MooseBreath Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25078544 Backpacks too heavy apparently. Who'da thought being in the military might require a certain degree of physical strength? But we're all about gender equality in this country, can't point out the obvious differences between men and women otherwise we're sexist. Until they hurt their backs because they can't actually do the job. What a stupid country we live in.
Zingari Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 i suspect their pelvises were being stretched doing other activities.
Jon the Hat Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 That is one way of looking at it. The other being that the services benefit greatly from having servicewomen, and therefore training should take into account the obvious differences you mention. Also that medical staff should be good enough to identify these issues.
Jon the Hat Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 £100k?? Let me join and hurt my back! Did you read the article? Pelvic fractures are not nice. The RAF had a duty of care and they failed to look after their people.
DennisNedry Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 Did you read the article? Pelvic fractures are not nice. The RAF had a duty of care and they failed to look after their people. I'll let you fracture my pelvis with a sledgehammer right now for 100k.
StanSP Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 What were they expecting? Toy guns and teddy bears?
Zingari Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 I'll let you fracture my pelvis with a sledgehammer right now for 100k. stop talking dirty !!
The Year Of The Fox Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 We got beasted really badly once for about 2 hours on the parade square. It was horrific, I ended up pissing blood! Should've claimed!
purpleronnie Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 I'll let you fracture my pelvis with a sledgehammer right now for 100k. Are you a nutter?
Fox92 Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 What a Country we live in. I understand that the forces have a duty of looking after them, and one of the women in that article said they told her to get on with it, but surely you know what you're signing up for? Just like other forces as well, such as firefighters. It's a good job all our veterans didn't/don't moan.
notnow john Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 We got beasted really badly once for about 2 hours on the parade square. It was horrific, I ended up pissing blood! Should've claimed! Were you involved in any of this pelvis fracturing ? You do have form!!
Vacamion Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 Whenever I see people roll out the "we're all going to hell in handcart" sentiments I pause and remember that in a just society, there have to be some cases where outcomes appear unfair, there have to be some swings to match the roundabouts. So: - Do I agree that women should be able to serve in the miltary? - Yes. - Do I agree that the military owes its personnel a duty of care? - Yes. - Do I agree that where an employer is proven to have breached a duty of care and the breach caused injury, that compensation is due? - Yes. As such, whilst the story might not appear to most people to be the best use of the military's money, in a just society, cases like this will, regrettably, arise.
purpleronnie Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 Whenever I see people roll out the "we're all going to hell in handcart" sentiments I pause and remember that in a just society, there have to be some cases where outcomes appear unfair, there have to be some swings to match the roundabouts. So: - Do I agree that women should be able to serve in the miltary? - Yes. - Do I agree that the military owes its personnel a duty of care? - Yes. - Do I agree that where an employer is proven to have breached a duty of care and the breach caused injury, that compensation is due? - Yes. As such, whilst the story might not appear to most people to be the best use of the military's money, in a just society, cases like this will, regrettably, arise. exactly, but no apparantly its just our country.
Rincewind Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 What job can't women do? Sorry for asking but I can't see Mosebreaths post and nobodys quoted him.
MooseBreath Posted 24 November 2013 Author Posted 24 November 2013 The RAF had a duty of care and they failed to look after their people. Some soldiers died over the summer training in the Brecon beacons. No big law suits for a breach of duty of care there. Military training needs to be physically tough for obvious reasons. If you're having to soften it down and make it nice and easy so no-one gets hurt then you've simply lost the plot. We're talking about preparing people to be sent into live warzones, not shelf stacking at waitrose.
Smudge Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 If the average inside leg measurement to the ground of a woman is about 27" and she is being asked to stride 30" then the triangle formed is flatter than a unilateral triangle, put a heavy load on that and it is structurally unsound. A six foot man on the other hand would maintain an angle less than 60 degrees at 30 inches which is structurally sound. Their beef is not about the weight of the packs but the stride they have to take, least that's the way I read it
The Year Of The Fox Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 You don't march as you're on parade with packs/bergens anyway. They're talking about simple marching as in the picture. I've never heard of this 30" thing though unless its purely for the RAF. Were you involved in any of this pelvis fracturing ? You do have form!!
FoxesAreBlue Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 Surely if you poke around any of the forces websites or recruitment websites it will give anybody the information relating to entry standards?
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 That is one way of looking at it. The other being that the services benefit greatly from having servicewomen, and therefore training should take into account the obvious differences you mention. Also that medical staff should be good enough to identify these issues. That being said, Jon, police women are expected to pass the same strenuous training as the men. Some of them are far better than their male counterparts.
Guest Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 stop talking dirty !! As chat up lines go it needs a bit more finesse
AdamN Posted 24 November 2013 Posted 24 November 2013 I did RAF basic training at Halton, and I'm pretty sure that standard practice was to stick the girls (who generally tend to be shorter) at the front, so situations like this didn't come about. Doesn't make any sense if you've got a bunch of people who are 5'5 trying to keep up with someone who's 6'8, setting the pace. So yeah, it looks like some corporal/sergeant has fucked up. They can have little complaint about the size of the packs they were carrying, though. It doesn't matter if you're a feeble little nerd or you're Brock Lesnar - you all need to be capable of carrying the same basic equipment on foot, as you won't survive without it.
Bryn Posted 25 November 2013 Posted 25 November 2013 Tbh, a young woman suffering four pelvic fractures is pretty ****ed up. Don't know how you can disagree that their health was jeopardised.
Zingari Posted 25 November 2013 Posted 25 November 2013 Shouldn't we have kept the WAAFs and RAF separate so that lower standards of fitness ( or physical capabilities) can be allowed? This would obviously have to be reflected in pay though. Do men and women have different physical testing on entry ? Surely there must be shorter men too if not.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.