Well girls you got what you wanted...

[Minimalist]

For women in the military the term "watch your ass" has a whole different meaning...which was Shel's point.

[popeyespappy]

To be honest, if the women in question wants to go into the military, I say let her. Just make sure she knows the risks.

Being raped by fellow soldiers shouldn't one of the risks of joining the military.

While this is very true as far as I know women in the US military don't experience a higher risk of being raped than those who aren't. With the possible exception of POWs. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that first point. The problem with rape in the US military isn't increased risk of rape. It is the way upper echelons deal with it. Or refuse to deal with it depending on your perspective.

[Shell B]

If I remember correctly, and I know there are sources to back it up, particularly "The Invisible War," roughly 20% of women and 1% of men in the military have been victims of rape in the military while the instances among civilians lingers around 5%. The DoD is well aware of it and even reports on it. Thankfully, a recent measure was taken to remove investigation from commanding officers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statis...ted_States

[Autumnlicious]

I see this as a wonderful thing.

With regards to the "rape epidemic", having more women in the military will allow for more chances for these incidents to be reported, more chances for friendly fire investigations to take place, etc,.

For the longest time, having women in the side lines of the US Military means that they are "special cases" that can be ignored.

Now they cannot in ever increasing volumes.

To stop the so-called epidemic of rape, light must be shed upon it. More eyes means more light.

Or would naysayers here like Shell prefer that the issue be passively solved in a top-down manner that has be "attempted" for years to no success?

One way to change this is to shock the system. Women in combat roles and more women in the military might just be the shock that is needed to change the cultural make up, either peacefully or violently.

[Psykhronic]

A few friendly fire incidents might go a long way in dealing with this problem...

Well, the problem is not currently being dealt with, so it can only get worse or simply not get better.

Seriously though, other militaries have women in combat arms. Apparently they are dealing with this problem. Besides, I'm pretty sure women were going without showers their entire lives for most of the last couple hundred thousand years. Apparently it is doable.

To be fair, "entire lives" was a lot less a while back and hygiene did not matter. Today, in the military, it does. A women with a urinary tract infection or toxic shock syndrome because she had to keep her tampon in too long isn't going to be too helpful. Also, it is a complete myth that birth control completely stops your period. I have never met a woman on birth control who had no period to speak of. You might argue that the physical exertion would make her period stop, but that typically only happens in boot camp.

I'm not saying it is bad to have women in combat. I'm saying, our military is not ready for it. That says more about our military than our women.

Some women do have their periods stop, either on a hormonal IUD or they take a birth control pill every day or a shot or whatever, it just doesnt work on EVERY woman. There are more women than who you have met. However, periods are a legit problem, but like others have said, apparently they have been managing it.

Menstrual cups can be used instead of tampons, although you may want more research performed on them-- which is valid.

And yes, rape in the military needs to be addressed. The higher ups do need to actually DO something about incidents. There needs to be more than just that, however I am not sure what else.

[Something completely different]

Sounds nice.

There never was any prohebition on what jobs a woman could have in our army, they simply wont join in.

[Violet]

As someone who appreciates equality, I still find this to be a terrible idea in the United States military. Until they deal with the epidemic rape problem they have, women should be very wary of joining up in any combat capacity. Also, how the fuck are they going to deal with their periods in the field? Men can go without showers for fucking ages. Women can't. Apart from that, I say have fun.

Rape's a valid concern.

How are they going to deal with periods? Like bosses.

Why do they *need* to shower? Being smelly really doesn't matter when you're doing dirty work. (Imma fisherman)

[TaraJo]

I think this is a good thing overall, but, Shell has some legitimate concerns. Thing is, it's a difficult situation to resolve. Military culture is really a macho guy's club, where toughness and strength is the highest priority. The fastest way to change all that is for more women to get into the military, especially combat roles. But women don't want to do that because of the threat of rape. It kinda turns into a paradox from there.

[Autumnlicious]

After a while, I feel that others "concerns" are merely code words for "I do not support this because <insert a circular logic problem>"

Fact: Rape is a problem in the military.

Fact: Rape is underreported, for both men and women demographics.

Fact: Cultures that embrace rape, regardless of sex, are reinforced by being populated by similarly minded rape supporters.

Resolution: Change the culture by insisting that non-similarly-minded people are injected into that society in mass droves.

Result:
Many nasty crimes, many heinous incidences.

Eventually enough investigations, disciplines, punishments are done to bring down the problem to a signficant level.

Might I remind others here that Blacks in the Military suffered tremendous crimes done to them during the processes of integration?

[Shell B]

With regards to the "rape epidemic", having more women in the military will allow for more chances for these incidents to be reported, more chances for friendly fire investigations to take place, etc,.

Oh, good idea. More victims does mean more reports. Brilliant! /sarcasm

In reality, I doubt this will mean more women in the military. It means more women in a different position, one which is far more subject long periods of time without supervision of COs. How would these lead to more investigations of friendly fire?

To stop the so-called epidemic of rape, light must be shed upon it. More eyes means more light.

Ah, yes. Making it less legitimate by calling it "so-called" is ever so helpful.

Or would naysayers here like Shell prefer that the issue be passively solved in a top-down manner that has be "attempted" for years to no success?

Moros, you are being terribly condescending. I am not a naysayer. I am a proponent for reform that would make this a safer transition. Really, don't assume that I am a proponent for certain measures that are already not working when I said no such thing. In fact, I have stated the opposite. I already said that I am happy with a new change that takes the investigation away from the immediate commanding officers, making it less likely to be a buddies help buddies kind of system. Putting it all in quotes to make it seem like less of a problem and acting like having more victims to talk about it is going to help is ludicrous.

I am a woman, for fuck's sake. I want to have all the opportunities I can possible have. However, I think it is irresponsible of the military to make superficial changes without working on making the military environment safer for woman. Combat is dangerous enough without having to worry about violent rape or would "quoters" like Syn prefer we just let them all get raped so they can protest louder? (Note: Most of that was purposely hyperbolic. I find it difficult to respond to condescension seriously.) Fuck if I try to raise legitimate points in the midst of people so desperate to be extremist that they forget about reality. Just because the military isn't succeeding at a problem doesn't mean that it is not possible or that making it worse is going to help.