Last All-Male Military College to Admit Women

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by Charles, Oct 24, 2005.

Loading...
  1. Charles

    Charles New Member

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,173123,00.html

    Whatever the argument was for single-sex precommissioning education, it has been eclipsed by the reality of a very diverse military.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 24, 2005
  2. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Having graduated from an all-male military high school, I can promise you that females, just by their presence, will destroy the very experience it is they seek.
     
  3. DTechBA

    DTechBA New Member

    Yeah but....

    What about the experience's the boys are seeking.....:D
     
  4. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: Yeah but....

    That's what will destroy the military school experience. A group of all males in a military setting accept their fate, and focus on doing the job at hand. Adding females into the equation provides a myriad of distractions that will ultimately take away from the experience.
     
  5. adireynolds

    adireynolds New Member

    Re: Re: Yeah but....

    You know Bruce, I agree with you on a certain level (and even wrote vociferous protests in Letters to the Editor when the VMI debaucle happened in the 90's).

    BUT.

    For those females that wish to receive a military-based schooling, what should they do? To my knowledge, there are no all-female military academies. And, to continue to play devil's advocate, since men are going to encounter women once they get into the actual military, would learning to keep to the task at hand earlier (i.e., avoid distractions) in a school environment be more productive than, say, doing so for the first time in a possible combat environment?

    Just two cents here from a female Army vet who hasn't yet made up her mind on this topic.

    Cheers,
    Adrienne

    P.S. When I went through Army basic training, it was completely segregated. It's my understanding that it has now been, for some time, coed to a certain degree. Does anyone have any information or stats on how that's worked out, not only for the Army in general, but its effect on unit readiness, morale, etc?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 26, 2005
  6. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: Re: Re: Yeah but....

    Well, they can attend any military college in the country, since they're now all co-ed. I was lamenting the passing of the all-male military college. I have nothing other than my gut feeling, but I don't think there's enough of a market for an all-female military school.

    My basic training was all-male, being at the Infantry School at Fort Benning. However, when I was deployed for the first Gulf War, I was in a National Guard MP Company, and we did have one female in my platoon. She went home pregnant after a couple of weeks of us arriving in-country, and morale in the platoon improved immensely. There is just something about being in a war zone where men want other men covering their backs, for better or worse.
     
  7. adireynolds

    adireynolds New Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah but....

    I'd certainly agree with you here . . . definitely not a market big enough.

    I will admit, I've never been in a real combat situation, so wouldn't dare to comment like I have. The closest I've been to that was in PLDC, which I took at Ft. Ord with all light infantry guys. I could see, in the beginning, how suspicious they were of what my performance would be in the field (and justified, I'll grant), but at the end, they accepted me as one of their own, when they saw I could (and did) do everything they did, and then some. Of course, I realize that any training environment isn't the same as the real thing, no matter what.

    This is an issue I've struggled with for a long time, as a female, and as a veteran -- namely, the more general idea of women in combat roles and/or units. I still haven't landed on one side of the fence or the other -- I see, and believe, excellent reasons for both views.

    Cheers,
    Adrienne
     
  8. Charles

    Charles New Member

    The reality is that women have become an integral part of the armed forces.

    Though the combat arms (armor, infantry, artillery, special forces, and submarines) are closed to women, they command warships, fly combat aircraft, and have engaged in ground combat in so called combat support roles.

    Recently Sgt. Leigh Ann Hester became the first woman since World War II, to be awarded the Silver Star Medal.

    http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2005/20050616_1745.html


    As far as I know the Marine Corps is the only service that completely segregates men and women for basic training.

    We should note that the military colleges and basic training commands do not share the exact same mission. I think the argument for segregated boot camp companies is a lot easier to make.

    I served in male-only and mixed-gender units. As more units became integrated, leaders were faced with a whole different set of leadership challenges, despite these challenges women have continued to prove themselves. I think it is very unlikely that women will ever become less integrated in the armed forces.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 26, 2005
  9. me again

    me again Well-Known Member

    The last 80 years has definately seen a blurring of gender roles. I don't think it's healthy.
     
  10. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah but....

    Even in a training environment, problems can arise. When I was in an Infantry unit, I was in Division Recon, so we would frequently be inserted by helicopter into a remote area for seven days at a time, with nothing but what we carried on our backs. Putting aside the strength and endurance factors, there were simply things you had to do that would have made a female's presence impractical.

    For instance, when you had to go.....you dug a cathole, and you couldn't wander anywhere away from the rest of your team. I don't know of many females that would be comfortable doing that in a group of males, or many males that wouldn't be a bit distracted by it. There are other things about the female anatomy that makes long stays in the boonies impractical, but I'm sure I don't need to explain them to you.

    At the risk of sounding un-PC, I don't think females have any place in the Infantry. I can't speak for the other Combat Arms, since I have no experience with them. Heck, they might even be better than males for Armor, since the inside of a tank is rather cramped.

    Infantry requires brute strength, endurance, and a killer mind-set. As long as there are enough males willing to take on the job, I don't see the point of lowering morale and effectiveness by allowing females, in order to spare someone's feelings.
     
  11. uncle janko

    uncle janko member

    DI at its best (off-topically, anyway)

    Thanks for a bunch of well-argued and interesting posts.

    A nicely-behaved catechism class is a real joy.:p
     
  12. DTechBA

    DTechBA New Member

    In the 80's....

    Way back in the 80's the Army funded a detailed and realistic study of how women function compared to men. After the study was presented, the Army Times published an article under the headline that went roughly (Woman Artillery Crew Functions as Well as an All Male Crew". The article, without any apparent clue whatsoever, goes on the recount that a female crew with 3 more members than the all male crew performed just as well as an all male crew in a test of battery firing in combat situations. (!?)

    Some stronger women can function as well as some weaker men. However, these are so limited in number that you have to ask is it worth it to place them in an infantry type unit when that unit would have to carry extra supplies to support the unique needs of just a few female soldiers. In the case of an artillery unit, you would have to have roughly 30% more soldiers to do the job. That unit would also cost about 30% more since supplies and pay for females are the same or more. A loader on a tank is crueling work. The female back probably couldn't take the load as they carry most of their strength lower.

    It is more than an equality issue....
     
  13. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: In the 80's....

    The Army Times ran a propoganda piece??

    Shocking!! :rolleyes:
     
  14. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    I've never been to an all-male school, military or otherwise, but (just out of curiosity) can you explain for me how women destroy the very experience they seek by going to formerly all-male schools?
     
  15. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    As I mentioned before, a group of males in a military environment accept their fate, and are single-minded on accomplishing what they need to do, so they may one day leave that environment.

    Adding females, especially a small number of females in relation to the number of males, destroys morale, and causes infighting, back-biting, and all-out physical fights, as the males vie for the attention of the females. I've seen it happen, more than once.

    So...if the females are seeking that type of esprit de corps environment, they're going to destroy what they seek, just by being there.
     
  16. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    The ironic part is that all-women's colleges use exactly that argument in justifying why they won't go coed.

    So what's intolerably sexist when men's schools say it (all-male colleges have become an endangered species) becomes inspiringly feminist when women's colleges say exactly the same thing. (Women's colleges are going coed as well, but not as rapidly.)
     
  17. adireynolds

    adireynolds New Member

    Yes, well, women often seem to use such a double-standard, I'm sad to say. *sheepish look -- please don't flame me, feminists out there!*

    Bruce, I would still agree with you that the combat arms roles should be closed to women, as I agree that most women couldn't handle the sustained physical challenges of that role. However, I also wonder if my attitude isn't socially conditioned -- I read a great book a few years ago called (I think -- I'm on the road in London at the moment, so can't look it up on my bookshelf) Battlecries and Lullabies, which details women's involvement not only in the military, but also in battle, throughout history and the world, reaching back into antiquity. I guess what I'm trying to say is, perhaps women don't do as well in battle, since we're all conditioned to think of women as "the fairer sex", so to speak. After all, the Amazonians in Africa a couple thousand years ago could whup some butt pretty well! :p

    This is a great discussion, and as you can tell, I don't know where I really sit with it -- I'm quite conflicted. I love to hear differing opinions on this -- hopefully that will help me to crystalize my own thoughts!

    Cheers,
    Adrienne
     
  18. DTechBA

    DTechBA New Member

    I should point out...

    That what got VMI and the Citadel in trouble was thet they were PUBLIC all male schools. Private same sex schools can do as they wish. I would bet Valley Forge is doing this for attendence reasons rather than political....
     
  19. Mr. Engineer

    Mr. Engineer member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yeah but....

    Having never been in the infantry, I can only take your word for this. I think we need to have one standard for everyone to meet for a given MOS. I know some women who frankly could kick most guy's butts - I also know some male Army personnel who are so out of shape that they have no business in the field. My take: If they are qualified and can do the job, let them serve. As far as the morale issues, this is the same excuse they gave for separating blacks/asians and whites in the Army. What is really takes is strong leadership from the top with a no-nonsense policy to avoid the morale problems. If the leaders aren't forced to accept it, then the rank and file won't either.

    As far as the Navy - I know of no job except for possibly the Seals (which 99% of the males in the Navy aren't able to do) that women cannot do equally as men. I was an ET so bascially a women could be as good as a male.
     
  20. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: I should point out...

    Oh, I definitely agree.

    Ironic, as my all-male miltary high school has record applications, and admission is quite competitive.
     

Share This Page