US military to allow women in direct combat

[Erttheking]

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/23/military-to-open-combat-jobs-to-women/

Seems that the US has a different take on the role of women in the military than the UK. It says it might take awhile but this is the direction they're moving in.

Thoughts?

 

[IndomitableSam]

About time. Women have wanted to fight for their countries since countries began, and have always had to take a backseat/alternate role because of fragility and ther reasons (that I don't need to get into, we all know them and many are right and many are wrong).

Now? They have the same endurance training as men, and guns are a great equalizer. If we were still swinging swords around and wearing chainmail, men would be better suited for war, buw not it's your backpack, flak jacket, gear, etc (which weighs less for women as the surface area isn't as lage, etc) and a gun. Women are just as capable as men with guns.

... Not to say I approve of any current fighting going on at all, but women have been sidelined or pretending to be men since war became a thing so they could protect/whatever their reasons just like men. It's about time.

 

[deanospimoni]

As long as all soldiers are all held to the same high standards of conduct and fitness, I see no problem with this. If standards are lowered to meet recruitment quotas, I see a lot of problems with this.

 

[DevilWithaHalo]

Quick broken record thoughts...

* Still don't like this "option" being "open to women" when selective services is still enforceable. Are we going to abolish that or just keep ignoring the elephant in the room?

* What do they mean when they say they will "examine physical standards"? Is an examination a precursor to change? I like the idea of gender-neutral requirements so long as they aren't fucked.

* How did the ACLU actually justify those arguments? My military ignorance showing here, but how does being barred from front line combat duty prevent promotion?

I'm all for scientific experimentation; try it out and see how it works. If it works, cool beans. If it fails, then move on.

Obligatory... /popcorn

 

[SadakoMoose]

This is going to sound awful, but I'm kind of hoping this leads to a "Beauty and The Beast" Unit scenario.
Not because I thought those scenes were awesome, I just like the idea of exploiting women in an unconventional fashion. Like, why put women in the kitchen, when you could turn them into science experiments and set them upon poor people.

That said, I've always (seriously) supported the idea, but at the same time can't help but worry that maybe there's too much combat to go around in the first place.

 

[Erttheking]

This is going to sound awful, but I'm kind of hoping this leads to a "Beauty and The Beast" Unit scenario.
Not because I thought those scenes were awesome, I just like the idea of exploiting women in an unconventional fashion. Like, why put women in the kitchen, when you could turn them into science experiments and set them upon poor people.

That said, I've always (seriously) supported the idea, but at the same time can't help but worry that maybe there's too much combat to go around in the first place.

Eh...I'm sorry what are you trying to say? I honestly have no idea.

 

[bastardofmelbourne]

This is going to sound awful, but I'm kind of hoping this leads to a "Beauty and The Beast" Unit scenario.
Not because I thought those scenes were awesome, I just like the idea of exploiting women in an unconventional fashion. Like, why put women in the kitchen, when you could turn them into science experiments and set them upon poor people.

That said, I've always (seriously) supported the idea, but at the same time can't help but worry that maybe there's too much combat to go around in the first place.

Eh...I'm sorry what are you trying to say? I honestly have no idea.

Metal Gear Solid 4. I think.

OT: All good news. "Examining physical standards" is vague and sounds a little suspect, but whatever.

 

[Erttheking]

This is going to sound awful, but I'm kind of hoping this leads to a "Beauty and The Beast" Unit scenario.
Not because I thought those scenes were awesome, I just like the idea of exploiting women in an unconventional fashion. Like, why put women in the kitchen, when you could turn them into science experiments and set them upon poor people.

That said, I've always (seriously) supported the idea, but at the same time can't help but worry that maybe there's too much combat to go around in the first place.

Eh...I'm sorry what are you trying to say? I honestly have no idea.

Metal Gear Solid 4. I think.

OT: All good news. "Examining physical standards" is vague and sounds a little suspect, but whatever.

Oh THAT beauty and the beast. I was thinking of the other one.

 

[Thaluikhain]

* How did the ACLU actually justify those arguments? My military ignorance showing here, but how does being barred from front line combat duty prevent promotion?

As I understand it, in the US military, in certain areas, serving in a combat role is a prerequisite for promotion. Presumably they don't want someone with no experience in actual fighting getting too far up the ladder.

...

Anyway, like the last time this has come round, I think it's a good idea. Yes, there will be male personnel who will be uncomfortable with serving with women (but who are presumably ok with people trying to kill them), the same as there was with serving with openly gay people, or black people before that.

 

[SadakoMoose]

This is going to sound awful, but I'm kind of hoping this leads to a "Beauty and The Beast" Unit scenario.
Not because I thought those scenes were awesome, I just like the idea of exploiting women in an unconventional fashion. Like, why put women in the kitchen, when you could turn them into science experiments and set them upon poor people.

That said, I've always (seriously) supported the idea, but at the same time can't help but worry that maybe there's too much combat to go around in the first place.

Eh...I'm sorry what are you trying to say? I honestly have no idea.

Metal Gear Solid 4. I think.

OT: All good news. "Examining physical standards" is vague and sounds a little suspect, but whatever.

Oh THAT beauty and the beast. I was thinking of the other one.

The one with the 9/11 werewolf?
No, that's exploiting MEN in an over the top fashion. That's no fun because everybody does it. Exploiting WOMEN is where it's at! For the first time in our history, we have come to a point in gender relations where both men and women alike can be treated as equals and have their lives destroyed to satisfy the whims of horrible wealthy people in same ways, rather than in gendered modes. Whereas before, women could only be exploited through traditional gender roles ie. domestic labor, or the constant sexualization and objectification, now their bodies can be used to maim and kill others for the purposes of far wealthier, powerful individuals. The best part is, because they're women, is that we can still do the other stuff to them at the same time!

(Ok, that's the ultra-cynical view.
In reality, I do support out armed forces, just not the people at the top nor the system of neo-liberal geopolitics that necessitates these bloody conflicts. While a strong national defense is important, and there are far fewer things quite as noble as giving up large portions of your life in service of the people, I think we do need to occasionally remind ourselves that shit flows down and that there are people at the top that might not really have our best interests in mind.)

 

[sextus the crazy]

* How did the ACLU actually justify those arguments? My military ignorance showing here, but how does being barred from front line combat duty prevent promotion?

for the same reason, you wouldn't hire people with no job experience to run anything. See how combat is one of the most important functions of the US military, having experience in combat is almost always necessary for a position in high command (unless the country hasn't been in a war recently e.g. switzerland).

Not to mention, that combat provides glory to commanders, which is pretty handy for rising in the ranks.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Great, now men and women alike can go around the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

 

[TheIronRuler]

This is bad news...
Poor gals already have it bad as it is, now some will be stuck in nowhere with a group of guys on patrol. Sexual harassment and rape will go through the roof.
I'm not personally against women in fighting roles, but the prospects are frightening.

 

[the clockmaker]

I'm going to say the same things I said when Australia did it
1-Happy for them to give it their best
2-Fitness standards must not in any way be lowered
3-There must not be imposed any quotas or there must not be any women pushed through to special forces for the image of it
4-The women must require only the bare minimum additional logistics.
5-Any woman who cannot perform one of the roles in an infantry section cannot join the infantry. I don't care if she is a magnificent rifleman, if she cannot physically operate a support weapon (an issue that I have seen) she should not be there. It is the same for men.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I'm going to say the same things I said when Australia did it
1-Happy for them to give it their best
2-Fitness standards must not in any way be lowered
3-There must not be imposed any quotas or there must not be any women pushed through to special forces for the image of it
4-The women must require only the bare minimum additional logistics.
5-Any woman who cannot perform one of the roles in an infantry section cannot join the infantry. I don't care if she is a magnificent rifleman, if she cannot physically operate a support weapon (an issue that I have seen) she should not be there. It is the same for men.

All individual members of an infantry section must be able to perform all the roles of the section? I didn't know that.

Actually, there sorta kinda is an argument for a quota, for peacekeeping at least. You don't want to only have men around when you want to strip search a woman, and so on.

IIRC, in the US military, specialist groups kept taking women from regular units because of that sort of thing, which pissed regular units off because they needed people for that as well.

 

[Erttheking]

This is bad news...
Poor gals already have it bad as it is, now some will be stuck in nowhere with a group of guys on patrol. Sexual harassment and rape will go through the roof.
I'm not personally against women in fighting roles, but the prospects are frightening.

I feel like I shouldn't shoot my mouth off without all the facts. Is this really a problem?

 

[the clockmaker]

I'm going to say the same things I said when Australia did it
1-Happy for them to give it their best
2-Fitness standards must not in any way be lowered
3-There must not be imposed any quotas or there must not be any women pushed through to special forces for the image of it
4-The women must require only the bare minimum additional logistics.
5-Any woman who cannot perform one of the roles in an infantry section cannot join the infantry. I don't care if she is a magnificent rifleman, if she cannot physically operate a support weapon (an issue that I have seen) she should not be there. It is the same for men.

All individual members of an infantry section must be able to perform all the roles of the section? I didn't know that.

Actually, there sorta kinda is an argument for a quota, for peacekeeping at least. You don't want to only have men around when you want to strip search a woman, and so on.

IIRC, in the US military, specialist groups kept taking women from regular units because of that sort of thing, which pissed regular units off because they needed people for that as well.

1- Obviously someone whose role it is to carry the gun will be better at carrying the gun, but if he goes down, someone needs to step up. Same with radio operator, same with commanding the section. Now there is a designated chain of succession for these things, but if a female/male cannot fulfill any of those roles it imposes a limitation on the capabilities of the section, meaning that your mates will have to carry your burden.

2-And I agree that there is a requirement for women to be in the defence force for those sort of purposes, but that does not necessitate them being in an arms corps. Especially for peace keeping ops.

 

[Khrowley]

They should have read Terry Pratchett's Monstrous Regiment when it was published; 10 years ago.

Captcha: bad books

It most certainly is not!