Originally Posted by
SaltyDog
BDGERJMN, AK Hawg
Interesting discusion. This is very common unfortunately.
Slice never mentioned anything other than than mixed gender units deployed have fraternization problems. BDGERJMN introduced the capability of women. AK Hawg you made the same assumption. Slice did not question the capability of women. That had nothing to do nor has anything to do with the increased fraternization issues. I have service on both sides of this fence. Mixed gender, deployed units has caused many problems. It is a fact, many leaders fail this test, and the citizens of the US accept the increased leadership failures, broken homes, extra training costs, etc as a necessary part of military business in an all volunteer force. I accept that, but still have the same opinion as Slice, though unimportant anymore and I absolutely support current policy. Yes, have worked with some extraordinarily capable servicemembers of both genders. (Again, a non issue) The service of all volunteers is very appreciated. My sister was Navy enlisted, she actually shared alot of the reasons that formed my opinions. I won't duck the incoming PC comments <g>
Ya' know, I took a lot of spears in my career on this argument. I'll give you a snapshot of how a woman can change the dynamics of a situation:
Intra mural softball...pilots and ops verses maintainers in Spain around 1995. We had a really cute 1CO that was on our team. After a few innings of ball, she makes a smart remark about one of the enlisted guy's socks looking goofy. At that point, several other guys...mesmerized by her cute looks, also join the fray and raz the offending dude for his socks.
Now...play the tape without a woman there. Somebody makes a comment about a dude's clothes. The response I suspect he would have gotten would have been along the lines of "why don't you shut the $#@ up, what are you, a pole smoker? You wanna check out my undies too?"
My point is that putting women into a group dynamic changes things. In this case, every male wanted the little hottie's approval. I'm not saying its better or worse, but you cannot deny it is different. I fought in Desert Storm with a Europe based M-1A1 unit, and the battallion was all male. In the support areas, however, fratenization was obvious. Ditto on my trips to Dahran where the 1 Wing from Langley set up camp. The stress of impending battle, and possible death, brought a tension and atmosphere that probably invited the "why the heck not?" sort of mindset that I saw.
If improper relationships were happening, I am not here to lay (hehehe) blame on anyone. What I am pointing out is that sexual tension in the support echelons was very real and to ignore it and say "you all need to be professionals" is to ignore eons of biology and social programming.
My argument against women in fighter units for years was they run the risk of eroding or undermining the special warrior character that permeates a fighting unit. That said...one of my last flights in the F-15 was helping a sharp young gal get through her G issues as she went through F-15 training, and I flew with several very capable female pilots in my career. The brass said that rights of the female to serve outweighed the potential changes to the culture of the unit. I didn't quit the AF...I saluted smartly and did my best to not only accept the change but to adapt and support the policy as much as I could.
However...put a woman in a unit or location and it is "different". We can work around the issues, find a way to make it work, etc but denying that somehow a more "enlightened" policy undoes years and years of biology and our own human characteristics is fallacy. People of the opposite sex are going to be attracted to each other at times, especially when emotionallly vunerable or stressed. Combat will exacerbate our own nature. This is just a new issue we'll have to work through as a fighting force...