M14 Forum

GARRARD · April 15th, 2011, 08:48 PM

By Rick Maze - Staff report
Posted : Thursday Apr 14, 2011 19:04:57 EDT

Quote:

A Defense Department report on whether women should be allowed into direct combat assignments, due to Congress on Friday, won’t be delivered until Oct 1.

Stanley said an interim report might be provided to Congress before October, but the delay in the final report appears to keep the issue of the future roles of military women out of any debate on the 2012 defense budget, which the armed services committees will begin writing in May.

A blue-ribbon commission created by Congress recommended in December that all remaining military restrictions on assignment of women should be eliminated and that policies and regulations should be updated to reflect changing gender roles.

The Military Leadership Diversity Commission, in a controversial decision, found that keeping women out of direct combat units and combat-related specialties hurts career opportunities for women, and challenged long-held beliefs about why women should be excluded.

The commission concluded that women do not hurt unit cohesion; do not lack the physical ability to perform combat missions; and are no more likely to develop mental health problems than men.

Those recommendations fueled expectations that Congress would face a battle this year over opening jobs and assignments to women that would be just as politically bruising as last year’s fight over repealing the military’s ban on allowing openly gay people to serve.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/0...tober-041411w/

The Army Times had a more detailed article earlier this week but basically Congress and Secretary Gates think women should be allowed to be grunts, artillerymen, cavalry troopers, etc.

DukeRustfield · April 15th, 2011, 09:46 PM

Obviously women aren't going to have the same physical abilities as men. But there also a lot of positives. If it only took muscles to be in the military, a whole lot of people would be disqualified.

porsche2nr · April 16th, 2011, 03:26 PM

I'm going to have to disagree with letting women in a frontline/combat role. I've seen friendships ruined and arguments ensue over a girl that was attached to a infantry platoon. Rules change like not being able to take off shirts to work or dig foxholes, have to watch your language and what you say, watch your jokes. I've seen the girl recieve complements from one guy, laugh and joke and like it, but would report another guy for saying the same thing to her. But the main reason is what if for some reason she gets captured, what would the enemy do to her??

DukeRustfield · April 16th, 2011, 06:51 PM

The same thing they do to a guy, minus one orifice. I seriously doubt any CO is going to care about shirts on/off, language, whatever.

A friend of a friend is a grunt woman back from Afganistan recently. There were 2 of them in the unit and they "manned" checkpoints along with their male counterparts. The number of violent altercations with locals went down significantly after the 2 women arrived and the Captain was trying to get more out ASAP. She said there was no problems at all with unit cohesion. She said her staff sargeant was not in favor of women at the front until she saved his ass once and there was never a problem after that--but this is her story, so who knows how objective it is.

porsche2nr · April 16th, 2011, 11:24 PM

I'm not trying to start an argument or anything but just a discussion.

This is from my experience, we were digging foxholes, straddle trenches, and working setting up GP tents and all. Hot humid day so some took off shirts to help with the heat, 5 minutes later we were told to put our shirts back on because its not fair to others when they cant take their shirt off, and they shouldnt be subject to look at shirtless soldiers. Some guys from another squad got written up for using offensive language, I guess a wife or gf was cheating on him so of course he tells his buddies in "colorful" language about whats going on, "B" word, "C" word and all the other ones. She was within earshot of the conversation and went straight to the SGM about it and felt offended.

If having women on the line and with men saves lives and makes things safer then I'm all for it. But please dont be offended if you get called a "B" or a "muthaf", its not that we personally are being called those names but its just the normal language that gets used if you're messing up or used to help motivate soldiers. But theres even guy soldiers that you cant curse at or motivate, so its both sides are guilty on that.

Anywhere you go, at least a couple of guys are going to be attracted to a female soldier no matter what she looks like, and thats where problems really come up in my opinion. One guy can say something to her and she'll laugh and flirt back but some other guy will say just about the same thing and she'll get offended and end up reporting him.

I just would like things to be fair. Dont get this guy in trouble for saying one thing and then like it when another guy says it just because they're attracted to him. If a woman can hump the same weight pack/vest and do the same job as male soldiers with no help then by all means try it.

daniel17319 · April 16th, 2011, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DukeRustfield

The same thing they do to a guy, minus one orifice. I seriously doubt any CO is going to care about shirts on/off, language, whatever.

A friend of a friend is a grunt woman back from Afganistan recently. There were 2 of them in the unit and they "manned" checkpoints along with their male counterparts. The number of violent altercations with locals went down significantly after the 2 women arrived and the Captain was trying to get more out ASAP. She said there was no problems at all with unit cohesion. She said her staff sargeant was not in favor of women at the front until she saved his ass once and there was never a problem after that--but this is her story, so who knows how objective it is.

What else did she tell you? Can we speak to her directly.You misspelled SSG. Her objective was to search civilian females. If you don't know you don't know. Your right about the "CO" he/she wouldn't care because hes not an NCO and has no direct involvement with the soldiers if he or she is a good "CO" and nos his or hers place. Holy bajeezus did you just call a female a grunt, you really don't know. Don't speak the lingo if you don't know it its like watching a foreigner trying to be cool with Americans and saying stuff to try look cool or impress. Explain in civilian terms and ill be willing to listen like her boss, or something. So would you call them "unmanned" when they put females their?

GARRARD · February 18th, 2012, 09:56 AM

This isn't the final word, but here's what is now open to women.

13M- MLRS Crewman
13P- MLRS Operations/Fire Direction Specialist
13R- Field Artillery Firefinder Radar Operation Specialist
91A- M1 Abrams Tank Systems Mechanic
91M- Bradley Fighting Vehicle System Maintainer
91P- Artillery Mechanic

Swamp Rat · February 18th, 2012, 10:05 AM

David Hackworth wrote extensively on the effects of women in combat MOSs.

CharlieEcho · February 18th, 2012, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swamp Rat

David Hackworth wrote extensively on the effects of women in combat MOSs.

I haven't heard from Col. Hackworth in quite a while. Was this a book? I wouldn't mind reading more on this.

IMHO; Nothing good will come of this. That's a quote from someone from long ago. But I believe it. I was eighteen once and in the military. Young men tend to have wondering minds as I recall. He!! meye mynd tens two wondre effen 2day.

willriskit · February 18th, 2012, 10:39 AM

The Equal Rights Amendment to the constitution failed miserably in 1976 and yet our elected representatives behave as if it passed. Like removing sodomy and bestiality from the UCMJ, putting heterophobes in units, placing women in combat roles is good news only to our enemies. The present leadership will apparently stop at nothing to undermine the cohesiveness and combat efficiency of our military, whether the electorate likes it or not. I will be eternally thankful to have served when I did.

When are we going to wake up?

Seventh Fleet · February 18th, 2012, 10:41 AM

The Military Leadership Diversity Commission sure sounds like a bunch of hard charging war fighters tasked with destroying the unit cohesiveness of the US military through out of control political correctness.

Females have no place in a fox hole or on any combat war ship! PERIOD!

Furthermore they have no place in a Crown Vic answering calls for service with any police department, except for perhaps Mayberry RFD PD...

I have worked females in law enforcement and the men tend to be over protective of their female counter parts. I ended up transferring them to where they could do the least damage, such as DARE, SRO billets or Community Policing.

7th

armydogdoc · February 18th, 2012, 12:23 PM

One thing I can tell you from experience with split tails and the military, when it comes time for some good old fashioned physical labor the females have a nasty tendency to sit on the side lines and watch while you are working your a$$ off. I saw it first hand when we were deploying out of Ft. Carson and the whole time I was in country. You are not a delicate flower, you are a United States soldier and you need to act like one because we are all depending on you to do so. The bad thing is this, she is taking the spot of some Joe who would be right in there with you busting his hump as hard as you are busting yours. Instead this split tail is here occupying his spot and just watching the fun. It creates feelings of resentment and hurts unit cohesiveness. This is BAD JUJU, and I realy dont see it working to well.

My 2 cents worth on the subject, soap box dismounted.

Swamp Rat · February 18th, 2012, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CharlieEcho

I haven't heard from Col. Hackworth in quite a while. Was this a book? I wouldn't mind reading more on this.

IMHO; Nothing good will come of this. That's a quote from someone from long ago. But I believe it. I was eighteen once and in the military. Young men tend to have wondering minds as I recall. He!! meye mynd tens two wondre effen 2day.

He died a few years ago from bladder cancer.

IC2(SS)19Z50C5 · February 18th, 2012, 01:09 PM

All of this discussion just reminds me of an article I saw in Army times last year or the year before. The article centered on the Leadership “issues” a new Brigade Commander had to deal with upon taking command of a Brigade Combat Team at Ft. Carson, Colorado. One of his first “Challenges” was how to deal with the effects of a DVD that was floating around the brigade of one of the female Lieutenants from one of the brigade supports units who was filmed “Doing” numerous enlisted soldiers simultaneously.. It sounded as if she were doing a Navy damage control reenactment exercise… I.E., Having all three of her holes “plugged” at the same time.
Oh yeah one other thing, I spent my last 10 years of Army active duty in Army Aviation, I had female Soldiers in my section and fellow Senior NCO’s who were female… All in all they are more trouble than they are worth. Glad I’m retired now, but I still see on a daily basis the military of yester years being watered down and suffering the long term effects of “estrogen contamination” at all levels..

philip26p · February 18th, 2012, 01:24 PM

Woman in combat positions SHOULD NOT HAPPEN. Across the services the females have easier physical fitness tests, if they want to be in combat positions and be treated equally then first things first, the scores go across the board, they have to perform at the same level os their male counterparts.
I know from personal experience that if females around, shirts are on and all that bs, they are lazier and expect the males to do all the work and try to sleep their way to do nothing, then if you don’t sleep with them and make them work they get pissy and don’t like being able to control you.
So in closing IMHFO women should not be on ships, subs, combat units or anywhere but office jobs.