Started By
Message
Off-Topic: Memo released officially opening all positions to women (Army)
Posted on 2/8/16 at 11:51 am
Posted on 2/8/16 at 11:51 am
One thing I noticed that was interesting:
When we commissioned, males were required to select 2 combat arms, 2 combat support, and 2 combat service support branches, with a combat arms being one of the top 3. Females were not.
Now females are required to select the same way males are. This will lead to a lot of women being "forced" into certain branches that they do not want to go to.
Brings the adage "be careful what you wish for" into play.
When we commissioned, males were required to select 2 combat arms, 2 combat support, and 2 combat service support branches, with a combat arms being one of the top 3. Females were not.
Now females are required to select the same way males are. This will lead to a lot of women being "forced" into certain branches that they do not want to go to.
Brings the adage "be careful what you wish for" into play.
2
Posted on 2/8/16 at 11:55 am to CGSC Lobotomy
thats weird. is there any reason why they are doing this?
Posted on 2/8/16 at 11:58 am to WestCoastAg
quote:
thats weird. is there any reason why they are doing this?
DOD was directed by Congress and the President last year to open up all military positions and career fields to women. Implementation takes effect this month.
Or are you asking why they're requiring the accession of women entering service to be the same as that of men?
Posted on 2/8/16 at 12:04 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:i guess im reading this wrong. i took your post to mean that men choose two different branches and then are put into either but women are just placed into one and they have no say in the matter. but maybe im just stupid
Or are you asking why they're requiring the accession of women entering service to be the same as that of men?
Posted on 2/8/16 at 12:07 pm to WestCoastAg
You're required to put one combat arms branch in your top 3.
Prior to this month, women were not.
Prior to this month, women were not.
Posted on 2/8/16 at 12:10 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
ohhh, so now they can be placed into combat?
Posted on 2/8/16 at 12:13 pm to WestCoastAg
If we're truly going for equality, then EVERY American would be required to sign up for Selective Service once he or she turns 18, but there's no way the SJW crowd would allow this.
Posted on 2/8/16 at 12:14 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
Gender "equality" when it comes to the military is poppycock.
Posted on 2/8/16 at 12:23 pm to TbirdSpur2010
An alternative solution, of course, is to do away with the selective service altogether...but when is the government willing to REMOVE excess bureaucracy?
Posted on 2/8/16 at 12:49 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:Guess who agrees with you!
If we're truly going for equality, then EVERY American would be required to sign up for Selective Service once he or she turns 18,
Posted on 2/8/16 at 12:50 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
Gender "equality" when it comes to the military is poppycock.
This.
Men and women are not equal. Hell men and men aren't equal either. I damn sure know no one this board and get up and go like Von Miller.
Selective Service came up in the last debate. I about wanted to throw the remote through the TV when they said women should be in selective service.
Posted on 2/8/16 at 1:09 pm to Farmer1906
quote:
Selective Service came up in the last debate. I about wanted to throw the remote through the TV when they said women should be in selective service.
What in the frick.
quote:
Men and women are not equal. Hell men and men aren't equal either. I damn sure know no one this board and get up and go like Von Miller.
Speak for yourself, Farmer
Nvm, you're right, I'm just wishin'
Posted on 2/8/16 at 1:10 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
is the government willing to REMOVE excess bureaucracy?
Lemme think about that for a sec--
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:Posted on 2/8/16 at 1:10 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
Speak for yourself, Farmer
Well if anyone is the closest to Von, its me.
Posted on 2/8/16 at 1:35 pm to Farmer1906
I think EVERYONE should be required to complete 2 years of service at the age of 18 to be granted full citizenship. Whether it be combat or administrative or humanitarian.
Posted on 2/8/16 at 3:12 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
An alternative solution, of course, is to do away with the selective service altogether.
I don't know why we don't. We haven't had a draft in 43 years and barring Armageddon I can't see it coming back. So what's the point? Except...
quote:
..but when is the government willing to REMOVE excess bureaucracy?
Oh, yeah. There is that.
Posted on 2/8/16 at 3:17 pm to Farmer1906
quote:
Selective Service came up in the last debate. I about wanted to throw the remote through the TV when they said women should be in selective service.
That's because you're imagining the worst: women being drafted as infantrymen... errr... infantrypersons. There's no reason to think that will happen. There are plenty of non-combat roles drafted women could fill nicely.
Posted on 2/8/16 at 3:36 pm to Old Sarge
quote:
I think EVERYONE should be required to complete 2 years of service at the age of 18 to be granted full citizenship. Whether it be combat or administrative or humanitarian.
Like they do in Israel?
In some ways that would be a good way to teach future generations discipline. In other ways it would encourage war if we have a big standing army just sitting around. Right now with a volunteer army there is a limit to how long you can stay engaged in a conflict before the costs of recruitment become too great.
Posted on 2/8/16 at 3:45 pm to cardboardboxer
Not just as soldiers, you misread.
Everyone, as they graduate high school or turn 18, to be a full citizen of the US and thus be able to vote, receive any sort of govt benefit, drive, bear arms, ect...
Would have to serve the country as either a soldier, administrator of humanitarian worker. Serve doesn't always mean soldier. Health care, inner city youth programs, or simply filling administrative roles.
The compensation for those two years would be the smallest living wage possible.
The real benefit is citizenship, imagine if all youth had to serve their country in a fashion.
Everyone, as they graduate high school or turn 18, to be a full citizen of the US and thus be able to vote, receive any sort of govt benefit, drive, bear arms, ect...
Would have to serve the country as either a soldier, administrator of humanitarian worker. Serve doesn't always mean soldier. Health care, inner city youth programs, or simply filling administrative roles.
The compensation for those two years would be the smallest living wage possible.
The real benefit is citizenship, imagine if all youth had to serve their country in a fashion.
Posted on 2/8/16 at 4:09 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
gender quality when it comes to the military is poppycock.
Yep
Unless every woman going into combat situations is a former MMA fighter, this is retarded. The vast majority of woman just cannot be as physically effective as a male in live combat with equal training.
Page 1 of 2
Latest Texas A&M News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News