Expanding women’s roles in combat
I don’t what I can say about this I haven’t already said but here’s the story at Stars & Stripes;
Citing defense officials, the AP reported that the new rules are expected to continue the long-held prohibition that prevents women from serving as infantry, armor and special operations forces. But they will formally allow women to serve in other jobs at the battalion level, which until now had been considered too close to combat.
AP said the changes would formally allow women to be assigned to a battalion and serve in jobs such as medics, intelligence, police or communications officers.
About twenty years ago I wrote a letter to the S&S when the military was contemplating this move after the Gulf War. I said then, like I say now; that’s fine and dandy with me, except that if they’re going to start putting women closer to the fight, they have a responsibility to train them for it. That means eliminating gender-specific standards for training. If they’re going to do men’s jobs in men’s environment, they have to do it to the same standard.
Combat doesn’t discriminate. Bullets don’t don’t go less far or slower for women.
From Associated Press;
“We believe that it’s very important to explore ways to offer more opportunities to women in the military,” Pentagon press secretary George Little said Thursday. “This review has been thorough and extensive,” with input from all branches of the military.
It’s not a matter of career opportunities, it’s more related whether you’re going to train to an acceptable standard that doesn’t discriminate. This isn’t the movies where men are trying to keep women out of our boy’s club. Generally, when women get trained to a man’s standard, they cry that they’re being treated unfairly.
Take that cow, Shannon Faulkner, who spent years battling for her chance at The Citadel who dropped out after a few days because she thought she was going to be treated differently and spent not one minute preparing for the rigors of the college. In a 2009 interview she still blamed men for her one week tour of duty;
She spent just one week at the Citadel. During that time, Faulkner battled extreme physical and mental stress, and passed much of the week in the infirmary, suffering severe dehydration.
Yeah, you don’t get dehydrated from stress, you get dehydrated from not being prepared. Women every where are celebrating this decision by the Pentagon, but they need to understand that there’s a price still to be paid.
Category: Military issues
Women have no place in combat roles. Period. I don’t care what women in the media say about it, they clearly haven’t seen most women in the military. If they aren’t on light duty or pregnant, they’re busy falling out of pt runs.
Karlen – you clearly did not serve with some of the folks I did. Dead weight, goofballs, and incompentants come in all varieties of gender et al. Please don’t blame those who served honorably and meritoriously for the screwups of recruiters, supervisors and policy makers.
I couldn’t agree more. I would not want a woman in my squad in the middle of a war zone. Even if they are top notch, men will always try to protect them and some men will die because of it. There were times in Vietnam that the toughest men I know fell apart from exhaustion and fear, lack of eating properly, etc. Not many women could do it.
Too late…they are allready there.
“Sgt Leigh Ann Hester’s squad was shadowing a supply convoy March 20 when anti-Iraqi fighters ambushed the convoy. The squad moved to the side of the road, flanking the insurgents and cutting off their escape route. Hester led her team through the “kill zone” and into a flanking position, where she assaulted a trench line with grenades and M203 grenade-launcher rounds. She and Nein, her squad leader, then cleared two trenches, at which time she killed three insurgents with her rifle.
When the fight was over, 27 insurgents were dead, six were wounded, and one was captured.”
Gonna assume karlen has a silver star or better to go with that sweeping generalization.
Trenches. lol
You had to bring up Faulkner didn’t you.
Bastidge.
Hey guys this just in, we women folk already serve on the “frontlines”. Granted were not Infantry, Armor, and SF but we still are out there doing our jobs. Some of us have been killed or horribly wounded doing our jobs. Yeah there are some whiny ass women out there but hey I ran into some whiny ass men in the Army too. Being a whiny douche bag is not gender specific. Neither is heroism or courage under fire.
Eh, HHC in Combat Arms Battalions were always a joke, now they will be even more so.
I’ll go ahead and give an example here. I’m in comm school, and there’s this female there in my platoon for a bit. Sits around and talks about how she’s going to be in the Lioness program and kick in doors. She was on light duty the entire course. Also, Jessica Lynch. That’s two examples to your one.
Karlen, betcha dollars to donuts you wouldn’t say that to my old lady. But then again, wherever you are and whatever you’re doing is probably more challenging than the year she just spent in Afghanistan and she hasn’t been faced with anything as daunting as a PT run.
What are you trying to convey in your last sentence? That a pt run is the most daunting thing she faced?
Karlen – you REALLY do not want to play this game with those of us who have already been there, done that. Especially with Jessica. You clearly have NO idea what she did then or since.
Before you even consider saying another derogatory thing, especially about Jessica, you might want to consider that several of us here know her personally and are more than a little aware of what she has done, what she has gone through, and how she has comported herself with the utmost honor in the face of unreasonable pressure from media types, and others, which would have put those of lesser character into a catatonic state.
Seriously youre in Comm school and youre talking shit…… I can give you some examples of whiny ass MALE soldiers doing the same shit but they are in actual units…. You know the kinds of soldiers who arent in TRADOCland any more… We had an INFANTRY soldier attached to our unit during our deployment to Iraq in 2003 who shot himself in the foot because he didnt want to be deployed. Or how about the myriad of shitbags (male and female) that I had to deal with on rear detachment who couldnt deploy for and were kicked out of the Army for all kinds of stupid shit. Again, being a douche bag is not gender specific.
I agree with Jonn and will add another point.
Keep in your pants.
You support teammates….you don’t use them.
Was supposed to read:
Or how about the myriad of shitbags (male and female) that I had to deal with on rear detachment who couldnt deploy for *insert whiny ass reason here* and were kicked out of the Army for all kinds of stupid shit.
Oh and before you get the idea I was on rear detachment for some whiny ass reason I was on rear d for a pending med board due to an injury that kept me from wearing IBA otherwise I would have been down range in the suck just like my joes.
I said when. lol.
Or meant to say when. But that sentence of my story was in past tense.
Back to the original topic, if we may. Yes, I completely agree that whatever physical requirements are needed to do whatever job is under consideration should be applied to all in that field. Nothing else makes any sense at all.
Perhaps there is some justificaqtion for having gender-specific requirements for the general requirements for service – like runs and such, with weight requirements/body fat limits and things based on healthy medical norms. But, if a mechanic needs to be able to hoist a 45 pound toolbox around – well, no one who cannot hoist a 45 pound toolbox need apply. Or whatever the equipment needs might be under the worst conditions for each job specialty.
If they can pull the same weight as men, and have my back as Brothers, then I’d be honored to have them by my side.
Shit bags come in all packages, and after 22 years in the Infantry, I was about fed up with shitbags.
Hell they built the o courses shorter for females on parris island. Oh, then score pft and cft differently.
I have a feeling Karlen I would take Roberts any day over your ass…let me correct myself, just from what I know about Roberts I would definately take her over you. Because those who are quick to point the finger at others don’t want eyes on them too hard. I wonder if you ever seen a woman out on a recovery mission after an IED blast? I have. Or out to pick up EPWs that have been detained? I have. Delivering fuel…yep. Mending wounds… I could go on. Maybe you just need to get laid and quit resenting women so much.
@CI and OWB: I concur. If a person can meet the standards for the job let em do the job. The biggest issue I can see with all of this is the societal problems of males and females in certain types of workplaces. But hey if people can pull their own weight and be adults about things I dont see there being a huge problem.
From my branch perspective (Signal) I actually think this is a good idea. In terms of Signal Officers, men were at a disadvantage compared to women when it came to selection for command (Company level) due to the fact that there were/are some S6 positions that women could not fill (Combined Arms BN, certain Cav Squadron, FA BN S6 jobs). Since HRC was insistent on having Company Command and Battalion S6 weighted the same in terms of Key Developmental positions as a Captain, you had some Battalions who simply could not fill S6 positions due to the fact that they couldn’t place women there…but they had no problem being put in command. This did a disservice overall to many males, who were pushed away from command through no fault of their own.
“Especially with Jessica. You clearly have NO idea what she did then or since.”
Jessica Lynch is a poor example. The results of the investigation are a matter of public record. There was no “firing until she ran out of ammunition”. No heroic tale. She slammed her head on the radio mount and was knocked unconscious. SHE EVEN TESTIFIED TO THIS IN PUBLIC.
I know what she did and has done since. I wouldn’t mention her if I didn’t.
Just look how the media ran with it though.
Really Karlen? Let me ask you a simple question. What is more important? The headspace and timing on the 50 your truck, or the woman manning the 249 in vehicle 3? Really think about this question…
Also Karlen what did Jessica Lynch have to do with the media when she was still a POW?
What are you going to do when you have a real war? Battle of the Bulge,Chosin Reservoir,Dak To etc….? What country in it’s right mind send women into harms way, when there are able bodied men sitting at home? This question was posed to me be a WWII, Korea, Vietnam Veteran. The big lie and social experiment continues.
Clearly the 50.
There are two issues with women in combat: (1) men may screw up the mission to protect a woman, whether she needs it or not – it is just part of the psyche of the men drawn to the profession; and (2) whether she can do the job – without gender norming. I am all for gender norming if the question is with regard to a physically fit (throw in your branch here). However, if the job is to lift x or slog y distance in z time, do it or don’t ask for the job. Which leads to another issue, is it worth the loss of unit cohesion in SF to insert the very few women who can meet the standard?
As to Karlen – I suggest you have missed an opportunity to keep you mouth shut and hide you ignorance.
If the women are held to the exact same standards, what’s the problem? When I was in we had an ‘S’ something officer that wanted to experience Amtracs first hand. When it was 2nd Plt’s turn to provide tractors for Amtrac school she went with my section to thrash the boots. She went so far as to take off her bars so she would be treated just like the rest of the class. During vehicle recovery she was in the mud with the rest of the boots. She went with us on ship board ops too. We even gave her a Plt t-shirt! We were “Byrd’s Bandits”. She was game as hell and did quite well. I wish I could remember her name.
Oops, 32 above was me.
20% of the females I served with were good to go, the other 80% worthless as fuck.
80% of the Marines I served with were good to go, 20% worthless as fuck.
The numbers dont justify the expense required to continue what is nothing more than a social experiment.
I kept my mouth shut about it for 20 years.
but the truth is the truth.
If you have to lower the standards for women to be in combat roles, then you are not equal. you are substandard and will likely perform as such.
BeretVerde,
Just like always go to war. Its really weird though if you think about how insulated we in the west have kept ourselves. Think about Russia during WWII. Every man, woman, and child had a part in that war. Is it right or wrong that we have kept women out of our wars? I don’t really know from a sociological point of view. If Josephene wants to defend her home and country just as bad as Joe who are we to tell her she can’t have that honor?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_Faulkner
“After four hours of the military indoctrination training, she spent the remainder of the first week in the infirmary before voluntarily resigning, citing emotional and psychological abuse and physical exhaustion. After her departure, the male cadets openly celebrated on the campus.”
I love that story…
I have a strong feeling this is going to devolve into dead horse beating and useless nonfact spouting… I’m taking an early exit before said devolution begins.
There you go, karlen! Are you seriously suggesting that a MALE being thrown on the radio mount would have fared better just because of his hormones tending toward testosterone? Are you aware just how absurd you sound? And you are blaming Jessica because others lied about what happened to her? How does that work in your world? Punish her, and all other women, because someone else lied?
You were warned, karlen, not to go there, yet you are acting like so many whining babies that entirely too many of us have had to deal with. You lambast all women for acting exactly as you are acting here. Except that you are wrong.
Wrong to generalize about the service of women. To tell us that “all women” behave in one way or another is clearly asserting something which you could not possibly know unless you somehow have become acquainted with every woman in service.
You were either wrong to tell us that you are in comm school, or something later about meaning to say “when.” Yet that entire sentace makes no sense whatever if you change the tense from present to past tense. So, which is it? Are you now in comm school, or were you at some time in the past?
You are wrong, or at least seriously misguided, if you think that very many of us were not exposed to slackers. For you to suggest that all women are slackers is beyond absurd.
Got any data to suggest that a higher proportion of women in service are slackers than their male counterparts? If not, then you might want to rethink your assertions that they are.
As several others here have suggested – it mattered not a whit to me what the physical characteristics were of the folks I worked with or later supervised. We had missions to complete, and it took each of us doing our part to accomplish that mission. Those who couldn’t hack it were escorted to the door. Or tent flap. Or commander’s office.
I dunno I seem to remember that during WW2 there were Russian women who served as snipers and there was a group known as the Night Witches who flew night time bombing missions in biplanes that were meant to be used for training and crop dusting. Also the IDF has some all female Merkava tank crews.
You’re talking about Russians. They came from the womb with a bottle of vodka and are built like brick shithouses. Not these beauty pageant wannabe’s we have here.
@40 – Do tell…and did they lower the standards for those Russian chicks so they would be afforded the same “career opportunities” as their male comrades?
@36 Russia was invaded and had very few choices. For Josephene’s “honor” you will need more body bags. Again the big lie continues. Uneffing believable!
@43 – I’ll bite. What’s the “big lie”?
@Claymore: Im fairly certain that they were all given the equal opportunity to die heroically for their country but hey what do I know.
But seriously I am against the lowering of standards just to allow gender integration. I figure you are either able to do the job or not but if you cant dont bother to apply.
@Karlen: Your ignorance is again showing. You might want to go do something about that.
Devolution has begun…
Karlen I just gotta know something… when you hold the headspace and timing gauge up the go and no go will do something. What is it?
46 see 38
Dulce decorum est…
I think, memory isn’t as good as it used to be.
41 – Karlen, some of those Russian models and tennis players would beg to differ. Some of the men here looking at them would as well.
Russian women did what they had to do to survive. You theaten a woman’s child, it will generally astound you what she is capable of doing.
I do not believe in lowering standards for anybody, unless the requirement is simply “physically fit.” Female JAGs do not need to be able to run as fast, neither do doctors or, for that matter, fighter pilots. If you want a job that has job-specific standards, meet the standards or move on.
I do not support women in combat arms because, as my female friends who have been there say, it is not in the best interest of the unit.
Fighter pilots need to be in pretty good shape considered the g forces they go through.