Private First Class Jessica L. Nicholson and "Camille" (U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Conrad College)
"Gawd I love this woman," writes Whomping Willow (Where have you been, girl? We've missed you!) re Private First Class Jessica L. Nicholson "and her beloved SAW she named 'Camille'":
She made a poor grenade-toting Jihadi cry at a security checkpoint in Baghdad. Wretched little Jihadis. Even we girls can make them cry.
It's an interesting story to read, because it touches on an issue I've been wondering about ever since I was in the Army: Women in Combat. S'pose I'll just break out this can of worms right now.
"I'm still not sure how I feel about this. I've been inclined to say women have no place in combat," continues Willow, "and mostly this is because the issue has been highjacked by gender feminists who wish to use military operations as a platform for their 'equalization' social agenda":
But then along comes PFC Nicholson, a former cheerleader who used to wrassle with the boys (and probably gave 'em hell) back home in Idaho.
I completely get her, and if I were still in the Army, I'd want to be like her.
So I guess I'll just continue to feel ambivalent about this.
Gawd, we love this Willow woman.
Awww, THANKS! It's not easy for someone as whompy as I am to feel ambivanlent about something; which way do I whomp? This way? That way?
Anyway, thanks for the props, girl. I still read your blog everyday, even though I only show up sporadically on mine...
Posted by: willow | July 01, 2004 at 10:50 AM
Ambivanlent, ambivalent
Not sure how I feel about that anyway...
Posted by: willow | July 01, 2004 at 10:57 AM
Girls like Jessica make me proud. I wanna be just like her when I grow up!
Posted by: Deborah | July 01, 2004 at 06:17 PM
Me too. :)
Posted by: Sissy Willis | July 01, 2004 at 06:48 PM
Thanks for the support ,you wouldn't believe the shit I've had to put up with from the guys in my unit because of all of this. they're just (for lack of better words) haters. Thanks again.
Posted by: jessica nicholson | January 20, 2005 at 12:05 AM
Is that really you, Jessica? How awesome. So glad you stopped by. Keep on keepin' on.
Posted by: Sissy Willis | January 20, 2005 at 04:57 AM
I have no problems with females in "combat" like Pfc. Nicholson here, wherein she was basically acting in the role of a very heavily armed cop (I love the SAW - I used to carry one). The problem is with assigning females to the traditional "combat arms" (infantry, armor and artillery). Actually, the problem is really more with the infantry (or at least that's been my experience). To put it bluntly, 97% of females simply cannot physically do all the things that an infantryman is expected to do, and most of the rest don't want to. Sure Jessica can use her SAW at a checkpoint etc - but can she hump it and another 45+ pounds of gear through the boonies for 25 klicks, and then be ready to fight upon arrival? It's pretty doubtful - I mean, she's 5' 6" and 120 lbs - she'd be carrying more than half her own weight (assuming a SAW with ammo box is about 20 lb). Unfortunately all ammo weighs the same (as do helmets, grenades, shovels etc) - they are not adjusted proportionately to the size or sex of the soldier. If you admit females to the infantry, you are faced with two choices:
1) keep the physical standards the same, in which case only a vanishingly small number will make it in and very few of those will last. This sounds OK, except for the expense and disruption involved in accomadating a few tokens. Of course, as soon as most women fail out, the feminists and their ilk will start to wail about unrelistic standards and functional discrimination. Then there'll be lawsuits, which will lead to...
(2) The innevitable lowering of standards - sure, great in peacetime, except you'll have a less effective army, resulting in higher casulties and more failed missions - a small price to pay for diversity. And the questions remains - do you lower standards for all infantiers, or just the females? If you lower them for all, you get an even more suck army - if you lower them for just the females, you get resentment of the freeloaders who don't pull their own weight. Tough choice.
Anyway, the purpose of this rant was to add a little color to the debate, and to make the point that it's not about "combat" it's about "combat arms". Female MPs have been shot at and shot bad guys since at least the Panama invasion - this was technically combat, with all the associated dangers. These women like Pfc. Nicholson are to be commended and admired - I have no doubt that their courage and detirmination is at least equal to that of their male colleagues. I have no doubt that female MPs, engineers and others will continue to serve bravely, and continue to kill and be killed in Iraq and elsewhere. None of this, however, changes the fact that women are still unsuited to be infantiers.
Posted by: holdfast | April 07, 2005 at 06:27 PM
actually I was unarmed at that check point, for safty reasons, and yes i can hump 45 lbs for 16 miles thank you very much....i grew up in a tough city with nothing but men and strong female role modles.. I've allways been told I can do anything I put my mind to, despite gender... I'm currently out of the army.. going to school for Harley mechanics and work as a head diesel tech....jessica nicholson
[email protected]
Posted by: jessica nicholson | September 14, 2005 at 07:19 PM