Pentagon's women-in-combat push faces chilly headwinds

The Hill ^ | December 30, 2015 | Rebecca Kheel

[jazusamo]

The Pentagon faces major challenges ahead in 2016 as it works to make good on a pledge to open all U.S. military combat jobs to women.

The toughest part of the integration, which President Obama and Defense Secretary Ashton Carter have made a priority in their final year in office, will be overcoming deep-seated opposition among many male special forces commandos.

"They feel what makes them special is being all male, and somehow integrating women is going to make them less special and less adept," said Megan MacKenzie, author of "Beyond the Band of Brothers: the US Military and the Myth that Women Can't Fight."

"A lot of that is based on emotion and a lack of experience working with women."

The four services are already taking steps to allow women to serve in all jobs. Service chiefs must submit their implementation plans to Carter by Jan. 1.

Carter made history this month when he announced that all combat jobs would be open to women, with no exceptions. The decision came despite a recommendation from the Marine Corp to keep some jobs closed.

Carter acknowledged the difficulty of implementing his order when he made his announcement.

"How we implement this is key," he said. "Simply declaring all career fields open is not successful integration. We must not only continue to implement change thoughtfully but also track and monitor our progress to ensure we're doing it right.

The response to Carter's announcement on Capitol Hill was mostly positive. Still, some who praised the decision added that implementation would be crucial and focused on the need to not lower standards to get women into the newly available roles.

After Carter's announcement, Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) -- the chairmen of the House and Senate Armed Services committees, respectively -- promised to use Congress's 30-day review period to thoroughly examine the studies Carter used to inform his decision.

As part of that review, Thornberry and Rep. Joe Heck (R-Nev.), chairman of the subcommittee on military personnel, sent a letter to Carter with 17 questions about his decision.

Among the questions is how the Pentagon plans to implement Carter's decision, how the services plan to maintain gender-neutral standards and whether the decision has any legal implications on women registering for the draft.

"Although the department has provided some documentation and briefed the committee, several questions remain," they wrote in the letter, which was also signed by 16 other committee Republicans. "The issue of women serving in all previously closed positions is complex and multi-faceted, and the department's decision must be carefully reviewed to evaluate its impact on military readiness."

Thornberry and Heck asked for a response by Jan. 3.

An aide for McCain said Tuesday the Senate committee's review is ongoing and that a hearing is planned for after the Senate returns from the holiday recess.

There are already indications that integration is going to be tough. A survey of special operation forces released after Carter's announcement found that opposition to opening special ops to women was "deep-seated and intensely felt."

In the survey, 85.6 percent of the 7,618 respondents said they were either strongly or somewhat opposed to opening their specialty to women. And 70.9 percent said they were strongly or somewhat opposed to opening their unit to women.

The survey, done by the RAND Corporation and commissioned by Special Operations Command, also included a series of 49 focus groups. RAND kept the participants anonymous in its report.

The focus group responses show concern about lower standards, unit morale, political motives and accusations of sexual assault, among other issues. The 292-page study includes statements of vehement opposition from across the military's branches.

"It's a slap in the face telling us that chicks can do our job," one Army Ranger said.

"It's not the physical aspect that bothers me. My issues are morale and retention. This wouldn't be special to anyone anymore."

One special operations Marine chocked the entire initiative up to Washington politics.

"This is a political thing. This is people in Congress. Because there is no grassroots movement of women saying we want to," he argued in the survey. "It's some congressmen trying to make equal rights for women. Whether anyone in this room wants to say it or not, that's what I think we all think."

But not all the responses were negative.

"I think we are selling ourselves short by not opening it up to the best individuals," a special operations Marine said. "There are some positives. In some countries, two gorilla, tattooed men would look suspicious. But me and [a woman] walking down the street holding hands would not. It opens up new possibilities."

MacKenzie, the author of a book on the role of women in the military, predicted that some of the hang-ups about adding women into special forces would fade away once women actually join. She cited the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, in which feared consequences didn't become reality, as evidence.

"Just working with women will help dispel some of those myths," she said. "They'll realize women can pull their weight; they'll realize unit cohesion doesn't fall apart and the world doesn't end when they have to have a woman in it."

Leadership will also need to set an example for those they command, MacKenzie added. In that regard, she said, Carter has already done a good job by making his announcement unequivocal.

"Just making it clear this is no longer an option," MacKenzie said of how leaders should act. "Making it clear this is no longer something the military is seeking feedback on, that this is a decision that's been made."

[Shadow44]

Why are they such misogynists that they want to send people’s daughters to get drafted, raped, tortured, maimed, and/or killed overseas?

Seriously, how the hell does this benefit women in ANY way besides the ego boost? THAT is offensive if you ask me.

[PJBankard]

If combat jobs are open to women, the draft should be open to women. See how many women push back about having to register for that.

[goldstategop]

Another sign of American decline - common sense and standards thrown out of the window.

Equality is noble but isn’t much help when the reality is the only equality all of us have in common is the democracy of death.

Evil leftists are pushing along our country along the path to oblivion.

[Victor]

"....There is only one way to have women in combat. Make sure it’s an all female company....."

I kind of like the idea of women at the controls of, say, an F-15 or an Apache helicopter.

Can you imagine an entire squadron of those gals...?

[phs3]

I should have mentioned that they should not be infantry.

[rhoda_penmark]

If life were a John Wayne or Clint Eastwood movie, we would see the women in combat trailing behind in battles, after breaking the heels off of their shoes.

Real life results may vary but I doubt by much.

[tumblindice]

Homer used the words, in the Illiad: “the labor of combat” describing Ajax swinging his hammer.

[Maverick68]

Truth: Take 25 of the best trained male soldiers on the planet, have them take on 100 of the best trained female soldiers on the planet....the women are all dead before sundown.

[Popman]

Putting women in positions that require a lot of physical strength, like firefighting and open combat positions, will simply get people killed.

Well, leftist are very adept at getting people killed...

[Gay State Conservative]

Can you imagine an entire squadron of those gals...?

Well,on the plus side Allstate could send them a check for each accident free six month stretch they had!

[rhoda_penmark]

While we’re at it, I would like to see a lot more dwarves and caucasions represented in the NBA too.

[jwalsh07]

Yes. You hit that nail on the head. Women do not just suffer from lower upper body strength, they suffer from aeons of natural selection and are stress fractures waiting to happen. I understand the Marine who says they may have a place in CIA type ops but you could not put a platoon of women together wwho could meet infantry physical requirements. Nor are they clamoring to do it. And then there is the pregnancy thing.

[Secret Agent Man]

That would make title ix obsolete. Can’t take away special treatment just to make them truly equal. /truth

[Secret Agent Man]

wont work, the other male groups will still be protective of the female group. that female unit will be worth more and more stupid stuff done to save it than a male group.

[rlmorel]

This bothers me, because the people who made this decision will not be around when the SHTF.

They think we have a push-button military. When things go bad, and we don’t have unlimited and safe supply lines or air protection, we are going to lose due the lack of a nail for a shoe when it hinges on two soldiers from each side going toe-to-toe in hand-to-hand combat up to their knees in the snow after not having eaten or slept for days, and the one on our side is a woman. History tells us, that is how tight it can get. And we won’t even be close.

I will feel sympathy not only for the men who will be put in that situation, but the women as well.

There is going to be defeat, surprise, shed blood, humiliation, anger, and lots and lots of bitter, bitter, recrimination. The very people who support this and are making it happen will scream loudest for someone to hang because of it.

Being a student of history, there are times in my life when I see the future as clearly as if were already a reality.

When it comes to pass, it is even worse because I feel that if someone like me could have seen it, it could have been avoided. Boy, do things like that ever make me angry.

[Calamari]

This is no longer a big problem. Since you are what you identify as; any number of soldiers in the unit can identify as female thus solving the women in combat problem. This should be done on a rotating basis so that the unit as a whole will share in the accolades

[vette6387]

“How about the Administration and Congress in combat? Regardless of age or gender, how about sending all of DC to Afganistan ....”

Better still, send their children! Only when they actually have some “personal skin’ in the game will the RE’s change. Also, maybe they won’t be so quick to “commit our kids” to battle! The US Congress, striving to learn how to pick up a turd by the “clean end!”

[elcid1970]

Following the Operation Tailhook scandal in 1991, a DACOWITZ study did strength testing on 100 young fit males, and 100 young fit females, all serving on active duty.

Conclusion: the ten strongest women were only as capable as the ten weakest men.

Private Benjamin, we miss her.

;^)

[rlmorel]

I have posted quite a bit about this, and I am certain that there are a lot of people who might read my posts and conclude I have some kind of axe to grind against women, and nothing could be further from the truth.

I think nothing of working my tail off in a business environment for women, and I think women are the equal of men at decision making and being mentally tough.

My major points of concern are two...first, that mixing the sexes in a combat/deployment environment is a disaster. Throwing young men and women together is a recipe for serious morale and mission issues. It is a factor that will not add in any way to combat effectiveness, but can severely detract from it for a wide variety of reasons ranging from personal and medical to logistical.

Secondly, it is this graph I created that tells the tale of the physical disparity (assumptions are ALL medically accepted truths that are not contested):

It is that area with red stripes that is the issue. That is going to be the margin of defeat.