[residentEvil]

First female four-star U.S. Army general nominated - CNN.com

that's a man, man!

a 4 star general of the supply arm. not sure what to say. is she the only qualified person or since she can't be in combat they decided the supply path was where they would make things "PC"? seems the navy has been more women friendly with several lieutenant generals or vice admirals.

[mduell]

"only qualified person"? Why do you suspect she isn't the most qualified person?

[ballison]

wow way to be incredibly sexist

[residentEvil]

Originally Posted by ballison 

wow way to be incredibly sexist

sexist? the army is sexist. it has taken this long and all they could do was promote her inside the supply arm of the branch?

as i said, the navy has been more proactive with their promotion of females.

[subego]

Originally Posted by mduell 

"only qualified person"? Why do you suspect she isn't the most qualified person?

The same mechanism that made it take until the 21st century for a woman to reach that position: sexism in the military.

She's severely outnumbered, and the system has thrown-up barriers to her progress all along that haven't been there for the group that outnumbers her. I mean, a 4-star postition wasn't even a recognized career path until now.

It seems to me that playing the odds, there is a strong likelihood there is someone more qualified than her that got passed up.


That being said, I have no doubt she is qualified, and whatever we "suffer" for not having this position be filled on strict meritocratic criteria is a drop in the ocean compared to what we're suffering for the sexist lack of meritocracy throughout the rest of the institution.

Edit: scooped by rE on my main point.

[Chuckit]

So because she had to perform at a higher level than any of her competition just to be recognized and still had the deck stacked against her, you think she got the position even though there was somebody more qualified? I'm not sure I follow.

BTW, it says she was in charge of logistics, so it's not like she's just sitting around taking inventory in a warehouse. That is a pretty important aspect of warfare.

[residentEvil]

what i was getting at was; since women can't be in combat; was she (or other women) being led down that branch so the army could say we have a woman in a high ranking office? it seems other military branches have removed the sexism part (or maybe more publicaly) but the army is still lagging. being in the army that long, i'm sure she is more than qualified for a more combat oriented position. wasn't saying supply/logistics isn't important. i'm saying she is more than qualified.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by residentEvil 

sexist? the army is sexist. it has taken this long and all they could do was promote her inside the supply arm of the branch?

Perhaps that's her area of expertise? Significant points in her military career seem to have been in logistics.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by residentEvil 

as i said, the navy has been more proactive with their promotion of females.

Sorry, but you have no f***g idea what you are talking about.

My wife worked in both services (Army and Navy), enlisted and as an officer.
Let me tell you: the Navy is by far more sexist and racist than the Army.
Trust me, my wife is collecting good money from what the Navy has done to her.

-t

[residentEvil]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Sorry, but you have no f***g idea what you are talking about.

My wife worked in both services (Army and Navy), enlisted and as an officer.
Let me tell you: the Navy is by far more sexist and racist than the Army.
Trust me, my wife is collecting good money from what the Navy has done to her.

-t

thanks for your input

[subego]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

So because she had to perform at a higher level than any of her competition just to be recognized and still had the deck stacked against her, you think she got the position even though there was somebody more qualified? I'm not sure I follow.

You make it seem like she's sooo good that she forced the Army to see the error of its ways. Plausibly, how much better is she going to be than her competition at these rarified levels of skill and experience?

She's not the first because she's the best there ever was. She's the first by virtue of being around at the time and place when the integrationist faction of the Army built up enough power to make a play.

It's a political decision. Her performance versus her competition means less than the timing, therefore I assess it as probable someone among her extremely qualified competition is slightly more qualified. This is especially the case when you consider her (likely equally ambitious) competition has never had to "waste" time overcoming sexist barriers. Note that by "waste" I mean effort expended that does not directly translate into a job qualification, this is obviously not a waste when gauged by a different metric.

[dcmacdaddy]

Wasn't it Napoleon that said "an army travels on its stomach"? (e.g.: can only move when soldiers have full bellies?) I think a 4-star command for logistics operations is probably appropriate considering what it takes to make a military force actually work (keeping soldiers clothed, fed, and housed).

While I don't think logistics or materiel operations is as glamorous as artillery or infantry or airborne, you can be damned sure those others troops are glad the logistics folks are there to provide them with their shells, boots, and parachutes when they have to do their job.

[placebo1969]

Don't ask, don't tell.™

[subego]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Wasn't it Napoleon that said "an army travels on its stomach"?

A sentiment also expressed with the adage that "armchair generals discuss tactics, real generals discuss logistics".

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by residentEvil 

what i was getting at was; since women can't be in combat; was she (or other women) being led down that branch so the army could say we have a woman in a high ranking office? it seems other military branches have removed the sexism part (or maybe more publicaly) but the army is still lagging. being in the army that long, i'm sure she is more than qualified for a more combat oriented position. wasn't saying supply/logistics isn't important. i'm saying she is more than qualified.

You seem to be making and then missing your own point. Women can't serve in combat positions, so of course they are being "led" (by virtue of default) into non-combat positions. By definition, and the Army's historical selection criteria (combat experience) she is not qualified for a more "combat-oriented" command, because she doesn't have any combat experience (I'm assuming from reading the article -- I may be incorrect). It's as if you were complaining that in some corporation, the head of manufacturing didn't get tapped to run IT.

It's also worth pointing out that, by law, the Army can have no more than 12 four-star generals at any given time. It's a pretty big deal, so I don't think there is a need to feel outraged on her behalf.

[Monique]

Soon women will be in combat.

Anyway, when you are getting shot by the enemy you are not thinking about sex; I hope you do not.

[ghporter]

General Dunwoody was selected because she was the very best person for the job. Getting to be a Brigadier General was a major hurdle for her, since the deck is stacked toward "warfighter experience" in even getting to colonel. Getting her second and third star was similarly herculean; competing for a VERY few flag promotions against men whose records include significant combat command experience made her struggle very, very challenging.

As it turns out, Gen. Dunwoody's experience in her "not allowed into combat" jobs perfectly positioned her for that fourth star. She is THE person for the job because of the way the Army has shuttled her around in her previous postings, not because of some (absolutely impossible) "integrationist faction" in the Army. That sort of thing is far less likely than the sun rising in the West tomorrow morning.

The United States Army should be the second definition of the term "hidebound", right after the Roman Catholic Church. The Army would not accept airpower until it was forced to. The Army steadfastly propagated and enforced segregation until ordered to change by the president—and had a number of high-ranking commanders dismissed through the transition to integration because they refused to agree that the president was their boss, not Army "tradition." No, the Army HAD to do this, not because they were buckling to pressure, but because they had painted themselves into a corner. And Gen Dunwoody is going to prove to be an exceptional four-star officer because of what the Army has already put her through. They have engineered their own reversal, accidentally and perfectly. Just like always.

[subego]

Edit: this post was once a joke with a lame payoff.

[7TH SFG]

Take a look at her assignments – she has had her ticket punched at every level. How many women in service did not get the promotion they earned just because they were women.In no way am I advocating women in the Combat Arms MOS'S but in a COIN war in Iraq there are women riding convoy escort, pulling guard duty, being put in dangerous situation, coming under fire, firing back, helping wounded comrades, etc. Since the invasion of Iraq, women have been taken prisoner, killed in action, and decorated for valor. Sgt. Leigh Ann Hester and Spc. Monica Lin Brown are brave soldiers that deserve their Silver Stars.

I remember in the day when a female 0-7 BG was commander of the WAC's. At the time that was the epitome of woman to have and hold such power. Things have sure changed over the years and I feel we are all better for it..Women have traditionally been kept out of those ranks due to not having the prerequisite combat arms experience. That has been one of the key factors in women not holding these key 4-star billets. I'm glad to see that the mindset is changing.Being that only eleven Army 4 star's are allowed on active duty at one time, I am sure she will be noticed and will definitely leave her mark.