Women Open To Combat Roles

[Geico266]

Women and mothers in combat while knuckleheads guys are drinking beer & playing video games. Nice.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/23/panetta-women-combat-pentagon/1859221/

What say you POA?

 

[Hiperbiper]

I have a few I'll send...

 

[gismo]

Women and mothers in combat while knuckleheads guys are drinking beer & playing video games. Nice.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/23/panetta-women-combat-pentagon/1859221/

What say you POA?

I'd say if a woman want's to work in a combat role in the military why should we say she can't. OTOH, I don't think I could ever agree with drafting women for combat.

 

[bqmassey]

Women and mothers in combat while knuckleheads guys are drinking beer & playing video games. Nice.

I don't understand your statement.

 

[JHW]

It's about time we stopped ignoring half the population of potential recruits.

 

[EdFred]

I'd say if a woman want's to work in a combat role in the military why should we say she can't. OTOH, I don't think I could ever agree with drafting women for combat.

Equal rights means equal everything - not just what you pick and choose.

 

[Everskyward]

Equal rights means equal everything - not just what you pick and choose.

I agree. I don't think men should be drafted but if we decide people should be drafted it should be both men and women.

 

[bqmassey]

It's about time we stopped ignoring half the population of potential recruits.

There are plenty of females in the military. Nobody's being ignored. There just are certain jobs that females are not allowed to do. Any female that's medically and legally eligible for military service can enlist.

 

[TMetzinger]

No opposition to women in combat roles.

However, for certain things, there will be physical requirements, and those requirements need to be gender-blind. I know that the USCG rescue swimmer program operates that way - if you can meet the physical fitness requirements, you're ok. If not, you're not. And there's no difference in the requirements between male and female.

From what I know about Army Armor operations, there are probably some roles like a Tank crewman (where you have to crack and change track) that few females would be able to perform. But there are quite a few males that can't perform them too. I expect all the services have jobs that are similar.

The final issue to be dealt with is pregnancy - If a woman is captured, she's likely to be raped. This can happen to males too but it doesn't result in pregnancy. Pregnancy as part of "normal" peacetime operations is an issue too. Taking on a service role, especially a combat service role, is a commitment that is incompatible with pregnancy. So I think that women will have to choose. But it should be THEIR choice, not a choice withheld from them.

 

[roncachamp]

I'd say if a woman want's to work in a combat role in the military why should we say she can't. OTOH, I don't think I could ever agree with drafting women for combat.

I could never agree with drafting anyone.

 

[JoeSelch]

Women and mothers in combat while knuckleheads guys are drinking beer & playing video games. Nice.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/23/panetta-women-combat-pentagon/1859221/

What say you POA?

To your post I say, "WTH??"

To women in combat I say, "No problem. It's about time."

 

[Seanaldinho]

If they can meet the same physical requirements of their male counterparts have at it. If not...

 

[AuntPeggy]

There are plenty of females in the military. Nobody's being ignored. There just are certain jobs that females are not allowed to do. Any female that's medically and legally eligible for military service can enlist.

Women have been in combat for decades (centuries). By acknowledging that fact, we are opening up the opportunity for advancement to women and opening up the opportunity for their heroism to be acknowledged with medals and other awards.

As mentioned, there are a lot of jobs in the military that some women cannot do. Some men cannot do them either. The job of the military brass is to know who can and cannot do the job.

 

[Ted]

If women want to be in combat, they should be allowed to, provided they meet all the physical requirements just as for men.

A number of women in uniform I've seen could quite clearly win a fight with me without even trying. So why would I somehow be eligible for a role they wouldn't be?

 

[Henning]

No opposition to women in combat roles.

However, for certain things, there will be physical requirements, and those requirements need to be gender-blind. I know that the USCG rescue swimmer program operates that way - if you can meet the physical fitness requirements, you're ok. If not, you're not. And there's no difference in the requirements between male and female.

From what I know about Army Armor operations, there are probably some roles like a Tank crewman (where you have to crack and change track) that few females would be able to perform. But there are quite a few males that can't perform them too. I expect all the services have jobs that are similar.

The final issue to be dealt with is pregnancy - If a woman is captured, she's likely to be raped. This can happen to males too but it doesn't result in pregnancy. Pregnancy as part of "normal" peacetime operations is an issue too. Taking on a service role, especially a combat service role, is a commitment that is incompatible with pregnancy. So I think that women will have to choose. But it should be THEIR choice, not a choice withheld from them.

Norplant

 

[Henning]

Women have been in combat for decades (centuries). By acknowledging that fact, we are opening up the opportunity for advancement to women and opening up the opportunity for their heroism to be acknowledged with medals and other awards.

As mentioned, there are a lot of jobs in the military that some women cannot do. Some men cannot do them either. The job of the military brass is to know who can and cannot do the job.

Yep, Mongol women rode in with Mongol men.

 

[Velocity173]

We've had women in combat roles since 1994. This is simply opening up ground special ops and infantry positions. It's not like you had women just itching to become SEALs before either. You'll see very few women apply to these positions and out of them, hardly any of them will make it. The ones that do make it will deserve to be there. I really don't understand the controversy in it. They aren't being forced into these new roles, they have to compete for a slot.

 

[Henning]

We've had women in combat roles since 1994. This is simply opening up ground special ops and infantry positions. It's not like you had women just itching to become SEALs before either. You'll see very few women apply to these positions and out of them, hardly any of them will make it. The ones that do make it will deserve to be there. I really don't understand the controversy in it. They aren't being forced into these new roles, they have to compete for a slot.

Yep, I don't see a problem either, plenty of chicks out there fight hard and plenty of dudes can't cut the grade.

 

[Alexb2000]

I completely understand why some military women want this, it gives them a chance to serve in the roles that offer the greatest chance for advancement.

That said, in time it will certainly change the way women are treated by society. Some welcome that, others I'm not so sure. For example I don't think we can expect a man you has just served with women in combat to open the door, or change a flat, or allow any standard to not be equally applied.

 

[roncachamp]

No opposition to women in combat roles.

However, for certain things, there will be physical requirements, and those requirements need to be gender-blind. I know that the USCG rescue swimmer program operates that way - if you can meet the physical fitness requirements, you're ok. If not, you're not. And there's no difference in the requirements between male and female.

From what I know about Army Armor operations, there are probably some roles like a Tank crewman (where you have to crack and change track) that few females would be able to perform. But there are quite a few males that can't perform them too. I expect all the services have jobs that are similar.

The final issue to be dealt with is pregnancy - If a woman is captured, she's likely to be raped. This can happen to males too but it doesn't result in pregnancy. Pregnancy as part of "normal" peacetime operations is an issue too. Taking on a service role, especially a combat service role, is a commitment that is incompatible with pregnancy. So I think that women will have to choose. But it should be THEIR choice, not a choice withheld from them.

I don't see how capture and pregnancy become greater issues when these additional roles are opened to women.

 

[steingar]

Israelis have been doing it for years. Don't see the big whip myself.

 

[jtheune]

I have no issue with it as long as the requirements don't get gender normalized. I know from my time in the navy the ( late 70-80s) fitness requirements were different for men and women. I don't know if that is still the case or not. For roles that require a large amount of physical skills like SEALS I cannot say I'd want the requirements to be any less for women then men.

 

[Ted]

I completely understand why some military women want this, it gives them a chance to serve in the roles that offer the greatest chance for advancement.

That said, in time it will certainly change the way women are treated by society. Some welcome that, others I'm not so sure. For example I don't think we can expect a man you has just served with women in combat to open the door, or change a flat, or allow any standard to not be equally applied.

That depends on how the men are raised and how the women wish to be treated. Perhaps having been raised in New York City it's not a big issue for me. Most of the women I've been around growing up were successful. Few of them would ever complain about having the door held open, etc as a courtesy. Most welcomed it.

My wife used to fly S-92s in oil rig and SAR work. Not something you typically see women doing. If you ask her, she'll (hopefully) say that I treat her as a gentleman should. A female friend flew the same roles - no issues with said friend and her (male) significant other, who also flies the same roles, and is very gentlemanly towards her.

It's all what you make of it. I think men usually have ego issues with a woman being able to do such work with equal or better skill.

 

[Geico266]

I have no issue with it as long as the requirements don't get gender normalized. I know from my time in the navy the ( late 70-80s) fitness requirements were different for men and women. I don't know if that is still the case or not. For roles that require a large amount of physical skills like SEALS I cannot say I'd want the requirements to be any less for women then men.

Old Navy here too. Putting women on ship resulted in 50% pregnancy on some ships, but I'm not the one serving now. Let the service men and women of today decide.

 

[JHW]

Old Navy here too. Putting women on ship resulted in 50% pregnancy on some ships, but I'm not the one serving now. Let the service men and women of today decide.

so you propose that the military be a democracy?

 

[Alexb2000]

That depends on how the men are raised and how the women wish to be treated. Perhaps having been raised in New York City it's not a big issue for me. Most of the women I've been around growing up were successful. Few of them would ever complain about having the door held open, etc as a courtesy. Most welcomed it.

My wife used to fly S-92s in oil rig and SAR work. Not something you typically see women doing. If you ask her, she'll (hopefully) say that I treat her as a gentleman should. A female friend flew the same roles - no issues with said friend and her (male) significant other, who also flies the same roles, and is very gentlemanly towards her.

It's all what you make of it. I think men usually have ego issues with a woman being able to do such work with equal or better skill.

Ever see that movie G.I. Jane?

Can you imagine the excitement if a bunch of filthy goat herders captured a SEAL and it turns out to be a woman that looks like Demi Moore?

That party couldn't be stopped by Ramadan.

While I'm fully aware and have no issue with the fact that there are many woman pilots that fly (or any other thing) better than I do, including some primary students. I just don't know if I or our nation can handle that kind of thing on the news.

 

[steingar]

While I'm fully aware and have no issue with the fact that there are many woman pilots that fly (or any other thing) better than I do, including some primary students. I just don't know if I or our nation can handle that kind of thing on the news.

Actually, American women soldiers have already been captured and splashed on the news. Nothing novel to report here.

 

[Ted]

Ever see that movie G.I. Jane?

Can you imagine the excitement if a bunch of filthy goat herders captured a SEAL and it turns out to be a woman that looks like Demi Moore?

That party couldn't be stopped by Ramadan.

While I'm fully aware and have no issue with the fact that there are many woman pilots that fly (or any other thing) better than I do, including some primary students. I just don't know if I or our nation can handle that kind of thing on the news.

I guess I'm not entirely sure of your point. While our particular enemy at the moment would certainly talk about how weak and puny we are and likely torture and kill the captured, they do that anyway. I think the general response from the nation and our allies would be the same as it is when any other soldier is captured: get him/her out of there, and get the people responsible. Since these women would have volunteered anyway, it was their choice.

Also, just to clarify, I didn't mean to imply that you persoanlly had an issue with women being able to do anything better. My point was simply that many men do, and I see that as causing much of the concern.

 

[Alexb2000]

Actually, American women soldiers have already been captured and splashed on the news. Nothing novel to report here.

How come we all know the name Jessica Lynch?

I believe her biography tells a similar tale to my scenario above.

 

[roncachamp]

Ever see that movie G.I. Jane?

Can you imagine the excitement if a bunch of filthy goat herders captured a SEAL and it turns out to be a woman that looks like Demi Moore?

That party couldn't be stopped by Ramadan.

While I'm fully aware and have no issue with the fact that there are many woman pilots that fly (or any other thing) better than I do, including some primary students. I just don't know if I or our nation can handle that kind of thing on the news.

A teacher told her young class to ask their parents for a family story with a moral at the end of it, and to return the next day to tell their stories. In the classroom the next day, Joe gave his example first, "My dad is a farmer and we have chickens. One day we were taking lots of eggs to market in a basket on the front seat of the truck when we hit a big bump in the road; the basket fell off the seat and all the eggs broke. The moral of the story is not to put all your eggs in one basket."

"Very good," said the teacher.​

Next, Mary said, "We are farmers too. We had twenty eggs waiting to hatch, but when they did we only got ten chicks. The moral of this story is not to count your chickens before they're hatched."​

"Very good," said the teacher again, very pleased with the response so far.​

Next it was Barney's turn to tell his story: "My dad told me this story about my Aunt Karen.... Aunt Karen was a pilot in the war and her plane got hit. She had to bail out over enemy territory and all she had was a bottle of bourbon, a machine gun and a machete."​

"Go on," said the teacher, intrigued.​

"Aunt Karen drank the bourbon on the way down to prepare herself; then she landed right in the middle of a hundred enemy soldiers. She killed seventy of them with the machine gun until she ran out of bullets. Then she killed twenty more with the machete till the blade broke. And then she killed the last ten with her bare hands."​

"Good heavens," said the horrified teacher, "What did your father say was the moral of that frightening story?"​

"Don't mess with Aunt Karen when she's been drinking!"​

 

[Alexb2000]

I guess I'm not entirely sure of your point. While our particular enemy at the moment would certainly talk about how weak and puny we are and likely torture and kill the captured, they do that anyway. I think the general response from the nation and our allies would be the same as it is when any other soldier is captured: get him/her out of there, and get the people responsible. Since these women would have volunteered anyway, it was their choice.

Also, just to clarify, I didn't mean to imply that you persoanlly had an issue with women being able to do anything better. My point was simply that many men do, and I see that as causing much of the concern.

My scenario was supposed to add a tint of levity, but if you have to say it...

My point was simply that while the women that volunteer for it know what they're getting into. Maybe we as a nation or at least those with a more traditional background might find it hard to see or hear about women, mothers, and daughters being killed, beaten, and/or raped in a war zone.

When we can look at the news of a lost solider and truly feel the same level of remorse or concern over a 18 year old 200 lb. single man as we do a 30 year old single mother that leaves three children orphaned. Then I agree it will be a non-issue.

 

[nddons]

I have no issue with it as long as the requirements don't get gender normalized. I know from my time in the navy the ( late 70-80s) fitness requirements were different for men and women. I don't know if that is still the case or not. For roles that require a large amount of physical skills like SEALS I cannot say I'd want the requirements to be any less for women then men.

I was wondering about this myself. Is this going to be the case of us pretending there is equality, when in reality there isn't?

When I joined a certain county's sheriff's posse in Iowa at age 40, I had to take the physical fitness tests with all of the younger, full time deputy candidates. Fortunately, the tests were age-weighted. but they were also gender weighted.

The tests were "sit and reach", 1 minute sit-up, 1 minute push-up, and 1.5 mile run. The requirements were all different, depending on age and gender.

Being 40, thank God, I had to do the 1.5 mile run in 14:29. (If I was 39, I would have had to do it in 13:36.) (Yes, I could do it in high school and college football in 12:00, but I was older, fatter, and had 3 knee surgeries.)

A 20 year-old male had to do that run in 12:51. Not too challenging for any young man.

But a 20 year-old female had to do the 1.5 mile run in 15:26. Seriously? I had to run that distance quicker than a 20 year-old woman?

Now, the demands of an Iowa Sheriff deputy is nothing compared to the physical demands of a combat soldier. But I wonder if any accomodations are made for gender for this purpose.

 

[Henning]

A teacher told her young class to ask their parents for a family story with a moral at the end of it, and to return the next day to tell their stories. In the classroom the next day, Joe gave his example first, "My dad is a farmer and we have chickens. One day we were taking lots of eggs to market in a basket on the front seat of the truck when we hit a big bump in the road; the basket fell off the seat and all the eggs broke. The moral of the story is not to put all your eggs in one basket."

"Very good," said the teacher.​

Next, Mary said, "We are farmers too. We had twenty eggs waiting to hatch, but when they did we only got ten chicks. The moral of this story is not to count your chickens before they're hatched."​

"Very good," said the teacher again, very pleased with the response so far.​

Next it was Barney's turn to tell his story: "My dad told me this story about my Aunt Karen.... Aunt Karen was a pilot in the war and her plane got hit. She had to bail out over enemy territory and all she had was a bottle of bourbon, a machine gun and a machete."​

"Go on," said the teacher, intrigued.​

"Aunt Karen drank the bourbon on the way down to prepare herself; then she landed right in the middle of a hundred enemy soldiers. She killed seventy of them with the machine gun until she ran out of bullets. Then she killed twenty more with the machete till the blade broke. And then she killed the last ten with her bare hands."​

"Good heavens," said the horrified teacher, "What did your father say was the moral of that frightening story?"​

"Don't mess with Aunt Karen when she's been drinking!"​

Scarily enough, I know chicks like that.

 

[Ted]

My scenario was supposed to add a tint of levity, but if you have to say it...

My point was simply that while the women that volunteer for it know what they're getting into. Maybe we as a nation or at least those with a more traditional background might find it hard to see or hear about women, mothers, and daughters being killed, beaten, and/or raped in a war zone.

When we can look at the news of a lost solider and truly feel the same level of remorse or concern over a 18 year old 200 lb. single man as we do a 30 year old single mother that leaves three children orphaned. Then I agree it will be a non-issue.

I do understand your point there. I'd also question why a mother would volunteer for such roles in that case.

 

[Velocity173]

If Americans are worried about our combat women being raped if captured, well they don't understand the roles that women currently play in the military. The majority of captures are pilots. We already have women as combat pilots since 1994. While not a pilot, Jessica Lynch was serving in combat and she was captured in 2003. Women presently are just as much at risk as men in being captured. You don't need to be in a combat role to be raped either. Sexual assaults are at an all time high in the military. You have local civilians on base, military contractors and military personal themselves commiting plenty of sexual assaults down range. If I was a woman I'd seriously rethink joining any branch in today's climate.

 

[nddons]

Here's an interesting WSJ article on this topic:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...8260132111473150.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

The invasion was a blitzkrieg. The goal was to move as fast to Baghdad as possible. The column would not stop for a lance corporal, sergeant, lieutenant, or even a company commander to go to the restroom. Sometimes we spent over 48 hours on the move without exiting the vehicles. We were forced to urinate in empty water bottles inches from our comrades.

Many Marines developed dysentery from the complete lack of sanitary conditions. When an uncontrollable urge hit a Marine, he would be forced to stand, as best he could, hold an MRE bag up to his rear, and defecate inches from his seated comrade's face.

During the invasion, we wore chemical protective suits because of the fear of chemical or biological weapon attack. These are equivalent to a ski jumpsuit and hold in the heat. We also had to wear black rubber boots over our desert boots. On the occasions the column did stop, we would quickly peel off our rubber boots, desert boots and socks to let our feet air out.

Due to the heat and sweat, layers of our skin would peel off our feet. However, we rarely had time to remove our suits or perform even the most basic hygiene. We quickly developed sores on our bodies.

When we did reach Baghdad, we were in shambles. We had not showered in well over a month and our chemical protective suits were covered in a mixture of filth and dried blood. We were told to strip and place our suits in pits to be burned immediately. My unit stood there in a walled-in compound in Baghdad, naked, sores dotted all over our bodies, feet peeling, watching our suits burn. Later, they lined us up naked and washed us off with pressure washers.

Yes, a woman is as capable as a man of pulling a trigger. But the goal of our nation's military is to fight and win wars. Before taking the drastic step of allowing women to serve in combat units, has the government considered whether introducing women into the above-described situation would have made my unit more or less combat effective?

 

[Henning]

My scenario was supposed to add a tint of levity, but if you have to say it...

My point was simply that while the women that volunteer for it know what they're getting into. Maybe we as a nation or at least those with a more traditional background might find it hard to see or hear about women, mothers, and daughters being killed, beaten, and/or raped in a war zone.

When we can look at the news of a lost solider and truly feel the same level of remorse or concern over a 18 year old 200 lb. single man as we do a 30 year old single mother that leaves three children orphaned. Then I agree it will be a non-issue.

Then we as a nation should either buck up and accept the situation or think twice about getting involved in wars to protect our oil sources and switch to a different fuel. Our dependence on foreign oil and the profits it and the industry of war brings are what keeps us at war. We don't want our women and kids dying for Wall Street profits, change the game at the core of the issue.

 

[Henning]

Here's an interesting WSJ article on this topic.

While a touching and graphic article, it does nothing to address the real question that comes at the end, would the unit have been less effective? I'm not seeing anything in that article that would lead me to believe that it would have been. I guess as a sailor I've met too many gals who could hang in the roughest of conditions while not whining and complaining like the guys did. IME, chicks buck up while guys turn to whiny *******.

 

[Alexb2000]

I'd also question why a mother would volunteer for such roles in that case.

Ted, you're sterotyping, would we ask a single father that same question?

 

[Sac Arrow]

First of all, let me preface this by saying that women have always served in the military honorably, and always will. But, I cannot even begin to describe how abhorrently I am opposed to putting women in combat roles. I say this with first hand experience having been a combat Infantryman, and having been in field assignments where women worked closely with men.

It doesn't work.

Here's the problem. Take a group of testosterone charged, pumped up, adrenalized, ninteen year old males with a kill em all/F em all attitude, put them in a field environment for days and weeks on end, and put women in their midst. Sleeping beside them, sharing foxholes with them, working with them, playing with them, joking with them, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

What do you THINK is going to happen?

Well, males will compete with other males for the females, removing their focus on their job tasks. Relationships will form. Fights will ensue. "Do NOT put PFC Sally on point, Corporal Jake will have your ass!" Morale will go down the tubes. This isn't like a office environment. Existance becomes tribal. Plus, a certain number of outright assaults are going to happen. One only needs to look at documentaries on military life in Iraq and Afghanistan support that.

I guess you could "seeensitize" your male soldiers and make them "neutral" to the females in your unit. Remove their drive. But by doing so you remove their drive to fight and kill too. You can't have it both ways. It doesn't work that way. Is that the kind of fighter you want? You want to send Justin Bieber in hand to hand combat with the Taliban?

When I went to NCO school, it was an all-branch training unit and my company was comprised of some combat arms, and other support groups. We had four females in a forty person platoon. We would rotate leadership positions but I spent the majority of the time in the program as the platoon leader. In the beginning, in admin mode, no real issues, things worked fine. As we moved in to a more intense close-in working mode, and field mode, things started rapidly degrading. The men, from day one, were all trying to vie for a position with the females. Making pairing assignments and duty rosters became difficult, because of the conflicts. There were fights. Threats. The cohesiveness of the unit dissolved. When it was all over with, I thought "This is not the group of people I want to go to war with."

If you haven't been in a combat situtation, you don't understand the mentality that is required to survive and fight effectively. You operate in another mode. You flip a switch. You become an elite killing machine. Along with that all the other urges are intensified and discretion is reduced. Kind of like alcohol. You can't civilly deal with women in that mode. When you get back, you flip the switch back and become a normal person again.