Amazon has whacked our affiliate account. Hosting Donations/Commitments $2063 of $1920 (Sept 13/18). In Hand $1466 (Lump sum payments minus paypal graft). Paypal Donation Link Here

Women in Combat Roles

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
AWS260
Posts: 10165
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:51 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by AWS260 » Sat Sep 12, 2015 7:41 am

Rip wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:My personal preference would be to go into combat with superman and Captain America, but they don't exist in the same universe so...I guess I'd have to pick superman.
No wonder woman.

Sexist.
Definitely Wonder Woman.

Image

User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 25802
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana
Contact:
Blackhawk’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Blackhawk » Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:55 am

GreenGoo wrote:Well, to a certain extent frontline combatants have to be interchangeable. When the big guy assigned to lugging the 50 mm cannon around is incapacitated, does that screw the whole team? If WWII films are any indication, sometimes, but I'm sure in reality, not so much and the goal would be not at all.
I absolutely agree. Every soldier needs to be able to do every job. They're not saying in the study that the women can't achieve the raw muscle tasks - just that they're less efficient at it. That isn't a departure from the way things are now, though. Units still have big guys who barely notice the weight and small guys who barely passed the minimums. As long as the women can pass the physical minimums, it wouldn't be a big change. You still don't have the little guy carry the extra barrels and ammo.
[This space left intentionally blank.]

User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 16875
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Unagi » Sat Sep 12, 2015 2:23 pm

So I had read that most of the men in this test had been previously deployed, etc.; while most, if not all, of the women were not at that level of experience.

I can't find that article now, but I think it was just on Yahoo or something.

User avatar
Anonymous Bosch
Posts: 7204
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 6:09 pm
Location: Northern California [originally from the UK]

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Anonymous Bosch » Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:03 pm

Was It Fixed? Army General Told Subordinates: 'A Woman Will Graduate Ranger School,' Sources Say:
People Magazine wrote:Way back in January, long before the first women attended the Army's elite Ranger School – one of the most grueling military courses in the world – officials at the highest levels of the Army had already decided failure was not an option, sources tell PEOPLE.

"A woman will graduate Ranger School," a general told shocked subordinates this year while preparing for the first females to attend a "gender integrated assessment" of the grueling combat leadership course starting April 20, sources tell PEOPLE. "At least one will get through."

That directive set the tone for what was to follow, sources say.

"It had a ripple effect" at Fort Benning, where Ranger School is based, says a source with knowledge of events at the sprawling Georgia Army post. "Even though this was supposed to be just an assessment, everyone knew. The results were planned in advance."

...

Multiple sources told PEOPLE:

• Women were first sent to a special two-week training in January to get them ready for the school, which didn't start until April 20. Once there they were allowed to repeat the program until they passed – while men were held to a strict pass/fail standard.

• Afterward they spent months in a special platoon at Fort Benning getting, among other things, nutritional counseling and full-time training with a Ranger.

• While in the special platoon they were taken out to the land navigation course – a very tough part of the course that is timed – on a regular basis. The men had to see it for the first time when they went to the school.

• Once in the school they were allowed to repeat key parts – like patrols – while special consideration was not given to the men.

• A two-star general made personal appearances to cheer them along during one of the most challenging parts of the school, multiple sources tell PEOPLE.

The end result? Two women – First Lts. Kristen Griest and Shaye Haver – graduated August 21 (along with 381 men) and are wearing the prestigious Ranger Tab.
"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." -- Daniel Webster

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Fri Oct 09, 2015 1:29 pm

Anonymous Bosch wrote:
People Magazine wrote: • Women were first sent to a special two-week training in January to get them ready for the school, which didn't start until April 20. Once there they were allowed to repeat the program until they passed – while men were held to a strict pass/fail standard.

• Afterward they spent months in a special platoon at Fort Benning getting, among other things, nutritional counseling and full-time training with a Ranger.

• While in the special platoon they were taken out to the land navigation course – a very tough part of the course that is timed – on a regular basis. The men had to see it for the first time when they went to the school.

• Once in the school they were allowed to repeat key parts – like patrols – while special consideration was not given to the men.

• A two-star general made personal appearances to cheer them along during one of the most challenging parts of the school, multiple sources tell PEOPLE.

The end result? Two women – First Lts. Kristen Griest and Shaye Haver – graduated August 21 (along with 381 men) and are wearing the prestigious Ranger Tab.
Most of this I don't have any problem with in the short term. If the goal was to get women to pass the course as a sort of prototype or "see, it can be done", I have no problem with giving them extra training and multiple attempts.

I'm not happy that they got to be familiar with the course before running it for the evaluation, while other trainees didn't, but that in itself doesn't invalidate that they were able to successfully complete it, physically.

Listen, those that think women shouldn't be on the front line will see this as validation and upper brass "cheating".

As for me, I'm ok with the first women passing the course being "prepped" for it. It's not fair to the men (life hasn't been fair for women very often, and on a daily basis.) but the men will live.

While the end goal is to have the same requirements be met by both men and women, up until now it was thought that women simply couldn't meet the physical demands of the training and evaluation. According to what I'm reading here, they obviously can. I would hope that would put that argument to rest.

Now with that out of the way, we can get down to brass tacks, and allow women to "try out" (not sure what the term should be here) for elite fighting forces and not deny them the chance because "women aren't strong/tough/physical enough", and allow those women to succeed or fail on their own merits as individuals, rather than as a gender.

What I take away from this is that the women got extra training and more chances to pass than the men. Shrug. They did pass, and that was half the political battle over women in combat roles.

So to answer the first question, was it fixed? The answer appears to be no. Were the women given unfair advantage over the men? Yes. Did the women pass the course without lowering the physical requirements? Yes (and this is why I think it was unfair to the men but not fixed).

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 58938
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Isgrimnur » Fri Oct 09, 2015 1:38 pm

And colleges offer no-credit remedial math/english courses for those that came out of HS with the skills they needed to hang at the freshmen level. The desire is to help them achieve and remedy deficiencies, not just spike them back to the steno pool while you laugh in their faces.
Silver - 2k

Autobots and Starfleet officers — we fight together!

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Fri Oct 09, 2015 3:26 pm

I just want it clear that I understand the women had extra help and multiple attempts. They didn't just sign up and pass like they would have had to if they had been men. But they did pass, eventually.

Reviewing my own opinion on all of this, think here is where I am:

a) For regular infantry, moving the bar downwards slightly would allow more women to pass without diminishing front line infantry efficiency much. Of course it would be great if every soldier was a super soldier, but that ain't happening (yet anyway) and I think the bar has some flexibility. Just as moving the bar upwards probably wouldn't increase front line infantry efficiency much, lowering it shouldn't affect it much either.

b) For special ops, standards should be as high as needed, determined however these things are needed. If a special ops soldier has to be able to lug a light machine gun 500 meters in 5 minutes, then women should be required to do this as well. Special ops are not main front line infantry, and their specialized roles require specialized skills and strengths. As long as the standards are appropriate for the work and not specifically designed to weed out women, have at it.

c) I don't ever imagine an army that is 50/50 across gender lines for fighting troops. I do think that exceptional women who want to fight should be allowed to do so.

d) I don't want lies. Don't tell me what I want to hear, but don't spin it so it's what you want me to hear either. Give it to me straight. I can take it.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 58938
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu Dec 03, 2015 3:54 pm

Open the gates!
Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter said Thursday that he is opening all jobs in combat units to women, a landmark decision that ends a three-year period of research with a number of firsts for female service members and bitter debate at times about how women should be integrated.

The decision opens the military’s most elite units to women who can meet the rigorous requirements for the positions for the first time, including in the Navy SEALs, Army Special Forces and other Special Operations Units. It also opens the Marine Corps infantry, a battle-hardened force that many service officials had openly advocated keeping closed to female service members.

“There will be no exceptions,” Carter said. “This means that, as long as they qualify and meet the standards, women will now be able to contribute to our mission in ways they could not before.”
...
The services will have 30 days to provide plans to Carter on how they will implement the policy change, he said. By law, the military also must notify Congress formally and wait that long before making any changes.
...
About 220,000 jobs and 10 percent of the military remained closed to women before Tuesday’s announcement, Carter said. Another 110,000 jobs in careers like artillery officer were opened in a series of decisions since 2013.
Silver - 2k

Autobots and Starfleet officers — we fight together!

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:15 pm

Clearly, America's enemies are chortling evilling and emboldened by this obvious show of weakness.

User avatar
dbt1949
Posts: 20394
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:34 am
Location: Hogeye Arkansas

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by dbt1949 » Thu Dec 03, 2015 11:09 pm

When I was in the air force women could do just about any job a man could. They were however, were given special dispensations tho. I hope the women now have to do the same things and meet the same requirements as men.
Ye Olde Farte
Double Ought Forty
aka dbt1949

User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 33465
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:
Kraken’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Kraken » Thu Dec 03, 2015 11:12 pm

GreenGoo wrote:Clearly, America's enemies are chortling evilling and emboldened by this obvious show of weakness.
I relish the day that a major terror cell is taken out by a bunch of girls.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Fri Dec 04, 2015 1:19 am

Kraken wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:Clearly, America's enemies are chortling evilling and emboldened by this obvious show of weakness.
I relish the day that a major terror cell is taken out by a bunch of girls.
That is unlikely in the near future. The ability of women to meet the special ops requirements is significantly less than meeting some of the less specialized roles.

Still, I'd like to see headlines such as "US to train and field women to prevent terrorists from reaching heaven".

User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 33465
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:
Kraken’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Kraken » Fri Dec 04, 2015 3:01 am

GreenGoo wrote:
Kraken wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:Clearly, America's enemies are chortling evilling and emboldened by this obvious show of weakness.
I relish the day that a major terror cell is taken out by a bunch of girls.
That is unlikely in the near future. The ability of women to meet the special ops requirements is significantly less than meeting some of the less specialized roles.
The propaganda effect in a culture the devalues women would be huge. If I were running the military I'd embed one (qualified!) female with an elite assault team and credit her with shooting (terrorist_name). They would be mortified.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Fri Dec 04, 2015 11:31 am

Yep. I might even publish a kill list of terrorists killed by women. I might even artificially inflate it. Or include drone strikes as kills by women.

If we could get real names of terrorists, that would add to the propaganda, but just a running tally of ISIL members who's deaths have been attributed to women might be enough to scare them shitless.

I read an article in just the last year or so that suggested that ISIL fighters were reluctant to engage units with female fighters because dying by a woman's hand prevented them from arriving in heaven (or something). If they are going to be superstitious zealots, I say we use it against them whenever possible

edit:

UK article

NYPost article

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 58938
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu Feb 04, 2016 3:34 pm

First woman in Tennessee to enlist as combat engineer goes AWOL
Local 8 News was first to tell you about Erika Lopez back in July of 2015. She made headlines when she enlisted for a job that could involve fighting on the front lines.
...
Lopez was in basic training at Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri. An Army spokesperson tells Local 8 News that Private Lopez was scheduled to return from convalescent leave on January 4th. She was reported absent without leave (AWOL) on January 5th after she failed to return.

Spokesperson Tiffany Wood issued a statement saying, "After 30 days in an AWOL status, a Soldier is considered a deserter and a federal warrant is issued for his or her arrest. "
Silver - 2k

Autobots and Starfleet officers — we fight together!

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 58938
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Isgrimnur » Wed Apr 27, 2016 4:36 pm

Infantry leads the way
Capt. Kristen Griest, one of the first women to earn the coveted Ranger tab, will once again make history by becoming the Army’s first female infantry officer.

Griest is expected to graduate from the Maneuver Captain's Career Course on Thursday and earn the right to wear the distinctive blue infantry cord, officials confirmed to Army Times.
...
More women are expected to follow in her footsteps; the Army earlier this month announced that it had approved requests from 22 female cadets to enter as second lieutenants in the infantry and armor branches. Thirteen of the new officers will enter into the armor branch, the other nine will go infantry. After commissioning, the new officers must successfully complete branch-specific training before they will qualify as infantry and armor officers.
Silver - 2k

Autobots and Starfleet officers — we fight together!

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 58938
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Isgrimnur » Wed Apr 27, 2016 4:38 pm

WaTimes, Feb 06, 2016
Pvt. Erika Lopez, the first woman to register as an Army combat engineer in Tennessee, and the fourth to do so in the nation, has turned herself in to military officials after she went AWOL for a month.

Tiffany Wood, a spokeswoman for Fort Leonard Wood, Mo. toldArmy Times that Pvt. Lopez turned herself in to proper military authorities on Thursday night.
Silver - 2k

Autobots and Starfleet officers — we fight together!

User avatar
coopasonic
Posts: 15537
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Dallas-ish
coopasonic’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by coopasonic » Wed Apr 27, 2016 7:56 pm

In her defense, Combat Engineer training and Ft Leonard Wood are both terrible. I speak from experience. :P
-Coop

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 58938
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Isgrimnur » Wed May 11, 2016 1:37 pm

Marines
The US Marine Corps is assigning two women to frontline infantry roles, a first for the armed service under new Pentagon rules opening all combat jobs to women.

In a statement Tuesday, the Marine Corps said it had granted requests from two enlisted women to transfer into "ground combat arms specialties." One will become a machinegunner, the other a rifleman.
...
It will take some time before the two Marines are placed in their new roles, as a female "leadership cadre" needs to be established in their units at least three months beforehand.
Silver - 2k

Autobots and Starfleet officers — we fight together!

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 31897
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by El Guapo » Wed May 11, 2016 1:43 pm

Is the "cadre" going to have just the two women in it? Who gets to be the cadre leader?

Anyway, anyone who wants to go kill people on my behalf is welcome to do it.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Wed May 11, 2016 2:16 pm

El Guapo wrote:Is the "cadre" going to have just the two women in it? Who gets to be the cadre leader?

Anyway, anyone who wants to go kill people on my behalf is welcome to do it.
I don't understand what a "female leadership cadre" is, and therefore I haven't a clue why one is required.

Enlighten me, someone?

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 58938
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Isgrimnur » Wed May 11, 2016 2:23 pm

No female combat grunts without female combat officers.

Marines
6. OUR LEADERSHIP CADRE WILL REFLECT OUR WORKFORCE DIVERSITY. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR LEADERSHIP TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE EXTENDED TO ALL EMPLOYEES, WITHOUT REGARD TO RACE, COLOR, SEX, RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, AGE, MENTAL OR PHYSICAL DISABILITIES.
Silver - 2k

Autobots and Starfleet officers — we fight together!

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 31897
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by El Guapo » Wed May 11, 2016 2:28 pm

But there are only (soon to be) two women in their combat infantry unit, right? Does that mean that one of them is necessarily getting immediately promoted to officer? Is that person basically then in charge of leading the other woman in the unit?

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Wed May 11, 2016 2:29 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:No female combat grunts without female combat officers.

Marines
6. OUR LEADERSHIP CADRE WILL REFLECT OUR WORKFORCE DIVERSITY. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR LEADERSHIP TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE EXTENDED TO ALL EMPLOYEES, WITHOUT REGARD TO RACE, COLOR, SEX, RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, AGE, MENTAL OR PHYSICAL DISABILITIES.
But...diversity doesn't mean "required". Are asian ancestry soldiers only commanded by asian ancestry officers?

While I'm not opposed to female officers, I don't immediately understand why female grunts require female officers.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 31897
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by El Guapo » Wed May 11, 2016 2:36 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:No female combat grunts without female combat officers.

Marines
6. OUR LEADERSHIP CADRE WILL REFLECT OUR WORKFORCE DIVERSITY. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR LEADERSHIP TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE EXTENDED TO ALL EMPLOYEES, WITHOUT REGARD TO RACE, COLOR, SEX, RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, AGE, MENTAL OR PHYSICAL DISABILITIES.
But...diversity doesn't mean "required". Are asian ancestry soldiers only commanded by asian ancestry officers?

While I'm not opposed to female officers, I don't immediately understand why female grunts require female officers.
I mean, I understand why you would basically need women combat officers as a result of women combat soldiers - you want everyone to have an equal opportunity to advance to leadership, and having a diverse officer corps that reflects overall soldier diversity is good for the military.

I'm not sure how or why that would be needed immediately, though. Logically it seems like you would need one of the new women to be immediately promoted (which is potentially problematic) or you would need to put a man in charge of the women leadership cadre (which is also problematic).

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Wed May 11, 2016 2:50 pm

El Guapo wrote:
I'm not sure how or why that would be needed immediately, though. Logically it seems like you would need one of the new women to be immediately promoted (which is potentially problematic) or you would need to put a man in charge of the women leadership cadre (which is also problematic).
There is something fundamental I'm not getting. Why is a female officer *required* for female soldiers? Are all other females in the military only commanded by female officers? How high does this requirement go? How does the final female general (I assume there isn't one. I'll happily be shown I'm wrong though) handle being under a male commander in chief?

I'm just not sure why women *need* a woman to tell them who to kill.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 58938
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Isgrimnur » Wed May 11, 2016 2:51 pm

Forget it, Goo. It's the Marine Corps. :wink:
Silver - 2k

Autobots and Starfleet officers — we fight together!

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Wed May 11, 2016 2:57 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:Forget it, Goo. It's the Marine Corps. :wink:
And that's fine. I just needed to hear that was the motivation. I was struggling to understand the requirement, but if the requirement is it's own justification, ok (well, not ok, but at least I can stop wondering).

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 58938
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Isgrimnur » Wed May 11, 2016 3:04 pm

To be fair, I asked in the reddit thread on /military to ask them, in civvie terms, what it actually meant. I figure that there will be some female officers that get transferred in to address the vacuum.
Silver - 2k

Autobots and Starfleet officers — we fight together!

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Wed May 11, 2016 3:10 pm

Just to be clear, I'm not in outrage mode or anything. I didn't immediately understand why the need, so I was curious.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 58938
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Isgrimnur » Wed May 11, 2016 3:16 pm

I didn't figure you were. It is kind of a confusing statement without context.
Silver - 2k

Autobots and Starfleet officers — we fight together!

User avatar
Sepiche
Posts: 7833
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 12:00 pm
Location: Olathe, KS
Sepiche’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Sepiche » Wed May 11, 2016 5:59 pm

GreenGoo wrote: There is something fundamental I'm not getting. Why is a female officer *required* for female soldiers?
As I understand it, they aren't saying female enlisted can only be commanded by female officers, just that in combat units with female enlisted there should be at least some female officers available in case there are issues the female enlisted don't feel comfortable taking to a male officer.

They won't be looking to promote one of the enlisted, but rather will be waiting until some female officers are in the deployment pool which will probably be soon.

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26878
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Rip » Wed May 11, 2016 6:29 pm

Sepiche wrote:
GreenGoo wrote: There is something fundamental I'm not getting. Why is a female officer *required* for female soldiers?
As I understand it, they aren't saying female enlisted can only be commanded by female officers, just that in combat units with female enlisted there should be at least some female officers available in case there are issues the female enlisted don't feel comfortable taking to a male officer.

They won't be looking to promote one of the enlisted, but rather will be waiting until some female officers are in the deployment pool which will probably be soon.
This. Going from enlisted to being an officer is rare and unless the enlisted soldiers possess a degree nearly impossible without obtaining one. Submarine forces deftly sidestepped the issue by getting a number of female officers in the pipelines before they even accepted enlisted women.

It's a good policy with very sound reasons for it.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Wed May 11, 2016 6:59 pm

Don't feel comfortable telling...their commanding officer.

The only things I can think of are things that they wouldn't feel comfortable telling a commanding officer of either gender.

These are professional soldiers. I'm on my period and I think I've got toxic shock syndrome shouldn't be an issue (to tell an officer). And if it is, the woman is not ready to be in a combat unit. And if the officer can't handle it...how fragile are men built down there anyway?

the comfort levels of "one of our soldiers raped me" depends on the individual and the officer. While I can concede that, on average, a woman would rather report that to another woman than a man, but I'm not sure hypothetical situations that are not likely to happen to any specific individual are strong enough reasons for putting everything on hold until a female officer is available.

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26878
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Rip » Wed May 11, 2016 7:14 pm

GreenGoo wrote:Don't feel comfortable telling...their commanding officer.

The only things I can think of are things that they wouldn't feel comfortable telling a commanding officer of either gender.

These are professional soldiers. I'm on my period and I think I've got toxic shock syndrome shouldn't be an issue (to tell an officer). And if it is, the woman is not ready to be in a combat unit. And if the officer can't handle it...how fragile are men built down there anyway?

the comfort levels of "one of our soldiers raped me" depends on the individual and the officer. While I can concede that, on average, a woman would rather report that to another woman than a man, but I'm not sure hypothetical situations that are not likely to happen to any specific individual are strong enough reasons for putting everything on hold until a female officer is available.
There are also matters of potential security issues.

Do you think female enlisted would be bothered by being strip searched by a male officer? Perhaps being interviewed about the details of a rape or sexual harassment?

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Wed May 11, 2016 8:21 pm

Rip wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:Don't feel comfortable telling...their commanding officer.

The only things I can think of are things that they wouldn't feel comfortable telling a commanding officer of either gender.

These are professional soldiers. I'm on my period and I think I've got toxic shock syndrome shouldn't be an issue (to tell an officer). And if it is, the woman is not ready to be in a combat unit. And if the officer can't handle it...how fragile are men built down there anyway?

the comfort levels of "one of our soldiers raped me" depends on the individual and the officer. While I can concede that, on average, a woman would rather report that to another woman than a man, but I'm not sure hypothetical situations that are not likely to happen to any specific individual are strong enough reasons for putting everything on hold until a female officer is available.
There are also matters of potential security issues.

Do you think female enlisted would be bothered by being strip searched by a male officer? Perhaps being interviewed about the details of a rape or sexual harassment?
I wasn't aware that commanding officers were in the habit of strip searching their subordinates. Isn't that an MP sorta job? Ditto rape. Sexual harassment would depend on what kind of environment the commander had fostered in his unit I guess. I wonder how corporate America handles it?

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 58938
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Offline

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Isgrimnur » Wed May 11, 2016 8:51 pm

The reddit response I got:
Yes. Before one of the female infantrymen can check in there needs to be two female SNCOs (E-6 or above) or Officers at the Battalion for at least 90 days. In this case, there are no female officers that have passed the Infantry Officers Course and no female SNCOs who have been approved to lat-move into an infantry MOS, so those two female SNCOs/Os will fill support roles in the Battalion. Somewhere, there's a female Adjutant or Radio Chief or some other support MOS with orders to the BN(s) in question.
Silver - 2k

Autobots and Starfleet officers — we fight together!

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26878
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Rip » Wed May 11, 2016 10:50 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Rip wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:Don't feel comfortable telling...their commanding officer.

The only things I can think of are things that they wouldn't feel comfortable telling a commanding officer of either gender.

These are professional soldiers. I'm on my period and I think I've got toxic shock syndrome shouldn't be an issue (to tell an officer). And if it is, the woman is not ready to be in a combat unit. And if the officer can't handle it...how fragile are men built down there anyway?

the comfort levels of "one of our soldiers raped me" depends on the individual and the officer. While I can concede that, on average, a woman would rather report that to another woman than a man, but I'm not sure hypothetical situations that are not likely to happen to any specific individual are strong enough reasons for putting everything on hold until a female officer is available.
There are also matters of potential security issues.

Do you think female enlisted would be bothered by being strip searched by a male officer? Perhaps being interviewed about the details of a rape or sexual harassment?
I wasn't aware that commanding officers were in the habit of strip searching their subordinates. Isn't that an MP sorta job? Ditto rape. Sexual harassment would depend on what kind of environment the commander had fostered in his unit I guess. I wonder how corporate America handles it?
A deployed combat unit doesn't have such luxuries. Like a submarine initial investigation and potentially action dependent on whether NJP is sufficient is done at command level which often lacks billeted law enforcement resources.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 39979
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by GreenGoo » Thu May 12, 2016 10:35 am

Isgrimnur wrote:The reddit response I got:
Yes. Before one of the female infantrymen can check in there needs to be two female SNCOs (E-6 or above) or Officers at the Battalion for at least 90 days. In this case, there are no female officers that have passed the Infantry Officers Course and no female SNCOs who have been approved to lat-move into an infantry MOS, so those two female SNCOs/Os will fill support roles in the Battalion. Somewhere, there's a female Adjutant or Radio Chief or some other support MOS with orders to the BN(s) in question.
The problem of there being no female officers because there aren't any qualified crossed my mind, especially given that these 2 soldiers are being given such attention. If female officers were already in position, they would have been the 3 ring media circus and not these 2 non-coms.

While I think the answer you received is complete and useful, it still doesn't explain WHY the need for female officers. I assume they are the same reasons Rip is giving, but that seems less *need* and more *nice to have*.

But that's me.

This isn't an office job. You can't afford any political or overly sensitive "feels" in a combat role. The truth, stark and unvarnished, has to be the default otherwise too much energy is spent on bullshit and not enough on killing and staying alive. I expect females in combat positions to be tough, both mentally and physically. That means not being squeamish because you're naked and your commanding officer is looking at you.

Maybe that's an unrealistic view, I don't know. What I'm hearing in this thread though might explain the differences between those who support women in combat roles and those who do not.

Combat is for tough, strong minded people. Fragile débutantes need not apply.

User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 16875
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Women in Combat Roles

Post by Unagi » Thu May 12, 2016 2:37 pm

Do Jewish infantrymen require Jewish SNCOs?

Why does Female require Female?

:think:

Post Reply