Replies

I doubt they care. The time to reverse it was a) before it ever happened (not that Obama's a-hole SecDef gave a damn about the studies from the services screaming BAD IDEA), or b) Mattis's day one in office. I don't see a reason why Mattis and company would suddenly reverse course at this arbitrary date.

Services recommended that combat arms should stay all male, ignored. Services recommended that if girls are going to serve in combat arms, they ought to be subject to Selective Service as well. Congress hemmed, hawed, grandstanded, and ignored. Now the Army has 500 girls in combat arms last I saw, and the Marine Corps something less than that.

I was given a tour of the USCG cutter Seneca last year...I would estimate that close to half the crew was female. I saw an article in Stars and Stripes or one of the service magazines earlier this year (shortly before the Corps removed pass/fail from the Infantry Officer Course IIRC) titled "where are all the female marines?" complaining that there are no girls in recon, snipers, and some other specialized Marine combat roles. Quotas are needed, the article said, to make it "fair". They want combat arms to look like what I saw on the Seneca, and they'll get it. Girls can't throw grenades? simple, remove grenades from Army Basic! Ain't it grand.