Some women have fought in combat situations in Afghanistan and Iraq for several years, and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta overturned the ban restricting women from combat positions, and Ball State ROTC members have mixed reactions.
The military will offer all combat positions to females for the first time since 1994, and will have to come up with a plan by May so it can be implemented by January 2016. The ban would open up hundreds of thousands of front-line positions and also elite commando jobs, according to the Associated Press.
Some female Ball State ROTC members, such as Public Affairs Officer Britny Burton, don’t agree with the removal.
“I just don’t think that it’s something that’s going to help the military moving forward,” the senior anthropology and journalism major said.
Burton talked about physical disadvantages women might have and how they might change the dynamic of a group in a combat situation.
“I mean, you don’t want to be down there, fighting for your life and not be able to depend on someone beside you because you know that they can’t carry you,” Burton said. “If something happens and you go down, you want to know that they can carry you by themselves.”
Autumn Tolliver, a graduate student in biology and former battalion leader of Ball State’s ROTC, thinks lifting the ban is an improvement.
“I think it’s a good thing for the females who feel like they are as compatible as the males,” she said. “For the ones who think they are equal, it gives them obviously equal opportunity.”
Tolliver said she might go to Ranger School and train to be on the Female Engagement Team, or FET, which works with females in combat zones.
While FET wasn’t restricted by the ban, Tolliver said she might be interested in combat positions.
“Chances are that I would probably try something that I haven’t been able to do just to be able to have that opportunity through Ranger School,” Tolliver said.
Wesley Jones, a junior sociology major who has been in Army ROTC for three years, served in Iraq for two and a half years. He worked with female military police officers and felt their performance was satisfactory.
“I try to look at people as individuals, so in this case, I’m fine with [lifting the ban] if the standard for being in those roles isn’t diminished or altered to make it easier for certain people,” Jones said. “The Army is an elite fighting force, and we should try to keep our standards.”
Paul Sciutto, a junior chemistry major in his third year with ROTC, agreed that the standards shouldn’t change, but felt women are capable and ready for the job.
“I think a lot of the women [in the military] are going to be extremely happy, because personally I know a lot of them that would like to have a combat job,” Sciutto said. “As for the men, I feel some are going to be for it, but I think most are going to be against women going into combat.”
Jones agreed that women might be subject to some discrimination at first, but the end result will work out.
“It’s going to be a rough transition, that’s for sure. But like everything else, you get used to it,” he said.
Discrimination isn’t the only problem that females might face.
“I think another bad part with it is sexual assaults in the military are pretty rampant,” Jones said. “I don’t know with combat outposts being out in the middle of nowhere if that could be worsened.”
Sciutto agreed that there is a problem, but said the military takes matters, such as sexual assault, seriously and investigates those cases accordingly
All problems aside, Jones thinks the ban will promote equality in the military.
“As long as they meet the standards to accomplish the mission,” he said, “who am I to say that they shouldn’t be able to join?”
