Indian Woman for Combat Duties

Status
Not open for further replies.

Longewala

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2016
Messages
1,414
Likes
7,572
Country flag
Desk jobs.
Not necessarily.
There are plenty of jobs which are ultra critical, do not need heavy lifting and are suited to typical female strengths.

Operating sensors for instance, or radar operators, logistics....
Infantry, Artillery and tank crew are less than half if the overall army strength
 

Daisy

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
433
Likes
1,245
Nope, there are lots of jobs suitable for females other than desk jobs.

Medical ( already exists)
Logistics
Signals
Maintenance, Repair & Overhaul
etc etc..

why aren’t female jawans in these support professions?

Where are female army truck drivers?
Where are female IAF ground crew loading bombs onto fighter aircraft?
Where are female army certified forklift operators?
Hang on. This is just a start. Those domains will be open for women cadets gradually.
 

prasadr14

PrasadReddy
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2015
Messages
9,302
Likes
51,888
Feminists will NEVER join military...

You think those crazy bit**es would ever take orders from anyone, worse, if it's man.

The ones joining the military are ones that want to serve and protect & none of them I guarantee are feminists.
 

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
10,247
Likes
26,508
Country flag
Nope, there are lots of jobs suitable for females other than desk jobs.

Medical ( already exists)
Logistics
Signals
Maintenance, Repair & Overhaul
etc etc..

why aren’t female jawans in these support professions?

Where are female army truck drivers?
Where are female IAF ground crew loading bombs onto fighter aircraft?
Where are female army certified forklift operators?
Its a representational thing. Most of these radical feminists pushing for this agenda will NEVER join the armed forces in any capacity.

Infact most are anti-national pawns. NATO has let go of its self after the Cold War and now almost entirely relies on US to bail them out if Russia invades or China attacks.

That's why you see this promoted in Western militaries so much. Our priorities are different. We cannot have all combat roles for women because we are surrounded by enemies.

As for other roles, currently army is inducting women as MPs for frisk and CBMs. Female soldiers make women in a conflict zone more comfortable as it reduces their fear of rape and thus makes them more cooperative.

For the foreseeable future, there will be no combat roles for women other then air defence fighters for IAF, airborne tacticians in IN and limited MP in IA.
 

FalconZero

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2020
Messages
3,782
Likes
19,757
Country flag
Ooooo, very political thread, here are my 2 cent BIG BRAIN points:
>> If she qualifies for the Army without any need of special privilege like downgrading the requirements,etc. then no one has the right to deny her the opportunity.
>> Those who are crying about any cases of assault, extra facilities,etc. Even men can be brutalised, raped,etc. if you are treating two cases as different then you are a sexist bigot and coming to additional facilities etc well sooner or later you have to do it anyway, there are points made by Bhadra sir which give deeper insight about the duty related headache those are something that can be taken care after discussion.
 

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
10,247
Likes
26,508
Country flag
Ooooo, very political thread, here are my 2 cent BIG BRAIN points:
>> If she qualifies for the Army without any need of special privilege like downgrading the requirements,etc. then no one has the right to deny her the opportunity.
>> Those who are crying about any cases of assault, extra facilities,etc. Even men can be brutalised, raped,etc. if you are treating two cases as different then you are a sexist bigot and coming to additional facilities etc well sooner or later you have to do it anyway, there are points made by Bhadra sir which give deeper insight about the duty related headache those are something that can be taken care after discussion.
More bullshit. You cannot have women in combat roles without degrading standards.


Most of these feminists are nothing more than brainwashed marxists to weaken military from the inside.

Coincidentally, China and Russia never promote this in their military but NATO does. Tells you a lot about which side will win in a conflict.
 

FalconZero

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2020
Messages
3,782
Likes
19,757
Country flag
More bullshit. You cannot have women in combat roles without degrading standards.


Most of these feminists are nothing more than brainwashed marxists to weaken military from the inside.

Coincidentally, China and Russia never promote this in their military but NATO does. Tells you a lot about which side will win in a conflict.
Please read again what I said/commented, if she qualifies without the need of downgrading the requirements I don't have any issue, let her in......
 

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
10,247
Likes
26,508
Country flag
Please read again what I said/commented, if she qualifies without the need of downgrading the requirements I don't have any issue, let her in......
That's what they all say. Then the requirements are 'rationalised' to let a few women in for media puff pieces.

Long term effects are devastating for military readiness. But the fools who propose these measures don't suffer, only the men facing the enemy do.
 

Dessert Storm

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2020
Messages
1,672
Likes
5,862
Country flag
Before the thread spirals out into the same retarded bullshit... Constitutionally equal doesn't mean biologically same.

You are overlooking the fact that war is not about just fighting. Yes women can aim & fire so units NSG or RR could take women. But at the front there's mostly hauling load & maintenance of heavy equipment. Men will simply be more efficient in these cases.
And its all about efficiency. Just like I wear glasses so I can't become a fighter pilot! And that's completely fair.

As I mentioned, today there is room where the the sexual dimorphism doesn't come into play. Like air defence, rocket artillery, drones/aviation etc. Some of those can become women only, while infantry & armour take just men.

That would be meaningful involvement of women in combat roles!.. What's presently going on is a mere eyewash.
Please don't suggest assigning some combat roles to 'women only'.
 

Dessert Storm

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2020
Messages
1,672
Likes
5,862
Country flag
It is quite shameful for us as a civilization, that it has come to this. A man posting a picture of male soldier locking a woman 'soldier' just to prove a common sense thing.
Awww...... come one. He is probably the instructor. It's just a meme otherwise.
 

FalconZero

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2020
Messages
3,782
Likes
19,757
Country flag
That's what they all say. Then the requirements are 'rationalised' to let a few women in for media puff pieces.

Long term effects are devastating for military readiness. But the fools who propose these measures don't suffer, only the men facing the enemy do.
>> Then the requirements are 'rationalised' to let a few women in for media puff pieces.
That's just paranoia, if and buts doesn't mean you can deprive someone of the opportunity
>> Long term effects are devastating for military readiness
Here's the thing in the long term we will see more the decline in the difference between what man or woman can and cannot do, especially in this field, sooner or later we will have to involve them you can't deprive 50% of your population out of the opportunity based on 'log kya kahenge' so why not prepare from now.
Your points are not incorrect but they are conjecture of another side of the coin which will may/may not happen.
 

Longewala

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2016
Messages
1,414
Likes
7,572
Country flag
Please read again what I said/commented, if she qualifies without the need of downgrading the requirements I don't have any issue, let her in......
The problem is, as we have seen in the US military, that part you bolded soon goes out of the window.
We have seen useless females being inducted in banking, IT as a routine now, just to bring up the proportion (funny how the reverse doesn't happen, say more male teachers)
With loud proclamations how supposedly "strengthens" the organisation
There is nothing stopping the same happening when in the military.
 

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
10,247
Likes
26,508
Country flag
>> Then the requirements are 'rationalised' to let a few women in for media puff pieces.
That's just paranoia, if and buts doesn't mean you can deprive someone of the opportunity
>> Long term effects are devastating for military readiness
Here's the thing in the long term we will see more the decline in the difference between what man or woman can and cannot do, especially in this field, sooner or later we will have to involve them you can't deprive 50% of your population out of the opportunity based on 'log kya kahenge' so why not prepare from now.
Your points are not incorrect but they are conjecture of another side of the coin which will may/may not happen.
Read through the USMC study.


Then this happened after no women were able to get through infantry course.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mi...or-obstacle-female-infantry-officers.html/amp
 

FalconZero

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2020
Messages
3,782
Likes
19,757
Country flag
The problem is, as we have seen in the US military, that part you bolded soon goes out of the window.
We have seen useless females being inducted in banking, IT as a routine now, just to bring up the proportion (funny how the reverse doesn't happen, say more male teachers)
With loud proclamations how supposedly "strengthens" the organisation
There is nothing stopping the same happening when in the military.
Well, that was my two cents, my reasoning was that rather letting feminists dictate on how to handle military, the army itself should take the initiative since whether people like it or not sooner or later we will have to, we already have few of them leading the front, about US studies will read about it.
 

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
10,247
Likes
26,508
Country flag
Well, that was my two cents, my reasoning was that rather letting feminists dictate on how to handle military, the army itself should take the initiative since whether people like it or not sooner or later we will have to, we already have few of them leading the front, about US studies will read about it.
Its up to the Army to decide it's needs. Politicos, journalists, activists have no business in that.

People are sheep so they cannot differentiate between a mortar or a motor.

When these SJWs try to use pressure tactics simply use them as Battle Of Stalingrad style meat shields.
 

12arya

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2017
Messages
4,208
Likes
15,080
Country flag
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


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.
 

12arya

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2017
Messages
4,208
Likes
15,080
Country flag
Its up to the Army to decide it's needs. Politicos, journalists, activists have no business in that.

People are sheep so they cannot differentiate between a mortar or a motor.

When these SJWs try to use pressure tactics simply use them as Battle Of Stalingrad style meat shields.
I do hope army develop the spine to stand up to the court. What is SC going to do? Hang the Army Chief!
 

12arya

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2017
Messages
4,208
Likes
15,080
Country flag
The problem is, as we have seen in the US military, that part you bolded soon goes out of the window.
We have seen useless females being inducted in banking, IT as a routine now, just to bring up the proportion (funny how the reverse doesn't happen, say more male teachers)
With loud proclamations how supposedly "strengthens" the organisation
There is nothing stopping the same happening when in the military.
It's already happneing with the PC judgement; they have again gone to court stating the Shape 1 fitness standard is unfair to women!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top