Recent discussions within military policy circles have revived longstanding arguments about whether women should continue to serve in direct combat roles. Some viewpoints circulating in these debates claim that opening combat specialties to women has not improved military effectiveness and suggest restricting women from certain positions. Because these ideas have significant implications for women currently serving, they warrant close examination.

As long as there has been a military in the United States, women have been there. However, for most of that time, women in the US military were not allowed to serve in direct combat roles, specifically artillery, cavalry, infantry, and armor units. This changed in 2016 when that ban was finally repealed.

Prior to that, over 200K jobs were closed off to female military members, roles that were considered requirements to reach the most senior roles such as Chief of Staff of the Army or Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps. Revoking the progress made in having women in combat roles would push approximately 4,000 women out of their current roles. Those numbers include 10 Green Berets and 51 Army Rangers, some of the most elite forces in the world.

Removing women from direct combat roles won’t remove them from combat. As evidenced by the war on terror, there are no clearly defined front lines in combat anymore.

Three hundred thousand women are com-bat veterans of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. Many of them served on Female Engagement Teams (FET), teams of female service members who engaged with local women and children – positions prohibited to males for cultural reasons.

The FETs have been credited with gaining significant intelligence and developing im-portant rapport with local women and children in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Women are an ever-growing segment of the American military, making up about 20% today, and growing steadily.

In academics and fitness, two of the main areas the military looks at when evaluating potential recruits, women continue to outperform men and are expected to continue to grow as a percentage of the military as a result.

Current efforts to restrict women’s access to combat roles place these advancements— and the operation-al benefits they pro-vide — at risk.

Yet, despite now be-ing publicly treated as second–class citiens by one of the nation’s highest com-manding officers, women in the military will continue to do what they have always done: great things that let their actions speak for themselves.

For information on this club, please email militarywomen@nfbpwc.org.

Nicole Callender-Sedon
Chair Military-Affiliated Women