In today’s world ,where woman are competing with men in almost every field opened up to them & defying patriarchal norms What problems does it present to Indian Army from inducting them into combat roles? Or are the red flags raised only to create a reef ?
In this blog I will try to answer this question to the best of my knowledge not with a misogynistic view and leave it to readers’ discretion.
Women a symbol of care and seen as Mother , Sister, Daughter & a Goddess in patriarchal Indian society was deprived of education and universal adult franchise long until Independence. After Republic of India was formed they were encouraged, promoted & given reservations over subsequent years in different service sectors except armed forces until 1993 when their induction began into Air force , Navy & Army.
Today women comprise of 13% in Air force, 6% in Navy and 3% in Army. Their roles being restricted to support corps. Challenges it present to broaden their role are
A) Physical limits for a man and woman are different. Body types , body shapes and testosterone make all the difference. Men have 40% & 33% more muscle mass in upper and lower body compared to women. Not only that former’s muscle are stronger pound for pound by about 10%.
Risk of injuries to women in training is also as high as 30% as that to 10% in men and this too not in highly specialized combat or commando training but rather in milder versions of it.
Though I think physical limits are least important constraints as it is easiest trainable entity if we have time , but that is the question. Do we have time? Training period for women candidates is 1 yr at max it can be stretched to one and a half year to equal out with training period of male IMA cadets but is it enough for a average Indian girl ,who most probably haven’t played any sport for years and is not a MARY KOM OR GEETA PHOGAT to replace a rather better fit candidate in combatant role just for the sake of female representation at borders. It takes Years to make a MARY KOM ,who is tougher than most of the guys and can whop any boys ass in a fight but we dont have Years . More than that metal capabilities are also equally important as physical attrosciousness which is hard to find. Even if we get a girl who can get as aggressive as a boy and is tougher than him social factors play in …
B) In combat operations and border outposts conditions are harsh. Officers and men live in a 3 * 3 tent . Their are no washrooms 76% of our posts dont have basic facilities like clean drinking water, good food , electricity or all requisite medical facilities unlike that of european or developed countries. Imagine a girl coming from tier 2& 3 cities staying with men coming predominantly from villages in such harsh conditions. Where their are no medical facilities to cater for her special needs nor bathrooms.
Our social environment is not as modern as that of scandinavian countries to let both genders sleep in on tent. Boys & girls in villages hardly interact altough situation is a bit better in metro cities but that is not where majority of soldiers come from. Generals of US forces have also highlighted the fact of behavarioul changes in guys when a girl is brought into the group.
Behind the closed doors, boys hold each others back .Things are done without being said. The bonds are very deep but a woman officer in the gang may change these dynamics. Possibility of acts of indiscipline in animal like conditions cannot be ignored.
C) Change is essence of existence and things must only change if current state is not good or if the act brings any improvement. Neither of the above two conditions seem to follow if women are put in combat shoes. Men are doing very well and so are women providing them support to carry out their jobs efficiently. And support role is not second to any. Not all male officers are in infantry, armoured core or mechanised infantry , these doesn’t mean that they don’t serve their country or are not bravehearts.
Thank you.
PK'S BLOG 