Women in the Infantry

[Dreamlite]

Wow, this has really confirmed my belief that people authoritatively state opinions they have no basis to make due to a belief they are entitled.

I'll keep my opinions to myself, even though the Captain that wrote the article did stumble into my AO for a few days to turn our hill into a PB. Even with that, and my experiences with her in the USV, I still am greatly offended holyheadjch thinks they have the moral right to comment on her article and experiences in AFG or IQ. Regardless of her claims versus the actuality of her deployments, she still went out to an area in AFG where most Marines, male or female, wouldn't and never have ventured.

[HyacinthBouquet]

I understand that if women were allowed in combat roles it would cause issues (financing and bumping being two lesser ones). But on te flip side of the coin, doesn't anything new cause issues that need to be addresses.

[Maniac]

I understand how you feel afhuss. I have to restrain how I feel about people's comments A LOT and you and I, as well as many other veterans have good reason to feel the way that we do when we read stuff that are from people who haven't lived that part of life. Regardless though, not everyone has the same experience or understanding and even if they have hardline approaches with their reasoning it's not fair for us as veterans, as those with the experience and knowledge, to simply put people down for having those views when it is not entirely their fault for not having the understanding. I know it's like getting a slap to the face sometimes and all you want to do is go crush that person . . . but that's not the way we want the world to really work is it? I would love for you to engage in this thread afhuss, if you think you can do so in a way that's not going to get you banned. This thread has a lot of touchy issues in it that go beyond the topic of the thread.

[hakulchan]

I'm going to assume you meant bunking?!

I don't see how that would be a major issue. On the non-infantry side on Camp Lejeune the males and females stay in the same barracks, just not the same rooms. It may actually benefit everyone in the infantry because somebody might feel obligated to actually kill all the black mold growing in the rooms and fix the plumbing and air conditioning!

[NuNyaBe]

What I find interesting is that we wont allow them in the infantry but they can be MPs. Today MP role is far from the old "white hat" days where they stayed on post and wrote tickets or broke up brawls at the NCO club. The role of the MP today is a combat support role. In fact an MP squat is more heavily armed and outfitted then an infantry one. MPs are mobile as opposed to straight-leg units. MPs perform convoy escort, route recon and a wealth of other duties that place them right in harms way.

I don't know of any cases where an MP squad has met their doom because one of the female soldiers caved under fire or failed to do her job.

To me its simply a matter of mindset. Female soldiers are already dying in war while driving trucks in convoys, etc, why not let them actually ante up and kick in? Seems its just our old fashioned belief that somehow women are inferior. But THAT's going to be the biggest hurdle of all. Changing mindset is never easy. Look what it took to free the slaves, look what it took to establish equal rights (a battle we're STILL fighting), look at the battle homosexuals are fighting to have the same rights as straight folk. Anytime you try to change mindset you always get those stubborn few who dig in and refuse to change simply for the sake of being contrary.

Truth be told, I dont know that women will get to wear infantry blue braids and infantry blue discs on class A uniforms in my lifetime. Not for any lack of ability on their part, but rather simply a lack of ability on OUR part.

You'll always have men who feel they need to white knight a female, regardless of the situation. We see it every day at work, in social circles and its largely overlooked but overlay that with the dangers of combat and you have male soldiers taking unnecessary risks to either save female soldiers they dont think can save themselves, or that they've developed feelings for, or simply because "my maofftopic always taught me to be nice to girls"...

It's not the females that are the problem, its us.

[AshKetchum]

Aside from any physical/mental limitations there is data I found at one point which stated that when women were serving in the field with men and they were injured or killed the men had a tendency to go berserk on the enemy. Depending on context this could be a good thing but could also turn out very badly from an ethical standpoint if things like torture came into play.

[Alobar]

This is a section of the article written by the Captain in the video. Note that it's not about women not being capable of serving in a combat environment, but rather about medical issues she's faced and attrition rates in different "schools" in the Marine Corps. I think she has valid points and that more data needs to be collected for a better understanding honestly.

[fizixx]

I understand your concern for me representing a stereotypically ignorant point of view, but I assure you I am far from that...and in no way have any emotional ties to this issue. I guess my point was to suggest the moderation of a certain level of respect in this particular thread. I felt the other poster was being juvenile in rhetoric and displaying ignorance in subject matter when suggesting the author of the debated article needs to get punched in the face.

Again, I really don't have emotional ties to this issue. I will suggest there are utilitarian inconvenience of gender-integrated infantry units in the field. Unlike sexual preference, skin color, or religion, gender differences represent a disparity of a physiological nature. For those that want to suggest 'any woman who can qualify physically should be able to be in the infantry' I would counter that current physical test batteries are not, in fact, equal. Not only that, they certainly do not offer an accurate prediction of success in the infantry field...regardless of gender. So, its not really a valid point for either side of the argument...even if IOC makes equal physical requirements (and anyone in the military will know that, even if something is supposed to be equal, if its a newly proposed policy it will be fudged to make it appear as successful to appease coofftopicnders).

Far and above that there are non-physical considerations. There is a certain social and practical dynamic in an infantry unit. Camaraderie and morale is important in a balanced and functioning team. Currently, anytime females are thrown into the equation...like when the Capt. who wrote the article did with us...that presence disrupts the dynamic. Behavior is completely required to change, stress jumps up, people are walking on eggshells, etc. This is, in part, due to the fact she was a visitor...but there still remains aspects of pretty key differences...like the ones mentioned in her article among others.

I am sure there is potential for non-physical issues to be overcome in a generation; or so, post-integration, but I guess a valid enough argument has to be made as it pertains to risk vs reward. I really haven't heard a good argument other than for the sake of social experimentation and political maneuvering. This is what upsets a lot of veterans...the use of the military as a political battleground for social experimentation. The integration of homosexuals, while in a practical matter probably upset less people in the military, per capita, than it did in 'the world'...did seem to upset people in the military for what it represented politically. The military stands apart from normal society...our rights are as different from normal society as is our culture and social dynamics. The cause-heads pushing civilian political movements on the military for the sake of politics makes me feel cheap and used.

[jakeedd]

Lol, I had to re-read that a couple times because I had no idea what you were talking about. My post was addressed from one veteran (me) to another (you) on how people discuss us or people like us. To put it bluntly in a way that's probably offensive to others but I think you'll understand, "people think they rate to say what they want without having been through anything". In this case it being the level of disrespect in some of the statements made against this woman in another post. All I was saying is that I understood you in a way a lot of people won't, but I want the thread to keep going so I would appreciate if you didn't engage in the thread if you can't refrain from unleashing but would be more then happy to hear your opinion. I understand that knee-jerk reaction to wanting to slap somebody through the screen but I would like to attempt to gather a few different opinions on the subject so that sort of attitude isn't going to be helpful.

Awesome post on your views about political maneuvering though, definitely bringing another perspective to the issue.

[Icey]

Thats not the issue being discussed...and regardless it is a non-issue with most people I know in the military.



Integration with homosexuals was not a big deal in the military. Race and sexual preference doesn't enter into equality in an infantry unity...gender does, physiologically. There are exceptions...but why fundamentally alter the social and functional dynamic of the infantry for a few exceptions when there are already plenty of males who don't belong in the infantry. Nothing to do with women in combat, just in an infantry platoon.



Similarly things don't need to be changed for the sake of changing them. Women are equal to men socially and have the same rights...this is great, but doesn't mean that everything is appropriate for everyone to do. Please keep in mind that, if the government decides the military will be integrated, it will become so...whether or not the test trials are actually successful, they will be made so.


I don't know about that. Having personally taken unnecessary risks to save someone's life...and having them do the same for me, I don't see how it would be any different with women involved. In a kinetic environment, I know I don't have time to make gender-based decisions. I don't feel this is a valid argument for the anti-women in combat side.

"my maofftopic always taught me to be nice to girls" --does that antagonistic statement suggest that I have to let a female die to serve a social agenda threatened by the stigma that women are perceived as week? Coming from the perspective of a person who is involved with pro-women's groups such as Take Back the Night, I find that suggestion offensive.



The problem is the assumption that everyone is appropriate for, and has the right to do, what everyone else does or is appropriate for. I think people get confused as to what fundamental rights are. If women want to 'get some' in combat they have plenty of options...and its not something people really take that much issue with.