone than men and take longer to build strength and power but that doesn't mean it can't be done. If women are encouraged to push themselves as hard as men expect them to then they can match, and sometimes beat, their male counterparts.

Women aren't being placed in the roles of combatants not because they're weak or silly (cause they aren't). They're withheld because of their effect on men. psychologically, men will behave differently around women. If a woman takes a round right in front of a man, that man will try to help the woman placing himself in danger. If it was a man he would probably not put himself in the same danger. Personally, I love women. I can't get enough of em. but I would rather they not go off and get shot up somewhere for no reason. If a woman wants to run off and jump in front of bullets or take a mortar or catch rockets.... too bad. Your death wish will not be granted... not because your a frail little flower to be protected but because we men are hard wired to do that (Protect the women).

I want to summarize that for you to make it clear: Women are not in the primary combat groups because the men will behave differently.
I would also like to say how awesome an all girl spec ops unit would be. Would make a cool movie too. like, if it was a group of lesbian ninja's who go around assassinating bad guys in tight black leather... and there's a shower scene... oh man. If there are any Hollywood producers reading... I could whip up a script for you... Highest grossing movie evar.

As a man. I say that if women are able to pass the test, not a modified test but the same test a male SEALS then yes they should be allowed to serve. If they make a detremental mistake that would warant expolsion then they should be expelled just like a male. The ground should be entirely equal. Of course I have my doubts about women passing but I am sure their are some that would even if it is only a small marginal number. That is not sexism it is realism.

However if women being part of SF would be detremental to the mens performance(i.e. distractions ect) and it is proven that it is detremental then they shouldn't be allowed to serve. As harsh as it sounds, these are SF and they have to perform to the best of their capabilities in high pressure situations. If you claim that by me stating that, I am sexist then you are doing what you condemn us men for: using sex as an excuse. This is realism, it is clear that men would/will/do make up the majority of the military and SF, therefor they should be the most priorotised, however if women can achieve the same as men and do not have any detremental affects to the behaviour of men in SF and their capabilities then yes they should serve.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Now that women sports are getting more attention in sports, the gap will lessen. Since female runners are now allowed to compete, the race times for female runners has been steadily increasing. And in a few decades will catch up to men.

Surely you cannot be serious ?!

You can't seriously believe that there aren't large genetic factors which make the average man quicker and stronger than the average woman ?

What you are saying is utter tripe. Women have been competing in athletics for decades, and while the top athletes very gradually run quicker over the years, so do the top male athletes !

Both men and women have reached a general plateau in athletics, and all the women's world records between 100 metres to 1500m were set about 20 years ago or more

Women will never be remotely close to the athletic ability of men, and there is a huge gap ( considering the distances involved ) between men and women. Over a distance as short as the 100 metres, the top men are nearly one whole second quicker than the top women !


I don't see a problem with women being in the special forces, as long as they pass all the tests that the men are put through. The bar shouldn't be lowered to dumb down and accommodate those who aren't physically capable.
In reality, I doubt that you would get any women who would be able to pass all of the physical tests.

reply to post by Seektruthalways1


Little boys like to play with dolls too. It makes them better fathers. Maybe you should of played with more dolls or you wouldn't have such a gender barrier in your mind.

I played with dolls, and I played with guns, and bikes.I started weightlifting in high school. I can assure you that there was more then one female who could bench their own weight.

So maybe you should encourage the famales in your family to participate in sports, instead of squashing them with an easy back oven.

reply to post by ototheb85


I have no problem with men. I love them.
I do have a problem with a sect of society who believes boys should be boys and girls should be girls.

An interesting point my partner made who was SBS is that he would fully accept females into the squadron.

However, his issue was that when TSHTF, many of the men would tend to focus more on protecting their female team members than getting the job done.

He believes that there's something primal in it and that it would be easier for him to let a male colleague get on with it under fire, where he believes that he would seek to protect the female.

He doesnt doubt womens' ability - far from it - but he believes that women should be in the special forces. However, he doesnt believe that squadrons should be mixed sex.

reply to post by dbates


97% of men can't participate in the NFL either.

Only a select few who have been training their whole lives can. Even then after their careers, they suffer the rest of their lives in pain and with mental issues as a consequence.
So no use bringing up a sport that no one, nor should anyone play.


Now if you want to talk about jockeys. We can get a different debate going.

reply to post by nixie_nox


Jockeys... You mean those midgets that ride horses right? Surely you are joking....

Lol.
If women think they're so tough, let them serve and withdraw all male troops.

reply to post by ChaseHall


In 1991 my fat percentage "measured" at my waist was 13% when i enlisted. When i had completed my fist 14 days hell week as a combat diver, my fat percentage had only sunk to 10% measured at my waist.
Navy seals/combat divers do get weekends of very often. They don't do 25 weeks non stop.

When i did my time as a combat diver recruit in 1991 we started with a 14 days hell week, Then 7 weeks with different transportation and specialisation methods. Then a new 14 days hell week where we had to master everything we had learned so far. Then it was on to the physical part where we were put to our ropes when it comes to strength and endurance, this lasted for 21 days. Then specialised deployment with drager re-breathers and combat swimming "6 weeks" ,and after that a 14 days para course. Then it was out into the field again doing progressive hikes with different items and back pack configurations. This ended with a 50km hike with a time limit and a minimum of 45 kg back pack, one back pack was 70 kg. This one was rotated between every one.

People who are very thin initially don't loos as much fat as individuals who have a lot of body fat initially.

The worst thing about selections are injuries, dehydration and infections. Injuries, cuts and Brucie's don't heal when your body is under enormous stress. They only get worse. If you get dehydrated you will be in a world of pain and might have to leave, because these people often lose consciousness.
People who get achilles injuries usually dont make it, because they usually can't keep up on the long marches with a 45kg to 70kg back pack.

I have never heard that a recruit has died do to loos of body fat. But many do lay down their helmet do to the pain of losing body fat, because its a painful experiance.

I have to add that just about everyone who is taking part in selection are within the risk of getting serious injuries, and that is why some of the tasks have to be done under medical supervision.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Women have a higher pain tolerance then men. Have to in order to endure childbirth. I have seen men pass out from pain, I have never seen a woman do it.

Sorry, but that's just made up non-sense. Try having a kidney stone (or better yet 3 at once in the same kidney) and tell me how much more that hurts then childbirth. Stones run in my family and the women can testify that having a kid doesnt come close to being as bad. Also pain tolerance is completely based on the individual.


But back on topic, I think if the woman has what it takes to be top of the seals class then more power to her, but odds are extremely against it (even for men its not likely). I've seen some really tough big girls, but unless they can take steroids or something and not get in trouble for it I dont think they'll make the cut. Dont take that as sexist because ive had 3 friends try out for the seals and I while I wished them luck I laughed in their face, sure they were in "good" shape but we're talking about competing with the BEST of the BEST in the WORLD, for which you need to be a remarkable physical and mental specimen.


I dont know why you care so much anyway, seals are the best but it cant be fun at all, sure you get all the fancy new guns and equipment, but swimming in ice water all the time going on practical suicide missions and all that crap isnt for me, id rather fly a jet or somethin.

reply to post by Vanishr


Okay, if they were going into the SEALS, and they were captured, they would know full well what they were getting into the moment they signed those papers.

Just because they're going to 'most likely get raped' is not an excuse. They get raped by the men they serve next to too you know.

And dammit, if a woman can be a SEAL, let her, but only until she understands FULLY the consequences and possibilities of serving in such a position will get her in.

Originally posted by Redwookieaz
Seriously I am amazed at the attitudes of some of the guys here. You guys really believe that guys are better than women? I can't believe in this day and age that sexism is still so rampant.

I know that most men are stronger physically than most women, I'm not delusional, but if a woman can pass the same tests and meet the same requirements then why should they not be able to serve?

Btw, I have a friend who is a professional kickboxer. Some guy kept mouthing off to her about how he could beat her ass becuase she's a girl. Guess what, she gave him the beat down of a lifetime. It was hillarious.

You guys are seriously underestimating women.

edit on 2-6-2011 by Redwookieaz because: Grammar oops.

This has nothing to do with sexism, woman do not have the capablity to handle the stress, mentally and physically to be in the Navy Seals. Their training is rigorous, hell most of the men quit before they finish training. My husband got offered to be in the Navy Seals, declined and went for Bomb Squad, which is mentally draining, and no very few women are actually in the bomb squad too! Ask any Navy Seal if they want a woman on their team and they would said Hell No in an instant! Most of those men are married and they like woman they just know women cannot handle it period! Get over it!