BF2S Forums Australian politics thread.

This seems to be the topic of conversation on the NSW Statewide Drive show today. First person said "What about married women with kids? Should they be in combat roles?"

How is this any different from married blokes with kids in combat roles? He gets killed somone's still going to have to deal with the loss of a spouse or parent.

All this talk of female equality seems to have gone down the shitter.

I'd also like to say that there is one very sound reason women should not only be in combat roles but be leaders in them. I don't know how many of you have been in a mock-up of a battle, (or a real one,) but one of the key things is communication. If communication dies you're fucked and yelling over explosions and gunfire isn't the easiest things to do. Low male voices aren't easiest to hear over all that shit. However in part of my Basic I had a female section commander. She wasn't a bull dyke but she was phsyically capable. You wouldn't pick her to carry the gun but then you don't pick the weedy bloke, (such as myself,) to carry the gun either. In combat situations when we were yelling orders to each other her ability to yell orders was unmatched because her shrill voice sould be heard over all the other noise. Our section did bloody well during assaults because everyone in the section knew what was happening and knew what they were supposed to be doing.

afaik tyf was a reservists at NZDF.

Am a Reservist in the NZDF.

I come from a company that is 100% Infantry. Granted most of the girls at my basic and most of the girls in general are Medics or Loggies or Engineers more than Infantry. There are a number of female infantry officers but officers don't count. However the female infantry at my company keep up a fitness level at least equal to that of the average bloke. Standard fitness testing is running, sit-ups and press ups. The girls can keep up fairly easily with the running, female abdominal muscles are generally better than male abdominal muscles so ditto with sit-ups, (or what the army calls sit-ups.) The only area they struggle in is brute physical strength so they struggle with push ups.

Pass levels for fitness testing for women are lowered but there are different levels that can be gained - a quicker time will get you a higher pass for example. Most of the female soldiers generally don't crawl in by the skin of their teeth, they achieve high passes which are at least equal to the minimum pass rate for men.

If this is enough to disqualify them from combat roles you may as well throw out at least a quarter of the blokes as well. It makes no sense to disqualify women from combat roles if a weedy bloke such as myself is acceptable. I'm not incredibly well built and I'd be on the lower-average level of fitness - some of the women beat me easily. Women also have better pain tolerance - this counts not only if they're wounded but also marching for hours on blistered feet with 30kg packs. Like I said, you wouldn't pick a woman to be a section's gunner or sig or maybe even grenadier because it's more beneficial to have somone who has the necessary brute strength to carry all of the equipment. But Hell, I'm mostly a section grenadier but you wouldn't pick me as gunner or sig because I'm not physically strong enough to perform the role satisfactorally.

There are different levels of fitness and strength in both men and women. You would assume that a woman who wanted to be in a combat role would be the type who could perform at least equal to that of the men on the lower end of the scale. The fact is that many women exceed this. The type of woman who joins the army will be tough. The women who join the infantry are tougher than this.

Less than you'd think and not at a level that necessarily disadvantages women. Look if women are able to perform at a level that is acceptable if a bloke achieved the same level why should they be disallowed on the basis of gender alone?

I think this article is spot on.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/smi … 6038081845

Fraternisation is certainly against ADFA rules. The bottom line is, if she had followed the ADFA rules, she would never have been in that situation.

Also, I believe it is up to six inquiries, I could be wrong though.

The whole situation is ridiculous, and the fact that it is mainly the media just riding the bandwagon with all these other random (and mostly unrelated) stories about the ADF coming up. The most ridiculous one I read was one saying that the reason some Navy ships have been recently classified as unseaworthy is because of lazy RAN engineers and mechanics. What a load of bollocks, those ships are 40+ years old and were rust buckets when we bought them. It is the governments that aren't prepared to spend the money to buy better equipment and then expect the ADF to work miracles with old gear.

It does, as does the NZDF. Hell, our Helicopters are from the Vietnam era.

They don't really have an excuse. The fact that New Zealand doesn't do much outside peacekeeping seems to be all the excuse they need.

I was on Aussie radio today - ABC Statewide. I sent an e-mail to Bonnie Brown yesterday on my experience with women in combat roles with the NZ Army, (had to write under an alias as my work actually forbids me from taking part in radio discussions.) I wondered why she didn't read it out yesterday, turns out it was because she wanted to turn it into a full Interview segment. Not with me but the NZ Commissioner for Equal Employment Opportunities. It was a good segment.

Fair point. Let's just say they haven't proven otherwise.

Cybargs wrote:

afaik israel has a full women combat brigade but they're rarely on the front lines.

ya but they are hot.  NZ chicks are built like old school rugby players

cbf to find an article but i read somewhere women can't handle the emotional aspect as well as men do in combat.

Seems fair.

Also saw that the plan is for petrol to be effectively exempted from the carbon tax

Who are these people and where did they come from?

"We're going to have a carbon price that will effectively reduce Australia's contribution to climate change."

Things to be presumably excluded from carbon price.
Petrol.
Steel Industry.
Mining Industry.

Things presumable not excluded from cabon price.
Trees.
Rivers.
Bunnies.