How do you feel about the Army directing units to place new female Armor and Infantry officers in leadership positions ahead of males?

I want an equal opportunity in job competition, and I want my skills to be equally valued with my peers. I DO NOT want to be arbitrarily promoted or placed in a key position just because of my anatomy. That does nothing to garner respect or to affirm my actual qualifications or performance. I would always be the one who "just got the job because she's female." There would always be that doubt.

Just another move to make the POTUS happy. A very bad idea.

Sounds like a solid EO issue to me. Reversing the discrimination is not the same as providing equal opportunity for all. It does the opposite and creates a hostile environment with the wrong kind of competitiveness.

Not saying that it does not exist, but what entity or who is providing this 'guidance'?

Have not seen or heard anything of the sort.

If the female officer has filled the required check for that position including the physical fitness requirements they should be considered for position in the same way as their male counterparts. If they want to consider placing them in to that position based only because she is a female, and all things being equal as far as the basic requirements, then no they should not be considered just because of her gender.

No one should be stepped up unless qualified. Not male, female, color or otherwise. We are running an army not a liberal college campus. The military is the most important thing we have to protect our country. We need the best, certainly not political correctness.

Not to thrilled to be honest and it has nothing to do with gender. The BC ran an OML for PL slots and the officers had to do their time in staff purgatory (er..developmental positions) until it was their turn. Talk about creating animosity towards someone that may not already exist. Who advises these people nowadays?

"....ahead of their male counterparts...." The question, as presented, contains a statement the completely changes the premis being offered. It is one question to be placed ahead of more experience leaders rather than being place in a position of command, even down to the platoon leader. Keep in mind I ETS'd i 1971 and thoday's army bears little if any resembelence to the old army. However, having said all that, if all things were equal I would have no problem with a female office leading if she were truly qualified. It would be a travesty to lower physical qualfcation in order to allow a female squad, platoon or company commander in direct compat. I know when have acted in position of exposure to hostile fire in positions of non-infantry. Properly trained, just as men should be makes this a winner idea. I saw too manny butter bars in Vietnam that had no business in an infantry leadership position - lack of training.

This is nothing new. Was in Germany in late 70's. Went to an Engineer social function in Hanau. In the process of mingling, meeting my peers in the other EN BDE, met a 1LT (woman) EN officer who commanded a ribbon bridge company. Turns out she received a direct commission to 1LT on entry, and was given the Command one year in service. At that time, it took 2 years to 1LT and then 2.5 years to CPT. If you were good, you could get a company command towards the end of your three year tour (about 2.5 years).
While I understood the need to get woman in EN leadership positions, this did not sit well with me, particularly as a highly rated Regular Army EN officer having to bide my time.
Direct commissioning woman into the service was a popular tool back then. They seemed to get quality individuals.

Why not do something along the lines of the Starship Troopers military life style..where everyone trains together....just my opinion of course instead of being pc all the time...