U.S. Military To Allow Women In All Combat Roles
Today, the Pentagon is set to announce that the U.S. military will permit women to join all combat roles. The changes will take full effect on January 1, 2016.
From Associated Press:
Defense Secretary Ash Carter on Thursday ordered the military to open all combat jobs to women, rebuffing requests by the Marine Corps to exclude women from certain front-line combat jobs.
Declaring that “we are a joint force,” Carter said that while moving women into these jobs will present challenges, the military can no longer afford to exclude half of the population from grueling military jobs. He said that any man or woman who meets the standards should be able to serve, and he gave the armed services 30 days to submit plans to make the historic change.
Carter’s order opens the final 10 percent of military positions to women, and allows them to serve in the military’s most demanding and difficult jobs, including as special operations forces, such as the Army Delta units and Navy SEALs.
The extent of my military expertise goes about as far as “five kills in a row equals airstrike,” so I’m far from qualified to weigh in on this type of subject, but I’m going to throw my two cents in there anyway. Such is the life of an internet blogger.
While a badass, muscular, Ronda Rousey-type woman may be capable of passing the physical requirements to join men on the frontlines of combat, I feel like there’s a lot more to it. There’s a brotherhood aspect crucial to the training of elite soldiers. Throwing a woman in the mix could stir up emotional distractions. Should a male soldier have the mental fortitude to be unaffected by the presence of a woman in arms by his side? That’s not for me to say.
But I will say this: Gen. Joseph Dunford, joint chief of staff chairman and former Marine Corps commandant, thinks it’s a bad idea. He cited studies showing mixed-gender units already underperform all-male units. More importantly, the dude has been there. As a former high-ranking Marine, he knows what the environment is like and what is best for that environment.
Now let’s look at who handed down the order to allow women in frontline combat roles: Secretary of Defense Ash Carter. Carter is a former physicist and former Harvard professor with no history of service to speak of. When it comes to an inside perspective on what combat and preparing for combat is actually like (negotiating foreign policy from behind a desk does not count as “inside perspective”) Carter is right next to me on the couch, Xbox controller in-hand. I can’t help but feel as though he is merely catering to proponents of broader social issues who also lack insight into the realities of war.
Then again, the Associated Press adds that Dunford was the only joint chief of staff on a panel of seven decorated members to oppose allowing women in some combat roles. But that’s also “according to several U.S. officials” who weren’t named.
As Marine commandant, Dunford was the only service chief to recommend that some front-line combat jobs stay male-only, according to several U.S. officials.
Military people, I know there’s at least a few of you reading this. What do you think?.
[via Associated Press]
Image via Shutterstock
As an active duty Marine, I can say that I’ve served with some pretty badass women. When the chips are down, I would feel very appreciative of the fact that they have my six. But with that being said, everyone’s general consensus is spot on. They are far less likely to make it through the training and maintain their combat effectiveness. Female marines have a significant rate of medical separation due to the fact that their hips and back can’t handle the standard amount of training, none the less advanced infantry training. They have a higher probability of becoming a liability in a combat situation for that reason. In general, certainly not all of them, but in general; they are less emotionally equipt to handle the emotional stress of combat. And lastly, to no fault of their own, they have the potential to tear a fire team or unit apart due to the fact they will be seen as sexual objects. Its a harsh reality, but a reality none the less.
10 years ago at 9:58 amAs someone in the military, I speak for a large majority of soldiers who think this is a bad idea. Obviously we all want the standards to be the same for men and women across the board, but passing a standard is still different from the job itself. Fact of the matter is women’s bodies aren’t built for this kind of workload and they get hurt at a much higher rate. The bigger issue that we see is that we are being used for political points in a social experiment. The military, at this point in our country’s history, and with the threats around the world, is the last thing that should be used for this so-called “social justice”. For these politicians (including many of the Generals who play politics to get to that position), allowing women into combat roles was never about equality, it was about making themselves look good.
10 years ago at 8:53 amThis is a terrible idea (coming from an Infantryman). There is much more to combat and the business that we are in that women aren’t made for. It goes deeper than physical issues. The military isn’t about equality, it’s about killing the enemy and winning the war. If you want equality, stay a civilian.
10 years ago at 12:39 pmWhen are we going to move past the point of worrying about if what we say will offend someone. The truth is the truth, regardless of people’s feelings, and I really wish the general public would get back to that idea. In my opinion, I have no problem with women being in the military and serving the best country in the world. When it comes to the argument of combat roles, that is really not my place to debate either. I respect all who serve and have served our country and it should be up to them. However, simply forcing this new order down our soldiers throats just seems asinine to me. Reading the comments from tlance47, even though just his opinions; have truth to them. A brotherhood has something special to it, and I don’t think women will ever understand that. A horrible comparison but, much like fraternities and sororities; there are differences that are accepted because well for fucks sake men and women are different. A brotherhood to me, can’t fully act like a brotherhood when there is pussy in the air. Just like the mutual feeling in the group when it is a guys night out and one of your boys brings a chick. Shit just isn’t the same, and everyone knows it but won’t say it. Well fuck it, I’m saying it. It isn’t the same and it is because there is a woman there. Just like tlance47 stated, “The presence of females distracts men in combat. It’s the nature of the human male to protect the female”. If you need another shitty example from me, just watch a guy’s reaction when he brings his girlfriend to a bar and she gets hit on. He will change his emotions and go to protect his woman, either with violence or direct action. It is inevitable that men will develop feelings for the women in their combat group, how the fuck are you going to stop that? I for one am distracted by pussy and have been controlled by it in the past. So I conclude with, why the hell would we want those situations on the battlefield. This is my opinion on the matter, and I am also one of the guys who’s only “combat” experience is playing cod”. I truly hope that the opinion’s of combat experts are taken into serious consideration, rather than the bureaucrats that make these decisions for votes.
10 years ago at 12:22 am