Friday, December 15, 2017

Commission to recommend allowing women in combat units

January 14, 2011 by  
Filed under Featured, News

“A military advisory panel appears poised to recommend allowing female troops to serve in combat units without any restrictions, calling the current prohibition an out-of-date idea that unnecessarily discriminates against women.

If approved by military officials, the move could open front-line posts to military women for the first time. Until now, either U.S. law or Pentagon policy has prohibited female troops from serving in any unit whose primary mission is direct ground combat, although they may serve in combat support roles.

The Military Leadership Diversity Commission, established by Congress two years ago, issued the recommendation as part of a draft report on diversity in the services. The final report is due to lawmakers this spring, and commission members are meeting this week in Virginia to debate final changes.

In the draft, commission members call for a phased approach to open additional career fields with ground combat units to qualified women, saying the current policy limits the ability of commanders to pick the most capable person for their missions.

“To date, there has been little evidence that the integration of women into previously closed units or occupations has had a negative impact on important mission-related performance factors, like unit cohesion,” the draft states.

“Furthermore, a study by the Defense Department Advisory Committee on Women in the Services actually found that a majority of focus group participants felt that women serving in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan have had a positive impact on mission accomplishment.”

(Read the entire story at Stars and Stripes)

Comments

3 Responses to “Commission to recommend allowing women in combat units”
  1. D.R Mills says:

    There are some “givens” here, that there are some women with the physical attributes to compete in Combat Arms MOS’s. That leadership for “Combat” / “Maneuver” organizations requires combat arms background. Finally that women are confined to CS and CSS type organizations (which outnumber Maneuver type organizations by multiples).

    The math is simple, a percentage of the 14% of the force that women represent (since we’re talking about a subset of a subset of a subset) of the total force can fit the physical capabilities profile. Of that total how many will want to join the Infantry/Armor/Combat Engineers/Artillery?

    Adding complexity to the issue is standards, how do we define them? The norm is we define them by what the average are capable of when pushed. But, when we talk about Infantry, Armor, Artillery, COmbat Engineers and (especially)Special Operations the females qualifying will be exceptional physical specimens . . . so? It would not be “fair” to set them so high, so the standards will have to be “averaged” . . . and (consequently) the overall “standards” will have to be adjusted (to make everything “fair”) for everyone. Result? Lower overall physical standards for a force designed to close with and destroy enemy units. You can talk about “technologies”, transport, and weapon system advantages all you want. But, what happens when technologies and transport fail? If the mission still has to be accomplished it all goes back to “Shanks Mare” and the average Infantry summer Rucksack is about 90lbs + water/food and ammunition (+ mission essential equipment which is crossloaded). For Winter/Mountain operations add 80 to 100lbs . . .

    So we do all this for “Fairness” . . . Now let’s add common sense. Combat is “Evolution in action”, the strong survive, and the weak? Are carried or die. Combat is a discriminating chaos, but chaos it always is (Murphy is always there).

    The last piece of the puzzle is the one all try to ignore, social dynamics and genetic imperatives, the first we can think our way through, the second? It’s part of our “nature”. Added dynamics in combat situations distract, distraction kills. If not the one distracted, then some the distracted was tasked to protect . . .

  2. Artemis Eneldo says:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23547346/ns/us_news-military/

    Female medic earns Silver Star in Afghan war
    19-year-old only second woman to receive valor award since WWII

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!