If you have watched the movie G.I. Jane, you probably wondered if there really is a Lt. Jordan O’Neil in real life. Lt. O’Neil, the female protagonist of the story, went through SEAL/CRT training and received a silver insignia, inscribed with the words ‘SEAL’ and ‘CRT’, at the end of the movie.
The CRT (or Combined Reconnaissance Team) unites several branches of the service, namely the Navy SEALs, the Army Delta, the Marine Force Reconnaissance and the Navy Intelligence. This is just a product of the writer’s imagination, though. There has never been a member of the female species to ever take part of the Navy SEALs.
Gender typecasting comes at us whether we are paying attention or not, and women’s participation in the SEALs springs in a lot of discussions. Should women be allowed to become US Navy SEALs?
Sure, the women of today have been a lot tougher than before. There are many women who have excelled in fields that used to be dominated by men. In terms of physical capabilities, many women can endure the toughest obstacle courses ever made. Women can also be great snipers.
However, SEAL authorities have given out a number of reasons why women can’t be allowed to join the training. First, men and women cannot stay in a single house together. Another point is that women have special needs on hygiene, especially during their menstrual period, and fighters might have to stay and hide in a foxhole for a week during battles. Basically, a woman’s physiology proves inappropriate for battle conditions.
Many say that women can’t be in the battlefield, but there is surely a role in the SEAL operations that would be ideal for them. If the United States is to stay as the world’s most competent and powerful military force, we should find the best person for every job, regardless of gender.
November 11th, 2008 - 11:46 am
By all means find the best person for the job, regardless of gender. However, putting women in infantry roles is motivated by an ideological sense of fairness. And the real world is indifferent to our desire for equality. It’s wrong to simply ignore gender differences in a situation where person’s lives are at stake. Re-examining what roles might be best suited for females is a good idea, but it’s more likely that they may have an advantage as fighter pilots than as GI Janes.
March 28th, 2009 - 5:49 am
The two excuses sited are absolutely lame….women and men can not reside in the same quarters?! WTF! How about astronauts? Are they so afraid that there will be a orgy? Don’t these super warriors have control of their libido? And “special hygeine” needs?! First of all not all women have the same intensity of menstral cycles…and women who have very low body fat ratios have very light or no periods at all! So a women has to pull her pants off to pee….simple modification to BDUs would solve THAT problem. Just think how much acurate intelligence could be gained with a squad of burka wearing farsi/arabic speaking female seals.
May 13th, 2009 - 5:48 am
Dude, I’m a female firefighter with the US Forest Service. We bunk in the same house, sleep side by side in the dirt on the line together, and I really wish all that stuff about “feminine hygiene” were true because maybe then we wouldn’t have to go without showering for two weeks. The only thing keeping women out of the SEALs is the old boys, that’s it. New Zealand has a tier 1 special forces squad with the NZSAS and they already have female operators. America is just dragging it’s feet on repealing a few unconstitutional gender requirements.
May 16th, 2009 - 5:12 pm
Have you ever been shot at via multiple lines of sights while transporting wounded casualties to a medivac while carrying 65 pounds of survival gear? If not then you don’t need to respond, not matter what your civilian occupation is…and save us “real soldiers, sailors, and airmen” the dignity and honor we have earned.
May 19th, 2009 - 4:40 pm
Have you ever fought a wildfire? It’s like a living thing. It springs up anywhere and surrounds you in seconds, cuts off your escape routes and has the potential to blow with the same intensity as a Hiroshima Bomb. It travels up to 120MPH and faster uphill, try to outrun that in up to 60lbs of gear and a handtool or chainsaw. It spots like grenades being thrown and ignites in flashes so fast that by the time you realize the line’s been breached, you’re already burned over. They give us these thin aluminum foil bags to hide in called “fire shelters” when a nuclear fire front literally sweeps over you. Fire is like any Human enemy, it has a mind of it’s own, you tell me that’s not combat, that’s why at least 5 firefighters will die every fire season. I know it might not “seem” like that dangerous of a job because Hollywood hasn’t made it as cool as getting shot at, but go stand in front of one and then talk to me about “real soldiers.” I respect the military members as much as any decent American, but you need not respond about things YOU know nothing about, and show a little respect to your fellow Federal Employees as well.
November 10th, 2009 - 3:47 pm
I’ve never been in combat. Many years ago I was in a fire line armed with only a rake. Me and one other man. Yes it is tough work and I am proud to say we got the fire contained without it jumping our line.
Fire is dangerous but it does not shoot at you.
I have also worked in what used to be a males only job that required us to actually physically fight other males and sometimes females.
We were forced to employ females back in the late seventies early eighties. Some were very good, a very few I preferred to have backing me up over a male. But that is the exception and not the rule.
What really happened was as soon as we got women in our jobs they started hollering that we needed more men because they did not feel safe. Usually what happened was that the gals would set back and watch the men fight because that was the man’s job. Sort of like taking out the trash you know.
Things really got interesting when eventually we had more women working there than men. The women were forced to fight then and if they did not they got fired. Employee turnover got very high when people discovered they could not hack it. When women get hurt in a fight they wind up with more serious injuries than men. The men were also getting more than their share of disabling injuries because more of the work load was put on them.
I worked there almost 35 years. I would still be working there but I too wound up permanetly disabled because of all the fights I have been in. The law of averages eventually catches up with you whether you like it or not.
In the old pre-women days if a man did not help you out in a fight you caught him out in the parking lot after work and showed him the error of his ways. I called them ‘training sessions’ We stopped doing them when the women came.
As a rule the men got along better back then. If there was trouble it was settled out in the parking lot after work then everybody went out and had a beer later. If two women got in to it at work it went on for months.
Am I a woman hater?? The answer is no. I liked working with most of the women and the truth is I eventually married one of them. Yes I married one of the gals that I preferred to have at my side in a fight over a man. She’s also a better shot with a pistol than I am and is not afraid of hard work.
December 18th, 2009 - 1:20 am
I’ve fought wildfires. In fact, I was a wildfire investigator for four years. Being on a fire crew is not the same as combat. Not even close. It may be hard, dirty, cold or hot, but it pales in comparison to the utter brutality and physical rigors of combat.
December 22nd, 2009 - 3:52 am
[...] the pregnancy of a female soldier, however, was proven to be caused by a sexual assault, then the soldier will not be subjected to [...]
December 30th, 2009 - 12:17 pm
when you consider that they’ll be kicked out of the training program if they don’t seem to have the right attitude for the SEALs, I don’t think there is any problem with having females as SEALs. After all when they’re motivated they fight harder than any man and when they’re not motivated they fight just as hard as any man. And hygiene needs are easily met, solved and prevented.So no problems there.
January 7th, 2010 - 9:00 pm
There ARE NOT, nor have there ever been any fully badged female members of the New Zealand SAS (1NZSAS). Women have assisted, but in a support (non-combat) role only.
February 7th, 2010 - 9:16 am
While this matter can be very tough for most people, my notion is that there has to be a middle or common ground that we all can find. I do treasure that you’ve added relevant and intelligent commentary here though. Very much thanks to you!
February 10th, 2010 - 4:32 am
I’ve been reading this site for some time
February 28th, 2010 - 3:57 pm
the movie says its based on a true story though.
March 28th, 2010 - 4:15 pm
A middle ground has been struck that’s what so many do not seem to understand. Woman fill the roles for which they are physiologically capable of doing combat operations. could there be exceptions, maybe, could these exceptions be evaluated case by case, possibly. A simple analogy will point out why the navy doesn’t evaluated case by case. There are not enough woman who are up to the task, so you will not fill your all star team with players who only got honorable mention. Also I find that there is really to his day for a majority of women only a novel fascination in the women themselves to actually be in combat positions. I think the real first step any feminists who wish to advance their cause should take is get real data from women. how many truly wish to serve in active combat and in what role?? Even when poled from actively serving women the numbers might not tell the story that they want to hear.
April 4th, 2010 - 11:40 am
As former SF and Ranger and all the good stuff in between I would have no problem with a female in the role if they could handle and DO EXACTLY that we, as males, are required to do and handle. Straight forward.
My only suggestion is that if a female is able to finish and pull her own weight that she is REQUIRED to sign a waiver that gives up her right to bear any children WHILE ACTIVE ON THE TEAM. I had to depend on every one of my teammates and if one had to suddenly leave due to being pregnant it would cripple the team.
Other than that, I am all for it.
April 18th, 2010 - 12:41 pm
I would give up the ability to have kids if I could exchange it to have the physical abilities that guys do, but I can’t. I also love to have a voice like Barbara Striesand, but life is unfair and that is the way it is. Most women can’t do what guys do physically just like men can’t have kids, which is really too bad. Whining about it won’t change the facts. Even if there were a few women who could do the job and want to do it the military couldn’t afford to find those few. It is just too impractical.
April 23rd, 2010 - 4:08 pm
If a woman can pass the Seals training under the same condition by all means let them in….
May 5th, 2010 - 8:07 am
I have long considered joining the military and have decided if i am childless by age 23 (currently 19) i will enlist. I did watch that movie when i was younger but it hasnt really interested me till i was 14 or 15.
My husband also told me that he did a report on the first female navy seal in middle school, but he didnt remember the name of her. So I emailed the seal motivators and asked what the name of the first “frog woman” was. He said there had never been a female navy seal. Then I asked my husband why they would try to hide it if it happened and he said probably because they were embarrassed that a woman could make it in. So who knows if there was or not.
July 21st, 2010 - 5:49 pm
When a women can do the same training and I mean same amout of push up, pull up, run the same distance in the same time walk 20 plus miles with 60 plus pounds on your back, and watch how the seals in hell week, G I jane was a joke
July 29th, 2010 - 9:59 pm
The enemy knows this full well and will rape, torture, and humiliate any woman they capture until they can ring information out of her. These people that want women to serve in these positions don’t consider this when they are carring on about women’s rights. Why put a woman in this possible position? Some jobs are meant for men because men can handle this kind of emotional stress better than a woman. Women who are in the military should serve in non combat roles.
July 29th, 2010 - 10:12 pm
The first part of my message is that women are not emotionally wired for combat related jobs such as SEALs, Army Rangers, or any combat position. They may be up to the task physically, if they are fit enough, but I don’t believe that that can handle it emotionally. If they get captured by the enemy, well all know that they won’t be treated according to Geneva Convention Rules either. They will work on the woman first because they know she will break faster than a man.
August 23rd, 2010 - 11:14 am
I think everyone here is missing an important point. How wise is it to train our men to be indifferent to women. The issue I see raised in the movie (however implausible) is that the biggest hurdle would be to train out the men’s natural hardwired humanity to protect her. I think it is possible to do this but you would not be able to then try and distinguish between combatants and civilians. We don’t.want to train those feelings out of our troops that’s one of the boundaries that most men have hardwired. Its one thing to train desensitization twards torture but to know that the men would also have to be trained in watching a woman getting tortured and violated…. do you really want to have that environment. I think there are a select few women who could handle it. Higeine is BS, shared sleeping, BS,you could even train torture desensitization to the women who could make it. But I think its just a bad idea all around to have to train that moral compass out of good men. There are already enough things that we ask them to do and endure for our freedoms…. I for one don’t want to ask them to give up that part of their humanity as well.
August 24th, 2010 - 7:26 pm
Women are very well suited. They fight on the front lines and capable of doing any other job in the military, police officers, and fire fighters. So, drop the sexist attitudes! If men and women are allowed to be on a navy submarine together and the front lines, then they deserve every right to join the seals. The problem are the sexist pigs in the navy seals and the navy in general who are afraid to get their butts kicked by a woman!
November 1st, 2010 - 10:11 pm
First of all men and women all have attributes that suit them to the job, depending who they are dealing with. You are told to use your brain first. I have to say a lot of people I have read on here have brought up what they think of as valid points some I think are stupid as someone will think mine are also. If a woman can make it thru buds & sere she deserves respect. You are right they will not give a woman a chan at this time, but not to many years ago it was the same for people of other races. We have evolved. Someone brought up rape well all I have to say is Abu Grabe rape is not sexual it is power. When doing interogation people seek power for info. The American fighter is not immune to useing it ourselfs unfourtunately. It is wrong it happens it is something you can’t say who will or won’t do something that during times of peace you see as morally wrong. Every one of us is diffrent right now we are talking about gays in the military also. Some day we will realize that your place in the military should be based on your love for our country and your ability to conduct opperations under adverse conditions. Men ,Women,Black,Red,Yellow,Brown, and White will all work together.
P.S. By the way who ever does not think that fighting fires is not battle, I have done both, has no clue what they are talking about. In both situations once you are in the combat theater your head is on a swivel and you know that things change and your life can change at ANY TIME. Together we work to save lives to save the american way of life.
November 19th, 2010 - 1:54 am
I spent an entire career in the Teams. I hope this doesn’t come out sexist. There are women that are fast enough ( runs, swims, o-course) and there are women that are strong enough, but to find a female that could meet both of those standards would be very rare.
Honestly, it is rare to find in males. In my class we started with 129 students, that came out of probably 25 times that number of applicants – at the end of training, only 19 originals graduated. I am not saying it would be impossible, women do great at so many athletic activities. FloJo ran a 10.47 in the 100 meters and have you ever been around female bodybuilders and powerlifters – amazing!
I will use this as a reference, I was average in the Teams, I could bench 3 wheels for 2-5 reps and run a mile under 6 minutes until I was 47 years old. Honestly, I was only average ( maybe my bench was say in the top 30% but my running was below average) at best.
For the female firefighter, they have a firefighter competition, if you would win and say you had one of the top 50 scores of all time, you would have a chance. Maybe, because training would be like doing that competition every day for six months. But this is just the physical part which is probably only half of what it takes to be successful in the Teams. The other more subjective aspects are equally as important or no one will trust operating with you.
January 20th, 2011 - 3:49 pm
THERE ARE ALREADY MANY FEMALES IN THE SF COMMUNITY. THE FRONT PAGE OF THE NAVY TIMES HAS “FEMALE SEALS” ON ITS COVER OF JAN 2011. THE TIME FOR FEMALES IN SF IS UPON US. IT IS NOT ABOUT GENDER, ITS ABOUT QUALIFICATIONS.
February 21st, 2011 - 7:29 pm
Geez, you idiots dont know how much it costs to train a Navy SEAL let alone pull out more funds just to bring women in and it costs roughly a million dollars a year just to keep him active operator. With all this being said, if none of you have seen combat, then dont go talking about how you want to see a women in the teams. All you guys want is equal rights for women and you what you dont see is that you take apart the brotherhood experience that those men earn. Leave those guys alone. It’s the only group in the military where the men can act like men with out having to worry about women complaining about dumb crap like they do in the rest of the weak ass military that we have. Oh and the person that said her husband wrote a paper about the first SEAL was a liar. The program was never opened up to women. That guy was a liar.
May 13th, 2011 - 5:26 pm
Work is hard enough without extra distractions. Life isn’t fair. We built the treehouse. We don’t have to invite everyone up.
May 17th, 2011 - 9:58 pm
women are phyically, mentally and emotionally capable of being navy seals…it’s proven every day…if keeping men and women together is the only problem i’m sure the world can get over it…when women are under stress( like men) there monthly issue disappears.. we already know this..put women together..just like men a fellowsjip happens..we do gross and objectable things that are necessary for health etc…that the opposite sex may have an issue with..and from a sniper point of view won’t interfere with leaving a trace…america has the money..i think it’s more of an issue that the men in this natiion can’t get their balls in the right pocket…p.s no gender norming..if you can’t handle the heat get outta the kitchen!!!! just like the 5ft runt with the gummybear between his legs who just happens to be a man.
May 20th, 2011 - 8:55 am
Your comments don’t make sense, and you’re missing the point. You’re not invited. We’re not asking to join the Girl Scouts. We can’t make cookies that delicious.
May 21st, 2011 - 12:53 am
Sexual dimorphism is apparent but includes a lot of overlap between males and females. Culture plays an incredible role in gender differences as well…read books on sociology and especially anthropology. Biased opinions don’t make facts, life isn’t that black and white….Men and women both have dedicated their lives to this country. Instead of telling people what they can’t do, focus your energy on thanking people for the good jobs they HAVE done. Whether they are female or male……Fire fighters are cool too…….personally I think burning to death and being shot both suck. People who risk either to help other people should be respected. So sh*t up.
May 30th, 2011 - 5:42 pm
I have never been so stunned in my life. Dockus your comments belong to the dark ages. I bet you believe that women should be pregnant and barefoot in the kitchen. Well guess what? The era of change is upon us and your about to get a wake up call. It only takes one to break through that glass ceiling and the time is coming. For every man who doesn’t want to do a job there are going to be two or three women who are more than willing to take his place.
If a person can pass the test and do the job shouldn’t they be given the same respect as everyone else? Shouldn’t women be allowed to do jobs that are only reserved for men? Gender roles are no longer easily defined. Men are staying home and women are going out and bringing home the bacon. Theres even a more openess when it comes to sexuality. That “Don’t ask. Don’t tell” rule is a thing of the past. Granted it might take years but it’s a possiblity and every day doors are opening.
Remember ladies and gentlemen it only takes one.
May 31st, 2011 - 6:35 pm
Poor grammar and spelling discredits any argument. Someone has to hunt and someone has to gather. That’s how real life works outside of cushy, ultra-liberal, weak modern society. I guarantee immediate degradation in the tip of our country’s spear the moment this happens, simply because men will no longer strive to reach the goal of being a SEAL, and the men there already will leave the community in droves to find something that’s theirs again.
June 4th, 2011 - 9:42 pm
REALLY?!?!? Men join the SEALS just to get away from women and be alone with other men?!? You must be completely homo-social if you need tone around only men at work… Why not join a Frat too. I know that combat is dehumanizing, but I didn’t think it devolved you into a Cro-magnon– or maybe that’s just Dockos.
I think it is a pity that ANYONE has to go through such a soul-devouring thing as war, but anyone who can pass the training should be allowed to do the the job, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, creed or color.
June 5th, 2011 - 10:06 pm
I just wanted to say, I have wanted to be a Navy SEAL since I was very young. It wasn’t until I was 16 that I found out that I didn’t even have the chance to be considered for the SEALs, solely because I am a girl. But even to this day, I still workout at SEAL standards, and I must add that I am more physically fit than most of the men I went to school with. I am now 19 and attending a university for a degree in Mechanical Engineering, which is one of the most academically rigorous degrees one can obtain here, and am a part of the ROTC program there. All of this, because I’m hoping that some day before I’m 33, I will be able to finally apply and have my shot at being a SEAL. To all of you that say women aren’t mentally, physically oremotionally strong enough, I would like to remember me, and how hard I strive to one day be in their shoes.
June 6th, 2011 - 11:52 am
Enough with the melodramatic “?!?!?!?!?”. You don’t know that “combat is dehumanizing”. You’re speculating, as is the rest of your reply. Not sure why there’s an argument. Despite my own humorous commentary, it’s their community. You don’t have a say. It’s comparable to coming home to a stranger in your home trying to reorganize your personal space and set new rules. Being a SEAL isn’t a “job”. It’s a lifestyle that should be viciously guarded for the sake of those (you) who depend on it’s smooth operation. I’d love to have wings surgically implanted and join a flock of geese, but life doesn’t seem to be working out that way, despite how much I protest the doctors and feed the geese.
June 9th, 2011 - 1:47 pm
[...] Taken from the Navy SEALs blog: http://blog.usnavyseals.com/2008/10/women-in-seals-could-real-gi-jane-exist.html [...]
June 9th, 2011 - 11:25 pm
I think that those stating inherent biological traits (i.e. “men are designed to protect/risk their lives for women” and “men/women are inherently x”) as a reason for banning women should really reconsider… Because if you think about it, what is the MAIN thing we humans pride ourselves upon that separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom? It is our ability to reason, which essentially boils down to our ability to – when we *want* to – go completely AGAINST our built-in animal/gut instincts to make decisions/behave that we believe will affect the greater good. What makes us different is our ability to choose not to live simple, predetermined lives based on gut instinct. What many believe to be one reason for most of the Western world’s advantages over Africa and Asia are choices like delaying marriage and childbirth – and eventually, limiting the size of families – in pursuit of education and better finances before becoming responsible for others. Defying our biology often proves to be quite beneficial – funny how it’s only unnatural when men want to limit women.
As far as rape and sexual abuse go, I think that a simple and creative solution – especially for current women in the military who are frequently assaulted – would be the invention of an implantable device that would go in an enlisted woman’s, *ahem*, private parts, that would be somehow harmful – poisonous, or slicing – toward any attempting penetrative body part. I think it would only be fair to require women to get such an implant, both to avoid sex (consensual or not, both men and women sign an agreement not to have sex with each other while enlisted, but we all know that doesn’t happen) and pregnancy (and I think it’s also perfectly fair to require women take active preventative measures against pregnancy), as well as rape and assault. Such a device would not be able to be simply pulled out – would require surgical removal – but *would* obviously be removed upon discharge from the military… Obviously the trickiest part would be avoiding accidental cutting/poisoning of the person the device was implanted in… But hey, it’s just an idea.
And lastly, I think that a well-trained woman is perfectly capable of handling the emotional trauma of real combat. Women have far more life experience getting through situations where they may be temporarily powerless than men do. We go through physical abuse – domestic violence, rape – and sexism daily and end up pulling out on top in ever increasing numbers. When men become the abused and not the abusers – which will never happen – when they become the ones that go through systematic subjugation by the other half of the population, THEN they can tell the abused what they are capable of and what their “emotional limits” are.
July 16th, 2011 - 4:44 pm
Most of you on here have either had dreams of serving or knew someone that has served and has given you erroneous information. I’m a paratrooper and infantryman. I have served in both the infantry and support, and I have actually served with females.
The reason there are no females in the Seals or any other combat related field is because of the physical differences between men and women and that adding women into those units won’t enhance them. You do not want your combat arms units, especially the infantry and special operations units, to look anything like your support units.
The reality is that there are more cons than pros with allowing women into combat arms or the special forces teams at the moment. However, they should go through a modified selection course where a solid number of females could graduate and be integrated into the special operations units. The problem lies with the idea of trying to see one to five females make it through the current selection courses and call it equality which is horrible and stupid. They should not go through the same course as the men, just not necessary.
Women should have to perform at the level of top male combat soldiers. They WILL NOT be successful in such an environment and then other issues will creep up in the unit (like lack of promotion, unfairness, etc.). They are better suited in special operations given the nature of their work which is not just about carrying around 100 lbs packs and the such. Women can be very effective for special missions and they need to be included immediately if they have not already have done it.
The infantry is an altogether different beast and it is best that it stays all male. Women won’t make it better and that is pretty much the bottom line on that.
August 1st, 2011 - 1:25 pm
For all of you people who are complaining about how it’s so unfair women are allowed in the military, not meaning to be disrespectful or anything, but shut up and do something about. You need to be the change that you want to happen. It doesn’t matter if you can lift 200kg, if you don’t tell people. You’ve got to be the one standing outside their doors yelling at them for why there even is a door. To change the rules it’s going to take determination and hard work, just as it always has. I’m a girl and as soon as I get the chance I’m going to stand up for this. If you really care you should to.
August 25th, 2011 - 12:00 am
Alright ladies i understand that you are mad at this and this unfair and it probly is but its the law and it must stay this way for the sake of the troops who are actually in combat. Men are socially(possibly biologicly) programmed to protect women. So when a when a women is wonded on the battle field men are very likely to make reckless decisions. this could cost the lives of other soldiers and the man making the decisions. Is it worth it? could you walk up to the famlies that died and say to them “your son died buts its okay because we have women serving and it only costed your sons life and several others in the future due to this new hassard.” Im sorry and call me crazy if you want but I would rather have half a country of pissed off women then an entire country of heart broken families.
September 1st, 2011 - 10:43 pm
I’m a female in the military. I’m in better shape than most of the males. I should be given the same opportunity to do the same job. If I can’t meet the standards, fine. If I can, get over my vagina.
September 20th, 2011 - 5:35 pm
In my younger day’s I wished nothing more then to try out for my trident. I could bench over 250lbs, I could run a sub 5min mile, I could swim circles around the Combat Diver teams on the military base my father served on. I could do all the same drown proofing they did and even helped a few pass the pre-cert. I am also very skilled in many types of fire arms. When I went to enlist in the Navy and was asked what job I wanted to do, I was told I was born with the wrong plumbing. Needless to say I didn’t enlist. To say that women are not emotionally able to handle the stresses of combat is not only a joke, but a very old one. To say that a period lessens a woman’s abilities is also a very old joke. Depo is a drug used to prevent pregnancy, most women while on it do not have periods, and if on it for long enough causes the ovaries to stop working, and will eventually cause more male hormones such as androgen and even testosterone to rise in levels. I know because it happened to me after taking Depo for over 7 years straight. I would have given up my right to have children to have served in the teams. Many of the SF men I had come to know would have welcomed me with open arms knowing I was, at least in my youth, a woman that could put her money where her mouth was. I find it sad that the USA is still against women serving beside the men in the front lines, now with the wars in the Middle East I wonder if it will come to bite them in the ass. Many other countries use women in the front lines because there are places we can go that men can not, specially in the Islamic countries. I do agree that not all women are up to the task, but there are MORE then a few that are and they should be allowed the chance to prove it. I would think men in the teams would be honored to serve along side another who has proven they are capable of the job just as they are regardless of gender. Even the Spartans of ancient times knew women were just as capable as the men.
November 30th, 2011 - 4:11 pm
i tell you i for one am sick of PC we are not all EQUAL yes I said it.
An exceptional women maybe more fit then the average man. But the acerage woman is less fit then a below average man. Its not sexism it is a fact.
There is no equality anywhere in military females are required less then men in PT test. Same as any physical job.
And ladies you know its true. Otherwise why do men get in more trouble for punching a woman. I work in construction and we hire women who get paid the same as the men yet CANT do the equal work and thats fairness?????
I served I fought I survived. Until you have been in combat Don’t tell me what it is like or that you can handle it.
I know SOME women can but to many who cant would get in to be ”fair” affirmative action speciql intrests etc etc
December 13th, 2011 - 7:35 pm
Women could not join because 80% of men don’t make it and t you need every biological advantage testosterone is a biological advantage and it would require lowering overall standards which are meant to push them to there limits maybe if a all female team was made it might work but still there are just certain requirements women couldn’t be able to meet like men can I’m not being sexist just stating the facts ok
January 26th, 2012 - 9:46 pm
Well then could they join if they don’t have a period due to being infertal.(and yes I know I probably spelled that wrong) but still yes there are good reasons as to why girls shouldn’t be allowed but if seals was full of girls so to speak and guys wanted to join the ranks we could come up with more of the same reasons and excuses to keep them out too. Nobody wants to see their friends harmed in front of them regardless of their sex, and not everyone will get along, but how can girls get the chance to prove themselves that no matter what has been said that they acually can preform the same duties that men can when they dont even have the same freedoms. who cares if a girl can do things better than a guy and who cares if a guy can do things better than a girl, Everyone has their own talent and limitations on what they can and cannot do. Your serving your country, something to be honored and proud of but some people (whoever calls the shots on this matter) just can’t see past their i differences on the matter to acually sit down and go,”oh sure she’s a girl sure all these things could happen to her if something happens, those same things(except periods) could happen to a guy to, and as long as she meets the required criterias to join then she’s just as capiable at preforming and completeling her duty and should join!” Some good things that would come out of this would be more applicants to the branch and more money (more girl and boy applicants+only navy allowing girls in infantry=bigger payload) they wouldn’t have to continuously have debates about this matter and it may even cause other branches to grow a pair,realize their ignorance, and allow girls into that career path too. Step up to the plate and just give us a chance stop running front the matter and just sit down and acually think about it we are just as capable, determined, and willing to be in Infatry and seal positions. If we can pull our own weight complete our missions and get the job done we should be given the chance.
January 27th, 2012 - 7:45 pm
All this talk about women getting into SF/Rangers/SEALs, and gender equality. The last time I checked, the basic regular, conventional military PT test weren’t even gender equal so why don’t you start there before crying that you aren’t allowed into the units that DEMAND a higher level of physical fitness. And don’t think for a second because you’re a fast running in running shoes and shorts on a paved road during a sunny day that you can do 10-15 miles in boots, a 60 lbs pack (if you’re lucky that’s all it’ll weigh), water, ammo, special equipment, radio, and a SAW/203/or any other weapons across swamp, rock, sand and so on. I think some of you need to reevaluate your idea of physical fitness and training.
Take a look at the Marine Corps PT test, guys have to do 20 pull ups for a score of 100 and women are only required to hang on to the bar for 70 seconds! The men have to do an exercise that works arms/shoulders/abs/back and women have to do an exercise that works their forearms! You’re telling me that’s even remotely fair for a woman that wants to be MARSOC? I’ve trained men and women both in combat tactics and lets make one thing VERY clear…there is a physical difference, and that’s just BASIC infantry tactics, forget the more advanced stuff. Do you have any idea how many men have said …”Hey, I THINK I can do that” when it comes to specops and don’t make it? Ladies, listen to SSGT. Barry Saddler’s song “The Green Berets”…100 men we’ll test today but only three win the green beret. Those numbers are pretty close.
And last but certainly not least. What happens when a woman doesn’t make the grade, is cut from the training and crys sexism??? And I don’t think anyone in this forum believes it won’t happen. The physical standards will be lowered because the political leadership of this country is more concerned with being PC than functiional.
I don’t doubt a woman’s dedication to the job, her desire to try to live up to the standards and not let the team down, her heart to try, or a woman’s ability to kill in combat. I doubt the physical ability of 99.999% of the women that will try. Ladies, all jokes and arguing aside, read the book “Lone Survivor” by Marcus Luttrell. If three of your team mates are down and need to be carried to cover down the side of a mountain, do you honestly believe you could carry 3 times your weight, while effectively fighting the enemy by yourself?
January 27th, 2012 - 7:50 pm
My bad on the spelling errors by the way…got a little worked up about this topic.
January 29th, 2012 - 4:59 pm
After reading all comments, I really only have Patrick and that female forest firefighter to even remotely agree with.
My personal take on it is that the military as a whole needs an overhaul regarding gender and physical requirements.
If your job is a desk job, then leave the PRT as it is. But if your job is anything remotely physically related, females and males should have the same PRT. Screw the different standards. If you can’t pass, you can’t pass– choose a different job that’s not physically based. Goes for males OR females.
As far as females on the front lines– I call BS on almost everything anyone has said that is sexist against women. “Men are programmed to protect women”, “Women aren’t emotionally ready”, “Women’ll get raped” blahblah, BS, BS. THAT IS WHAT TRAINING IS FOR. An untrained woman is just as likely as an untrained man to flip out and have no idea what to do. Train them, then they’ll be fine.
Women need to sit to pee? Require a stand-to-pee device for women or modify the BDUs for them. Women get pregnant? Require a means of birth control or sterility. Men and women can’t stay in the same area? Absolute and utter BS. I think the entire military should make a push to be co-ed so we can desensitize our nation to this seperatist sex BS (But I know that’ll never happen).
I’m in the US Navy, normal enlisted, nothing special. But forward deployed. Yes, a lot of what the sexist guys say is true– women complain more, they don’t settle, they don’t pull their weight, men are better off without them, etc., etc. Yeah, it’s true– for the AVERAGE WOMAN.
You know what would get rid of that? Same PRT standards. That would weed a ton of BSing women out of the military right there.
I, and I’m sure most women, understand that the AVERAGE WOMAN would completely destroy the SEALs(and military). But if a woman can pass THE EXACT SAME REQUIREMENTS AS MEN, can pass the EXACT SAME QUALS/TESTS/TRAINING, etc., then their vagina should not be an issue.
The issue here is not that women can’t make it– Some of them CAN– the issue is if/when the military allows women into specops roles, when the average woman of the USA will bitch and moan about how the requirements “aren’t fair to women”.
That’s why the PRT standards are different for women and men now, and that’s why boot camp is becoming more and more of a joke. What Patrick said is right– the government’s more concerned about being politically correct than getting the job done. And unfortunately, that sort of bull is what ruins the chances for the few, exceptional women, that can actually make it.
January 31st, 2012 - 1:28 am
“New Zealand has a tier 1 special forces squad with the NZSAS and they already have female operators”
This may have been corrected already but if not there have never been any women in the NZ SAS. The ban on woman serving in the NZSAS was removed a few years ago but despite a number of women attempting to join none have got close to passing the selection course. Bound to happen one day though!
February 6th, 2012 - 4:14 pm
i hope that one day woman can be SEAls. isnt it dumb that these are probly the answers from the 80s. talk to some more people. people that think woman cant do what men can do are not living live the right way. by the time that i graduate from the navel acadomy woman better be able to be SEAls.
February 25th, 2012 - 2:18 pm
Why don’t we just form female infantry units so there is no problem between males and females. Also females won’t worry about their period if they in combat. They are physically and mentally stronger then some males in the navy Seals themselves.
April 8th, 2012 - 5:08 pm
The point that a female should be admitted in a combat unit if she passes the same physical tests as those required for males is irrelevant. All medical studies show that females are significantly more likely to have stress and bone fractures than males. Their inclusion in a combat unit would therefore significantly reduce its efficiency.