What are your thoughts: disparaging remarks about females who want to earn an opportunity to serve in a combat position.

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 20:32:24 -0500

I've read some disturbing comments in forum discussions about females in combat roles. The comments are made by males in uniform and span from accusations that women are lazy and unreliable to they are only useful for recreation and procreation. Having served for almost 23 years - I am not surprised but saddened. These are my brothers in arms whom I would risk life and limb for.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 6 at 2015 8:58 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 20:58:58 -0500

Anyone who wants to serve, should be able to serve. The only question is whether a person is able to pass the requirements of the role.

Recent discussions regarding Ranger school are probably the most heated, however they have "generally" been professional in nature.

In the Marines, all personnel go through School of Infantry (ITB or MCT) or The Basic School, so that there is a baseline. The Infantry Officer Course (IOC) has recently been opened to female officers, however none have passed as yet (to my knowledge). Based on current reports, it appears that ITB (20%~ pass rate for female) and IOC (0%~) physical requirements are too strenuous, relatively.

Response by SPC Jeff Leonard made Mar 6 at 2015 9:04 PM

SPC Jeff Leonard — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 21:04:26 -0500

I served from 88 to 97 as a scout and I would have no problems with women in combat roles, on a condition. Hold them to the same standard for PT and all the requirements of the position. I have to admit what I was told I am not sure if it is true. Sit ups, push ups and the two mile run for women were lower than the men. There is no reason why women can't be held to the standard. Once again if my information is incorrect I apologize.

Response by SGT Jim Z. made Mar 6 at 2015 9:12 PM

SGT Jim Z. — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 21:12:30 -0500

I believe that women should be able to serve in combat MOS if they choose and complete the necessary training to standards. As Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS stated the Ranger threads have been one of the most heated debates and I do believe there were some disparaging remarks. I do not agree with men making those types of remarks and I even called one on it but when he was baiting me toward non-professional comments I chose the high road. CPT Private RallyPoint Member it pains me that they still have this notion when one of the best snipers in WWII was a female http://www.businessinsider.com/claudia-kalugina-sniper-2014-2

How Claudia Kalugina Became One Of The Deadliest Female Snipers In History

The Russians trained 2,000 female snipers during World War II

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2015 9:14 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 21:14:26 -0500

For every guy who is claiming that women are lazy and unreliable, there is another out there who deployed with a female and was glad that she was there to watch his back. While I agree generalizing a whole group of people based on personal interactions is unfair, both of the aforementioned opinions are often based on personal experiences and that is difficult to overcome. Don't let it get to you.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2015 9:19 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 21:19:00 -0500

There are paradigms in place that have existed for years. Generational thinking. I'd say to you and any other female who serves, don't excuse the ignorance, just understand it. Every minority group has to face the majority in some way shape or form.

Drink water, keep your head low and chin up. Drive on!

I wish I had something more dynamic, but change is achieved slowly and we just have to left, right, left until we get where we're going.

Response by SN Jake Jordan made Mar 6 at 2015 9:30 PM

SN Jake Jordan — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 21:30:41 -0500

Ok i feel like women should not fight on the front lines because if they become shot or wounded men or ten time more like to drop what they are doing and go in the knight and shining armor mode to save the wounded damsel witch my cost the their life trying to save them but if a woman can take the pain of a child and can kick a man ass then hell yeah put them out there but if they drop that is what worries me a man can step over a fallen man to return fire until its safe but not always true if a woman goes down a man will grab her and try to drag her to safety that right there is what will cost two soldiers to die and not just one

Response by CPT Zachary Brooks made Mar 6 at 2015 10:08 PM

CPT Zachary Brooks — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 22:08:22 -0500

As long as anyone that wants to serve can meet the established standards they are more than welcome to do so. The issues that I personally have with it is that we have politicians attempting to get votes and are doing so by manipulating the military services into one large social experiment at the expense of readiness or completing the mission.

So long as the soldier (man, woman, gay, straight, yellow, white, green, black, etc) can meet the standards of the position they should be allowed to perform the duties of that position.

Response by SFC Walt Littleton made Mar 6 at 2015 10:42 PM

SFC Walt Littleton — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 22:42:15 -0500

Capt. Vogel, thank you for your service! I retired years ago however, I was in while the Army transitioned women from the Woman's Army Corps (WACS) to traditional Army. Yes they were only at the hospital or administrative the couple of years. There wasn't much of a change. As my years progressed so did their rolls. I was Signal so I was one of the first Spc5 to receive the first 2 female privates. Of course you get the jokes, stupid Neanderthal attitudes and of course let's treat them differently because they are female. I caught a lot of crap but I stuck to my guns and they were treated like all my other soldiers and it worked.

A few years later I was assigned to The 101st and Dejavu! I am receiving the first 5 female line soldiers to my forward support supply trains. Same crap different day. Our first field problem and the 1SG has a detail setting up a GP Small and camouflage for the females to sleep in and dig separate latrines. I'm like WTF is going on. Almost lost a stripe over this one after Top, the CO and i finished yelling at each other. I WON, NO SEPARATE ANYTHING!!!! They are soldiers and will be treated like every other soldier. They worked, ate and slept in the same GPs the males did. A row of hanging blankets at wake up for all to get dressed.

You treat everyone the same and you get the same results. As everyone molds, the teamwork jells and we all accomplished some amazing things.

My thoughts are a soldier is a soldier and as long as they meet the standards they should be given the opportunity period.

I had a unique opportunity to work with females I'd stack up against most men.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2015 10:47 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 22:47:17 -0500

Any individual making comments such as you speak of are "INSECURE!"

They need to get with the changing times and accept what the future holds. It has been decided that "Women Soldiers" are now able to posses any Military Occupational Specialty.

There is going to be a transitional period where the insecure individuals I speak of are going to perceive that the standards have been changed or lowered.

The Military is voluntary and anyone who does not like it is free to remove themselves from the Military. You can even request an early discharge if it bother you to that extent.

Bottom line some are insecure in the fact that a Woman will be successful and possibly even be better at the skill they cherish to be held by males.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Mar 6 at 2015 10:57 PM

COL Charles Williams — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 22:57:28 -0500

Disparaging remarks about anyone is not acceptable. Disparaging remarks about any service member, by another service member is beyond unacceptable. We are all entitled to our opinions, but it should never ever be personal. Keep it professional, and when it is not, nip it in the bud.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2015 10:59 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 22:59:45 -0500

I fully support a female who can meet the standard males have to meet.

Don't ever lower the standard though. If you want combat and you're a female, you have to meet the established male standards.

Response by A1C Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2015 11:51 PM

A1C Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 23:51:46 -0500

I'm sure when we were first allowed to join in the first place similar remarks were made, even though our role back then was restricted to doing an administration type of job, or being a nurse. The main difference is that we have a much more public place to express our opinions. That being said, we have to remember to be respectful of those around us.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2015 1:24 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 01:24:24 -0500

We have no room on RP for disparaging, disrespectful or unprofessional remarks. As long as I'm around I will call the offenders out and down vote any I see and I encourage all other RP members to do the same.

I will not take anything away from or restrict a female in any way any more than I would somebody of different color or religion. When we put on the uniform we are all equal.

By the same token I won't give anything to a woman just because she is a woman. No different standards, quotas or special privilege.

All of this said within the current regs and system we have. If women are allowed in combat MOS's, as long as the same standards are meet and no quotas or special privilege, I say welcome!

Response by SPC Jonathan Sellers made Mar 7 at 2015 1:38 AM

SPC Jonathan Sellers — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 01:38:53 -0500

Those remarks are baseless, but when it comes to the wisdom of putting women with men into combat roles that last month's at a time, there isn't much wisdom in it. If no hanky Panky takes place, it's a miracle... then the next thing you know, it's morning sickness, and that soldier is a mommy to be... so the entire unit loses a trained up soldier to be replaced by a cherry ass private... then there are the men arguing about who's the daddy... one of them dead, the other court martial and that's two more soldiers that need replacing by some cherry ass private, and one baby that we not know who daddy is.... so I guess if women need to be a grunt that bad and go to war fine, fuck it, who am I to stop you ladies... I'm just glad that as a young dumb full of cum Airborne Ranger I didn't have to deal with a raging boner because some fine ass lady somehow made it into Regiment. Guaranteed someone in the unit would be going to jail for some sexual crime because the officers would be politically coerced into scapegoating the male for what was a drunken off duty sexcapade between wonder woman and the invisible man... honestly, we are talking about kids who haven't even matured to make rationale life choices, and politicians and feminists are frothing at the mouth to have the first women in infantry units... good luck with the fallout, RLTW

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2015 2:00 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 02:00:15 -0500

My thoughts on the disparaging remarks about women are the same as my thoughts on the disparaging remarks about religion on this site. The are the same thoughts as my thoughts on the total disrespect shown in a majority of discussions on this site. My thoughts? I am pretty damn tired of it so, I just ignore them now.

One of the things about equal opportunity that everyone should understand is that everyone is prejudice. There is something that every individual does not like based on how they were raised. It could be homosexuality, race, gender or brussel sprouts but there is always something. No amount of EO training will ever take that away from that person but it will educate them that it is not acceptable to voice those opinions in the military.

Unfortunately this is not the military it's the internet. The admins try to clean it up but RP is not their day job, well maybe SFC Mark Merino 's but everyone else is pretty busy. Don't worry ma'am there are plenty of us that support our sisters in arms!

Response by CW3 Craig Linghor made Mar 7 at 2015 3:50 AM

CW3 Craig Linghor — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:50:21 -0500

There are a lot of fake personas on these forums with agendas. Sounds like some ignoramus trying to stir something up.

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Mar 7 at 2015 5:20 AM

CSM Michael J. Uhlig — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 05:20:36 -0500

You might not like the way it's addressed but the fact is there are lazy Soldiers, both male and females. The comment of females only being useful for recreation and procreation indicates ignorance and it's those Soldiers I ask what was their mommas purpose - it strikes a nerve because most of them are momma's boys.

I've been in (all-male) units in combat where the mentality was when a female was in a convoy (dropping off supplies) that the MWR platoon arrived, I was able to address that by being on the ground with my unit, sharing hardships with them is how I got their ear and was able to make it make sense that they were sharing risk also by bringing those supplies to us.

How does this mentality form/take place, here's a personal - relative - story that pissed me off during the same deployment: We had two females in our BN (both were medics from the FSB). We set up a combined (with the IA) snap TCP overnight to interdict a HVT (the senior female medic was with us) and we were hit with a VBIED (presumably the HVT's Scout). We collected casualties and called a medevac for two Local Nationals - she insisted on going with the LN even though there was a more qualified medic on the helo....I was pissed because she left the rest of us with less coverage (we hade two platoon on this objective so we had the platoon medics). Immediately upon her return she was asking for witness statements to justify her being recommended for a BSM with V. I was infuriated, this was the same Soldier that was talking about wanting to get in the fight, wanting to go on patrol and wanting to be part of the team, when she gets the chance, she coward and stayed hunkered down behind a barrier and when she saw the helo ran to the LZ to get on board.....the commander (whom was on the ground with me) said "just let her go"....the company XO put her in for an ARCOM - I was butt hurt because my scout and mortar platoon was there, was closer and we all stayed but none of the guys was recommended for anything. When I put 2 and 2 together, I saw the ARCOM prevented the BSM (V). That was a very negative female combat experience for me.

On the other end of the spectrum, in Iraq 2004, I will never forget it was a female Soldier that immediately responded to and pulled multiple (male) Soldiers out of burning vehicles, when she had severely burned arms and hands - she was awarded the Purple Heart and BSM (V) very deservingly.

I can also talk on the personal courage and dedication of many females on the FET's in Afghanistan and the way they were combat multipliers on multiple missions.

In summation, yeah there are lazy Soldier - male & female, don't be so thin skinned. The troublesome part is when a Soldier is looked at as purely entertainment purposes, and that takes active engagement (from peers to leadership) to change the behavior.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Mar 7 at 2015 8:12 AM

Cpl Jeff N. — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 08:12:53 -0500

I don't support women in combat roles, period. There are plenty of posts on here that address that topic. I also do not support disparaging remarks about women serving their country. Honorable service to nation should be supported and encouraged. We can agree or disagree on issues of policy without disparaging other's service.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2015 8:24 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 08:24:16 -0500

CPT Private RallyPoint Member I agree that making these comments personal is unacceptable and it should only be (IMHO and with all due respect). That said, you are not going to get a lot of support from older veterans and those younger troops who are set in their ways. Like any other issue, it takes time for people to see the intrinsic value of anything. Just like with the Tuskegee Airman, if you can handle it you belong. If not, I am very sorry but this really is life and death.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2015 8:29 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 08:29:33 -0500

As for females taking ranks in combat roles my personal opinion is that I have no problem with it, IF the selected individuals that wish to go combat arms can meet the same standards, I do not see in race, religion, or gender but rather four colors that matter to me green for my soldiers, and the red, white, and blue of our flag. your race and or gender will hold no fact on whether you can accomplish the job and any implied tasks but rather your individual drive, mindset, and personal choice to take on the tasks at all levels including physical fitness, marksmanship, MOS proficiency, survival skills. This goes both ways though I have seen in the past in civilian life where people ask for equality and then once received they want preferential treatment, as long as they don't request anything more anything less than their cohorts then I would gladly welcome them in to the ranks of positions. In summary don't take this as a offensive post, these are personal opinions and there are many male soldiers that I would not welcome in to combat arms because they lack the very qualities I mentioned before. To touch on the disturbing comments you mentioned earlier we need to all remember we are professionals at all levels juniors are learning the ropes and coming in to the military it is on their leadership to show them the right way, NCOs must remember their creed and live it "No one is more professional than I.", and Officers and Warrants must lead by example as they hold the highest authority, individuals must also remember they are held to higher standards being in the military, I can not speak for all branches as I only serve in the Army but we all know the ARs that cover how we should conduct ourselves. Service members from all branches must remember that the actions you take on social media, the words you use can and will be used against you. it is punishable under UCMJ holding misconduct on social media under Articles 88, 89, 91, 133 and 134.

Response by Cpl Bo Dronet made Mar 7 at 2015 11:55 AM

Cpl Bo Dronet — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:55:27 -0500

I'm sorry for the negitive commonts but I take my information from history and biology

Response by SPC David Shaffer made Mar 7 at 2015 12:49 PM

SPC David Shaffer — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 12:49:27 -0500

Ma'am remarks like that will never be tolerated on RP. There are too many great people here that will not let that fly. It takes a certain kind of person man/woman to serve in a combat role. I know many men that are the laziest, most unmotivated, bags of trash there could ever be. I know a lot of women that would be much more suited for a combat role than some of the men I have seen in my Mos (11B.) I think if any soldier chooses to go into a combat MOS and they can do the job, there shouldn't be anything or anyone to stop them.

Response by 1SG Steven Stankovich made Mar 7 at 2015 12:52 PM

1SG Steven Stankovich — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 12:52:15 -0500

When I look to my left or my right in a foxhole, all I need to know is that Soldier can shoot, move or communicate. I do not care if they are male or female, or what color their skin may be, or what God they may worship. Job performance and proficiency is all that matters.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Mar 7 at 2015 1:07 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 13:07:53 -0500

It is the nature of all Internet discussion forums. It reminds me of the old Disney cartoon starring Goofy as Jekyll and Hyde characters, Mr Walker and Mr Wheeler. They say things from the apparent safety of anonymity that they would never say in person.

I suspect that anyone who would disparage a woman who has not only demonstrated her commitment but also her ability to serve in combat, might not enjoy the lesson in respect they would receive if they attempted to do so in person.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZAZ_xu0DCg

Goofy in 'Motor Mania' (1950)

http://www.roadswerenotbuiltforcars.com Goofy stars as a Jekyll and Hyde character, Mr. Walker/Mr. Wheeler. When he's a pedestrian he's mild-mannered and rat...

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2015 4:06 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 16:06:15 -0500

Ma'am,

I'll be up front and say that I'm personally against placing females in combat arms. With that being said, you're absolutely right. The discussion needs to be professional and focused on tangible discussion points. Mudslinging or sexist diatribes have no place in our military or here.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2015 4:19 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 16:19:58 -0500

If you are a weather forecaster you better be smart or extremely lucky (LOL) because posers in any endeavor need to go. If a person goes to a recruiter and they ask you why you want to do a certain be sure you do it for the right reasons. Not because of your race, sexual orientation or gender. This is a zero sum game with regards to outcome. We do not need people are cross purposes with fellow serving members.

Response by SFC Christopher Perry made Mar 7 at 2015 7:23 PM

SFC Christopher Perry — Sat, 07 Mar 2015 19:23:50 -0500

We all wear the uniform every day, why should your race, sex, religion, or anything else prohibit your ability to succeed in your chosen profession?

Response by SFC Boots Attaway made Mar 8 at 2015 1:55 AM

SFC Boots Attaway — Sun, 08 Mar 2015 01:55:59 -0500

If they can meet the standards then why shouldn't they be in combat arms after all they have already been in combat. As for those who would make disparaging remarks of ANY KIND you do NOT belong on RP as we are all brothers and sisters here. If you have any snide remarks please keep them to your selves.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2015 3:33 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 08 Mar 2015 03:33:08 -0400

I have been thinking about this question for some time. I am in an predominately male dominated career field. From my point of view most infantry and special operations have a proud history. They have developed a warrior culture that they are proud of, and will protect at all cost. I also value and respect any woman who is in the service. I have worked around FETT team members that were very valuable to the military intelligence of our missions, and provided me with target information. We lost 12 soldiers on my last deployment, and I didn't think about it to much that is our job to fight and die for each other, but one of those soldiers was a female, and for some reason that impacted me more than all the other soldiers deaths. I can tell you every detail about that female soldier, and i never even met her. I think there is a political agenda being pushed, and eventually we will either have to embrace it or die. My point being Mam keep the same standards, and don't try to change a culture that has been in place for decades.If a female can pass good on her I will welcome her to the culture with open arms, but if she can't don't drop my standards across the board. We have a lot of male Bravado in our career fields, and that is what keeps us sharp, and ready for combat.

Response by CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2015 5:15 AM

CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 08 Mar 2015 05:15:18 -0400

I've known quite a few women who could do the job better than 75% of the men out there, yes there are some lazy women in uniform but no more than the men less in fact. The reason women shouldn't be in combat arms is simple the men couldn't handle it. Before getting all pissed off, let me explain. Men could handle them being there and doing the job. What they can't handle. Let say your inf. platoon is on mission, you get into a hard place the majority of the platoon is captured including the females. How long could the men that serve side by side with them let them be raped and sodomized, tortured and abused in front of them before telling the enemy everything. "Because it will all stop as soon as you tell us what we want to know. Anybody who has been a POW can explain the things that would happen a lot better than me I reckon. I've known women who I don't doubt could handle the abuse for a long time, the ones who would crack are the men with her. Plain and simple

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2015 7:02 AM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 08 Mar 2015 07:02:49 -0400

I too agree it is sad that anyone would post comments that females are only useful for "recreation and procreation". If that is how they really think then they don't deserve to have any women in their life. I would also challenge them to say that to their own mother and see what happens.

On another note, people making comments like that don't belong on Rallypoint or even in the military. Letting them stay in will only further the problem that the military has with letting women be treated as equals.

Response by 1LT William Clardy made Mar 8 at 2015 11:13 AM

1LT William Clardy — Sun, 08 Mar 2015 11:13:50 -0400

CPT Private RallyPoint Member, I try not to waste too much of my time dwelling on desperate attempts to use rhetoric in response to reason.

My own advice to women on how to best respond to disparaging stereotypes, speaking as a southern boy who was grew up witnessing the power of a matriarchy, is to do as women have done for years: refuse to accept them and then quietly but firmly rub the offending individual's face in undeniable disproof.

Response by 1SG David Little made Mar 8 at 2015 11:55 AM

1SG David Little — Sun, 08 Mar 2015 11:55:00 -0400

I am split on this. When I was a Counterintelligence Agent, having women in the office was an asset! I mean, what is more natural when conducting a surveillance; a man and a woman walking together and looking in a window as if window shopping, or two 'G-men' walking together? Which team stands out? Which team looks 'normal' and won't stand out? I worked with several outstanding female agents. On the other side of the coin, as a Special Forces soldier, THEY JUST DO NOT BELONG IN ANY WAY. Physical standards are standards which have developed to effectively do a job. It is a disservice to all to lower a standard to include women, since if you lower the standard to include women, it is basically saying that the higher standard 'really was not required' to effectively do the job. My rucksack weighed an AVERAGE of 135 lbs. How many women will be able to handle that kind of weight and still be effective? Also, when you are operating 'behind enemy lines' for MONTHS, there can be ..... difficulties. What willl happen if captured? Plus, many cultures also do not view women as equals. By having a woman on a Team they can be a hinderance to the mission.

Response by PO3 John Jeter made Mar 8 at 2015 12:20 PM

PO3 John Jeter — Sun, 08 Mar 2015 12:20:53 -0400

T'were much ado about nothing much........ Talk is cheap and many of those comments were likely tasteless humor not honestly meant. We all see those types of jokes growing up. Usually those 'children' outgrow them but some take longer than others. Who the victims are depends much on where you grow up. In much of Texas it's "Aggie" jokes. By no means am I making excuses for them. What I am saying is don't let them pierce your heart. If you allow this to hurt you then those very few who are truly mean spirited enough to be sincere about it will win.
On a positive note; 20 or 30 years ago, not many people would have been too concerned with this as an issue to be addressed. Progress is being made! Thank you for your service and God Bless!

Response by MAJ Emma Toops made Mar 8 at 2015 5:04 PM

MAJ Emma Toops — Sun, 08 Mar 2015 17:04:01 -0400

Cathy,
I am pretty passionate about this issue of women serving in combat MOS positions based on my experience serving in a Maneuver Support / Protection Branch alongside mostly Combat Arms personnel for much of my career. There are very few women who might be able to prove their ability to perform in these positions by performing to the same standards as men; however, they are inherently introducing risk to the team because of instincts and men’s conditioning to protect those smaller, weaker, their teammates, etc. Paradigm shifts in our military culture to change this will take a LOT of time and buy-in to the culture shift.

My opinion is that if given the opportunity and a woman wants to try, the standards must be exactly as they need to be for the roles – not compromised to accommodate for gender. However, I also believe that women who are adamant about the issue as being necessary for career progression / opportunity are being very short-sighted and selfish. There are plenty of opportunities for women to serve and be successful in a career – and isn’t our service supposed to be self-less and for a greater purpose than ourselves?

As a Chemical Officer, my function was specifically to analyze the environmental risks and consequences of CBRN, weapons of mass destruction, and unconventional warfare. Women in combat MOS roles is unconventional warfare. Are the risks acceptable? Not my decision, but my recommendation is always based on my subject matter expertise and opinion.

Also, now that I have transitioned back into the civilian sector, I can undeniably state that overcoming the challenges that having served in a combat role in service that men currently face will be even more difficult for a woman, because it is even more unconventional for a civilian to comprehend. Serving our country is a temporary career, even for those who serve a full 20+ career. Eventually, integration into a civilian work environment will happen. The effects of serving include physical and behavioral conditions – does serving in a combat MOS for the sake of “professional prestige” warrant those lasting effects?

I’ll close by saying this. When I was serving, I was high-speed, motivated, and did some pretty physically and emotionally challenging things because of my assignment to Infantry Divisions. I am the person I am today because of my service. I am a fully capable and functional Civilian, but I have had to accommodate into a new normal because of some of my service-connected conditions. Just saying.

Response by LTC Stephen C. made Mar 9 at 2015 10:16 AM

LTC Stephen C. — Mon, 09 Mar 2015 10:16:04 -0400

CPT Private RallyPoint Member, our friend, MAJ Billi Taylor Blaschke is at the Ranger Training Assessment Course even as I write this to you! She certainly has my best wishes for success!

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2015 1:53 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 09 Mar 2015 13:53:53 -0400

Ma'am,

I, too, have seen a lot of these remarks. The quickest way to get to the heart of a matter is to ask someone their honest opinion. However, most are a generalization of an entire gender and do not take into consideration that just like the average male may not be "special forces" material the average female may not be as well. Because when we begin to eliminate entire groups we miss out on the incredible ones. The ones that change history and become the 1st to lead the way for future hopefuls. Once upon a time females were not allowed on ships and though the transition was a painful one, look how far we have come as a service and a fleet.

This is where my statement (repetitive though it maybe and I apologize) is, "I have always been a firm supporter of equality to a point. I do not believe anyone should be banned from an opportunity based upon their sex, gender, race, religion or color. However, I also believe that standards should NOT be lowered either. If you can meet the standard regardless of all the factors of your genetic make-up then more power to you." I have stated this same opinion in the discussion of women on submarines and women in special forces (e.g. SEAL, etc.) and do not plan on changing my stance anytime soon.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2015 2:09 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 09 Mar 2015 14:09:24 -0400

Serving in the United States Army I can say I am not big on the situation of women serving in combat positions, but I am not against it. The only thing that I discourage about the situation is more sexual harrasment, and all the other potential negativity behind it. It seems like the military just wants to see if women can pretty much do what men do. I agree they're some women who can do my job, no doubt. Only thing is the military should look at the other nature in which could effect women who decide to take the combat road. Overall I accept what decisions my leaders come to.

Response by MSgt Denise Smith made Mar 9 at 2015 4:12 PM

MSgt Denise Smith — Mon, 09 Mar 2015 16:12:31 -0400

Unfortunately there will always be people that will speak poorly of women or folks not of their ethnic or cultural background. Those people are rarely "the best of the best" shall we say. Personally all positions combat or otherwise should be open to all personnel that desire to meet the existing physical, mental standards to fill that position. The number of personnel that are capable of completing the courses required to join any of the Elite units is extremely small and those personnel are normally extremely driven and in unbelievable physical condition. Honestly more power to them for even trying that is more than at least 75% of the active duty military will ever do.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2015 7:41 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 09 Mar 2015 19:41:21 -0400

I've been passing this thread for at least a week and it keeps coming back up.
I've ignored the threads about this debate on purpose because everyone should already know the answer. Combat, war, today, is not what it was twenty years ago, with nice lines on a map delineating what is ours and what is theirs. It's not even Vietnam, where they at least had a traditional army we might engage. Modern war is a mess and it's not going anywhere anytime soon. Women serve in every branch of the army except four, but that doesn't stop them from being attached to these branches even in combat. Coming from MI (CI), we had plenty of women, and I don't remember any of them asking for the for to be held. And when we deployed no one bothered to put up a curtain, to tired to care on their part, ands to tired to look on mine.
The truth is, you're just as dead getting bayonetted as you are from counter-battery fire as you are taking s heat round as you are from a snipers round, as you are from an ambushed convoy. If you want the job and can keep up, congratulations.

Response by SFC Collin McMillion made Mar 9 at 2015 11:11 PM

SFC Collin McMillion — Mon, 09 Mar 2015 23:11:04 -0400

it's really hard for me to respond to this because when I was in we had the Women's Army Corp (WAC's) whose primary goal was support. I consider myself fairly liberal when it come to this subject matter, though a bit opinionated. I see no problem with women in most combat roles as long as their performance is up tp par, but there are certain areas I am not sure about. The team I was with was sometimes hunted with dogs and due to their good sense of smell I wonder how detrimental "that time of the month might be", or the capability of carrying a wounded brother twice their weight to safety? There are a few other points or areas that might also be affected, but in general, if you can do the job and not endanger your brothers and sisters in arms, I see no problem. I think it would be quite difficult for me to get sexually excited over anybody while in combat and taking incoming fire trying to survive.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2015 11:46 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 09 Mar 2015 23:46:18 -0400

The men I drink beer with are the kind the speak honestly and without prejudice. I believe in enforcing a standard and gender is not a standard. I have seen men and women who could not pass an APFT and I have seen the opposite for both genders. I believe in equal opportunity and not changing standards. I am equally disappointed when standards are changed for the convenience of a few, as well as, I am disturbed by those who can easily meet the standard being denied opportunity. Do a support the comments to which you refer CPT Private RallyPoint Member, NO!

You can't make determinations until a person is given a chance.

Response by LCpl Mark Lefler made Mar 9 at 2015 11:50 PM

LCpl Mark Lefler — Mon, 09 Mar 2015 23:50:37 -0400

To me, i don't care if a person is male, female, gay, straight or purple, if they can do the job, they can do the job.

As for attacks on women, as members of the military we should have way more honor and dignity then that. Though at times it seems people feel they can say what they want, when they want to who they want because they served.

Response by 1LT Nick Kidwell made Mar 11 at 2015 1:16 PM

1LT Nick Kidwell — Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:16:14 -0400

I would say that their values are stuck in the 19th century and they haven't actually bothered to meet any women who go against their preconceived notions.

I would love to see one of those hotshots go just ONE round in the ring with some of the female fighters out there like Ronda Rousey, and then tell her that she's no good at fighting...

Response by MSG David Johnson made Mar 11 at 2015 1:33 PM

MSG David Johnson — Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:33:03 -0400

I was sent to 88M course, Motor Transport Operator, prior to a deployment in 2004. There were females in the courses that could not drive a car let alone an 18 wheel vehicle. But they were passed anyway. I personally had to ground guide one female Soldier through the staright back 100yd course. It took her almost 30 minutes and she cried the entire way. When she got to the point where she had gotten to the finish I told her to take her foot off the brake and just back up, it didn't matter at this point what her trailer did, she had completed this portion of the test. The instructor had long ago went to help someone else leaving me alone to help. When I walked over to her she asked why I finished the course for the operator. I explained that she got to a point where she wasn't going to fail the portion of the exam.
After being a civilian truck driver for the previous decade I was scared knowing this female Soldier was going to be deployed and be required to back up a truck. But, and this is a big BUT, there were male Soldiers who were just as bad or worse.

The unit I deployed with had about 15 females, not a single one of them could NOT drive, nor did any of them try to get out of deployment. We were assigned the KBR white unarmored trucks to drive. But the drama! OMG! Fortunately it was only a few.
There were 2 'Mama Hens' to keep them all in check and it made me feel glad I wasn't assigned to a mixed gender unit.
As I posted in another question, there was one of my Female Soldiers that I recommended for the BSM/V, unfortunately her gender prevented the higher ups from believing she was capable of what she was being recommended for.
My last tour had female Soldiers attached to our Combat Engineer unit, I would go into a fire fight with any and all of them. They would come to me and almost beg to go outside the wire with us on our route clearance missions, so we had to set up a rotation to accomadate these fine Soldiers, that because of a chromosome could not get into the type of jobs they wanted.

Out of ALL the female Soldiers I deployed with, there may be 2-3 I would not want to deploy with any time, any where.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 17 at 2015 2:06 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:06:03 -0400

Apparently my 1SGT (MALE) in Iraq thought two women were pretty BadAzz and that was myself (the driver) and my gunner, another female. There are always "Bad Apples." I just pray that the ones in a LEADERSHIP position WISE UP!

And if I see another man talking about a woman's "time of the month" as if they know anything about it, I think I will vomit. So I'll make my post and move out.