Bikerbernie's Weblog weblog Acting Locally Affecting the World Globally a Little at a Time!

Moms Should Not Serve in Combat

I cannot believe my eyes. In the MSNBC poll people voted 44.3% soldier moms should not serve in combat, 52% yes they should, and 3.7% are not sure out of 31,258 votes on 03/01/2009 16:39 hours. What is there not to be sure about? Collect a paycheck, DO YOUR WORK.

What in the hell is the difference between soldier moms and dads? Apparently this is another female privilege. Collect my money from my taxes and not have to do what you were trained to do. This is a fine example of women who get paid the same as men but do not have to take the same risks to get it. In essence they are receiving more pay than the men in the same situation. Can you say sexist?

This clearly shows that our society does not value men’s lives as much as women’s. How can we have equal rights and protection under the law when this type of disparity exists? This is why equal pay for equal work is a farce. These women are clearly not doing the same work, plain and simple. There is no question; women in this circumstance deserve less that what these men are making.


13 Responses to “Moms Should Not Serve in Combat”

  1. I’ve got a few thoughts about women in the military, but based on my experience, there are a wide range of capabilities, competancies, and movivations.

    My suggestion would be to have combat pay raised, and limit the number of people we pay combat pay to. Either that, or set up a tier system – one level for being deployed overseas in a non-combat unit or skill set, and another for being deployed in a combat unit with combat arms skill set (MOS).

    My other suggestion would be to do away with all of the “outs” for women. If your unit is coming up for deployment, and you “oops, get pregnant”, it should cost you for your unit to replace you. You’re not deployable, which is the whole reason for the military to have you. It’s a “Be equal to the pay you demand”. Same thing with claiming “I think I might be pregnant” when the unit goes to the Gas Chamber (Chemical warfare training), or goes out in the field for exercises.

    No more alternate tier for women and physical fitness. We’re talking about pushups, situps and running, here, not weightlifting.

    I think if we take the ‘gender discount’ out of the military, those men and women who embrace the job will rise to the occaision, and those who won’t, will wash out or find another way to make a living. Those that remain have made the mental calculus, determined that the risk is worth the reward. and have demonstrated to their peers that they’re worthy of the assignment and their rank.

  2. OD,

    Well said and well done.


  3. You don’t need the apostrophe in “Mom’s.”

  4. Debra,

    I knew that, damn auto spell correct, thanks. I swear the spell check is more trouble than it is worth. LOL


  5. anamerican,

    How about the fact that women already have SUPERIOR treatment? Over 20% of the armed forces are made of women BUT women are only 2.32% of the deaths in Iraq. It seems to me that this indicates a special protection that men are not receiving. It also indicates that they are not as close to the front lines as stated and or are in more “secure” areas of the front.

    This I am sure contributes to why PTSS is not treated in the same way as it is for male soldiers. I am sure that those in less protected areas of the front receive preferential and priority treatment. Simple, really.


  6. You left a comment on my blog, American Samizdat at, with a link directing me here, so I thought I would respond in detail.

    Before we go any further, please tell me your background regarding this issue: I find it extremely helpful to know where people are coming from.

    I am a former Army Reserve officer who received a research grant to travel to Iraq and Afghanistan, accredited by the Seattle P-I, where I was embedded with combat troops and provincial reconstruction teams. I have been published in everything from the Marine Corps Gazette and the Proceedings of the US Naval Institute to the Seattle Weekly. I would also add here, I spent many years as a Marine Corps wife and my second husband is a former Marine. My work on US Servicewomen was published as Women in the Line of Fire (Seal Press, 2006) and my speech at West Point, “The Woman Soldier: Biology, Equality, and the Profession of Arms” as a summary of the project, while “Into Time: Women and the Profession of Arms” as a capstone. Both are available on my blog under “Articles and Speeches.”

    Semper Fi and lookign forward to hearing from you,

    Erin Solaro

  7. The fact is is that females are not allowed to fight in combat, or become SEALS. In many services they cannot even train for special ops. Special Ops usually get a very high signing bonus, considering that it is a very dangerous job. SO, in a way they do get more pay for combat training

  8. Serena,

    That is a weak argument at best. With your thinking then women get more pay for less qualifications or “duties’ if you will. Men cannot get a federal job without a selective service card, get a student loan, get a state job (in many cases a county and local government jobs), in some states a drivers license (the list includes a myriad of other things also but hopefully this is enough for you to understand my point), they can however be jailed, their right to vote, and bear arms can be taken away. I believe women have the better deal here.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: