Congress puts gender-neutral combat job standards into law

SGM Matthew Quick — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:02:38 -0500

Pentagon official say they have no intention of creating special fitness standards for women who want to serve in combat jobs — but Congress wants to see that promise in law.

Does Congress have any faith/confidence/trust in our military?

The strongest pushback so far has come from officers in the U.S. Special Operations Command, who fear integrating women will jeopardize the unit cohesion of the small —typically 12-person — special operations teams.

Response by CW3(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2013 12:29 AM

CW3(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:29:58 -0500

This one is going to be tough to fight. If we don't, we will probably looked at as being sexiest for not letting women try out for combat jobs and assignments.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Dec 13 at 2013 12:41 AM

SSG Robert Burns — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:41:17 -0500

I know I wasn't born yet but someone tell me. Was there a line of women at the recruiting station lined up to go to Vietnam and turned away?

What is this really about? Is this about women's rights? Is it about equality? I really don't know but it never seemed to be an issue until now. Where are all these women who are pushing for this because honestly I've never met one. Not saying their not there but I haven't even seen one on TV. I mean I've seen women saying it, but none of which who were actually ones wanting to do it.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2013 1:35 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:35:02 -0500

Right now, I don't think there needs to be a change. Females are already authorized enlistment and re-class into combat arms MOS. I don't think females who are not up to the rigors of such MOS will be asking to enlist in, or re-class to one anyway. As for Special OPS, every soldier, regardless of MOS is held to the same standards set by that organization (Special Forces, Delta, etc.) So again, no change needed. I don't think the "push-back" is due to the physical standards so much as it is the sex of the Soldier and the possibility of non-platonic relationships within that small team which, my assumption, is what will cause the erosion of the cohesion of that unit. Let's face facts, there are no defined "front lines" in Iraq or Afghanistan anyway. Females in both theaters are subject to the same dangers as males. Female medics go on patrols and conduct MEDCAPs in hostile environments in both theaters. Female logistical Soldiers go out on LOGPACs and convoys and again, are subject to the same dangers as their male counterparts. No change needed and I personally don't see what the issue is anyway.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2013 1:52 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:52:11 -0500

For me, being a in a combat arms MOS its not about a female being in the unit but, if we look at it realistically, there are not many women that can pull a wounded 200+lb man out of the turret of a Bradley especially if he is in full kit.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2013 2:00 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 14:00:06 -0500

My concern is this; We all know that females serve in combat zones already. But by percentage alone, the vast majority of Soldiers who pay the ultimate price for our country are male. I would think this is due to the prevalence of males in combat MOS. What happens if those same MOS are equaled out with males and females? Is America ready to see the same types of numbers put up for the losses of their daughters, sisters, and mothers as we see now with the sons and fathers? I honestly don't think we are ready to face that fact. I'm not saying we need to deep six the opening of combat MOS to females based on this, but it's something that definitely needs to be considered.