Why Can't women be in Artillery?

Question

I can't think of a reason other there is a slightly higher chance of dying. There are jobs in Artillery and Armored and other jobs in the military that do not require the physical demands that straight leg infantry does, but still gets us closer to the front lines. I do not see why we can't be in those. I'm not looking for a fight, just want some opinions.

Again, I'm not saying Infantry or anything. But my Husbands MOS in the Army (13D) Seems like a woman can do it no problem.

And I am not saying that women could not do straight leg infantry either, but our country is not ready for that so we should not push it on them. It will cause more harsh feelings toward women in the military. I do have to give that to the opposition. I know some females that want women allowed into infantry but want the standards lowered for them. That should not happen. That could get someone killed.

Answer 1

I usually stay out of this argument because there is no way to win it especially if a person's objection to women being in infantry is because women have their period. Seriously of all the things to worry about in combat, that is what you are going to fixate on. How about worrying about the blood gushing out of your buddy's stomach and not the blood coming out of your teammate's vagina.



Here is the reality, more and more of the infantry positions will open up to women for the simple reason that there is no "front line" anymore. The last two wars proved that. Women were in direct combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. The women equipped themselves just as well as the men did. And yes, there are women who died as a result.



The objection that people have for women not being on the front line has less to do with a woman's ability and more to do with incorrect male perceptions.



Take for example, one of the poster's argument that a woman shouldn't be on the front line because she wouldn't want to get dirty. Mmmmmmmm excuse me. I got plenty dirty when I was in the Marine Corps. We were out in the field once for a month and yes, we were dirty but guess what, so were the men. Big freaking deal. So what if we stunk. Get over it. When we were over in Korea during Team Spirit, we lived in a pig farm. Yes, it was gross but who cared. And yes, when I was out in the field, I had my period and sometimes it was a little nasty but like pain, dirt is temporary. We will eventually take a shower.



For the poster who said that women can't march x number of miles with a 45lbs pack on their back. Yes they can. When I was in Okinawa, we went on a 26 miles hump from one side of the island to the next. And yes,until you went numb, it hurt like hell but you knew better than to get on that truck. Unless you were seriously injured, you didn't stop. And to be just a little bit facetious, come on guys. On any given day you can find civilian women carrying a 20lbs baby, a huge diaper bag, groceries, and god knows what else. If women can carry all that, and they can, they can hump a pack that has the 45lbs distrubted over their back.



And for the lovely former Army soldier who thinks all women are skanks. Perhaps, in the Army, but I doubt it even for the Army. You will find people who are less than honorable regardless of the gender or the branch they serve in. When I went to Desert Storm, only one person went AWOL.... and that was a MALE Marine. Should we now condemn all men? Or is it only ok to condemn and discriminate against women because of the actions of one woman, who may or may not have gotten pregnant "on purpose" just to get out of a deployment.



Also, for those who say that women shouldn't serve becuse "boys will be boys" and that they would be raped or sexually harrassed. Well, that isn't a good enough reason for women not to serve in infantry. First of all, men have been raped in wartime also. Civilian women have been raped in wartime. It is a heinous crime but not a good enough reason to keep women out of infantry positions.

And if a woman is getting harrassed, and nothing happens, that is a failure on the part of the leadership. When African-Americans were first integrated into the regular Army, there were a lot of servicemembers who didn't like it but the leadership stood up for them and made it clear that the African-American soldiers were soldiers and should be treated as such. And if the leadership won't do that for women, then it is their failure not the failure of the women.



Lastly, women have risen to every challenge that has been thrown to us. Everytime the military opens a MOS up to us, we suceed in it. Once upon a time, women couldn't fly helicopters in the military. Not only do we fly them now, we fly them in combat conditions and we fly them as well as the men do. Furthermore, women can shoot just as accurately as men do. When I went through recruit training, a woman recruit had the high score and she had had it for quite awhile. Women also do better in the prone and kneeling positions because we are more flexible. Should we ban men from shooting because they don't get into the kneeling position as well???? After all if one can use the argument that women should be excluded from infantry because they are not physically the same as men, shouldn't we be able to use the same excuse for men???



Anyway, this is another reason I don't usually respond to this question. I will just keep typing and typing and typing. And it is obvious of course, where I fall with this argument.



Women should be given the same opportunity as men. If they fail, they fail. If they suceed, they suceed.



Dena

Answer 2

because 13 series is a combat arms job, and ALL combat arms jobs are closed to women because they have a high potential of having to do strait leg infantry's job. a lot of 13 series are doing that in iraq and afghan right now, since arty isnt really being used. simply put, 99.999% of females cannot physically do that job, and those 13 series soldiers dont deserve to be put at greater risk because they have to leave the wire a few troops short. and no its not just the standards of the PT test, combat arms troops (no offense but REAL ones, not ones in the NG) are held to a much higher standard. for example army standard says males have to be able to do a 12 mile ruck march with a 45lb pack in less than 4 hours... combat arms units standards are often 3 hours. and even then: 45 lbs isnt close to the 100 lbs that you'll carry around outside the wire. women also have a bone structure thats not as suited for carrying large amounts of weight long distances. men however do. then theres the hygene issue: can you go lying still in a puddle of mud for half a week with only being able to roll to the side when you have to pee? or not changing your underwear for a week or so at a time? then theres also the "privacy" issue. if you're spending a week outside the wire are you expecting to get your own vehicle while the rest of the platoon, which is male, is overcrowded in other vehicles? then theres pregnancy: you cant deploy if pregnant, and that means your team is automatically a man short. that puts their lives at further risk. lastly, the main reason is women in the military themselves: for each one that wants to get into combat arms, theres 10 that dont want to have to live up to the male standards.

Answer 3

Various Military standards are there for a reason. If we change them willy-nilly, it will be self-defeating. We will be creating an inferior, less-skilled, less-able force if we lower standards just because some women feel that they like to get some cool jobs, but they really are not up to it, so want the standards lowered.



That is not to say, women can't be allowed in some careers -there are qualified women out there, but its up to them that tehy are qualified. Speaking as the mother of an active duty junior army officer, I would not want women(nor men!) with sub-standard skills/capabilities under his command, nor do I want him commanded by a sub-standard superior, man or woman!

Answer 4

I wonder how the US gets away with this. In Canada, we cannot discriminate based sex, religion, and so on. That includes the military, where all trades are open to both men and women. The only exception is Roman Catholic padre, as that church does not allow women priests. Even there, there are female RC "Pastoral Associates" who are padres. So, women are free to join the Combat Arms trades (Infantry, Artillery, and Crewman (tanks)) here.



I had thought that your Bill of Rights also included sex as a basis for discrimination. But, it seems some jobs are still closed to women there. I wonder why?

Answer 5

Quarter master or admin. Infantry battalions are staffed with females. Aviation also has woman pilots. MPs are a combat MOS, they are combat support. FA is a combat mos, and as such, dispite what youve been told, does not allow women to join. They might be attached as truck drivers(88M). So every job really has females closely working with men. Shame on trivial pursuit, the question is a misnomer and not limiting enough to illicit a single correct answer

Answer 6

Everyone can sit here and give you all the excuses in the world as to why or why not Women should be allowed in Combat Arms jobs(I am one of those that are against).....but the bottom line still and will remain that it will take an act of Congress to change it and that is not going to happen. Congress and the DoD don't need any reasons why they do what they do. Equal Rights does NOT belong in the military

Answer 7

If you have ever actually been in the military and see how most women soldiers act, you would understand. Most are just barracks skanks who use every excuse to get out of duty or PT, not excluding "female troubles".Then you have the ones who get knocked up to get out of deployments, cause drama, distract the men, etc. etc. etc. Though of course there are some good female soldiers, like me, I just kept to myself and did my job. But most are whiny drama queens (like a large percentage of women in the civilian world)



Not to mention the men have to be constantly worried about "sexual harassment" or offending the females.

Answer 8

I agree with you. I'm joining the Air Force soon and was slightly annoyed that all the cool jobs are closed to women. But realistically, no politician can allow women to come home in body bags, no matter how low the risk is.

Answer 9

you want to be in Artillery.

Can you pick up two 98 pound shell and carry them 50 yards to the gun next to yours?

or can you pick up a 250 pound spade?



probably not. that is why you cant be in artillery

Answer 10

Rape, sexual harassment, distractions caused by romantic/sexual relationships, pregnancies... I mean, all of this is illegal, but even then, there's the law, and then there's the way in which the law is carried out.



Just offering my perspective here. Not saying that the military is full of horny self-gratifying people with little regards to the rules and would break them if they could get away with it... but I'm not saying there aren't any of these people either, nor am I saying that these people are particularly rare.

Answer 11

Because once every 28 days they would just start blowing stuff up.

Answer 12

Womans are too WEAK!!! Must be Macho!!!!!!! Musttttttt likee pain!!!!!!!!!