Simply stop inducting them in services. Will save a lot of headache.
Not gonna happen, bro.
Women can be very nimble and have quick reflexes. Can be very lethal in CQB but that has to be limited to urban warfare only.There was a time when (if u go thru the initial pages of this thread and read my comments) when i thought there must be quite some percentage of women who r as strong as men; I vociferously argued for their intake if they fit the standards.
But the more i read, the proof overwhelmingly point to the fact that such females remain illusive or simply don't exist. I mean women can b used in so many sectors in military but not infantry...at least not with the current tech.
I do believe so many intelligent women r out there who r as smarter or even more smarter then men intellectually and I believe women will excel in such fields where intelligence is needed.
But physically, men r simply too strong. That's how they r created and i just don't get why feminists consider this an attack on women? I just cannot understand why does feminists consider, being soft or gentle or soft bodied or kind or nurturing or polite, is detrimental to females!
Am I the only woman who think these values and physical peculiarities shud b cherished
May be I am too old-fashioned for the current scenario.
If you demand pay parity, you have to match the exact standards as your male counterparts. Simple as that.
Urban warfare is the worst task for women as it demands extremely quick reaction, with threats emerging left and right all the time. What if a section has to deploy within 10 mins notice, and one female soldier has a period or something? You si.ply cannot compromise on operational readiness for whatsoever reason. Women cannot be part of infantry or artillery in an army actively engaged in combat.
But that's not the argument bro; its not abt being nimble and all. Instead, feminists always insist on women being equally as tough as men.
The big issue is higher infection rate; if there is even a drop in hygene UTI; if water is not gud, UTI; if u sleep with a not so clean guy, result UTI; get sexually active first, UTI.
I know many women in military do it and kudos to them.
The big issue is these feminists dont consider the other branches of Army where there is already good presence of women to be equal enough. They think only and only Front line induction is real job in ARmy and only after induction to front lines they will become equal to Men counterpart.
i have been fortunate to have worked with one of the most Bada** female colleague. She worked honestly and never seeked excuse for leaves. She partied like some of us hardcore males and could stand up face to face with any odd behaving colleague if need arised. She worked long hours and not taking off during periods if not needed. She was one of the best friend of mine from office. She got what she deserved , got onsite opportunity and is working in US currently.
It reaffirms their ignorance.
SC said hamara kaam ho gaya. File writ petition.Now they have suddenly remembered menstruation and biological differences when army told them to shape up if they want PC!
Criterion to screen women for permanent commission unfair, Army officers tell SC
Women officers have filed a plea challenging the General Instructions issued by the Indian Army to screen them for permanent commission.
21 October, 2020 7:19 pm IST
Criterion to screen women for permanent commission unfair, Army officers tell SC
Women officers have filed a plea challenging the General Instructions issued by the Indian Army to screen them for permanent commission.theprint.in
New Delhi: Women officers, who fought a decade-long court battle for securing permanent commission (PC) in the Indian Army, are now engaged in yet another litigation.
This time, they have challenged the General Instructions (GI) issued by the Indian Army on 1 August in compliance with the Supreme Court’s 17 February judgment granting PC to its women officers.
The GI refers to the set of instructions to screen women officers for PC in the Indian Army.
In their fresh petition last week, the women officers have alleged that the GI sets out a general medical criterion for all women officers without considering the physiological and biological changes that may have occurred in a few of them during their service period.
They have also alleged that the GI does not mention the promotional avenues for women officers once they become permanent and do not offer them a time-scale promotion benefit, which is available to male officers who have served the Army for more than 26 years.
The landmark February ruling had also directed the central government to grant promotion and other consequential benefits to women officers. But the petitioners have alleged that the GI indirectly traps them into “technical and procedural formalities and consequential denial of their rights”.
Advocate Chitrangada Rastravara, who represented women officers in the top court last week, told that the “purported compliance” of the SC judgment, almost five months after it was delivered, is “vitiated with arbitrariness, unfairness and unreasonableness”.
“This is a piecemeal approach by the Army. It has failed to determine a fair, rational road map and a well-reasoned policy for women officers, pushing them to approach the court again to assert their rights. Time is extremely crucial for these women officers who have already lost 15 years (time spent in courts). Instead of compensating them for their loss, the Army is penalising them further with such arbitrary instructions,” Rastrava said.
‘Subjecting all women to common deadline irrational’
The women officers have submitted that the medical criterion laid down in the GI is inconsistent with the basic tenets of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Women officers who are being considered for permanent commission fall within the age bracket of 35-50 years. But the medical parameters incorporated in the GI to evaluate them are the same as used for male officers aged 25-30 years, who are given the option of a permanent commission in their 5th and 10th year of service.
“This kind of prejudicial determination will lead to denial of PC to those officers who are equally qualified as their male counterparts and were kept in abeyance only for want of an opportunity of PC at the relevant time in their service career,” the officers claimed.
They also submitted that the medical parameters do not recognise physiological changes as a part of the aging process in the case of women officers. For instance, women officers above 45 years (approaching menopause) as well as unmarried women officers have been asked to undergo pregnancy test, overlooking their age and marital status.
The medical category of a woman in the Army is lowered when a pregnancy is confirmed and she is protected from strenuous duties. In the GI for women, a common deadline has been laid for all women officers, including those in the low medical category, to upgrade themselves to ‘Shape-1‘ category for the grant of PC, said the petitioners.
Subjecting all women to a common deadline is irrational and unjust, they said.
Lack of promotion policy
The petitioners have also highlighted the absence of a policy for promotion of women officers who will be approved by the Permanent Commission Board.
The existing parameters on which an officer is assessed for the purposes of promotion includes attending certain courses and appointments. However, since women officers were not eligible for PC earlier, they never got an opportunity to attend these courses. And, even if they were given an opportunity to attend those, it wasn’t for the purpose of evaluation by the promotion board, the officers said.
The women officers argued that they cannot be evaluated for promotion on the basis of parameters fixed for their male counterparts. This lack of promotion policy is likely to become another hurdle or roadblock for the women officers, unless fresh rules are prepared by the Army, they said.
“The conduct of the respondent suggests that they are playing psychological warfare with these women officers to avoid every possibility of granting them the benefits of permanent commission, promotion and consequential benefits, which is in clear violation of the order,” the petition said.
No bro. Never underestimate these feminasis. They'll keep on banging SC's door till they allow it.
SC cannot tell Army about standards. They can only request changes.
indianexpress.com
Ya @12arya Nibbi it's like this Womens are like carefully sculpted like a sport cars and we are utility focused like a 4 × 4 AWD Vehicles.There was a time when (if u go thru the initial pages of this thread and read my comments) when i thought there must be quite some percentage of women who r as strong as men; I vociferously argued for their intake if they fit the standards.
But the more i read, the proof overwhelmingly point to the fact that such females remain illusive or simply don't exist. I mean women can b used in so many sectors in military but not infantry...at least not with the current tech.
I do believe so many intelligent women r out there who r as smarter or even more smarter then men intellectually and I believe women will excel in such fields where intelligence is needed.
But physically, men r simply too strong. That's how they r created and i just don't get why feminists consider this an attack on women? I just cannot understand why does feminists consider, being soft or gentle or soft bodied or kind or nurturing or polite, is detrimental to females!
Am I the only woman who think these values and physical peculiarities shud b cherished
May be I am too old-fashioned for the current scenario.
A Major General as a corps commander??!!Army shunts officiating Commandant of OTA Chennai following complaints
The officer, a Major General, had been posted as Deputy Commandant of OTA, Chennai in May this year and was officiating as Commandant since July.
Army shunts officiating Commandant of OTA Chennai following complaints
The officer, a Major General, had been posted as Deputy Commandant of OTA, Chennai in May this year and was officiating as Commandant since July.
Written by Man Aman Singh Chhina
The Army finally decided to act in the matter and has posted the Major General as Chief of Staff of a Corps and another Major General has been posted as the officiating Commandant at OTA.
(Source: indianarmy.nic.in)
The Army has shunted out the officiating Commandant of the Officers Training Academy (OTA), Chennai, after receiving complaints regarding his approach to training woman cadets.
The officer, a Major General, had been posted as Deputy Commandant of OTA, Chennai in May this year and was officiating as Commandant since July. It is learnt that complaints had been received by the Army about the officer while dealing with the training of woman cadets in the academy and his emphasis on more “hands-on” approach towards activities like their military training and PT.
He is alleged to have encouraged physical contact with woman cadets and there were other issues of passing them in physical tests by allegedly lowering the required standards.
The officer is learnt to have justified his approach by saying that gender equality has to be ingrained in the minds of the cadets at the level of the training academy and that outdated methods of training should be abandoned. He is also said to have told the instructional staff for better training methods to decrease the failure rate among woman cadets in physical activities.
However, it is learnt that there was considerable discontent among the instructors, both men and women, and some woman cadets at the academy regarding the Major General’s approach.
“The matter reached the level of the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Army Training Command (ARTRAC) Lt Gen Raj Shukla, who visited the OTA and personally took stock of the situation,” a senior Army officer revealed on condition of anonymity.
The Army finally decided to act in the matter and has posted the Major General as Chief of Staff of a Corps and another Major General has been posted as the officiating Commandant at OTA.
When contacted, while declining to comment on the issue, a senior officer at Army Headquarters said, “As an organisation, the Army prides itself on providing a safe and secure working environment to all ranks by strictly implementing guidelines listed in various laws enacted by the Parliament as well as the Supreme Court to prevent sexual harassment of soldiers, officers and cadets. The Indian Army practices zero tolerance towards violation of established guidelines and practices and all allegations are promptly investigated and taken to a logical conclusion.”
The Major General in question had earlier faced a court of inquiry in 2014 as a Brigadier when a woman doctor in the USA had levelled charges of unbecoming conduct against him during his tenure at Indian Permanent Mission at UN in New York. However, the Court of Inquiry had cleared his name of the allegations at the time.
The OTA Chennai, which trains cadets for short service commission in the Army, has 80-90 woman cadets under training at any given point of time along with 370-odd male cadets. There are four woman officers who are part of the team of instructors and who are supposed to be dealing closely with the woman cadets.
