quote:

Originally posted by 8950331:
It certainly doesn't make any difference whether one is toting a weapon at an FOB, driving a truck or vehicle in a convoy, doing guard duty at an operating base, flying a chopper, or doing time at sea (brown water, littoral, or blue water); or whether you are male or female...these psychological traumas are happening, & must be dealt with, most honorably & fairly, by our Nation. It should be well remembered that; all who have served, are serving, & who will serve should & must be accorded whatever needs to be done in order to deal with this affliction, & to be able to get on with their lives. After all, they most certainly have extended themselves for their Nation, "light years" more so than those who whine or complain & not serve; & those who pacify & lend apologies & defenses to our enemies. May the Good Lord always bless& protect our Great nation, along with our brave & courageous men & women in uniform serving it....

quote:

Originally posted by MarineAuntie:

quote:

Originally posted by 6145060:
I think shes cute,....war is a mans world,....sure, our female veterans are doing an outstanding job,....but, is it worth the obvious damage to them? I do not intend to demean them,...I am just old fashioned, and feel they serve better as medical, and other non-combat related fields.

I speak from experience,...not from a book.

Yeah, too bad she's not a guy, because guys don't get PTSD ... oh, wait ...

This article does not give any comparative analysis between male and female soldiers suffering PTSD and seems to suggest that only women suffer from this problem when we all know that ain't true. So I'm not sure what the author's point is, except maybe to say that even the so-called rear echelon types are getting PTSD, but that's true for everyone in an exposed occupation such as convoy driver, transportation specialist, MP, etc. Since anyone can be blown up at any time, no matter what their MOS or location in country, maybe the point of the article should have been that even people - male and female - in positions that ordinarily would have been deemed less stressful are instead experiencing great stress because of the nature of the conflict. I think added to this, too, is the fact that a lot of military women have complained about sexual harassment by their fellow soldiers and commanders. This adds to their stress in a completely unacceptable and controllable

fashion.

quote:

Originally posted by 6145060:
What branch was MarineAuntie in,....?

My post was not meant to demean women, nor state that men are not susceptible to PTSD,...I speak from actual military experience, and current work experience,...women, as a rule, are not physically, or emotionally as strong as most men. That is a medical fact,....thus, they are NOT allowed in actual COMBAT roles.

Womens liberation has both helped women, and in cases such as these, as well as female police, and firefighters, HURT them, because they just do not NORMALLY pack the gear to fully perform the jobs they are assigned.

By the same token, most men are not qualified to fullfill roles historically performed by women.

quote:

Originally posted by Ol_Doc:

quote:

Originally posted by IC2SS19Z50C5:

quote:

Originally posted by 6145060:
war is a mans world,......

I am just old fashioned, and feel they serve better as medical, and other non-combat related fields.

I speak from experience,...not from a book.

BRAVO ZULU, My feelings exactly...

No point in debating the pros and cons concerning women in combat. Theory is over. This is reality. I don’t necessarily see PTSD and TBI as more or less tragic in female soldiers as in male soldiers. The point that needs to be made IMHO is that we are not only unprepared to deal with these combat related maladies in the numbers of male soldiers returning, we are way unprepared to deal with them in women. Just the number of resident treatment beds available to female vets alone is totally unrealistic. This Country needs to take action now, rather than expecting the problem to go away. Our experience with previous conflicts indicates it won’t go away. We need to take care of our wounded warriors regardless of sex.

quote:

Originally posted by SheepdogA39:
( im almost 49 years old, and still in excellent shape)I would eagerly return. I realize that though I am still in excellent condition, I am "old" concerning the current conflict,....that is a YOUNG MANS GAME.

------------------------------------------------

I'm 43. I just got back. I don't think it's a young man's game, and I'd go as far as to say things would be alot better if we had more old soldiers. Our judgement almost always exceeds the younger troopers. Dedication, mission focus, the ability to handle situations as they arise...all exceed the younger troopers. Our life experience enables us to handle horrible situations alot better. We don't waste time learning how to do basic things in combat because we already know how (to change tires, jerry rig, self recover...all the old tricks.) And anecdotally speaking? I met young troops who could run faster, and bench more, but not a one that could stay alert, or focused, or outlast one of us old guys. Not one.
My best friend and I, he's 46, volunteered for deployment because we were tired of seeing broken young men and women and figured if we went there'd be at least two less youngsters with a lot of life to live required to go. I don't know how valid our theory was, we ended up seeing alot more broken youngsters...and that was hard.
But as far as the PTSD...Ruanne has IMHO hit on the real reason more women are suffering from it. It's true that women are more likely to report it. There is a stigma attached to "not having nerves of steel" for men.
Another factor not mentioned yet is that the VA and the Army, seem to be "pushing" PTSD. My friend and I, having been shot at and blown up a couple of times were told that we qualify for disability under PTSD if we: Have dreams about it, think about it when we don't want to, can't sleep, get headaches...a whole list of stuff that is easy to claim, and impossible to disprove. I think, for some reason, they want as many of us Vets in the system as they can get. A few years ago, when you returned from deployment, the VA rep would push tintivitus, or ringing in the ears. Easy to claim, impossible to disprove...and it'd get you in the system with a disability. Next thing you know, we're all required to wear earplugs in combat. Then it switched to TBI and PTSD. I think there's a bit bureaucratic politics going on here and what really torches me and my friends is that we see a bunch of people lining up to take a slice of the services and benefits that really injured and disabled warriors have coming to them.
We had dreams about it. We thought about it when we didn't want to, but hey, I've got ex-girlfriends that I'd like to never think about again too. And they too occasionally make an appearance on the concious stage of my mind...that's just life.
We'll just have no part of it. The benefits should be there for those who need it, not for those who can simply take advantage of it.

quote:

Originally posted by 6145060:
What branch was MarineAuntie in,....?

My post was not meant to demean women, nor state that men are not susceptible to PTSD,...I speak from actual military experience, and current work experience,...women, as a rule, are not physically, or emotionally as strong as most men. That is a medical fact,....thus, they are NOT allowed in actual COMBAT roles.

Womens liberation has both helped women, and in cases such as these, as well as female police, and firefighters, HURT them, because they just do not NORMALLY pack the gear to fully perform the jobs they are assigned.

By the same token, most men are not qualified to fullfill roles historically performed by women.

quote:

Originally posted by BRATTandTROOPER:
This article really frustrates me. Great, they have factual evidence that PTSD has risen with military females. What is the evidence on men's rates with the nature of this war? In addition, they mentioned that females are serving more in combat roles now than ever in history, but they did not link that to being the cause of the increase. If women had been serving in these types of roles for the past 50 years would there be an increase? of course not, so why are we honing in on this fact like it's the end all, be all of arguments on women in combat?

I completely agree with restrictions on women in traditional combat roles. Not because they wouldn't be qualified (although I agree that 95% wouldn't be), but more so because of what female integration does to all male units that are ideally just warfighters. Now, having females on the battlefield is a huge benefit in today's war because of the interaction with the populace, etc. However, to post a picture of a young pretty girl who reminds everyone of their little sister on the cheerleading squad, and try to scare everyone with the idea that women are naturally more inclined to have issues after being in combat is absolutely unfair. There are women all over our Army who are defying the stereotypes, and in all honesty, are probably under more pressure than the men, because they are in a combat zone, but don't get treated the same and do not have the same opportunities for true commaraderie that men do.

Yes, you have guessed right, I am a woman, currently deployed and LEADING combat patrols in Iraq with ALL MEN. I have had my share of traumatic moments, but the effects on me are no worse or better than those effects I've seen on my male soldiers. Sure, there are females here who have had trouble, but we've also had males with the same issues. This is probably too long of a response to such a short article, but honestly, my issue with it was not in the fundamental subject itself, as much as with the way in which is was presented. I also have a husband leading in combat in Iraq right now as well. I am truly grateful for the opportunity to serve my country in the same capacity as my husband does. Sure, I look and act like a normal American girl - but I signed my name to take the same risks if asked of me, and I expect to be just as vulnerable to PTSD or anything else as my male counterparts. I'm really sick of the female issue being an issue, because I've seen far too many exceptions to the rule!

God bless all men and women who have raised their right hand to do whatever was asked of them and to lead our country into an unknown future. War is difficult - maybe if more civilians stepped up to the plate, stereotypical women wouldn't have to serve, but what does it matter? Even with all the men sitting on their lazy behinds at home, smoking dope or watching the latest celebrity sagas on TV and driving around in their expensive car that far outweighs his paycheck, women in the military (instinctually weaker or not) will never get the same respect because of articles like this. You can call me feminist, but put yourself in my shoes as a person and a soldier and you may understand.

quote:

Originally posted by Weatherguesser:

quote:

I completely agree with restrictions on women in traditional combat roles. Not because they wouldn't be qualified (although I agree that 95% wouldn't be), but more so because of what female integration does to all male units that are ideally just warfighters. Now, having females on the battlefield is a huge benefit in today's war because of the interaction with the populace, etc. However, to post a picture of a young pretty girl who reminds everyone of their little sister on the cheerleading squad, and try to scare everyone with the idea that women are naturally more inclined to have issues after being in combat is absolutely unfair.

Absolute Balderdash.

I love that line... "Male Units"? THAT is what drives most of what the men are saying, without really saying it... eh? "Male Units" are THE reason why women frighten men in the military. Got to get over it.

Think there aren't any young "pretty" men in uniform out there? Ask any women to look at any 10 soldiers... she'll find at least 1 or 2 "pretty" ones. How do women "looking better" than the next guy or gal make ANY difference to their ability to fight and die for their country?

Also, how did you come by that figure of "95%" who wouldn't be qualified? How on Earth could you know that? You couldn't.

Also, women are acknowledged to be STRONGER "emotionally" than most men, but from what I remember of my days in the Navy, there were plenty of frightened little punks around(males), goldbricking - while the rest of us ran the ship.

Lastly, our Navy now has tens of thousands of WOMEN serving on Warships, many IN that area of the world, which means they are already serving in "Combat Roles".

( I wish we could have served with women on my ships, back in the early 1970's. )

quote:

I'm 43. I just got back. I don't think it's a young man's game, and I'd go as far as to say things would be alot better if we had more old soldiers. Our judgement almost always exceeds the younger troopers. Dedication, mission focus, the ability to handle situations as they arise...all exceed the younger troopers. Our life experience enables us to handle horrible situations alot better. We don't waste time learning how to do basic things in combat because we already know how (to change tires, jerry rig, self recover...all the old tricks.) And anecdotally speaking? I met young troops who could run faster, and bench more, but not a one that could stay alert, or focused, or outlast one of us old guys. Not one.