Eternity RPC Board
03-13-2017, 03:20 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-13-2017, 08:40 PM by Seperallis.)
Nyland Daily News
Department of Defense lifts ban on women in combat
By M. M. Goode
Published: 9 Tolven, 1582
![[Image: womencombat.jpg]](http://www.motherjones.com/files/womencombat.jpg)
Women participating in Army training exercises...notably, alongside men.
HESTIVIKEN - Following Pentagon hearings over the matter for the past couple weeks, the Department of Defense approved a measure lifting restrictions on women entering combat-specific roles in all branches of Nyland's military. The change in regulations marks the first time in history where men and women will be expected to serve in a fully equal capacity across all branches and all work disciplines. DoD Secretary Olof Sverkerson (Army Gen., Retired) affirmed that the changes would not in any way change current testing and training standards.
While indeed historic, most of the arguments for the removal of the ban came not from work equality advocates, but pay equality arguments. While serving in the military is certainly nothing new, gender restrictions prevented women from seeking specific training or assignment into combat-specific roles, though women still saw action in many logistical or medical roles, as evidenced in the Tambossa Conflict. However, while women undoubtedly performed their work in dangerous and hostile environments, they were still denied either combat and hazard pay, due to their "not being allowed in combat."
Major Anette Cedar was one of the women leading the fight for practicably equality in military service. Now serving as a surgeon trainer for the army, she once served as a combat medic during the conflict in Tambossa; then Captain Cedar was awarded the Silver Star for "distinguished heroism" in her duties, but it never "sat right" with her. Speaking on the record during the hearing, she mentioned that, "It always felt like some great irony, receiving that [medal]. Here I was being recognized for 'gallantry in combat,' while at the same time being told I couldn't be compensated because I wasn't actually in combat because women can't be in combat? It was incredibly demoralizing."
Now, however, men and women will be allowed to serve together on the field of battle in equal measure, and, maybe more importantly to some, be compensated for their actions equally, as well.
While celebrated by many, the measure is not without its criticism. While few argued against women receiving due hazard pay for duties that put them in the path of danger, some such as Maj. General Oscar Varela on the hearing board expressed concerns as to the effects on unit morale and viability of women serving in mixed-gender combat units. Many questions still remain unanswered as to the psychological effects of wounded women on male counterparts, as well as how fully aptly a woman's body can perform under the strains of high-activity scenarios. Still others questioned whether the nature of combat, especially against modern insurgent enemies, might present women with excessive and "unique" dangers.
"You do not need to lecture women about these dangers," commented Major Cedar at the hearing. "These might be hypothetical to you, but they are real daily dangers we face every day, and the current regulations do not do anything to make it any less a possibility; women are already in combat and already faced with these dangers, and trust me when I say that any woman in the service today has already considered the possibilities before enlisting, or accepting a commission."
As far as mixed-gender units are concerned, the Department of Defense has not gone so far as to force integration of units until further studies on their effects on combat effectiveness can be determined. "The military is not the place for social experiments," a statement read, "and while women in combat is a proven valuable asset, the safety of our troops and the integrity of our missions are paramount."
For their part, servicemen in currently all-male combat units have presented mixed feelings on the subject. However, most have voices a kind of acquiescing indifference; as one sergeant aptly put it, "I don't care if you're a man, woman, or three-toed-sloth, as long as you can pass your training and pull your weight." The Department of Defense seems to agree, as the new regulations on women in combat are set to be in place and enforcible starting at the beginning of 1583.
Department of Defense lifts ban on women in combat
By M. M. Goode
Published: 9 Tolven, 1582
Women participating in Army training exercises...notably, alongside men.
HESTIVIKEN - Following Pentagon hearings over the matter for the past couple weeks, the Department of Defense approved a measure lifting restrictions on women entering combat-specific roles in all branches of Nyland's military. The change in regulations marks the first time in history where men and women will be expected to serve in a fully equal capacity across all branches and all work disciplines. DoD Secretary Olof Sverkerson (Army Gen., Retired) affirmed that the changes would not in any way change current testing and training standards.
While indeed historic, most of the arguments for the removal of the ban came not from work equality advocates, but pay equality arguments. While serving in the military is certainly nothing new, gender restrictions prevented women from seeking specific training or assignment into combat-specific roles, though women still saw action in many logistical or medical roles, as evidenced in the Tambossa Conflict. However, while women undoubtedly performed their work in dangerous and hostile environments, they were still denied either combat and hazard pay, due to their "not being allowed in combat."
Major Anette Cedar was one of the women leading the fight for practicably equality in military service. Now serving as a surgeon trainer for the army, she once served as a combat medic during the conflict in Tambossa; then Captain Cedar was awarded the Silver Star for "distinguished heroism" in her duties, but it never "sat right" with her. Speaking on the record during the hearing, she mentioned that, "It always felt like some great irony, receiving that [medal]. Here I was being recognized for 'gallantry in combat,' while at the same time being told I couldn't be compensated because I wasn't actually in combat because women can't be in combat? It was incredibly demoralizing."
Now, however, men and women will be allowed to serve together on the field of battle in equal measure, and, maybe more importantly to some, be compensated for their actions equally, as well.
While celebrated by many, the measure is not without its criticism. While few argued against women receiving due hazard pay for duties that put them in the path of danger, some such as Maj. General Oscar Varela on the hearing board expressed concerns as to the effects on unit morale and viability of women serving in mixed-gender combat units. Many questions still remain unanswered as to the psychological effects of wounded women on male counterparts, as well as how fully aptly a woman's body can perform under the strains of high-activity scenarios. Still others questioned whether the nature of combat, especially against modern insurgent enemies, might present women with excessive and "unique" dangers.
"You do not need to lecture women about these dangers," commented Major Cedar at the hearing. "These might be hypothetical to you, but they are real daily dangers we face every day, and the current regulations do not do anything to make it any less a possibility; women are already in combat and already faced with these dangers, and trust me when I say that any woman in the service today has already considered the possibilities before enlisting, or accepting a commission."
As far as mixed-gender units are concerned, the Department of Defense has not gone so far as to force integration of units until further studies on their effects on combat effectiveness can be determined. "The military is not the place for social experiments," a statement read, "and while women in combat is a proven valuable asset, the safety of our troops and the integrity of our missions are paramount."
For their part, servicemen in currently all-male combat units have presented mixed feelings on the subject. However, most have voices a kind of acquiescing indifference; as one sergeant aptly put it, "I don't care if you're a man, woman, or three-toed-sloth, as long as you can pass your training and pull your weight." The Department of Defense seems to agree, as the new regulations on women in combat are set to be in place and enforcible starting at the beginning of 1583.