Should women fight in war? (on the frontlines) page 26

832 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by WolfgangAzureus:

I have only read 2 posts in this thread. So I have no idea if your ideas are idiotic or not – I just found it funny that you suddenly accused her of threatening you, when:
1) It didn’t even look like a threat
2) It doesn’t matter if she was

For some odd reason, some posts don’t show up complete and that was one of those cases.

 
Flag Post

Same as men, if women wish to risk there life for their country, they should be allowed to.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

Vika why your posts show half at a time and then show full?

Because I edited it almost immediately after posing it, when I saw your ‘insults’. So the second paragraph wasn’t there when you quoted it.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
Originally posted by vikaTae:

You don’t even have to ‘waste effort’ finding capable women. Allow us to fight and we will come to you.

Are you threatning me?

Hence, the reason I use “you” & “YOU”.
LOL
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
No, I am not sexist at all, what gives such an unholy Idea?
I just don’t want army to be weakend by weak individuals.

That’s kind of a douchey thing to say. When I went into the service, I was a lot stronger and more athletic than a lot of guys I was posted with. Weak is an interesting adjective you’re using; studies have shown that women overall have faster reflexes than men and thus can make very effective pilots. Is this a sign of “weakness”?

I think the U.S. has a pretty good idea of what it’s doing with it’s armed forces, and it sees fit to let women in it’s ranks. If you’re from the Middle East, my Army kicks your Army’s ass, women included. :-)

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
No, I am not sexist at all, what gives such an unholy Idea?
I just don’t want army to be weakend by weak individuals.

That’s kind of a douchey thing to say. When I went into the service, I was a lot stronger and more athletic than a lot of guys I was posted with. Weak is an interesting adjective you’re using; studies have shown that women overall have faster reflexes than men and thus can make very effective pilots. Is this a sign of “weakness”?

I think the U.S. has a pretty good idea of what it’s doing with it’s armed forces, and it sees fit to let women in it’s ranks. If you’re from the Middle East, my Army kicks your Army’s ass, women included. :-)

I said our airforce have female pilots.
What I am against is women in army.
and I am from Pakistan(No, its not in middle east, its in south asia) .

Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

Vika why your posts show half at a time and then show full?

Because I edited it almost immediately after posing it, when I saw your ‘insults’. So the second paragraph wasn’t there when you quoted it.

How you do that?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

How you do that?

HOW or WHY?
The why is obvious. Upon posting and then seeing something or thinking of something that ya want to make a further comment in that post, ya simply edit that post.

The how is to click on the “edit” icon there by your avatar.

Also, that is where ya can delete an entire post or a part of it.
The word edit (or addendum) one puts in their original post is used to indicate that such happened so that false claims about the original posting can’t be made.

Click on the number of posts anyone has and it will take ya to ONLY theirs in the recent past.
This makes it much easier to find someones post rather than go looking through the pages ON the forum.

Click on the avatar, it will give ya the person’s profile.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

I said our airforce have female pilots.
What I am against is women in army.

The reason some posters (nearly all?) here think your position here is kinda douchey is that we see it as being quite biased against women in general. YOU have yet to offer any real defense for your position,,,,while a huge amount of rational ones have been thrown against (what appears to be) a very bigoted opinion on the matter.

I think my following point has been made,,from many directions by many posters,,but, I will make it once more. One factor of EQUALITY is: “2. with the same rights: having the same privileges, rights, status, and opportunities as others” We, in America, believe very strongly in equality. YES, our historical “track record” isn’t stellar on this,,,nor have we fully achieved it in both individual and governmental areas. BUT, our govt. certainly has made huge changes from past stances and continues to strives to do so.

While all of the above parts of equality are of strong merit,,OPPORTUNITIES is most applicable to what is currently being discussed here. If a PERSON (by the way—this INCLUDES women) has, in general terms, an opportunity….this isn’t the same as a GUARENTEE = “assurance: something that assures a specific outcome”

If a standard is made and persons MUST meet that standard,,then to show bias based on a number of things—ethnicity, gender, creed, etc.—is just wrong…PERIOD. Just cause must be shown for any challenge to any of those traits. YOU are showing a bias against women when YOU disallow females to serve IN ANY CAPACITY that a male does if comparable qualifications are met.

How simple do we need to make it for YOU to understand?

One minor difference that would need be addressed is that tampons would be issued to women in their packs for the battle zones. BUT, if women are there along the side of men,,condoms would be likely put in the men’s packs. Such is the nature of things. lol

and I am from Pakistan(No, its not in middle east, its in south asia) .

YOU may think so. However “The first official use of the term “Middle East” by the United States government was in the 1957 Eisenhower Doctrine, which pertained to the Suez Crisis. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles defined the Middle East as “the area lying between and including Libya on the west and Pakistan on the east, Syria and Iraq on the North and the Arabian peninsula to the south, plus the Sudan and Ethiopia.”13 In 1958, the State Department explained that the terms “Near East” and “Middle East” were interchangeable, and defined the region as including only Egypt, Syria, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar.17"
 
Flag Post

many different definitions of Middle East have been used. Pakistan is normally counted as South Asia, geographically. however, in ways it’s clearly more similar to the Middle East, and politically often grouped in with it.

 
Flag Post

One minor difference that would need be addressed is that tampons would be issued to women in their packs for the battle zones. BUT, if women are there along the side of men,,condoms would be likely put in the men’s packs. Such is the nature of things. lol

Again from westren prespective.
Looks like no one read my link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault_in_the_United_States_military

 
Flag Post

funny:

Over 100 cases were reported within the first eighteen months of the war
the first eighteen months of a war that lasted two weeks, that’s quite impressive.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

funny:

Over 100 cases were reported within the first eighteen months of the war

the first eighteen months of a war that lasted two weeks, that’s quite impressive.


Then yo have no Idead what insurgency is.
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

One minor difference that would need be addressed is that tampons would be issued to women in their packs for the battle zones. BUT, if women are there along the side of men,,condoms would be likely put in the men’s packs. Such is the nature of things. lol

Again from westren prespective.
Looks like no one read my link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault_in_the_United_States_military</a

I read your link.
AND, I’ve read the headlines (at the time) of the more infamous incidents.
The very fact—FROM YOUR LINK—that 1 in 5 females and 1 in 15 males are sexually assaulted means that YOU have a very skewed opinion of what such assault means and how it applies to our military.

“Sexual assault is an assault of a sexual nature on another person, or any sexual act committed without consent. Although sexual assaults most frequently are by a man on a woman, it may involve any combination of two or more men, women and children.1

“The term sexual assault is used, in public discourse, as a generic term that is defined as any involuntary sexual act in which a person is threatened, coerced, or forced to engage against their will, or any sexual touching of a person who has not consented. This includes rape (such as forced vaginal, anal or oral penetration), inappropriate touching, forced kissing[citation needed], child sexual abuse, or the torture of the victim in a sexual manner.23

I’m not gonna look for the stats, but I do wonder how the common LARGE workplace in America number’s would compare to those in your link. There it is called SEXUAL HARASSMENT instead of assault. YOU do know there is a difference between assault & battery?

Besides, since we are taking about “front lines”….most definitely I’m gonna say this personel is ARMED. I seriously doubt much of any such assault goes on there. In fact, my bigger concern is that some of the women might start up a rather enterprising “business” that would make ROBBERY more likely than sexual assault. LOL

Dood, as time goes by, women (and soon Gays) will have all the appropriate, STRONG protection they need. Deal w/ it. YOU (likely?) need to live in the U.S. to have a better understand of how things go here.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

Besides, since we are taking about “front lines”….most definitely I’m gonna say this personel is ARMED. I seriously doubt much of any such assault goes on there. In fact, my bigger concern is that some of the women might start up a rather enterprising “business” that would make ROBBERY more likely than sexual assault. LOL

Are you implying that some of us might use the opportunity to ‘borrow’ rather valuable, if bulky equipment from various buildings? Honestly as if I’d use the excuse to nick a Da Vinci unit. By the way, disregard that truck. She’s with me.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

One minor difference that would need be addressed is that tampons would be issued to women in their packs for the battle zones. BUT, if women are there along the side of men,,condoms would be likely put in the men’s packs. Such is the nature of things. lol

Again from westren prespective.
Looks like no one read my link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault_in_the_United_States_military</a

I read your link.
AND, I’ve read the headlines (at the time) of the more infamous incidents.
The very fact—FROM YOUR LINK—that 1 in 5 females and 1 in 15 males are sexually assaulted means that YOU have a very skewed opinion of what such assault means and how it applies to our military.

“Sexual assault is an assault of a sexual nature on another person, or any sexual act committed without consent. Although sexual assaults most frequently are by a man on a woman, it may involve any combination of two or more men, women and children.1


“The term sexual assault is used, in public discourse, as a generic term that is defined as any involuntary sexual act in which a person is threatened, coerced, or forced to engage against their will, or any sexual touching of a person who has not consented. This includes rape (such as forced vaginal, anal or oral penetration), inappropriate touching, forced kissing[citation needed], child sexual abuse, or the torture of the victim in a sexual manner.23


I’m not gonna look for the stats, but I do wonder how the common LARGE workplace in America number’s would compare to those in your link. There it is called SEXUAL HARASSMENT instead of assault. YOU do know there is a difference between assault & battery?


Besides, since we are taking about “front lines”….most definitely I’m gonna say this personel is ARMED. I seriously doubt much of any such assault goes on there. In fact, my bigger concern is that some of the women might start up a rather enterprising “business” that would make ROBBERY more likely than sexual assault. LOL


Dood, as time goes by, women (and soon Gays) will have all the appropriate, STRONG protection they need. Deal w/ it. YOU (likely?) need to live in the U.S. to have a better understand of how things go here.

Yes I know what sexual assault is I am not 5 yr old
You say these women will be armed so they have less chance of being attacked.
Well NATO forces are armed too but g0reen on blues attacks still happend
You are right, I have not experienced life in america but this thread is a world wide question.
That is why I posted before that we have a difference of perspective.
we
Dood

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

Besides, since we are taking about “front lines”….most definitely I’m gonna say this personel is ARMED. I seriously doubt much of any such assault goes on there. In fact, my bigger concern is that some of the women might start up a rather enterprising “business” that would make ROBBERY more likely than sexual assault. LOL

Are you implying that some of us might use the opportunity to ‘borrow’ rather valuable, if bulky equipment from various buildings? Honestly as if I’d use the excuse to nick a Da Vinci unit. By the way, disregard that truck. She’s with me.

DOn’t worry men do it already.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

DOn’t worry men do it already.

That’s a brain-dead obvious statement. Of course some men steal, same as some women steal. It’s an individual and circumstances thing.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

DOn’t worry men do it already.

That’s a brain-dead obvious statement. Of course some men steal, same as some women steal. It’s an individual and circumstances thing.

You can thank the captain obvious (Thats me Thats me )

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

Besides, since we are taking about “front lines”….most definitely I’m gonna say this personnel is ARMED. I seriously doubt much of any such assault goes on there. In fact, my bigger concern is that some of the women might start up a rather enterprising “business” that would make ROBBERY {{ OF THEMNOT BY THEM }} more likely than sexual assault. LOL

Are you implying that some of us might use the opportunity to ‘borrow’ rather valuable, if bulky equipment from various buildings? Honestly as if I’d use the excuse to nick a Da Vinci unit. By the way, disregard that truck. She’s with me.

LOL….NNNOOOoooooooooooo.
Ya went entirely the wrong direction.
I meant that the women possibly stood a greater risk of being robbed INSTEAD OF being sexually assaulted,,,
the very likelihood that the ratio of male-to-female combined w/ the fact that (BASICALLY?) men have a much higher """need""" for sex,,,,
that SOME of the women might end up taking advantage of these "disparities in order to make some “money on the side”,,,
OR, on their backsides,,,
OR, whatever position-4-hire was agreed upon.

THEN, due to the (huge?) amounts of cash those particular women would likely have (ON the front lines….NO banks there), ROBBERY of said money would be the bigger concern.

Sure, they still have their weapons. BUT, the money might be back at camp….their “pussy” is always w/ them & their guns, hence the greater likelihood of a “robbery//theft”. AND, real money is likely a greater motive than a simple forced “quickie”.

Crap, let’s cut to the chase here. The main objection to women being in such situations as “the front lines” (hint: they don’t really exist anymore) is the SEX. Why do ya think Gays are such a No-No? Men whose lives are “on the line” on a daily basis don’t particularly “think” normal. STRESS is a MESS. Nam was hell. Ya didn’t know who could kill ya, they all dressed alike….no “uniforms”. Patrols could easily be deadly (why else go on them?)….waiting to go on patrol was crazy boredom….sometimes for several days on end. Physical rest….but still the mental stress.

thepunisher is somewhat right here.
THIS is the main objection…..
men under the stress of possibly dying aren’t really all that easy to refrain from doing some atypical crap. Believe me. The Brass won’t come out and say it to the press. No mom back home wants//needs to know just how fucked of a situation her child is in. Take a Nam vet out to a bar….get him to talking….have a look at what such stress can do to a person.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

THIS is the main objection…..
men under the stress of possibly dying aren’t really all that easy to refrain from doing some atypical crap. Believe me. The Brass won’t come out and say it to the press.

Yeah. I can regrettably say I have seen some of the really screwed up minds, and understand something of the utter psychological meat-grinder of what you see in the combat zone. No, I’ve never been a soldier, but as a medic, you see some serious shit that never ever goes away. Especially when you start out in a civilian military support position.

I had the misfortune once, to be on scene at a nasty collision. It was pure fluke timing. We were using the same road as a softtop van driver who was trying to get out of a bad situation as quickly as he could. I didn’t see what happened, heard it, but one of the others did see it. He took the corner too fast, going about 80 or so clipped the embankment, and flipped onto the side. He skidded along the road, and his cab was bisected by a streetlight. Sheered clean off.

I didn’t see the collision, but I did see him. You don’t have a choice Karma. When you’re on-scene of something like that, you do what you can. The poor bastard had survived. He had been bisected by the lamp; his lower half wasn’t attached to him any more. He didn’t live very long, and there was absolutely nothing we could do for him. The experience stays with you. I’v spoken to you before about other nightmares in my life, but they all affect you.

That’s not dealing with a combat situation as well. The soldiers see the same horrific mess time and time again. A family butchered, a half a dead body by the roadside, people dying in their arms. It dehumanises. They lose the ability to relate to people properly. Part survival mechanism and part severe trauma.

they don’t get a chance to deal with it and seek professional help. Well, they do, but not every time. They’ve got to go out there and do that shit all over again, till the tour is over. By that point their mind is a wreck.

HOWEVER, saying that, and understanding your point, I don’t accept that as being a reason to keep women out of the front lines. You say they don’t exist anymore. I disagree. They exist all right, but the entire area is the front line. Yours and theirs at the same time. You have civilians mixed into that mess. As such, there’s not really a time when you’re not on the front line, whilst you are within the disputed area. Make sense?

These soldiers have still got to interact with women, even if there are none in their squad. These women may be in support like Twilight was, civilians on the street they encounter during patrols, the medical professional trying to put a band-aid on a broken arm figuratively speaking, or a family encountered in their own home.

They have to maintain some form of control ofthemselves in all those situations. The advantage military women have is the attitude. The civilians are not all going to have that. I’m trying to think how to describe it to you. Ball buster probably comes closest. You have to be a bitch, to let them know you mean business. you are no pushove,; you deserve to be there.

The women who are going to sign up for that kind of duty are going to be tough as nails, no-nonsense people. It is the kind of mindset needed. If a man in the unit does try some shit, he’s going to draw back a bloody stump. I suspect you know this. They’ll go through the same psychological meat-grinder as everyone else, and develop the same shell. If anything it’ll make it less likely something of that nature will occur without violence in reciprocation, not more.

waiting to go on patrol was crazy boredom….sometimes for several days on end. Physical rest….but still the mental stress.

there are many ways to try and deal with the tension of waiting these days, Karma. No method will fully eliminate it, but even things like X-boxes will help. Givethe mind something very different to focus on. They’re pretty much standard issue, for that very good reason.

Sex happens. Male on female, female on female, male on male, male on blender, female on cucumber… Even with DADT in place, it still went on. It’s a healthy release. A way of dealing with mental stress. Yes, the anti-pregnancy defenses in heterosexual sex aren’t perfect, but if that occurs, it will be dealt with each case as necessary. It is no reason to deny those who really want to fight, from fighting.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

THIS is the main objection…..
men under the stress of possibly dying aren’t really all that easy to refrain from doing some atypical crap. Believe me. The Brass won’t come out and say it to the press.

Yeah. I can regrettably say I have seen some of the really screwed up minds, and understand something of the utter psychological meat-grinder of what you see in the combat zone. No, I’ve never been a soldier, but as a medic, you see some serious shit that never ever goes away. Especially when you start out in a civilian military support position.

Fershur. I had forgotten how your profession very likely would put ya in a position to very well understand the (near-immediate) war combat stress that is exacerbated by the loss of a limb. I’d like to think our VA did a whoooole lot to address the mental stress issue of our warrioirs to the max level. However, I pretty much know otherwise…and its to a near minimum, for the most part.

I had the misfortune once, to be on scene at a nasty collision. It was pure fluke timing. We were using the same road as a softtop van driver who was trying to get out of a bad situation as quickly as he could. I didn’t see what happened, heard it, but one of the others did see it. He took the corner too fast, going about 80 or so clipped the embankment, and flipped onto the side. He skidded along the road, and his cab was bisected by a streetlight. Sheered clean off.

I didn’t see the collision, but I did see him. You don’t have a choice Karma. When you’re on-scene of something like that, you do what you can. The poor bastard had survived. He had been bisected by the lamp; his lower half wasn’t attached to him any more. He didn’t live very long, and there was absolutely nothing we could do for him. The experience stays with you. I’v spoken to you before about other nightmares in my life, but they all affect you.

Yeah, I know what ya mean. That one was grizzly and had to have had a deep affect on ya. For me, its not so much the “blood-N-guts”, it’s the intimacy of watching “the light go out”. Its a very sharp reminder of just how much death is a constant companion of ours. For some very odd reason, fate has choosen me to also be one to haplessly “stumble upon” that cold companion of others and look him squarely in the face.

One, I was “pottying” my dog out front of the house late one night, I hear a “pop” (I know exactly what it was) and running up to me is this woman who is one of the neighbors next door. She is wildly screaming a lot of things and “drags” me into her house, her boyfriend has sucked off a .38. His light was quickly sucked away, too. After the coroner left w/ the body, I had the “fun task” of doing the clean up….before the owner//friend came home. Getting blood outta the carpet is hard. Getting the bone & scalp out of the ceiling light shade ain’t a walk in the park either. All of this I’m doing while the girlfriend is wailing in the living room.

Another is going to a prvate airfield to learn to sky dive. A new aquaintanace took me. Upon arriving, I hear: THEY’RE OUT. Looking up, I see tiny figures free-falling, then chutes being opened. One of them was a “spiral”. The dood cut his chute at about 300 yards….too close for this reserve to be of any use. He pancaked….reserve only hald deployed. By the time I and my new friend arrived to his side, he wasn’t even in that much pain….total shock, died w/in a couple of min. Death laughed….silly boy, jump out of a good airplane.

That’s not dealing with a combat situation as well. The soldiers see the same horrific mess time and time again. A family butchered, a half a dead body by the roadside, people dying in their arms. It dehumanises. They lose the ability to relate to people properly. Part survival mechanism and part severe trauma.


they don’t get a chance to deal with it and seek professional help. Well, they do, but not every time. They’ve got to go out there and do that shit all over again, till the tour is over. By that point their mind is a wreck.

Yup. That is the issue I was wanting to address. Brass knows how hard it is to maintain order. Adding women, they think, will only acerbate the issue because of this primordial drive of men…esp. where it involve the continuence of human life. Polite manners towards women are well covered over by this “drag them to the cave by their hair” mentality.

HOWEVER, saying that, and understanding your point, I don’t accept that as being a reason to keep women out of the front lines.

Yeah, it’s NOT MY reasoning. It’s that of Pentagon brass and strongly lof field commanders.

You say they don’t exist anymore. I disagree. They exist all right, but the entire area is the front line. Yours and theirs at the same time. You have civilians mixed into that mess. As such, there’s not really a time when you’re not on the front line, whilst you are within the disputed area. Make sense?

Makes perfect sense. I guess I should have said TRADITIONAL front line. It might have helped make my discription of the cause of modern warfare stress of have not “timeout” by going to the “rear”.

These soldiers have still got to interact with women, even if there are none in their squad. These women may be in support like Twilight was, civilians on the street they encounter during patrols, the medical professional trying to put a band-aid on a broken arm figuratively speaking, or a family encountered in their own home.

Yes, this is my point about why the Brass has such a reluctance to include women along side the men. The Brass already has an “image” nightmare on their hands. Esp. of their troops being in such close prox. w/ civilians. The Brass just doesn’t want to have to deal w/ “men picking on women” in the “wilds”.
>They have to maintain some form of control ofthemselves in all those situations. The advantage military women have is the attitude. The civilians are not all going to have that. I’m trying to think how to describe it to you. Ball buster probably comes closest. You have to be a bitch, to let them know you mean business. you are no pushove,; you deserve to be there.

Hence the posters here making the strong arguement about REQUIREMENTS being met for women to qualify for combat duty. AND, let me unequivocatly state that I DO NOT think a large % of women don’t have a “ball-busting” capacity….both physical & mental.

The women who are going to sign up for that kind of duty are going to be tough as nails, no-nonsense people. It is the kind of mindset needed. If a man in the unit does try some shit, he’s going to draw back a bloody stump. I suspect you know this. They’ll go through the same psychological meat-grinder as everyone else, and develop the same shell. If anything it’ll make it less likely something of that nature will occur without violence in reciprocation, not more.

EXACTLY.

waiting to go on patrol was crazy boredom….sometimes for several days on end. Physical rest….but still the mental stress.

there are many ways to try and deal with the tension of waiting these days, Karma. No method will fully eliminate it, but even things like X-boxes will help. Givethe mind something very different to focus on. They’re pretty much standard issue, for that very good reason.

Sex happens. Male on female, female on female, male on male, male on blender, female on cucumber… Even with DADT in place, it still went on. It’s a healthy release. A way of dealing with mental stress. Yes, the anti-pregnancy defenses in heterosexual sex aren’t perfect, but if that occurs, it will be dealt with each case as necessary. It is no reason to deny those who really want to fight, from fighting.

Absolutely. Most any “arguement” raised can be met w/ simple, common sense application of a little effort in training & support. But, alas….while we put great effort into military hardware,,,we sadly do little for humans.
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Marh:

I think they would be a distraction to the men, not just for that reason, but because they would rather protect them. On the other hand people are less likely to shoot a woman than a man.

I don’t really care, they do everything else.

No comment, I’ll let somebody else respond for me.

You ever read over a paragraph you just wrote and go “oh god this is stupid”? Never too late to start.

 
Flag Post

I don,t think so.

 
Flag Post

I’ve done a very in depth look on this topic and have written a paper of my findings for over a month take a look at my website for more information but just a intro to – http://womenfrontlinefighting.com/

Let’s begin with the definition of direct combat “Engaging an enemy on the ground with individual or crew served weapons, while being exposed to hostile fire and to a high probability of direct physical contact with hostile personnel” (Keating, par. 3). In the U.S. today there are 14,000 jobs open to women with 200,000 still exclusive to men. With women gaining more influence within the U.S. military they are begining to have looser restricitions on who can join what unit. The U.S. marines will now usher roles for women which for the entire 236 year history of the corps have been held exclusively to men (Drummond, par. 1). This is showing the first steps with women intergation of the corps although, the Pentagon Policy continues to ban women serving as infantrymen, Special Operations commandos and other direct-combat positions (Dao, par. 2).

 
Flag Post

It comes down to the nature vs. nurture of the U.S.