Ban On Women On Front Line Lifted

Leon Panetta, the US Defence Secretary, has decided to lift the military ban on women who fight on the front line. This is a move that could allow thousands of women to get positions on the frontline in far more prestigious positions. It overturns a 1994 rule prohibiting women from being assigned to small ground-combat units, yet the military have until 2016 to work out whether any positions should remain closed to them.

Some jobs are expected to be opened to women this year, while others – including for special forces such as the Navy Seals and the Delta Force – could take longer. However, in total 230,000 jobs are expected to become open to women in the military. Senate armed services committee chairman Carl Levin welcomed the decision: “I support it,” he said. “It reflects the reality of 21st-Century military operations.”

The decision should be finalised today. What are your views on this?

Thanks for reading,

Digestible Politics

9 comments on “Ban On Women On Front Line Lifted

  1. It’s about time. Ridiculous that this was even a rule.

  2. Hyperborean says:

    If women want to get shot at and blown to bits, so be it. But do try to keep up with the men.

  3. Guls says:

    Interesting comment and debate on this very subject here:

    An aspect of female participation in the military that gets far too little press is the ‘friendly fire’ they come under in the form of sexual harassment and violence they experience from male peers. Deployment onto the front lines can only increase it’s prevalence: shitting in a bag and heavy artillary fire ought to be a breeze by comparison.

  4. Sonia K says:

    Can’t believe that women are so sheer in competing than remaining in their skins and enjoying their individual body and mind. The psychological aspects of being on the front line are drastic for men- women would end up raising a broken and depressed generation who would be killing more than educating!!!

  5. This sounded like a Feminist desire..wanting to be on the front line as men. Some of them who are mothers and wives should talk to their familiea about making thus huge and over the top decision. I am a woman but I also enjoy my femininity. Just because I may be able to perform some acts like a man does not mean that I should.

    When you see a female police officer when she first joins the force verses about 5 years AFTER she has been on the force, you may almost NOT even recog her.

    By now, if she lasted that long, she is one of the boys…..she has a horrid potty moith like them, has tons of aggression, her walk is even different, her past flirting eyes has now changed into a gazing barking bite, she seriously feels more comfy in pants than a nice flowing summer dress, she is less likely to show her emotions too!

    Because she wanted to prove something to men and even herself.. She has changed her poodle character for a pit bull and has changed her dainty and sweetheart personality and aura to a Doberman Pincher.

    Im all for women and equality …race equality etc. But fighting to be a CEO v.s. fighting to go undercover for the DEA, be on a Navy Ship with over 2, 000 MEN who are known to be out at sea for several months at a time to wanting to be on the frontline and weighing about 130 – 150 pounds and NOT able to carry their fellow soldiers who will be roughly 220 pounds …JUST IS NOT HAVING WISDOM.

    I know and understand to a certain degree how some women may feel via certain positions but when they made G.I. Joe, there was a reason aand a statement behind that… and like 50 years later they made G..I. Jane…the movie with Demi Moore as well as the barbie doll.

    Guess what! The doll didnt sell well and the movie only did well because Demi Moore was a household name via acting but there were NO SEQUALS to the movie or another mock movie was ever made witj a women in Navy Seals let alone being on the front line.

  6. henrymoore says:

    If it is wrong for men to commit institutionalized plunder and murder, it is wrong for women. Some victory.

  7. Steven says:

    I can’t speak for everybody who’s ever served, but my own opinion as a combat veteran is that this is not a good idea. In my experiences I’ve seen that women serving as attachments with a specific purpose to combat units may work decently in areas that have already been taken over by the infantry and are patrolled for security purposes, but to integrate them into infantry and other combat units and send them out on missions where these units spearhead attacks and drive back the enemy as an invasion force, is not a good idea at all. Denying fundamental differences between men and women and our respective strengths/weaknesses, is a denial of reality when we equivocate the two as equally suitable to serve in the toughest combat roles. Combat units are not the place to be conducting these social experiments; equivocating this with the racial integration of the military a few decades ago is comparing two very different things, as men of varying ethnic backgrounds are not divided by fundamental psychological and physiological differences in the way that men and women are.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s