Get breaking news alerts via email

Click here to manage your alerts
Women in combat: Good to go if they meet standards
Military » Physical requirements include being able to lift a 50-pound artillery shell.

< Previous Page

There long has been opposition to putting women in combat, based on questions of whether they have the necessary strength and stamina for certain jobs, or whether their presence might hurt unit cohesion. But the Pentagon’s announcement was largely hailed by lawmakers and military groups. There were only a few offering dissenting views.

Spc. Jean Sardonas, who works as a lab technician at a hospital at Fort Bliss in Texas, said she considered joining an Army team that faces combat situations. But since she’s had children, she said her perspective had changed.

At a glance

Women’s military jobs past and future

Pilots » The only Air Force jobs closed to women until now were special operations roles like enlisted pararescue and combat control officer. These jobs were opened Thursday by Panetta’s order.

Subs » The Navy in April 2010 opened submarine service to women, but only aboard the larger ballistic missile and guided-missile subs, where berthing is less of a privacy problem than on attack subs. On Thursday the Navy announced it is extending that to include attack subs.

Marines » Women already may serve in a variety of combat-related jobs in the Corps, but the decision to stop excluding women from ground combat means that about 35,000 infantry slots would be opened to women who can meet the qualifications.

Soldiers » The Army has kept female officers out of many ground combat roles, including armor, infantry and special forces. For example, enlisted women could not be a cavalry scout or a fire support specialist, a position that is primarily responsible for the intelligence activities of the Army’s field artillery teams, until now.

Join the Discussion
Post a Comment

"If you see the enemy, well, that’s the enemy, but now if you see a kid with a gun you’re going to think twice" about shooting him, she said.

Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, who will be the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he is concerned about the possible impact of completely ending the ban, adding that he suspects legislation may be needed to stop changes that would be detrimental.

Under the new memo, military service chiefs will have until May 15 to develop plans for allowing women to seek the combat positions. Some jobs may open as soon as this year, while assessments for others, such as special operations forces, may take longer.

The services will have until January 2016 to argue that some positions should remain closed to women.

Thursday’s move fits into the broad agenda President Barack Obama previewed for his second term during Monday’s inaugural address, which focused in particular on issues of equality. It also comes on the heels of a presidential election in which Obama won the majority of female voters following a campaign that focused heavily on women’s issues, though not women in combat specifically.

The change also comes as Panetta wraps up his tenure as defense secretary. The order expands the department’s action of nearly a year ago to open about 14,500 combat positions to women, nearly all of them in the Army.

Under the 1994 Pentagon policy, women were prohibited from being assigned to ground combat units below the brigade level. A brigade is roughly 3,500 troops split into several battalions of about 800 soldiers each. Historically, brigades were based farther from the front lines, and they often included top command and support staff.

The necessities of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, however, propelled women into jobs as medics, military police and intelligence officers that were sometimes attached — but not formally assigned — to battalions. So while a woman couldn’t be assigned as an infantryman in a battalion going out on patrol, she could fly a helicopter supporting the unit, or move in to provide medical aid if troops were injured.

story continues below
story continues below

Dempsey suggested that eliminating the ban on women in some combat roles could help with the ongoing sexual assault and harassment problems in the military.

"When you have one part of the population that is designated as warriors and another part that’s designated as something else, I think that disparity begins to establish a psychology that in some cases led to that environment." said Dempsey. "I have to believe, the more we can treat people equally, the more likely they are to treat each other equally."

Copyright 2014 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Top Reader Comments Read All Comments Post a Comment
Click here to read all comments   Click here to post a comment

About Reader Comments

Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
Staying Connected
Contests and Promotions
  • Search Obituaries
  • Place an Obituary

  • Search Cars
  • Search Homes
  • Search Jobs
  • Search Marketplace
  • Search Legal Notices

  • Other Services
  • Advertise With Us
  • Subscribe to the Newspaper
  • Access your e-Edition
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact a newsroom staff member
  • Access the Trib Archives
  • Privacy Policy
  • Missing your paper? Need to place your paper on vacation hold? For this and any other subscription related needs, click here or call 801.204.6100.