SPLIT--> Women in the Military

[deep]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

Female sailors still cannot serve in the elite SEAL program, because those are considered frontline combat unit positions. Similar regulations in the other branches of the military also prevent women from serving in combat positions.

still no full equality

[MrsSpringsteen]

It's a step-every journey starts with one step and all that.. Steps are required-and mindsets and attitudes have to change too.

[DaveC]

Women are allowed to serve in any branch of the Canadian Forces they want to (and are able to, physically/mentally/etc), although obviously there are far fewer females in the combat arms trades than males. In my experience, however, the women can be and are just as tough and just as skilled (and often are better) at what they do as the men. There's a female sergeant I work with who is the loudest, scariest person in the whole unit when she's mad, which I know for a fact because I've been on the receiving end of her rage before

[MrsSpringsteen]

By Pauline Jelinek
Associated Press / January 14, 2011


WASHINGTON—Women should finally be allowed to serve fully in combat, a military advisory panel said Friday in a report seeking to dismantle the last major area of discrimination in the armed forces.

The call by a commission of current and retired military officers to let women be front-line fighters could set in motion another sea change in military culture as the armed forces, generations after racial barriers fell, grapples with the phasing out of the ban on gays serving openly.

The newest move is being recommended by the Military Leadership Diversity Commission, established by Congress two years ago. The panel was to send its proposals to Congress and President Barack Obama.

It is time "to create a level playing field for all qualified service members," the members said.

Opponents of putting women in combat question whether they have the necessary strength and stamina. They also have said the inclusion of women in infantry and other combat units might harm unit cohesion, a similar argument to that made regarding gays. And they warn Americans won't tolerate large numbers of women coming home in body bags. Those arguments have held sway during previous attempts to lift the ban.

Congress recently stripped the "don't ask, don't tell" ban on gays serving openly, and the Navy changed its rules over the last year to allow women to serve on submarines for the first time. Women are barred from certain combat assignments in all the services but face the broadest restrictions in the Army and Marines.

Anu Bhagwati, a former Marine captain and executive director of the advocacy group Service Women's Action Network, said the prohibition on women in combat "is archaic, it does not reflect the many sacrifices and contributions that women make in the military, and it ignores the reality of current war-fighting doctrine."

Although thousands of American women have served in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and been exposed to great danger -- 134 of them have been killed -- they have been largely restricted to combat support jobs such as medics or logistical and transportation officers.

Defense policy prohibits women from being assigned to any unit smaller than a brigade whose primary mission is direct combat on the ground.

The new report says that keeping women out of combat posts prohibits them from serving in roughly 10 percent of Marine Corps and Army occupational specialties and thus is a barrier to advancement.

"The Armed Forces have not yet succeeded in developing leaders who are as diverse as the nation they serve," said the report. "Minorities and women still lag behind white men in terms of number of military leadership positions."

Women generally make up about 14 percent of the armed services. Of the roughly 2.2 million troops who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, more than 255,000 have been women, said Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez.

Supporters of the change say women essentially have been in combat for years, even if they are nominally removed from it.

"It's something whose time has come," said Lory Manning of the Women's Research and Education Institute. She said ending the ban would be "a logical outcome of what women have been doing in Iraq and Afghanistan, where the Army and Marines have been essentially ducking the policy."

She said, for example, that military officials have employed terms of art to skirt the ban, for example "attaching" women to a combat unit instead of "assigning" them.

The new report says there has been little evidence that integrating women into previously closed units or military occupations has damaged cohesion or had other ill effects. It says a previous independent report suggested that women serving in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan "had a positive impact on mission accomplishment."

Defense leaders have said they see the change coming someday. For example, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in September that he expects women to be let into special operations forces eventually, and in a careful, deliberate manner.

The advisory commission recommends a phased-in approach. The Army is doing its own internal study of women in combat as well.

Pentagon figures show that as of Jan. 3, 110 women had been killed in the war in Iraq compared with about 4,300 men. In the Afghanistan campaign, 24 women have been killed compared with more than 1,400 men.

Lainez said the department will review the recommendations when the report is delivered.

But regardless of what becomes of the policy, she noted that women will continue to be drawn into combat action, "situations for which they are fully trained and equipped to respond."

[Moonlit_Angel]

I'm sorry, it just makes me laugh that we actually have to have reports done to prove what is already painfully obvious-that women, or gays, or blacks, or whoever, serving in the military will not weaken the overall structure in any way, shape, or form.

Anywho, thanks for finally coming around to the realization, Washington! Here's hoping this means this will become a full-fledged reality as soon as possible. Perhaps once we stop continuing on with these unfounded fears about certain groups of people serving in the military and start focusing on the actual point of the military overall, which is to, you know, protect the country and serve overseas when needed for foreign activities, we might actually get somewhere in our military endeavors here and abroad.

Angela

[financeguy]

A moment of levity from Iraq

U.S female soldier having fun with Iraqi soldiers - YouTube

[BoMac]

.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Senior defense officials say Pentagon chief Leon Panetta is removing the military's ban on women serving in combat, opening hundreds of thousands of front-line positions and potentially elite commando jobs after more than a decade at war.

The groundbreaking move recommended by the Joint Chiefs of Staff overturns a 1994 rule banning women from being assigned to smaller ground combat units. Panetta's decision gives the military services until January 2016 to seek special exceptions if they believe any positions must remain closed to women.

[U2Fanatic4ever]

wow.. saw that.. this is huge news.

[Pearl]

Awesome

[Moonlit_Angel]

Wow, really?

Cool. Good move, Panetta .

[Jive Turkey]

Welcome to the 1980s, USA!

As long as there remains one standard for service, it shouldn't matter what sex the person is.
That said, hypothetically, if there was a draft in the future, what would everyone think about all able body people over 18 being required, regardless of sex?

[Moonlit_Angel]

Good question. Given how things are shifting in this country regarding who's allowed to be in the military now and everything, I think, were we to reinstate the draft, we'd be more likely to include anyone who can fight. Though I'm sure that we'd still have some people out there talking about, "Who'll stay home and care for the children?" and stuff like that.

But while I fully support women who want to be on the fighting lines having the right and opportunity to do so, I sure as hell wouldn't want to be to be part of that, by force or by choice, for a whole host of reasons. So it'd be interesting to see how, if women were included in a reinstated draft, we would react to those who did try and find ways to get out of serving. Would we have more or less sympathy for them than we would men?

[Jive Turkey]

If it came to a draft, I would support women being exempt

[The_Pac_Mule]

its funny how this issue has been for the most part championed by those who have never served in the military and never experienced combat.

[The_Pac_Mule]

Women’s Rights Activist Demands More Females Killed In Combat

WASHINGTON, D.C. – In a highly-anticipated press conference held in the nation’s Capitol today, a leading women’s activist announced that she would be taking up the cause of having more female service-members killed in combat.

U.S. Representative Judy Chu (D, CA) announced the creation of Femme Fatal, a movement specifically tasked with ensuring that women get the same opportunities to be shot, killed, wounded, and suffer debilitating emotional stress as men throughout the military.

She appeared with Private Ellen Brown, an active-duty female soldier serving with the 10th Mountain Division in southern Afghanistan.

Private Brown, a supply clerk, is currently a member of a Female Engagement Team whose duties include speaking with local women on patrol and searching female civilians. She appeared via Skype from her base’s Morale Welfare and Recreation center.

“Women make up 14.6% of the active duty military, but just 2.3% of the casualties,” complained Rep. Chu.

“Did you know that in the past decade, our military has only had 140 women killed in combat?” asked Rep. Chu. ”Compare that to more than six thousand men killed, and it paints a disturbing picture of a military reluctant to let women near the front lines. Obviously we have to find a way to narrow the casualty gap.”

The idea of women serving behind the front lines has largely disappeared in Iraq and Afghanistan as more and more women have experienced combat at some level.

But Femme Fatal says a “camouflage ceiling” still exists, blocking women from serving in Special Forces, Infantry, Armor, and Field Artillery, a ceiling that Rep. Chu believes can only be shattered by, “blood… lots of blood.”

In recent years, the military has seen multiple cases of heroism from women in combat but divisions have continued to grow on both sides of the debate.

Some detractors have said females cannot handle the stresses of infantry life, while proponents have noted examples of women who have excelled in a male-dominated military.

During the conference, James Durst, a reporter for the Los Angeles Times, asked Rep. Chu about how the physical differences between the sexes would affect the standards and methods used in training to produce America’s most elite warriors.

“If a man can do it, a woman can do it!” Rep. Chu responded.

“Private Brown is just as capable of having her arms and legs blown off by IEDs, her face ripped away by hot shrapnel, her throat torn open by a sniper’s bullet…”

At this point Private Brown doubled-over vomiting and was heard saying, “Fuck this shit, I’m just here for the college money.”

“… before she’s unceremoniously kicked out of the Army because there are too many trigger-pullers and spends the rest of her life shitting in a colostomy bag, begging the VA for her disability money,” Rep. Chu finished.

Some people remain unconvinced.

“It’s called infantry-MAN, not infantry-LADY, and that’s a scientific fact,” said Ron Meyer, a former infantryman who served in Korea and Vietnam, and avid Duffel Blog commenter.

“I don’t care what the studies or the polling show. Some things just need to stay the way they are.”

Others, including some women in uniform, were upset over Rep. Chu’s eagerness for a higher female body count.

“Who the hell are these women and why are they so eager to get me killed?” demanded Sergeant Jacquie Williams, a female combat veteran of Iraq. ”Do any of them plan on going anytime soon? I’ve been in combat. I’ve done the job. But groups like this don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground.”

Faced with that criticism, Rep. Chu also announced that as soon as the ban on women in combat units was lifted, she intended to immediately resign her congressional seat and enlist in the Army as an infantry-person.

“Why should Private Brown get to have all the fun?” Rep. Chu laughed.

“Besides, I’ve always wanted to see what the inside of a human head looks like after I’ve smashed it open with my E-tool.”


http://www.duffelblog.com/2012/07/wo...male-infantry/

for those who don't know, the Duffel blog is the militarys version of the onion.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by The_Pac_Mule

its funny how this issue has been for the most part championed by those who have never served in the military and never experienced combat.

Completely irrelevant

[BVS]

Originally Posted by The_Pac_Mule

its funny how this issue has been for the most part championed by those who have never served in the military and never experienced combat.

Should those that didn't have voting rights wait for someone with voting rights to champion for them?

What's "funny" about it?

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by The_Pac_Mule

its funny how this issue has been for the most part championed by those who have never served in the military and never experienced combat.

Israel allows women to serve in combat.

Proof: BBC News - Women at war: A combat soldier in the Israeli army

[Jive Turkey]

Canada has for decades

[Irvine511]

How does a right winger reconcile the one thing Soviet Canuckistan and The Boss of America have in common?