INFANTRYWOMEN

Why shouldn't women be allowed to serve as infantrymen?

The US govt holds women to the same tough performance standards that are applied to men. So if you think that a weaker "man" should get the job when a stronger woman is available, frankly, you don't give a shit about national security.

For Army Infantry’s 1st Women, Heavy Packs and the Weight of History nyti.ms/2r40o5P

>inb4 LEAF
How original
>inb4 muh Esprit de corps
US soldiers are mature, professional and not sexist
>Inb4 OP can't inb4

Prove me wrong, shitlords.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=w846UcmIo5o
npr.org/2015/09/10/439246978/marine-corps-release-results-of-study-on-women-in-combat-units
military.com/daily-news/2016/01/08/opening-combat-jobs-women-mean-lower-standards-marine-general.html
popularmilitary.com/nearly-half-females-failed-graduate-army-infantry-training-standards-also-lowered/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>Why shouldn't women be allowed to serve as infantrymen?
Because despite the stereotypes, lots of guys in the army are beta cucks and would endanger the lives of others and not follow protocol to protect womyn soldiers.

Because they are called infantry man you idiot

>US govt holds women to the same tough performance standards that are applied to men
They literally don't though.

Why don't you ask the handful of women in Canadian infantry regiments? No reserves, but reg force.

If you can find one that lasted longer than 5 years without being medically retired, I'll be impressed.

This woman can outrun and outlift 98% of you twerps. How dare you claim that soldiering is a "man's job" when you fat losers can't even do a single pull up. This women is providing the blanket of secure that you sleep under every night. Be prepare to kiss her feet and thank her for her strength and courage.

Put a bunch of men and women in isolated close quarters and wait for biology to kick in.

Also men are more likely to sacrifice the mission to save women.

You can't do anything about hardwiring.

>They literally don't though.

They literally do. Lrn2read.

>Still smarting over accusations that it had lowered standards to help the first women graduate from its elite Ranger School in 2015, the Army has taken pains to avoid making any exceptions for infantry boot camp. To the pound, men and women lug the same rucksacks, throw the same grenades and shoulder the same machine guns.

Women are weaker
Women are less resilient against physical and psychological stresses
Women belong at home raising men's children while we fight the wars because we are actually built and designed for that
Quit being a fucking cuck, OP

Because they are Weak end of story. I'm 6-4 and weigh 250lbs w/o any gear, so when you slap gear on me I'm over 300lbs no fucking way in hell is some cunt going to pull me to safety

you've tried too hard leafcuck your low t is showing

the only thing she could do is outrun a lot of the men on here, a non manlet who has sat on his ass for years could still beat her up and force fuck her if it came down to it

cool typos shill / foreign piece of shit

>Women are weaker

Not ALL women. The army needs the strongest candidates available. Most will be male, but many will be female who are stronger than 1pl8 twerps like you who like to play armchair commando.

This retarded leaf doesn't know what affirmative action is.

The weaker man shouldn't have the job either.

The weaker man can't also get pregnant and decide to terminate military service.

Weaker men can endure longer periods of physical abuse and do not require the same level of needs ad a female.

The weaker man can be prepared for the rigors of war much more quickly and with fewer resources.

The weaker man will receive peer pressure to operate at higher levels, while the female will receive adulation just for giving it her best.

I don't really care if women are in combat roles, but the narrative that gets pushed is bullshit.

Ok I'll extend some variety of woman / faggot to this leaf's possible existences

youtube.com/watch?v=w846UcmIo5o

This is a normal load for a day patrol. If you're out on foot for multiple days & nights you're going to be carrying a lot more.

Sometimes you're carrying so much you can't even stand up on your own and you need other guys to help you to your feet.

Ranger school is not batt there standards are appropriate for a "female" infantry soldier also muh sand in my vergina and what not

You're a fuckin nigger. They have a much easier PFT. That Ranger class was a total shit show where the ladies were clearly held to a lower standard and basic training is easy as shit. Heaviest load you carry in basic is like 50 lbs for a few miles. Heaviest load I ever carried in combat was 170lbs for 25 miles. Those girls are in for a rude awakening if they ever get deployed to the real shit.

Women should be allowed in if held to the exact same standards. The problem is the standards are lowered everywhere so that they can put their female numbers up and look good on stats for the public. Anyone who's ever been through as much as basic will tell you how much the girls bitch about everything

Lowers morale

Guys bitch about everything too. Difference is they're capable of doing everything and just don't want to.

They now hold women to the same standard of men. That Ranger debacle was a learning experience. And those ranger women resented the lowered standards. It's patronizing as hell. Now women are treated - and tested - as true equals, which is just as it should be. I'm proud of these women and hope that they can kill some towelheads soon.

women cant handle hardship like men do and men get rapey when isolated from civilization so it is a stupid idea to recruit women as soldier for a professional army, unless there is shortage of men joining the army. In conscription armies or militia though, it is a good idea, conscripts mostly do free labor and used as bullet catchers anyway and there are a lot of useless women who are not conributing to society that can fill the position.

Yeah nah the APFT varies by gender and age bud.

This.
If you want your infantry to dissolve, add women.

There might be a few women who are really good soldiers but overall it seems the costs do not justify the benefits. The military is not a progressive institution with the goal of equality, frienship, or justice. There's no right to be a soldier either. The military is a necessary evil that is supposed to do a job and work together towards strategic goals. It's not about the individual feeling happy or accepted, it's not about achieving your dreams, it's about getting the job done.

With the woman the uniformity of the team is broken, the leadship might get undermined, morale might suffer, and so on. Like first at camps you have to introduce toilets and showers for women now, or time share your infrastructure. If you don't you'll get other problems like sexual harassment, which also undermines morale. And we're talking about an ideal scenario where everything runs as smooth as it can without any fighting and enough to go around for everybody.

Generally in combat women I suppose will be a burden that will be more expensive to train while performing worse on average. It makes already complex problems even complex just in order to satisfy some chicks feminism goals, which should question their ability to be teamplayer. Again, maybe there some very capable women but it's not worth the effort on a large scale in terms of direct action.

If they hold female recruits to the same standard as men the passing percentage will be in the single digits. There is no political way the screeching fems will allow 95% of women trying to get in the army being sent home as failures. The 5% that pass are just a logistical burden that can't be justified because even though the pass they barely pass and should expect to be treated as the lowest performing males that also barely scrape by. That means no fast promotions and no good duty assignments. The extra money spent on female creature comforts means they are even more inefficient on a cost vs benefit angle.

Right that my fucking point...no way in fucking hell is some vag going to drag me to safety.....Its not happening. Not even some roided out crossfit bitch

not if you create women only squads/camps, they might be shit fighters, still they can do the task of getting trapped in a fortification and take fire. being a bullet catcher is primary low infantry work, i think they cant do worse than primary school educated males on that one.

Because they're infantrywomen

>roided out crossfit bitch
There was a chick like that on my Infantry Qualification. Very fit, very heavily built, probably trained for years to get there. Looked like some kinda viking warrior woman.

She got recycled on week 7 due to a lower body injury. Don't know what happened to her after that. The only other female infantyman (ahem, "infanteer") I met survived for 6 years before getting medically retired due to lower body injury.

I give them mad props for wanting to serve their country and having the guts to do so in a combat role, but has the rights of it in that the costs do not justify the benefits. Every female infantryman you train is just another empty slot you have to fill a few years later, and a medical pension you have to pay for the rest of their lives. It's money spent that does not increase the combat effectiveness of the military.

Should've mentioned I served in the Canadian army, not the American army.

They underperform as soldiers, require special treatment, tend to get pregnant, cause dissent, captured they would be a nightmare for morale and men are more disposable in society. There is no reason they could not work in logistics or support but frontlines is foolish.

I also bet that 50%+ of female infantrymen would suddenly wind up pregnant and pulled off the line if a real WW3 scenario came into play which will be catastrophic.

because its cheaper to train men that will be more effective than womyn in combat

If a woman soldiers gets caught in the middle east she will be raped repeatedly and the videos will be uploaded to the internet.
Then you'll have multi-million people marches to bring "our brave girl home".
Hundreds of lives of men will be spent trying to rescue her under unfavorable odds because she is a woman.

...

Could you punish them for getting pregnant like soldiers are punished for harming themselves?

npr.org/2015/09/10/439246978/marine-corps-release-results-of-study-on-women-in-combat-units

>lower body injury

When the Marine Corps did their co-ed CAX a few years back to test the viability of women in Combat Arms, they found all the women who were in the mixed infantry unit broke. As in, they all suffered pelvis fractures. Men and women are built differently. And while I've served with women in combat, and they performed as they should, there is a difference between finding ones self in combat, and marching into combat. Their bodies just can't handle the load. So unless we start giving prepubescent girls iron and calcium supplements and have them hit the heavy weights during puberty to build up their bone density, they will always have that issue.

Doubtful. Our Armed forces have taken huge steps toward becoming family friendly because it helps retention. Pretty sure you can get in trouble for getting pregnant overseas because there's a no fraternization policy.

>If a woman soldiers gets caught in the middle east she will be raped repeatedly and the videos will be uploaded to the internet.

Some leftist groups may actually be counting on that. Groups like Antifa and BAMN have policies where they use small women as shock troops to initiate violence, in the hopes they get injured. They know that nothing will give them more political power than an injured woman.

The leaders of anti-war movements aren't stupid. They know this is precisely what would happen. In fact it already did happen. A pretty woman as a victim is precisely what they want.

I think this might backfire in the long run, all it acomplishes is to make liberal women appear unstable and fuel anti-feminist sentiments.

They actually did a study on this on Parris Island when they were determining the feasibility of making women do pullups like the men (3 minimum). They determined Parris Island didn't even have enough room to house all of the recycles and grad holds because most females wouldn't even graduate boot camp, which is designed to be passed. Idk why women are arguing they should be muh stronk soljur gurls. If they don't get back in the kitchen all these Mohammeds we are importing are going to put them back there anyway, but this time with a hijab.

I would love to believe that but the reality is that almost every single man wantttt some fucccc and its terrified of publicly disagreeing with women.

Well, they wouldn't publicly admit they want captured/killed women. They'd publicly demand equality, knowing that such women would be inevitable. When the victims start stacking up they'd just blame America for wars and not their stupid policies of pushing for female combat arms.

>fuel anti-feminist sentiments
I think the best way to get feminists to wake up to the reality of women in combat would be to force all women to sign up for selective service. They've never had to face the possibility of being drafted into a combat unit before.

A pregnant woman on the battlefield is less likely to jump on a grenade to save others, or take one for the team

>or take one for the team
if she got pregnant on the battlefield she already did.

They really need to implement a requirement all females get the birth control arm implant for their first enlistment to discourage abuse of the system. Between the light duty and limited work hours during pregnancy, maternity leave and subsequent recovery time, a woman can join the US military, pop put two kids, and then go to college on the GI Bill despite spending the vast majority of her enlistment absent from work or on half days. I saw many females abuse this, and the dumb cunts had the gall to complain and make excuses when the command would try to squeeze in their required annual training like the rifle range or a course into the few weeks of the year they were actually fully duty. I met a few good ones but the majority were completely useless. Feminine nature is not compatible with a military force. It's being forced on us to make us weak.

The same tough standards? Look up the pt standards, you idiot.

>They now hold women to the same standard of men

No they don't. The OPAT you take for initial entry is gender neutral but the APFT you take when you actually get to your unit is still separated male and female and by age group.

Because women are nuts and just as likely to fall in love with the enemy as kill them. Have you ever seen a message board with a negative comment about Justin Bieber? They lose their grasp of reality during middle school

I'm going to be building a M4gery soon.

This pic makes me unable to decide whether to do an acog or a comp m4

>Why shouldn't women be allowed to serve as infantrymen?

Greater logistics requirements than men
Lack the innate instincts for war that men have
Do not have bodies designed for war and subsequently suffer more injuries during routine operations
Their presence triggers natural male protective instincts which fuck with male war-time decision-making

They can't lift as much, walk as far, shoot as accurately, or make snap decisions.

You only send women to fight when you've run out of men.

They will never, ever, get deployed into a genuinely dangerous combat situation:

1. Political suicide for those involved if the women die.
2. Even ignoring that, 80% of the women will suddenly get pregnant and "whoops lol i guess i can't go :)"

women r too weak. stick to intelligence jobs we need more sexy spies

Anyone who has ever left their basement knows that men always act completely different when women are around. So obviously you wouldnt understand.

women have been allowed to fight on the front for years, they just make shitty soldiers. When they are pushed forward by the political correct, it results in casualties and failed objectives

The only military force which hold female recruits to the EXACT same standards as the males is the British Royal Marines which go as far as having males and Females bunking in the same building.

The hold to their standards so much that since the female trials begun last year only two females have applied and both failed to pass the PRMC so they didn't even meet the standards required to begin training.

>Why shouldn't women be allowed to serve as infantrymen?

1. The very vast majority of women are physically weaker and less athletically capable than men. Especially in terms of upper body strength, which is essential to infantry work. Before you try to dispute this, please keep in mind that the Olympics are separated by gender, and the female gold medalists often perform remarkably worse than their male counterparts.

2. Gender integrating infantry and combat arms positions has already been given trial runs in the Marine Corps and the Army. Something to the tune of 3 in 15 women managed to pass the Marine Corps School of Infantry with lowered physical standards. For reference 20% is the kind of pass rate that is common for Special Operations programs like Navy SEAL training or Army Special Forces. Opening combat arms up to women and lowering the physical standard to achieve a pass rate of about 20% is a waste of time, money, and resources that will only lower the combat effectiveness of any given unit.

3. Integrated combat units are a hinderance to what the military calls "good order and discipline". As much money as the military would waste attempting to train soldiers to treat female infantrymen the same as their male counterparts, that simply wouldn't happen. Women will be treated differently due to their sex, and that special treatment, whether benevolent or malevolent, detracts from unit cohesion and distracts from their primary purpose.

>why shouldn't women serve in the infantry


lol go ahead

>>They literally do. Lrn2read.

Bro I was actually in the American military and know for a fact that women have a separate set of physical standards that is much lower than that of men's. Like shockingly lower. So much lower that even some of the women complain about how low it is.

>you don't give a shit about national security
...and neither do you.

Since when has Western military given two shits about his/her own nation? Currently, we finance, fight and die in wars for all interests but our own

vulnerable to injury compared to men
physically and mentally weaker
enjoy being raped 24/7 by all guards when captured
women invoke protective instinct from men which cause them to risk mission success/their life to rescue them

Because men act differently when there are women around. It's the same reason i don't think gay people should be too open about it in combat roles. Also women make worse leaders, so it'd be hard to stop them from being promoted if they are already in infantry roles. All in all it would put every soldier in greater danger and serve nothing but womens fee fees

women can't be infantrymen unless they get a sex change you idiot

>Canadian flag
>US Policy
TRASH

>Not ALL women

Less than 1% of women in the service are up to the challenge. Such a small number of the relative population would be cost ineffective to train unless we did like the Brits and didn't make gender separated facilities for them, but we would because that's how the US military does things.

You're talking too much sense for any feminist to understand you.

>Still smarting over accusations that it had lowered standards to help the first women graduate from its elite Ranger School in 2015, the Army has taken pains to avoid making any exceptions for infantry boot camp. To the pound, men and women lug the same rucksacks, throw the same grenades and shoulder the same machine guns.

Even if it were true that the women who went through Ranger School were held to the exact same physical standard as the men (it isn't, and /k/ can back this up), out of the 19 women that classed up, only 2 managed to pass. That's a 10.5% pass rate. Unfucking satisfactory and not worth the ridiculous amount of money it took to put them all through special workup programs so that they had a chance and the money and man hours wasted taking them out of jobs that they could have been more productive in, and feeding/equipping them for training that almost all of them failed.

First off, women are not held to the same physical standards in the military. There is a whole set of standards, and those scale from harder to easier with age, but they scale even more dramatically to the easier for dickless soldiers versus the male variety.

Second off, women don't belong in the military at all, let alone in a combat role. I served, and while we were out counting ARFABs and shit, the females were sitting on their ass in the air conditioning with the NCOs. They either get pregnant (and later murder the child) just before deployments, or they magically get an injury during the last airborne operation before deployment. So they can stay home and keep sucking the government tit for no real service. It's just a welfare program for them but where they have to put on a uniform to collect, and in return they are paid in dollars instead of food stamps.

Third off, women are cowards. There is no social stigma against it, and they are cowards. Not all of them, granted, but enough. You cannot count on them when shit gets real. Be in Afghanistan at a base. Raghead blows his minivan up outside the gate. The female soldier nearest the action literally shit her pants and abandoned her post, fled deeper into her base while the male soldier posted there with her stayed in place. She was given a day off and no punishment.

Females in combat roles is literally going to cost people their lives. When you have a squad of 8 people on patrol and 2 are female, you have 6 people you can count on when shit hits the fan. If you needed all 8, kiss your ass goodbye while the females run without shame for safety.

Men don't have blood seeping from their genitalia that require it to be stuffed with a pad.

I've seen poolee functions with females that wanna be combat arms, up to and including infantry. But they're the last ones in the shuttle runs, the ones that do the least amount of pullups/pushups, the ones that are the first to give up and complain. They are a total disgrace. I wouldn't put them in even in the Marines. Really disappointed in the lack of effort.

>military.com/daily-news/2016/01/08/opening-combat-jobs-women-mean-lower-standards-marine-general.html

Before this whole "women in combat arms" thing, didn't they attempt to see how capable females were by making them actually do pullups instead of the just flexed-arm hang? Couldn't even veteran female Marines who were in decent shape not even manage 3 pull ups?

>"The US govt holds women to the same tough performance standards that are applied to men"
How about no.
>mfw 11B with three deployments being lectured by a fucking leaf

As per 2017, all female Marines are required ONE whole pullup for their PFT to pass. One... not to mention virtually all of them who do manage a single pullup actually do a chinup which is arguably useless. But yes, they did away the flexed-arm hang. The standards got higher and thank god.

>the same tough performance standards
dropped

> all female Marines are required ONE whole pullup for their PFT to pass.

And male Marines have to do at least like 8 right? And anybody who just does the minimum is unsat, has no chance of promotion and will be given shit by literally everyone in their unit right?

plus testosterone is like going crazy when you are with 20 other battle buddies for hella long without seeing women. it's why barracks rats are a thing. any pussy walking through those barracks doors is getting fucked by the whole platoon.

I remember the barracks rats. We never had them in my POG barracks, but it was known that the Fayetteville lardasses could come into 82nd Airborne barracks and ride a fit soldier mostly at will. Horny ass 19 year old will fuck mud, and some leftist retard wants to cohabitate him with trim? Battlefield pregnancy will be a thing. And maybe a little blue on blue when the male doesn't want to deal with the repercussions.

> I like to get my dick wet.
> An Army vet
> Have female veterans

War is going to be so much fun. I can rape without any regrets because women couldn't fight back. Now they could.

I can't wait for WW3!

The absolute state of Female Fitness Standards in the RAF.

Gee. I wonder why.

>only eighteen of the thirty-two female infantry recruits made it through

> it strikes a more concerning tone when factoring in that the females needed only to meet the much-lower female standards for physical fitness that separate them from their previously all-male counterparts

>some sources who graduated from within the unit -whom requested concealed identities to protect their new careers- claimed a clear double-standard between males and females in their training cycle, including lighter rucksacks and lower expectations

popularmilitary.com/nearly-half-females-failed-graduate-army-infantry-training-standards-also-lowered/

>Why shouldn't women be allowed to serve as infantrymen?
Because they're weaker and psychologically unfit for combat.

>The US govt holds women to the same tough performance standards that are applied to men.
Then why are women performing worse in combat simulations then men?

Stop trolling the retarded portion of my countrymen, leaf.

That wasn't my experience at all in British army. The lads may have groaned but there was rarely a word of complaint out of anyone but girls.

Sauce on the info?

Repost from /tg/ for my dear leaf

>M320 GL

Overpriced kraut garbage

Go A2/M203 or go home

>They bleed
>They'll be raped, and could get pregnant, making the whole unit less effective
>The incredible small number of women that can pass the tests will need equipments build especially for them, since the female body is different. Just a budget burden
>They help the nation more staying at home and raising more boys to become future soldiers.

I'm 5'6 I'm a bitch I have to bust my ass to barely lug around 350lb where I work. I know for a fact they're are women stronger than me. Feminine hygiene aside its stupid to not utilise them.

>manlet
you should kill yourself

Women have to squat to pee
Anatomy is destiny

>out of the 19 women that classed up, only 2 managed to pass. That's a 10.5% pass rate. Unfucking satisfactory and not worth the ridiculous amount of money it took to put them all through special workup programs

Best argument in thread. You can't argue against economic reality.

Like fuck they have the same standards.

I was in the Marine Corps. Women don't have the same fitness standards. Their official tests are easier. Easier run times, easier strength requirements. You're a lying piece of shit who doesn't know what the fuck his ass is talking about.

>I'm a bitch
Well you were spot on about one thing at least

>Feminine nature is not compatible with a military force. It's being forced on us to make us weak.
That's why I say, fuck it.
It's a retarded idea but let's allow it to happen to bleed the beast dry and show the world how retarded PC gender politics is.

How will women take the holy white seed if women can fight back against the holy white men who rape them?

>Why shouldn't women be allowed to serve as infantrymen?

Sex drive gets in the way of combat performance.

>The US govt holds women to the same tough performance standards that are applied to men.

Show me a single case where they didn't drop standards to get women in.

this shouldnt even be a question.
women are weaker.
they have shit predatory instincts.
when captured they will be raped for 1000 years or until they die.
women are not men.