XPost: alt.transgendered, or.politics, talk.politics.guns
XPost: sac.politics
From: flwp@in.valid
On Wed, 4 Feb 2026 19:25:26 -0000 (UTC)
Webbster wrote:
> > Male warrior, female warrior. Warrior is not a gender.
>
> Absolutely it is. Even today, women regardless of physical ability
> are not allowed on the front lines in battle.
Ding!
Wrongo, you senile dumb fuck.
AI Overview
It's been 10 years since women were allowed to serve in ...
Yes, women are allowed in combat roles in the U.S. military. As of January
2016, all military occupations and positions, including direct ground combat
units, were opened to women who meet the gender-neutral standards. Thousands
of women currently serve
in these positions, including in infantry, armor, artillery, and special
operations.
Key Details on Women in Combat Roles:
Policy Change: Then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter officially opened all100% of
military positions to women in 2016, removing the restriction on the remaining
~220,000 jobs previously closed to them.
Performance Standards: It is against the law to lower standards for women in
combat roles; all requirements remain gender-neutral.
Ongoing Integration: While fully integrated, some branches, particularly the
Marine Corps, initially pushed back on the integration of training, but have
since moved to mixed-gender battalions.
Current Status: As of early 2026, about 4,500 women serve in ground combat
positions within the Army and Marine Corps, with a small number in special
forces.
Recent Discussions: Despite their decade-long integration, there are ongoing,
periodic reviews of the effectiveness of women in these roles, as noted in
reports from early 2026.
Women have served in roles that exposed them to combat, such as medics
and military police, for decades prior to the 2016 policy, with the
2013-2016 changes formalizing their eligibility for direct combat
roles.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
