Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Women in combat?

Posted by on Dec. 2, 2012 at 11:16 PM
  • 181 Replies

Hegar, et al. v. Panetta

November 27, 2012

The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Northern California and the law firm Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP are representing four servicewomen and the Service Women’s Action Network in challenging the Defense Department’s longstanding policy barring women from thousands of ground combat positions, known as the “combat exclusion policy.”

The four servicemembers have all done tours in Iraq or Afghanistan--some deploying multiple times--where they served in combat or led female troops who went on missions with combat infantrymen. Their careers and opportunities have been limited by a policy that does not grant them the same recognition for their service as their male counterparts. The combat exclusion policy also makes it harder for them to do their jobs.

See the full profiles of the plaintiffs.

Two of the plaintiffs were awarded the Purple Heart after being wounded in the course of their deployments.  Two led Marine Corps Female Engagement Teams, in which women Marines lived with and went on missions with Marine Infantrymen in active combat zones.  Two were awarded medals in recognition of their performance while in active engagement in combat zones.  One earned a Distinguished Flying Cross with a Valor Device for extraordinary achievement and heroism while engaging in direct ground fire with the enemy, after being wounded when her helicopter was shot down over Afghanistan.

Women make up more than 14 percent of the 1.4 million active military personnel, yet the rule categorically excludes them from more than 200,000 positions, as well as from entire career fields. Consequently, commanders are stymied in their ability to mobilize their troops effectively. In addition, servicewomen are:

  • denied training and recognition for their service
  • put at a disadvantage for promotions
  • prevented from competing for positions for which they have demonstrated their suitability and from advancing in rank.
by on Dec. 2, 2012 at 11:16 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
mehamil1
by Platinum Member on Dec. 2, 2012 at 11:34 PM
5 moms liked this

The US is one of the few nations that does this to female service members. It's an embarressment. 

kailu1835
by Ruby Member on Dec. 2, 2012 at 11:43 PM
3 moms liked this

Here's a tiny history lesson.  Marines didn't accept women.  Then women made a stink, and so Marines started letting women join.  Now the physical standards are lower. 

Women don't belong in combat.  Period.

mehamil1
by Platinum Member on Dec. 2, 2012 at 11:44 PM
6 moms liked this

My inner feminist says yes. 

My inner pacifist says no one belongs in combat. 

Quoting kailu1835:

Here's a tiny history lesson.  Marines didn't accept women.  Then women made a stink, and so Marines started letting women join.  Now the physical standards are lower. 

Women don't belong in combat.  Period.


tooptimistic
by Kelly on Dec. 2, 2012 at 11:44 PM


Quoting kailu1835:

Here's a tiny history lesson.  Marines didn't accept women.  Then women made a stink, and so Marines started letting women join.  Now the physical standards are lower. 

Women don't belong in combat.  Period.

Totally agree.

kailu1835
by Ruby Member on Dec. 2, 2012 at 11:46 PM
1 mom liked this

Feminism is a problem when we're talking combat.  Women are EQUAL, we are not the SAME as men.  Wanting to go into combat is wanting to be the same.  There are MANY, just as important jobs as combat, that are more suitable to a woman's physiological makeup.

Quoting mehamil1:

My inner feminist says yes. 

My inner pacifist says no one belongs in combat. 

Quoting kailu1835:

Here's a tiny history lesson.  Marines didn't accept women.  Then women made a stink, and so Marines started letting women join.  Now the physical standards are lower. 

Women don't belong in combat.  Period.



babiesbabybaby development

Paperfishies
by Silver Member on Dec. 2, 2012 at 11:46 PM
6 moms liked this
I think anyone who wants to be in combat should be allowed BUT there should be NO special treatment of any kind. The physical requirements should be the same across the board.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
FromAtoZ
by AllieCat on Dec. 2, 2012 at 11:52 PM
3 moms liked this

If a woman wants to be in combat, she damn well better not say anything about the possible consequences or otherwise.

Susan0805
by Silver Member on Dec. 2, 2012 at 11:59 PM
9 moms liked this
That's not true. Pt standards are not one size fits all. They are designed to ensure the member is physically capable within their individual limits. Example an 18 year old male member does not have the same pt standard as a 40 year old. It's specific to the person, factors are not just gender but also height, age etc. when i was active duty we marched, did drills, trained, ate, obstacle courses, etc with our male brother flight. We were NOT treated differently. Our pt tests are specific and not even two males neccesarily have the same standards. You dont know what you are talking about.
Ps.... Women are already in combat, and doing a damn fine job too. Period!!!!


Quoting kailu1835:

Here's a tiny history lesson.  Marines didn't accept women.  Then women made a stink, and so Marines started letting women join.  Now the physical standards are lower. 

Women don't belong in combat.  Period.

Posted on CafeMom Mobile
FromAtoZ
by AllieCat on Dec. 3, 2012 at 12:03 AM
2 moms liked this

Mention of physical standards........the are lower across the board, every branch.  It has very little, if any thing, to do with gender.  You see far more, and far too many, over weight individuals in all branches of the military now than in years past.

One female will not be held to the same 'test' as another, same with the men.  Age, body shape and other factors come in to play.

Susan0805
by Silver Member on Dec. 3, 2012 at 12:05 AM
That makes no sense. Physical standards are not the same for every male either. There are qualifications to do certain jobs, not every male or female qualifies. But as for pt standards even for men they are not equal. My husband has been active duty for 9 years his standards are different than an 18 year old. Pt standards are not the same as job qualifications. Pt's purpose is to ensure the member is physically fit, not that all military members look exactly the same... Its not possible for us all to be the same we are not soldier clones we are human beings of different races, heights, weights, body types etc. diversity is good.

Quoting Paperfishies:

I think anyone who wants to be in combat should be allowed BUT there should be NO special treatment of any kind. The physical requirements should be the same across the board.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Featured