Ending U.S. combat ban will even career playing field, servicewomen say

Comments (4)
mrmouth wrote:

This is symbolic. And I have no issue with it until they start forcing things. Women have long proven themselves in many areas that modern infantry are tasked with. But there are issues.

The Female Engagement Teams in Afghanistan showed perfectly the potential drawbacks of women in a combat zone in that often it was their male counterparts that had to physically carry what the females could not. And that is a major reason as to why there will always be a difference in what can be achieved.

So with these great increases in weight shouldered by our Soldiers and Marines, comes all manner of chronic injury, right down to degenerative issues and stress fractures. That is greatly amplified with women. That is nature.

And even the out of shape male infantryman is going to be able to evacuate their comrade if need be – whether by dragging or carrying that casualty. That casualty might weigh upwards of 300 lbs.

Women can serve at forward posts and bases. Absolutely. They can shoot. They certainly can (and have) go on mounted patrols and light foot patrols. But there are always going to be fundamental drawbacks that need to be accepted, and accounted/planned for.

Jan 23, 2013 11:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
4ngry4merican wrote:

mrmouth – Your openmindedness is to be commended, and your concerns have already been addressed. There is already in place a provision for commanding officers to request that women be excepted from their units for the reasons you mention.

Jan 24, 2013 11:02am EST  --  Report as abuse
grant7843 wrote:

This is a very poor decision. Why aren’t women in the NFL? Why do we have a seperate professional basketball leagues for men and women? We have a WNMA and a NBA. Why don’t men and women compete against one another in USA Track and Field? Why do we still have segregated bathrooms and locker rooms? Fast moving combat units may not have the luxury of having seperate shower/bathroom/changing areas. How will this complicate the Military’s problem with sexual assualt? 1 in 4 women report being raped while deployed. Why hasn’t the US military in the last 40 years created physical performance standards that are equal for both men and women? Women’s standards are always lower than their male counter parts. These are all good questions we need to answer, despite how unpolitically correct they are.

Jan 24, 2013 2:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
grant7843 wrote:

It’s a myth that this will help women rise to important General Officer positions in the military and I suspect the Joint Chiefs know this. Why? Numerically its far too unlikely. Let me explain.The majority of General Officers (atleast in the Army) are Infantry Officers or other combat arms officers. In order to even get off the ground as an Infantry Officer you need to go through the elite Ranger School; a very difficult school. For the few women that sign up to be Infantry Officers, which is bet will be very few even fewer will pass Ranger School. We’re already talking about a tiny percentage of Active Duty Second Lieutenants. From there, they’ll have to go the next 30-40 years and rise as the cream of the crop in the combat arms branches. The odds of this happening seem to me to be so small we’ll never see a female Commanding General of a war. It’ll never happen.

Jan 24, 2013 3:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.