British military must march like women

[Skybird]

If true (its the Sunday Mail), this is a principle issue, and must be seen in the light of the blossoming genderism madness in Europe, for which it seems to be just one of so many crazy symptoms.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2512412/Female-RAF-recruits-100-000-compensation--march-like-men.html

What's next? Reduction of Rucksack weight? Two free days every 27 days?

Getting international treaties that forbid enemies in military conflict to shoot at own female soldiers...?

[Cybermat47]

Disgusting :nope:

For a woman who spent years in agony, Tracy Davies sure looks happy.

EDIT: And as many people in the comments section pointed out, WHAT ABOUT SHORT MEN?!

[Sailor Steve]

WHAT ABOUT SHORT MEN?!
The get told to stop acting like women, and then they wash out.

Maybe the women should be marching in trousers rather than skirts.

Hey, wait a minute! Can men in the army wear skirts? DISCRIMINATION!!!

[August]

Hey, wait a minute! Can men in the army wear skirts? DISCRIMINATION!!!

Actually in their army they do:

http://www.your-kilt.com/images/regimental1.jpg

[Aktungbby]

I'm not see'n the Skean Dhu in those socks MON; they're probably wearin' skivvies under their kilties too...must be lowlanders!

[Herr-Berbunch]

I joined up with plenty of short women, all managed training just fine. My career continued with some short women and whilst the majority may have whinged and moaned about a lot of things - pace/stride of marching wasn't one.
:yep:

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

I'm on their side. Sure, if they got hurt because of legitimate, combat-effectiveness related activities, we might call it a valid They Can't Hack It. Marching to a particular stride is merely pretty and does not qualify.

[Tribesman]

It is very simple , the military lives by regulations, it set the regulations on marching, it broke the regulations, it is liable.

[the_tyrant]

Reminds me of this really:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0C1jj6I0eJA

"No women's worth crawling on the earth, so walk like a man my son"

[Herr-Berbunch]

Here's the new UK Joint Forces Marching Regulations (2013) training video, hopefully this type of compensation claim will never be seen again.

Edit - see Privateer's link, below, that's what should've been here.

[Tchocky]

The problem here is that women want to do something they have traditionally blocked from.

Therefore it must be fought tooth and nail.

Because family.

Because man-hating feminists are removing pork from school lunches.

[Jimbuna]

Here's the new UK Joint Forces Marching Regulations (2013) training video, hopefully this type of compensation claim will never be seen again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0dWo31hwpI (http://freckerwwiiteam5.wikispaces.com/Katya+Budanova)

That link is taking me here:

http://freckerwwiiteam5.wikispaces.com/Katya+Budanova

[Madox58]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0dWo31hwpI

[AndyJWest]

If true (its the Sunday Mail)...

Yes, but it's the Sunday Mail. The reality (as always) is more complicated: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25078544

The issue wasn't 'women marching with men'. It was particular women suffering injuries during basic training after being told by qualified medical personnel "to march through it". The RAF should be well aware that all new recruits may have fitness issues, and ensure that they receive appropriate medical advice.

[Ducimus]

I can't get past the picture in the article. I think we have a better way to march in the US military. These exaggerated arm swings and the like other nations military's do i think are ridiculous. If memory serves correctly, our arm swing is 6 to the front and 4 to the rear, not this raise your arm parallel with the deck BS.

[Jimbuna]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0dWo31hwpI

Ah, Python :)

[CaptainMattJ.]

Should they receive compensation? Yes. Should they be receiving that level of compensation ? No.

[Jimbuna]

Should they receive compensation? Yes. Should they be receiving that level of compensation ? No.

Why not?

[Herr-Berbunch]

Why not?

Because you can come back from worst places in the world than RAF Halton, with loss of use of a foot and only get £27k.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/11/23/article-2512412-1999AE8400000578-403_634x944.jpg

[Tribesman]

Because you can come back from worst places in the world than RAF Halton, with loss of use of a foot and only get £27k.

Occupational hazard with no negligence involved so no liability, entirely different kettle of fish.
Plus of course thats a one off payment which is followed by further payments so it can't be measured against the other which is a full and final settlement.