Pentagon will begin review of 'effectiveness' of women in ground combat positions

[AZProgressive]

Source: NPR

January 6, 2026 5:00 AM ET
Tom Bowman

The Pentagon is mounting a six-month review of women in ground combat jobs, to ensure what it calls the military "effectiveness" of having several thousand female soldiers and Marines in infantry, armor and artillery, according to a memo obtained by NPR.

Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel Anthony Tata wrote in a memo last month that the effort is to determine the "operational effectiveness of ground combat units 10 years after the Department lifted all remaining restrictions on women serving in combat roles."

Tata requested Army and Marine leaders to provide data on the readiness, training, performance, casualties and command climate of ground combat units and personnel. The services are to provide points of contact no later than January 15th to the Institute for Defense Analyses, a non-profit corporation that assists the government on national security issues. The memo says the data should include "all available metrics describing that individual's readiness and ability to deploy (including physical, medical, and other measures of ability to deploy.)"

Moreover, the seven-page memo calls for any internal research and studies — not publicly available — on "the integration of women in combat."

Read more: https://www.npr.org/2026/01/06/nx-s1-5667583/pentagon-review-women-in-ground-combat-roles

[bucolic_frolic]

1. Molly Pitcher is waiting /nt

[Rhiannon12866]

2. Hegseth Under Fire for Saying 'Women Don't Belong in Combat - Liberal Lens 8/4/2025

Senator Elizabeth Warren didn’t hold back during Defense Secretary nominee Pete Hegseth’s confirmation hearing. In a powerful and tense exchange, Warren confronted Hegseth with a 12-year trail of on-the-record comments—many of them recent—where he repeatedly claimed that women don’t belong in combat roles. From Fox News to his own book and podcast appearances, Hegseth consistently argued that allowing women in combat would “erode standards.” But just 32 days after declaring “women absolutely should not be permitted to serve in combat,” Hegseth suddenly reversed his position following his nomination by Donald Trump.

Warren pressed for answers: What happened in those 32 days? Was it a true change of heart—or a political maneuver? And why, if he so strongly believed in banning generals from entering the defense industry post-service, was he unwilling to make the same commitment for himself?

This hearing raises critical questions about integrity, accountability, and whether someone who’s dismissed the service of women for over a decade is fit to lead the entire U.S. military. Viewers will see the full exchange and hear commentary that breaks down what’s really at stake—not just for women in uniform, but for the future of military leadership.

[OldBaldy1701E]

5. Well, neither do you, Kegseth!

I know damned well I would not want to be in a combat situation with your drunk, pansy ass! You be running after the first 'pop' sound you heard!

[electric_blue68]

18. TY, Rhi! Sen Warren is bringing it to Kegsbreath! Fierce!

[Irish_Dem]

3. You can't make rank if you don't serve in combat.

Being a secretary or nurse is not a way to climb the ladder in the military.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Here we go.

[Lonestarblue]

6. Given the current leaders in the DOJ, we can all write the results of this study now.

Women are too weak to serve in combat roles, women’s hormones affect their judgment, women lack the intelligence and capacity to serve as leaders, women are only promoted as a result of DEI, etc., etc., etc.

THEY’re damned good at filing papers and making coffee, though!

[William Seger]

7. If the Institute for Defense Analyses didn't recommend firing Kegseth after the Signal chat stupidity...

... then they are as incompetent as he is. Not that #rump would have followed that recommendation, since he doesn't actually give a damn about national security, but all he had to do was blame Kegseth's nomination on someone else.

[nitpicked]

8. Are we heading back to the 1990s?

I remember when Navy had GURLs (general unrestricted line officers) (the vast majority of them female), and they were mostly penned up on shore, then eventually allowed onto auxillary ships and finally (about 1993) a few were permitted into combat roles. Many others were faced with involuntary separations during force drawdowns (along with the enlisted who were denied reenlistment), and many took VSI/SSB payments on their way out.

Is such an end result possible for current servicewomen? I hope not.

[BradBo]

9. No more women in the military is Project 25s goal.

And pretty much every republicans goal including female republicans.

[lonely bird]

11. Yes, it is

Of course, along with a whole bunch of counter-revolutionary crap.

The entire “conservative” think tank group is an interlocking terrorist organization.

[AverageOldGuy]

10. A personal experience

I'm an old artilleryman -- a cannon cocker, graduate of the US Army Comanche County Cannon Cockers' College, Ft. Sill, OK (sometimes referred to as the US Army Artillery School; home to Blockhouse Signal Mountain).

Back in the day -- back when men were men -- we had four calibers of artillery: 105mm, 155mm, 8-inch, 175mm. (The 8-in and 175 have been replaced by truck-launched rocket systems, 105 and 155 still alive and well.)

The 105 round is fixed ammo -- it looks like a big bullet -- brass shell containing the powder bags with the explosive round sitting on top. The others are "separate loading" -- which means the big bullet -- the explosive projectile -- is separate from a heavy plastic tube containing the powder, which is in bags.

To load the 105, pick up a round (40-45 pounds), shove it into the breech end of the gun, slam the breech block closed, cock, fingers in your ears, pull the lanyard, and BOOM!! -- rounds on the way. It's a little more complicated but that will suffice.

The 155, 8in and 175 are SEPARATE LOADING. Open the breech, place the projectile in a loading tray with handles on each side, 4 gun bunnies pick up the loading tray, hold the loading tray at the breech opening, 2-3 gun bunnies use a ramrod to ram the projectile into the breech, then another gun bunny pulls powder bags out of the powder canister, shoves in 1,2,3,4, or 5 bags, slams the breech, insert an igniter, everyone sticks their fingers in their ears, pull the lanyard.

The rounds for the 155, 8in, and 175 weigh respectively 100, 200, and 150 pounds -- picking up one of those rounds, loading it onto the loading tray, then holding the loading tray and the round while the round is rammed into the breech takes some muscle.

So -- there was a discussion at Ft. Sill one day a lifetime ago about assigning women to artillery units. One know-it-all colonel harrumphed "I'd like to see a woman pick up an 8-inch round and load it. " To which a grizzled old sergeant Chief of Firing Battery responded: "I don't know of one male soldier who can handle 15, 8in, or 175 rounds singlehanded -- it takes 4 gun bunnies to pick up a 155, 8-inch, or 175 round and load it -- I'm sure 4 women can manage."

Women were admitted into artillery units.

Later on, a mechanical loading system for the 155 was developed but it still took 2-4 people to wrestle the round into the hydraulic loader.

[lonely bird]

12. Thank you for that

On a related note, perhaps the IDF can provide some insight for the misogynists currently squatting in the Pentagon.

[RetiredParatrooper]

13. I don't have a problem with women in combat arms...

...(Infantry, Armor, Artillery, Air Defense Artillery, Special Forces, Engineers and Aviation), but they MUST be able to do the job, physically and mentally, just as ANY man does. If a Soldier can't, they are a liability in combat.

I held a two MOSes in the Army, one in the Field Artillery (a FO), and the second (and all of my combat time) was as an MP. Both of my (primary) drivers were women, and they were excellent not only when the bullets were flying, IDF hitting the FOB, and the IED, but at the day to day things you do in a combat zone (maintenance, etc.).

Major Hegseth can piss up a rope.

[DonCoquixote]

14. Hey col. Joni Ernst

How does it feel to get friendly fire? Especially when your friends use you, then shoot?

[Bayard]

15. New uniform for women in combat

[Munu]

16. Rolling back all progressive gains, one at a time.

[Shipwack]

17. This is wrong on several levels, but...

What bothers me most is what happens when they fit the facts to their conclusions.

A competent plan would be to slowly transition the women out of their roles, over a period of a few years. This would ensure no issues with readiness, and ensure stability.

Instead, I’m betting that SecDef Cockwaffle is going to immediately kick out every woman in a combat role out of the military (or at least out of their rating) without any plan for replacing them. Readiness will be compromised for years.

Putin’s long term investment pays off once again.