Myths About Women in Combat
I offer for discussion an interesting piece from a female Marine officer in the WaPo:
Five myths about women in combat
By Jane Blair, Published: May 27
During my service in Iraq as a Marine officer, I, like many other military women, found myself fighting on the front lines of America’s wars — yet was unacknowledged for doing so. Women are dying in combat, but Congress still officially bans us from serving in combat units that engage the enemy with deliberate, offensive action.
This antiquated policy may be seeing its final days. Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.) has prepared an amendment to the defense budget bill that would end the the ban. On Memorial Day weekend, let’s also end some revered stereotypes purporting to explain why women couldn’t possibly succeed in combat.
1. Women are too emotionally fragile for combat.
2. Women are too physically weak for the battlefield.
3. The presence of women causes sexual tension in training and battle.
4. Male troops will become distracted from their missions in order to protect female comrades.
5. Women can’t lead men in combat effectively.
Now I am by no means an ally of feminism, but I have always felt that the ban on women in frontline or combat units was mostly stupid, as long as the individual could pass requisite training an qualifications. After 20 years in the military, I can certainly say that there are plenty of women in the military who would be more than qualified to serve in frontline units.
Are there some circumstances that would need exception? Perhaps. But to pretend that women aren't in combat already is farcical. As Major Blair points out, female service members have died in combat over the last 10 years, not one of them in what is classified as a frontline or combat unit. However in the two wars that we are currently engaged, there is no frontline. There is no FEBA, or easily discerned line separating battling armies. We are amongst each other. So the old rules that keep female troops in "support units" stations "in the rear" don't make a whit of difference. But even if we do revert to a world where armies battle across vast fronts, and support units are "in the rear", the idea that women cannot serve of the front is as outdated as the field radio.
If a female can pass whichever set of qualification is called for, I say she should be allowed to serve in the unit she is qualified for.
- Comment (62)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (7)
Comments:
Aug '10
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
in the approximate 14000 years of some form of civilization, why has this question suddenly become so prevalent ? To form a metric, if 14000years of civilization was one day , this question popped up at 11:56 PM. And precisely what has changed in the last five minutes or so to change mankind's view ? Have the women changed ? Has combat changed ? Has killing, dying, or honoring one's country with duty ?
Edited on May 29, 2011 at 10:29pmMay '11
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
flownover: in the approximate 14000 years of some form of civilization, why has this question suddenly become so prevalent ? To form a metric, if 14000years of civilization was one day , this question popped up at 11:56 PM. And precisely what has changed in the last five minutes or so to change mankind's view ? Have the women changed ? Has combat changed ? Has killing, dying, or honoring one's country with duty ? · May 29 at 1:27pm
Edited on May 29 at 01:29 pm
The concepts of democracy, freedom of speech, the free market, and many other enlightened ideas only became widespread around 11:50 or so.
The rules of combat have changed like in the rest of society where strength isn't as much of a necessity, and brains are more important. The only ones I can see causing any trouble would be #3 and #4.
Edited on May 29, 2011 at 11:22pmMay '10
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
I'm less inclined to allow historical inertia to guide my opinions on rules governing military membership and behavior. I'm moved by empirical evidence. Have women been allowed to possess combat occupational specialties in other armed forces? If so, what were the effects? I think that effectiveness should be the standard, over tradition.
Combat has changed, which is why I entertain the notion of female combatants. We've already got female pilots responding to requests for close air support. Once again, I think the criterion should be effectiveness, not tradition or equality.
May '10
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
Charles Allen:
If she's sexy, we'll follow.
Mar '11
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
'If a female can pass whichever set of qualification is called for, I say she should be allowed to serve in the unit she is qualified for.'
That is the big 'if'. For two reasons. As I argued in a recent article here in Australia ('The mathematics of gender equity'), if soldiers are restricted to, say, the top ten per cent of the male population as measured by upper body strength, then you can expect something like 1 in 15,000 (yes, fifteen thousand!) women to qualify.
In today's world, such proportions would be an affront to all right thinking people, irrebuttable evidence of systemic discrimination. It is inevitable that there would be pressure for equitable representation. The only way to do that would be either differential standards for men and women, or a lowering of standards for all.
Does physical capability still matter? Ask the wounded Afghan interpreter whose saviour, an Australian soldier subsequently awarded the Victoria Cross, picked him up under fire and carried him to safety.
Edited on May 30, 2011 at 1:40amMay '10
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
Stephen Dawson: 'If a female can pass whichever set of qualification is called for, I say she should be allowed to serve in the unit she is qualified for.'
That is the big 'if'. For two reasons. As I argued in a recent article here in Australia ('The mathematics of gender equity'), if soldiers are restricted to, say, the top ten per cent of the male population as measured by upper body strength, then you can expect something like 1 in 15,000 (yes, fifteen thousand!) women to qualify.
In today's world, such proportions would be an affront to all right thinking people, irrebuttable evidence of systemic discrimination. It is inevitable that there would be pressure for equitable representation. The only way to do that would be either differential standards for men and women, or a lowering of standards for all.
Does physical capability still matter? Ask the wounded Afghan interpreter whose saviour, an Australian soldier subsequently awarded the Victoria Cross, picked him up under fire and carried him to safety.
Impressive.
Feb '11
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
Stephen Dawson: 'If a female can pass whichever set of qualification is called for, I say she should be allowed to serve in the unit she is qualified for.'
That is the big 'if'. For two reasons. As I argued in a recent article here in Australia ('The mathematics of gender equity'), if soldiers are restricted to, say, the top ten per cent of the male population as measured by upper body strength, then you can expect something like 1 in 15,000 (yes, fifteen thousand!) women to qualify.
In today's world, such proportions would be an affront to all right thinking people, irrebuttable evidence of systemic discrimination. It is inevitable that there would be pressure for equitable representation. The only way to do that would be either differential standards for men and women, or a lowering of standards for all.
Does physical capability still matter? Ask the wounded Afghan interpreter whose saviour, an Australian soldier subsequently awarded the Victoria Cross, picked him up under fire and carried him to safety. · May 29 at 4:38pm
Edited on May 29 at 04:40 pm
Charles have you thought about what will happen to female POW's?...
Feb '11
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
Do you think our enemies will hesitate about raping the female captives? I know rape is not limited to women but how do you think it will affect our national conciousness when stories of rape (regarding female soldiers) begin to leak to the press? Don't think for one minute the stories will be completely supressed. Ask any rape survivor how that horrible trauma scars their psyche. How do you comfort a female soldier rape survivor? Do you tell them it was part of their sacrifice for their country?
Jul '10
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
"Equalling" Men and Women? Then say bye to the Gentleman.
At what month of pregnancy would She be exempt from combat?
And if She is, should the Father be exempt too? Sounds "equal" to Me.
Feb '11
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
Remember that woman captured during the invasion of Iraq in 2003? How she was rescued from an Iraqi hospital?
Maybe there are only myths about the place of women in combat, but the American people, the army and the media believe them.
May '10
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
As to Rosie's comments, I've mentioned this in a previous discussion of women in combat, but during the first Gulf War, a female Army flight surgeon was captured by Iraqi soldiers and raped. Banning women from combat units doesn't protect women from capture or torture. It doesn't protect them from being killed either. I fully agree with Charles. If women can pass the qualifications, they should be able to serve. But the physical demands of combat training are so challenging anyway for men, I imagine the attrition rate would be really high for women. The only reservation I have is that some combat units spend weeks in very rough conditions. Female physiology is not as compatible with those situations as male. I'm sure women are serving in austere conditions already, but I don't know to what degree the conditions would be different in combat units.
Feb '11
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
True, but why are women placed in assignments that places them at higher risk? I imagine that most parents of female soldiers tend to think that the military will place their daugthers in lower risk assignments. As noted by various commenters most women will not have the physical stamina or strength to be combat ready. As Stephen Dawson notes the progressives will cry foul if the standards are maintained since it will exclude the majority of women. Inevitably the standards will be lowered and only when the true results are known (they won't be pretty) will people begin to question this mantra. In regards to my prior comments on the threat of rape I sense that many people downplay how severly traumatic it is to the human psyche. Many rape victims who are brutalised wish for death instead of survival. In many ways to live is more a punishment than a benefit. I know many overcome this feeling but others never do.
May '11
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
Are there complaints on the ground re: women in combat?
Edited on May 30, 2011 at 3:13pmMar '11
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
Civilization has these rules for a reason. Apparently, we're so stupid that we need to re-learn them.
May '10
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
Warfare is more sophisticated than who is the strongest. Troops should be deployed where they can be most effective based on whatever criteria is relevant. If physical strength is the needed skill set then all men would be appropriate. If on the other hand, leadership, stamina, tactical and strategic skills are relevant -- well then I can imagine there could be plenty of better qualified women.
Think of grey-eyed Athena and her champion Achilles defeating Hector outside the gates of Troy. Women have been involved in combat since the beginning of recorded history.
Dec '10
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
This discussion is always framed in terms of "if women want to join combat units, they should have the right to do so". Isn't the correct formulation for this discussion, "should women have the obligation to register for the draft and if drafted accept assignment to combat units".
Granted, Draft Boards are currently dormant, but, this discussion is always cherry picked in terms of rights for those who choose to join combat units and not in terms of accepting a gender wide obligation to participate in combat. I'm not sure that most or even many women want to assume that obligation.
In the future, if it were necessary to reestablish the Draft, men would have no choice ... if that were to happen, are you suggesting that women have exactly the same obligation?
May '11
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
As Jane Blair said, women are already fighting and dying on the front lines whether you think it's a good idea or not. All cultural and physical arguments for restricting them officially are void if this is the case. And if arguments against having women in combat are as strong as some suggest, then they should be completely removed from harm's way in any operation.
May '11
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
Claiming that something is a myth does not make it so.
Maj Blair has not been in combat. Sitting in a vehicle is not being in combat. Wandering through third world villages is not combat, even if you're carrying a rifle.
Combat is not passe, though it is not the norm in our current wars. If the current war were to get more "kinetic" then she would learn very quickly how different men are from women. When my battalion was in Al Anbar, Iraq our Marines fought pitched battles that were little different from most other "conventional" wars in a smaller scale. No women were present. The same is true of the battles that rage here in Afghanistan.
Marines do not put women in combat. Sometimes women Marines find themselves in places where they are shot at, but they are not infantrymen and they do not locate, close with and destroy the enemy.
Maj Blair is seeking to advance an agenda that is not supported by all of human history. It would be dangerously shortsighted to use the current war as the standard for policies that will hurt us in a big war.
May '10
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
If women are fighting in combat, won't there be pressure for them to be included in the draft? I think this is a terrible idea. Men and women are different. Not just physically, but spiritually too. If the difference are abolished by law, we'll all suffer.
Mar '11
Re: Myths About Women in Combat
The fact is she almost certainly cannot pass the standards. Indeed, the surest way to eliminate women from the military is to hold them to the same PT standards. There would still be a few who would qualify but it would hardly be worth having separate facilities. It seems all five "myths" are largely true.
As for the first point, concerning mental health, it is demonstrably true:
Edited on May 30, 2011 at 1:54pmhttp://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-ptsd-women-military-20110519,0,6360607.story