Will female recruits see Combat Arms MOS's as a viable enlistment option?

SFC J Fullerton — Fri, 26 Feb 2016 17:18:55 -0500

Interested in getting the female perspective on choosing an MOS previously closed to women. Do you feel that branches like the Infantry, Armor, and Artillery will offer the career experience you seek from military service? Do you feel this policy change is genuinely for the wants, needs, and desires of potential female recruits, or more of a political statement?

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Feb 26 at 2016 5:44 PM

SGT Kristin Wiley — Fri, 26 Feb 2016 17:44:53 -0500

I think some women will but they will fall into different categories. You'll have the military brats who know what they are getting into, then you'll have regular recruits who won't know what they are getting into but choose that as a means to prove themselves. More than anything I think you'll see more women on the officer side to compete for high-ranking positions, and MOS-transfers from the women who want genuinely want to serve in those positions.

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made Feb 27 at 2016 12:44 PM

CPT Pedro Meza — Sat, 27 Feb 2016 12:44:29 -0500

1974-76, I saw women rigors at Ft Devens and there was one or three in 10 SFG, 1985 women Officers in FA branch, 2005 female MPs on missions with Marines in Jalalabad Afghanistan. In Afghanistan and Iraq women have been in combat when not, now that they can they will.

Response by Cpl Glynis Sakowicz made Mar 1 at 2016 9:42 AM

Cpl Glynis Sakowicz — Tue, 01 Mar 2016 09:42:31 -0500

This is not an easy question, and it has no simple answer. Women, like men, are all different. Some will want the CHANCE to try something previously closed off from them, and others won't. Some will probably excel in fields that they could never have attempted before, and others will walk away, but again, its not a male-female thing, its simply a person thing.
When I was a kid, my father, having three younger brothers himself, and no idea how to handle three daughters, pretty much raised us as Marines. We learned hand-to-hand when my mother left us in his care... we learned some impossibly shocking WWII marching songs, and we learned to shoot. I mention this, because I was a damned good shot, and with the childhood I had, you might understand why my dream was to be a sniper.
I was not all that great at social interaction because I was shy, and Dyslexic, but the second I understood Windage and Elevation, I was hitting targets at 300 yards with shocking ease. That was the ONE thing I really wanted to try when I earned the uniform. I'd have done the side-stroke thru raw sewage to get the chance to try it, but it was closed off to me. Not because I couldn't do the job, but because I was female.
I have no idea if I'd ever have been able to DO the job, or if I would have been able to handle the job if I'd had it, but I was never given the chance. That is all most women want... is the CHANCE to try. Most will never want to even attempt one of these fields because it just isn't them... but somewhere out there, there are a few little girls like I was, who have this dream that they want to try for... let them. If they succeed, then find a place for them that won't be disruptive to the operation. If they don't, well, they at least had the chance to reach for a goal, and maybe the next woman in line will do it.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 1 at 2016 12:44 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Mar 2016 12:44:22 -0500

Just like men, there will be women who do have these wants, needs, desires, and undoubtedly capability to succeed. There are plenty of men who join to serve in non-combat roles. It is not about a political statement, it is about allowing and utilizing those who are qualified for the job to do the job. I personally know women who chose not enlist or get out to enter law enforcement/federal agencies because they had the opportunity to join special operations and tactical units.

If they told me I could retrain into TACP tomorrow I would. I can meet the PAST requirements. Although, when I enlisted I did not know I personally had the capability or want to fulfill that role. Part of that may be because of the gender roles society establishes. Part of that may be because BMT did not prepare females for the roles in the same way they ushered the men into them. But after training at Tigerland for and completing an Advisor deployment, I know I do. And I do have the desire, though my progressing rank will probably exclude me from the opportunity when it is finally implemented. Not that my training came close to encompassing what a Special Operator or Infantryman goes through, but I know with further training I have the capability.

Women have been serving in combat roles in militaries across the world since the beginning. These women CHOSE to, and even in our own history hid their gender to be included and allowed the opportunity. Women have been put in situations throughout the OEF/OIF "attached" to combat units finding themselves in the thick running with the boys.

Also, in this day and age of fitness models, body builders, and cross fit enthusiasts physical capability and gender shouldn't even be a question.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 1 at 2016 1:41 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Mar 2016 13:41:24 -0500

double post

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 1 at 2016 1:44 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Mar 2016 13:44:44 -0500

The very fact that we are discussing what anyone "wants, needs, or desires" shows just how far down the rabbit hole we have gone. The Marine Corps does not give a fuck what you want. You are there to serve the needs of the Corps. This is a political stunt that is going to backfire in a BIG way.

Response by Capt Michael Halpin made Mar 1 at 2016 9:55 PM

Capt Michael Halpin — Tue, 01 Mar 2016 21:55:59 -0500

I recall a survey the Marines did, asking every woman Marine if they were interested in serving in the infantry.. According to the report, only 1% of all the women in the Marines were interested in serving in the infantry.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 2 at 2016 7:06 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 02 Mar 2016 07:06:40 -0500

As a recruiter I do not believe that it is a matter of gender but of opportunity. Future service members will have the same opportunity regardless of gender in their chosen military occupational specialty. The major problem lies with whether or not a person is able to meet the physical attributes necessary to accomplish the task. The major challenge is a cultural change.

Response by Cpl Kristin Tosh made Mar 2 at 2016 8:33 AM

Cpl Kristin Tosh — Wed, 02 Mar 2016 08:33:51 -0500

No I think that it is going to weaken us more then help because males are going to be more worried about protecting that female to his right then fighting. It is just plan crazy to let female into the combat mos.

Response by SPC Jesse Barber made Mar 2 at 2016 9:06 AM

SPC Jesse Barber — Wed, 02 Mar 2016 09:06:27 -0500

As stated earlier by a few women, it depends on the individual woman. As a prior USARNG member in a co-ed medical unit, I can say the biggest problems are going to be fraternization and sexual harassment. I saw it every year during our two week annual training period.

Response by MAJ Bill Darling made Mar 2 at 2016 11:00 AM

MAJ Bill Darling — Wed, 02 Mar 2016 11:00:04 -0500

Although I'm not your target audience for this question, I'll speak to the first part of your question. I'm an all or none type of person, in most matters. If women have the"opportunity" to serve in these MOSs and are seeking "equality" then, probably yes, it should be an enlistment option. However, the language I have seen out of DoD revolves around "if she can do the job" and heretofore non existent MOS-specific PT tests.
Both statements are problematic from a policy perspective. Will infantry in the Army still be considered a basic branch or will women (and presumably not men) have to try out for it like SF or Ranger batts?
And will women be forced into the Infantry as men were (are?) when I served thanks to the Branch Detail Program?
And what will govern what MOS-specific test you do? Your MOS? Your Corps? Your Bn? (i.e. an infantryman assigned to an AG bn or vice versa; being in the 82nd versus COSCOM or separate unit; what about units detailed to another (different MOS) unit?)
And in a broader context, will there be a single PT test regardless of sex or age? And will other screening criteria (age, handicap, weight, education, height, etc) be waived in the future as long as the person can do the job?

Response by Lt Col Marlene Brake made Mar 2 at 2016 6:12 PM

Lt Col Marlene Brake — Wed, 02 Mar 2016 18:12:46 -0500

This will be very interesting to see what happens. Having served in the AF for 25 years - entering at the end of the Viet Nam war, the reception was less than welcoming for many women. Even though USC Title 10 changed in 1975 to allow women to serve when pregnant, there were still few women on active duty. in the '80s women were allowed to enter certain career field previously closed to women. For example, the maintenance career field opened to women and the physical requirements were levied on both men and women entering the career field, but not without some airman struggling or being unable to carry the 70-80 lb tool kits out to the aircraft. That said, if the qualifications , whether physical or mental, are levied evenly for both men and women, the opportunity for success increases.

There are obviously infrastructure issues when integrating new people into new career fields. I don't specifically call out women, because the move a foot is to include gays, transgender etc. Though, there is historical reference in integrating women into aircraft, missile field and many other career fields that opened to women over my career. Care should be taken to create situations that are as inclusive of women or others so that they are fully integrated into the teams and groups. This will benefit the career fields and the units as all members will have equal opportunity to contribute.

Many women have served in operational career fields very successfully. They have served their country admirably. Many have served in combat and should continue to be included and encouraged to serve their country whether for one tour or for a 20 year career. We will be a better DoD for their service in any career field for which they are qualified.

Response by CPT John Ferrie made Mar 2 at 2016 9:38 PM

CPT John Ferrie — Wed, 02 Mar 2016 21:38:53 -0500

I think that women Officers will want to be in the combat arms, hoping to be a General one day. However enlisted woman will not be so enthusiastic about it.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 5 at 2016 7:18 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 05 Mar 2016 19:18:42 -0500

I think its good and bad in some ways honestly. It gives females a chance to expand, but I feel that they should be able to meet male standards for combat MOS jobs. It was rammed through by political people in the name of equality and I believe physical speaking most woman are not as strong as men. If they think we are so equal then there should be one standard for PT Some woman can do the job and for them great that things are open to them. I am 5'4'' and maybe 115 pounds I struggle with carrying heavy rucks so to me i would have to train hard to keep up with my male counter parts. I really feel it was a decision not made by Military soldiers at all. I have competed in 2 best warrior competition always against men and I'm but I see superior strength in them. I think that there is woman can do the job of combat its been proven in some battles in Iraq were woman were caught up in front lines, and some woman even graduated these combat MOS schools. I just think that very few girls can do this I am glad its open to them because they can try . I believe 100 percent that combat jobs though should only have one standard the male standard