• Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    I would imagine them being slower and sneakier, with lighter armored but more specialized soldiers.

    Again, you’re really thinking of frontline soldiers, which is kind of a small part of the jobs in the military. And you’re pretty much thinking of the army(and/or marines).

    I’d say that women are people, like men, and like men, they have more individual strengths and weaknesses than they do as a group. Military is just built around the physicality of men, but most of the taller girls kept up pretty well, just like it was easier for the taller guys to keep up with things.

    And the reason the girls usually didn’t get placed in the frontline groups was that those are the shortest and easiest to train, and every one of those women volunteered, so they’re didn’t want to just take the shortest and simplest way out (as the training and thus service time for basic infantry was months shorter).

    Also I know of at least one girl who was an infantry squad leader (leader of a jaeger squad jääkärialikersantti) and went off to become an infantry officer after her service. She tried getting in the first time, but as her tests weren’t in the top, she wasn’t accepted, but everyone can go through the training after their service with the next group of arrivals if they so choose and fulfill certain requirements. So she should be an officer now. Last saw her some 16 years ago when she went off to the after-service officer course. So I’d reckon she might be a lieutenant or even an overlieutenant or maybe even a captain if she’s been actively going to reserve drills. Probably not, but at least a vänrikki (one under lieutenant, ~ensign, nato rank OF-1)

    But like my point is that they’re really not that different.

    One thing I did kinda dislike though is that the physical requirements were less for women than men. Because I think they should be set by objective needs and not just be scoring the physically best of each sex.