FOX: Panetta opens combat roles to women

[twa]

Nice read sjihan, there is also the propensity of bone fractures more common in women

I have a daughter(and son) in the military and have no objection to opening up different mos, but not to lowering standards.

[DM72]

If a a fellow soldier is wounded in battle and need assistance, will a woman be able to throw him on her back and carry him to safety?

Just a question.

[Popeman38]

Let me clarify my position. I am in no way opposed to women serving in combat. I am against women serving in a combat arms MOS in a line unit.

[renaissance]

If a a fellow soldier is wounded in battle and need assistance, will a woman be able to throw him on her back and carry him to safety?

Just a question.

Will every man be able to do this? The woman isn't going to make it through the training if she can't do this.

[SemperFi Skins]

I did 8 years, but 2 of them were at the end in a cush strategic job with little physical requirements. Those 2 years killed me. I was in for 20 until I PCS'ed away from Ft Drum. Worst decision I ever made. I would be 5 years from retirement right now. Course, I wouldn't have Skins tix and there is a chance (albeit small) I would be in the ground right now from all the rotations Drum did in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I feel both of ya'lls pain... and I'm 28... I was a heavy gunner and workout warrior but to this day I've been back and forth to doctors and specialists regularly.

Here's a good read for some of ya..

http://www.forbes.com/sites/katiedrummond/2012/10/16/marine-corps-women/

Female Lieutenants Flunk Marine Corps' Fierce Infantry Training

The first-ever women to enroll in the Marine Corps’ difficult infantry officer course have both been dropped before successfully completing the 13-week program.

In a statement to Marine Corps Times on Tuesday, an official confirmed that the second of the female Lieutenants was pulled from the program last week because of unspecified medical problems. The other Lieutenant dropped out on September 28th, after failing to complete the first day of training. She was joined by 26 male participants, out of only 109 enrollees in the grueling course.

Also, I wanted to point out that women in a combat zone may have difficulty if they want to have children, or they may not be able to have children at all... Something to think about.

Most of the women advocating for this, haven't tried it yet

Remember, G.I. Jane was just a movie...

---------- Post added January-24th-2013 at 01:49 PM ----------

[DC9]

Course, I wouldn't have Skins tix and there is a chance (albeit small) I would be in the ground right now from all the rotations Drum did in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Thanks for your service! Everyday I kick around ETS'ing, lol. But my wife ensures me that I'll make it to 20 and then she'll "let me out to coach High School Football" or something like that. And I agree, I love being here in DMV. I was in Alaska and Fort Lewis for the first 7 years and I've been here since 2010 and it's been awesome. It was a hard adjustment, but I know what you are talking about, nothing beats the line mentality and I'm amazed at how many people have been stationed here in DC for 10 plus years and missed the whole GWOT (my father being one of them).

But, now, with the drawdown and deployments scaling back, it may be an ideal time to implement women into combat arms (if there is a better time, I don't know when that is). I don't think there will be as many "trying out" as most people do. But when I was with the Rangers and in an Airborne Brigade before that, I met some bad girls who were medics. One of them put my buddy back together long enough to get him back to the FOB and save him. I've met a couple in PSYOP who were straight killers; always in the gym when on downtime; always volunteering to come out in the cold with us. Those are the two that immediatley come to mind.

When Sapper school was opened to women years back, the Engineer community flipped ****. You know how many Sapper qualified women I've seen? One. That medic who saved my boy. That's just what I'm trying to say here, if any woman tries to go out for one of these jobs, she'll more than likely be ready.

Initially you might have one or two who just want attention and quit (the lady who went to the Citadel back in the 90's comes to mind), but more than likely it's going to be a woman who is more than capable and one that understands that just like any guy out there, she's going to be expected to carry her weight and then some, and just like any guy out there she will sink or swim on her own volition.

---------- Post added January-24th-2013 at 02:29 PM ----------

Will every man be able to do this? The woman isn't going to make it through the training if she can't do this.

that's exactly what I'm saying. Not all dudes get to play. The ones that make it through are expected to be Soldiers. If a woman makes it through, good for her, she's a combat Soldier now. It doesn't bother me in the least.

[Larry]

Quoting something a friend on Facebook said:

Rep. Tammy Duckworth: The Illinois congresswoman who lost both her legs as a helicopter pilot in Iraq praises the move as "long overdue".... "the reality on the ground in a 360 battlefield is that women have been serving in combat," she adds. "I didn't lose my legs in a bar fight."

[Popeman38]

Quoting something a friend on Facebook said:

That's a nice anecdote. However, no one in this thread mentioned women being barred from combat. In fact, I think most have acknowledged that women are in combat every day in Iraq and Afghanistan. What we are talking about is combat arms specialties and special ops, i.e infantry, armor....

[DaGoonie55]

But when I was with the Rangers and in an Airborne Brigade before that, I met some bad girls who were medics. One of them put my buddy back together long enough to get him back to the FOB and save him. I've met a couple in PSYOP who were straight killers; always in the gym when on downtime; always volunteering to come out in the cold with us. Those are the two that immediatley come to mind.

We had to be at the same FOB in Iraq in 04-05. The PSYOPS unit there was full of non-combat types that were full tilt, all the time. Had to keep one eye on them and make sure they didn't go over the line.

I agree with you, if you can make the cut - and its on equal ground - outstanding. Just be ready female soldiers, the life you want is not an easy one. I'm afraid of what will happen if, God forbid, we lost a squad of infantry - made up of women. Then those who fought so hard to defend their country will have to endure this criticism again in the future. Our country needs to change it's preception of what a combat soldier/sailer/marine/airmen is for this to go smoothly.

[SloppyOneXXVI]

I'm not a vet, but I work with many vets and current military members daily. We talked about this at work today, and I would like to bring up one point that has not been touched upon.

I know this is unfair to women, but men are not ready to have women beside them in combat. Atleast not infantry, armor, front line type combat. The other men in a unit are seen as friends, brothers, men at arms. Unfortunately, men will not see women in the same light. They will see women as (little) sisters, girlfriends, wives, mothers. Men might even create a physical attachment to the women in the unit. The emotional attachment men will form with women would be hazardous for everyone involved. Many men have a hard enough time watching one of their brothers get shot and keep fighting. Imagine watching your sister getting shot and keep fighting. Men are naturally protective of women, and would be more likely to break rank to save women, etc.

Again, I know this is unfair, but changing the emotional attachment men have for women is not possible.

[DC9]

I know this is unfair to women, but men are not ready to have women beside them in combat. Atleast not infantry, armor, front line type combat. The other men in a unit are seen as friends, brothers, men at arms. Unfortunately, men will not see women in the same light. They will see women as (little) sisters, girlfriends, wives, mothers. Men might even create a physical attachment to the women in the unit. The emotional attachment men will form with women would be hazardous for everyone involved. Many men have a hard enough time watching one of their brothers get shot and keep fighting. Imagine watching your sister getting shot and keep fighting. Men are naturally protective of women, and would be more likely to break rank to save women, etc.

Again, I know this is unfair, but changing the emotional attachment men have for women is not possible.

Pretty sure Popeman was a Paratrooper and I was an Army Ranger. Re-read my friend.

[SloppyOneXXVI]

Pretty sure Popeman was a Paratrooper and I was an Army Ranger. Re-read my friend.

I absolutely defer to your experiences, and by no means believe the theory I presented would be true for all, or even most soldiers. I just think it COULD present a problem to SOME.

FWIW I talked to two Rangers about this today, and they agreed it COULD be a possibility. However; they may have agreed to get out of the conversation and then called me a sissy civilian behind my back. I wouldn't put it past them, sometimes they call me a sissy civilian to my face....except they usually don't use the word "sissy."

[GoSkins561]

i'm actually curious to see how many women actually want the job of being on the front line...then pass the required test. Or even better try to join the Special Forces groups.

[LeesburgSkinFan]

There was a female ( international) soldier at KAIA a few years ago that I saw who was about 6'5 220. No doubt she could have served in front line combat situations (if given a shaving profile).

[zoony]

I have no problems with allowing women to serve in combat as long as they are judged by the same standards as men. To just allow woman to serve while using a separate lessor physical standard is only putting lives at risk.

I agree. I'm all for women or men doing whatever. Needs to be equal though. That's what equalty is

[Jumbo]

Women in combat face doubts over emotions, ability

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20130125/US.Women.in.Combat.Reaction/

SAN DIEGO — During her time in Iraq, Alma Felix would see her fellow female soldiers leave the Army installations where she worked at a desk job and head into combat with their male counterparts. But many returned home feeling that few knew of their contributions.

"I guess we do disappear into the background," the 27-year-old former Army specialist said. "You always hear we're losing our sons out there. And although women have fallen out there, you really don't see very much of it."

Now, with the Pentagon ending its ban on women in combat, Felix and other female troops hope the military's plan to open hundreds of thousands of combat jobs to them will lead society to recognize that they, too, can be courageous warriors.

"We are the support. Those are the positions we fill and that's a big deal — we often run the show — but people don't see that," she said. "Maybe it will put more females forward and give people a sense there are women out there fighting for our country.

more at link

[DaGoonie55]

So, since we're all equal now - do women have to sign up for the draft when they turn 18 too? Or is that still taboo?

[ldysknzfn1]

I'm prior Navy...loved my time in the Navy..had a blast...I was a hospital corpsman..so I was safe & sound at sickcall onboard a ship..or in a clinic or a hospital...I don't know why any woman would want to be in a combat role...I'm sure it's very difficult for the men..I can't imagine being in some of those situations w/men...I have no problem w/equality...but damn if I wanted to be on the front lines..I wanted to patch em up and ship em back...I'm with a few of the members that think women aren't physically capable..I don't think women are physically built to do some of the things necessary for a combat role in the military...there was a reason I chose the Navy..I wanted to sleep in a warm bunk/rack/bed every night...not on the cold hard ground or the hot desert sand...but that's just me...keep me off the front line...let those Marines storm the front..I'll put 'em back together and send 'em back or send 'em home...tyvm..Just my opinion...

---------- Post added January-25th-2013 at 12:02 PM ----------

So, since we're all equal now - do women have to sign up for the draft when they turn 18 too? Or is that still taboo?

I think they should if they're going to implement this women in combat roles...why continue to save that fun activity for the guys? Woman want equality? Give it to them across the board I say...not equality they pick & choose...across the board..

[jpillian]

It should have come hand in hand with this announcement if they wanted to be equitable.

[greenspandan]

the outrage and hand-wringing by men over this decision is such an absurd joke. everyone knows there are still many combat roles women will not be eligible for, and we are far from the first military to allow women in combat roles in general. As has already been pointed out, Israel has been even more inclusive than our new position for over a decade, and they are not the only ones. Military types are going to throw the same hissy fit they did when DADT was implemented and again when it was repealed, but in the end, the biggest real obstacle to implementing this will be prejudice, not ability. dudes are going to have to accept that US military culture is changing -- here come the gays and the girls. and while it might not be as openly homophobic and misogynistic as it used to be, it will still be just as capable if not moreso. welcome to america.

[renaissance]

It should have come hand in hand with this announcement if they wanted to be equitable.

I'm not opposed to this, but what happens if there is a draft and Jon and Mary Smith, married and with a child, both get called up? I guess there must be some rules in place if a single father were to be called up now, but who goes when both parents are called up?

the outrage and hand-wringing by men over this decision is such an absurd joke. everyone knows there are still many combat roles women will not be eligible for, and we are far from the first military to allow women in combat roles in general. As has already been pointed out, Israel has been even more inclusive than our new position for over a decade, and they are not the only ones. Military types are going to throw the same hissy fit they did when DADT was implemented and again when it was repealed, but in the end, the biggest real obstacle to implementing this will be prejudice, not ability. dudes are going to have to accept that US military culture is changing -- here come the gays and the girls. and while it might not be as openly homophobic and misogynistic as it used to be, it will still be just as capable if not moreso. welcome to america.

The problem is people can't see past the present. They make these generalizations that women can't do certain things, based on one broad perception of women. If I generalized men based on the average population, the majority wouldn't even be able to meet the most basic PT and weight standards, much less survive infantry school.

The majority of women don't have to be interested in or capable of something in order for those who are capable and interested to have the opportunity to try.

[DaGoonie55]

I'm not opposed to this, but what happens if there is a draft and Jon and Mary Smith, married and with a child, both get called up? I guess there must be some rules in place if a single father were to be called up now, but who goes when both parents are called up?

There are policies in place to not deploy both parents at once, or assist with arrangements if it is unavoidable. My buddy's mom was in the exceptional family member program. The only doctor in the Army hospitals that could treat her illness was at Fort Lewis - so he stayed there his entire career thus far. The DOD can take care of families and is sympathetic to a point. Whether they do a good job or not us up for interpretation by those affected.

[Popeman38]

The problem is people can't see past the present. They make these generalizations that women can't do certain things, based on one broad perception of women. If I generalized men based on the average population, the majority wouldn't even be able to meet the most basic PT and weight standards, much less survive infantry school.

The majority of women don't have to be interested in or capable of something in order for those who are capable and interested to have the opportunity to try.

I love how those with experience are "making generalizations" on women. It isn't the women. It is the fact that you cannot do certain things in mixed company. There are female Marine officers first hand account of how her body broke down under the combat load -- a marine who trained for it. Why do those that support this automatically dismiss this as "old fashioned" and "backwards" and sexist? There is scientific evidence that women can't physically do what a man can (and yes, I realize there is evidence that men can't do some things women can). The military has separate standards for males and females. Why do they have separate standars? Why are men required to run faster and do more push-ups than women?

[renaissance]

I love how those with experience are "making generalizations" on women. It isn't the women. It is the fact that you cannot do certain things in mixed company. There are female Marine officers first hand account of how her body broke down under the combat load -- a marine who trained for it. Why do those that support this automatically dismiss this as "old fashioned" and "backwards" and sexist? There is scientific evidence that women can't physically do what a man can (and yes, I realize there is evidence that men can't do some things women can). The military has separate standards for males and females. Why do they have separate standars? Why are men required to run faster and do more push-ups than women?

Generally speaking, yes, men are physically stronger and built differently than women. That is why the basic PT requirements differ. And generally speaking, the job of an 11B has much different physical requirements than that of a 42A, so I'm pretty sure when they go to AIT they are not having to meet the same PT standards. Just because men are generally held to a lower physical standard, doesn't mean some men aren't capable of meeting a higher standard.

There are already several jobs in the military which hold men and women to the same PT standards. I gave an example earlier in the thread of an AST in the Coast Guard. You could also look at the Navy Dive Program. At least for AST, I know very few women make it through the training, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to try. Especially when few men even make it through the school (more than 70% of all who try, fail).

What people also fail to realize, is that sure, right now there are probably very few women who have an interest in pursuing front line combat jobs. That is because in our history it's never even been an option for women, so it's never been a reality they could even consider.

[Popeman38]

Generally speaking, yes, men are physically stronger and built differently than women. That is why the basic PT requirements differ. And generally speaking, the job of an 11B has much different physical requirements than that of a 42A, so I'm pretty sure when they go to AIT they are not having to meet the same PT standards. Just because men are generally held to a lower physical standard, doesn't mean some men aren't capable of meeting a higher standard.

There are already several jobs in the military which hold men and women to the same PT standards. I gave an example earlier in the thread of an AST in the Coast Guard. You could also look at the Navy Dive Program. At least for AST, I know very few women make it through the training, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to try. Especially when few men even make it through the school (more than 70% of all who try, fail).

What people also fail to realize, is that sure, right now there are probably very few women who have an interest in pursuing front line combat jobs. That is because in our history it's never even been an option for women, so it's never been a reality they could even consider.

And in order to train a femail to be an 11B, you are required to have a female Drill Instructor, separate female bunls, separate female latrines, you have to pair females together for all close quarters combat drills and self defense drills, you have to have female battle buddies, which all mean you have to manage the number of female recuits in each class. You also have to ensure the same concessions are made for the fallow on AIT. Granted, most combat arms are now OSAT.

Also, if very few women have the interest in pursuing combat arms, why are we pushing this?