NationStates Jolt Archive

LG's thread got me thinking. I know that there are many sci-fi movies, books and series where women get to be marines, engineers and pilots in mankind's military. Star Trek, Appleseed and Battlestar Galactica are a three examples. Now thinking about this made me wonder. Will there be women taking up those posts in the future without fear of being raped? Will female combat personnel turn from fiction to reality in the not too distant future?

Discuss!

Haven't female combat personnel been reality for quite some time now?

And not all of them get raped, either. It was only a few hundred, I believe. Out of many thousands.

Females do get to be Marines. I see female Marines every single day.

Um, they are reality in a great many countries.

Females do get to be Marines. I see female Marines every single day.

This

Um, they are reality in a great many countries.

Also this.

fail.

It should also be noted that the USMC uniform is much better fitted for the female frame than the US Army ACU's. Of course, the ACU's could make Angelina Jolie look like an amorphous blob...

Females do get to be Marines. I see female Marines every single day.

An ex-girlfriend was a marine. She once boasted that she could kill a man by jamming a pencil into the divot of flesh between his scrotum and his anus. Sweet girl. :)

It should also be noted that the USMC uniform is much better fitted for the female frame than the US Army ACU's. Of course, the ACU's could make Angelina Jolie look like an amorphous blob...

Service Cs make their b00bs stick out.

This



Also this.

fail.

So tell me, should a war break out in any of these countries would they be piloting the jets, storming the trenches, piloting the tanks as the men are?

I think we have too many threads on rape. :confused:

So tell me, should a war break out in any of these countries would they be piloting the jets, storming the trenches, piloting the tanks as the men are?

Jets, yes. However (to my limited knowlege) women are still barred from Armor and Infantry, among a few others.

LG's thread got me thinking. I know that there are many sci-fi movies, books and series where women get to be marines, engineers and pilots in mankind's military. Star Trek, Appleseed and Battlestar Galactica are a three examples. Now thinking about this made me wonder. Will there be women taking up those posts in the future without fear of being raped? Will female combat personnel turn from fiction to reality in the not too distant future?

Discuss!

Depends on if they're blond, hot, and have huge knockers.

Or if they're Twi'lek... for some reason all the sci-fi guys are hot for chicks with suspiciously penis-like appendages hanging from their heads....

To actually answer the question, maybe, we'll just have to see.

An ex-girlfriend was a marine. She once boasted that she could kill a man by jamming a pencil into the divot of flesh between his scrotum and his anus. Sweet girl. :)

Would certainly make one think twice about asking for a blowjob, 'while you're down there...' could have terrible consequences.

LG's thread got me thinking. I know that there are many sci-fi movies, books and series where women get to be marines, engineers and pilots in mankind's military. Star Trek, Appleseed and Battlestar Galactica are a three examples. Now thinking about this made me wonder. Will there be women taking up those posts in the future without fear of being raped? Will female combat personnel turn from fiction to reality in the not too distant future?

Discuss!

I know a female marine who is retired. So, yes, women "get" to be marines.

There are female fighter pilots in the Navy and Airforce. Those are, I believe, combat positions.

Jets, yes. However (to my limited knowlege) women are still barred from Armor and Infantry, among a few others.

It really does depend on the country. There are quite a few of the European militaries, especially in Scandinavia but also I believe Isreal, where women can (and do) serve in all positions, including infantry and armour.

Pretty much all western armed forces allow women to serve as fighter pilots and other front-line combat pilots. The UK allows women to serve in all positions except those whose "primary purpose is to engage and close with the enemy", which is basically as you say, infantry regiments (at least in combat roles, they can fulfil logistical/support functions within this regiments), armour regiments, cavalry, RAF regiments and Royal Marines (unlike US Marines, the Royal Marines are part of the Navy and are commando units, equivalent somewhat to Navy SEALs). Women do serve however in pretty much all other branches including Artillary, Intelligence and the even as part of special forces, in the form of the Special Reconnaissance Regiment.

Personally I think as time and society changes women are going to serve more and more in front-line combat units. Certainly given that with the changing nature of warfare, the definition of "front-line" is changing heavily and a lot of the old excuses don't hold as much weight. This said, if you are talking about specifically elite or commando units, the number will probably be small, simply because less women are likely to pass the physical requirements necessary, but those that do will be just as capable as their male colleagues.

,piloting the tanks as the men are?

you drive Tanks

So tell me, should a war break out in any of these countries would they be piloting the jets, storming the trenches, piloting the tanks as the men are?

In the UK, Service women, as like all over personnel, are trained in front line combat. However, women are not allowed in the front lines. There are lots of women in the navy, there are a few female fast jet pilots, where they have seen service. In the Army, they tend to be in artillery crews. I don't know about armour. But, there have been women in patrols along the front line before. They aren't primarily meant to be combat troops, as they are usually in support roles. However, some have seen combat, and faired well.

Also, alot of the techy stuff is done by women. And they cannot join the SAS, but have served in other special forces. Other than that I think they can pretty much do what role they please. They

In the UK, Service women, as like all over personnel, are trained in front line combat. However, women are not allowed in the front lines. There are lots of women in the navy, there are a few female fast jet pilots, where they have seen service. In the Army, they tend to be in artillery crews. I don't know about armour. But, there have been women in patrols along the front line before. They aren't primarily meant to be combat troops, as they are usually in support roles. However, some have seen combat, and faired well.

Also, alot of the techy stuff is done by women. And they cannot join the SAS, but have served in other special forces. Other than that I think they can pretty much do what role they please. They

To be precise they can't serve in: Infantry, Armour, Commando (including Royal Marines), Airfield Defence (ie RAF regiment), Special Air Service or Special Boat Service. They are also not allowed to serve Royal Navy Submarine Service or as Mine Clearance Divers., apparently for medical reasons (to do with resistance to pressure apparently), though I suspect this restriction will be removed soon, since other Navys have started allowing women to serve in these roles without too many issues. But women serve in pretty much everything else, though they make up only 10% of the armed forces overall (more in the RAF, slightly less in the Army)

In the UK, Service women, as like all over personnel, are trained in front line combat. However, women are not allowed in the front lines. There are lots of women in the navy, there are a few female fast jet pilots, where they have seen service. In the Army, they tend to be in artillery crews. I don't know about armour. But, there have been women in patrols along the front line before. They aren't primarily meant to be combat troops, as they are usually in support roles. However, some have seen combat, and faired well.

Everything here applies to women in the US military as well, except women usually being in artillery crews. Women in the US military can do everything except Infantry, Armor (to include Cavalry) or Artillery. Women in the US Army who want to see combat usually join the MPs as their primary responsibility in Iraq is convoy escort and for many years, perhaps decades, the MPs have been called the "chick infantry".

As for the whole "Marine" thing I think South Lizasauria fell prey to the USMC PR Machine and thinks that all Marines are hardened elite shock troops.

Oh, and someone said the USMC isn't part of the Navy, which isn't quite true. The Marines hate to admit it but they are indeed part of the Navy.

I think we have too many threads on rape. :confused:

that's just what i was thinking

Apparently women are restricted from:-
(US))
Army: Infantry, armor, special forces, combat engineer companies, ground surveillance radar platoons, and air defense artillery batteries.

Air Force: Pararescue, combat controllers and those units and positions that routinely collocate with direct ground combat units.

Navy: Submarines, coastal patrol boats, mine warfare ships, SEAL (special forces) units, joint communications units that collocate with SEALs, and support positions (such as medical, chaplain, etc.) collocated with Marine Corps units that are closed to women.

Marine Corps: Infantry regiments and below, artillery battalions and below, all armored units, combat engineer battalions, reconnaissance units, riverine assault craft units, low altitude air defense units, and fleet anti-terrorism security teams.

It's a bit silly to discriminate based on anything other than performance, so yes I think we will be seeing female marines as you do in fiction. A case can be made for having single gender regiments though, same case made about single gender schools.

According to Wikipedia, in Canada women have been able to serve in any combat role (with the exception of submarines) since 1982.

*list of stuff women are restricted from in the US*

That's for enlisted women. Officers get a bit more flexibility.

It's a bit silly to discriminate based on anything other than performance

Agreed. There are a lot of women are capable of doing combat arms jobs and lots of men who aren't.

Google for "Killer Chick" and read her story.

According to Wikipedia, in Canada women have been able to serve in any combat role (with the exception of submarines) since 1982.



According to a Canadian Colonel who posts on another board I visit from time time, women can serve in any combat position, but few actually try and very few meet the physical requirements for infantry jobs.

So tell me, should a war break out in any of these countries would they be piloting the jets, storming the trenches, piloting the tanks as the men are?

http://pratt.edu/~rsilva/sovwomen.htm
You mean like these ladies?

And these?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/12/AR2005051202002.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_the_military
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defense_Forces#Women

Please... we're not shrinking flowers unable to shoot, bomb, run over, stab and beat people just as well as the men do.

Agreed. There are a lot of women are capable of doing combat arms jobs and lots of men who aren't.

Though I think it is important that women looking to serve in such combat roles need to pass the same physical requirements as their male colleagues even if this will generally mean you have less women serving in these positions (on average women are physically less strong). Although I think most women (in the armed forces) can pass the general Infantry requirements, I suspect this will start seeing an impact once you get to Commando and Special Forces (already most male army personnel don't meet these requirement). Although a few years back, despite not being allowed to actually serve in a Commando regiment, a female soldier did pass the All-Arms Commando course, so it is more than possible.

This is important for two reasons: firstly to keep the quality of the combat personnel to the right level but also on a morale level. The last thing you want is a perception of a two-tiered system and the only way your going to effectively integrate men and women in combat units is if you treat them both exactly the same, something that has to start right and the top and go all the way down.

I think we have too many threads on rape. :confused:

Posting threads about rape is the unconscious desire to put and keep women in society "in their place" instead of letting them compete with males.

Posting threads about virginity is all about denying the female sexual gratification while allowing the male to sow his seed whereever and whenever her wants.

Well, sorry... we wimmens is gonna continue to be uppity and "not know our place".

Posting threads about rape is the unconscious desire to put and keep women in society "in their place" instead of letting them compete with males.

Posting threads about virginity is all about denying the female sexual gratification while allowing the male to sow his seed whereever and whenever her wants.

Well, sorry... we wimmens is gonna continue to be uppity and "not know our place".

...wait, huh? How is posting threads about rape and virginity linked to chauvinism?

(Firefox's spellchecker freaking sucks. "Dur...galvanism?")

This



Also this.

fail.
I think the point is that, in the U.S., anyway, women Marines don't do combat arms MOS's. No arty, infantry, pilot, etc is female. The Marines seem to be the last service to successfully avoid co-ed combat arms assignments.

No women on subs either. Weird thing was, I talked to a couple of 18 or so year old women at MEPS about it, and both seemed to think it was a good idea they were kept out of some positions. (One even made jokes about PMS on subs being...shall we say...bad.)

Ridiculous of course. It was like Stockholm syndrome or something.

as we have conscription,all men have to go to the army.women don't have to but can apply for any position.after the first 45 days they can leave if they want.but after that they have to complete 6 to 12 months of military service.but back to topic yeah,women can eventually be in frontline duties

as we have conscription,all men have to go to the army.women don't have to but can apply for any position.after the first 45 days they can leave if they want.but after that they have to complete 6 to 12 months of military service.but back to topic yeah,women can eventually be in frontline duties

Wait, wait, wait...FINLAND still has conscription?! What for?!

Will female combat personnel turn from fiction to reality in the not too distant future?

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/3/32/Zetta_slowpoke.gif




Will there be women taking up those posts in the future without fear of being raped?
If they are taking up these posts, they obviously don't fear being raped.
Next talk about whether men can come there not fearing to be raped.

Rape doesn't happen in any halfway decent unit, but any military consists for 90% of crap units, so there are lots of instances of 'not completely intended sex' - it's not the "behind you in a dark street" kind of rape, rather being peer-pressured into a relationship with the horniest of males around.
But this is a social issue and isn't going to change.

I'm surprised why you're talking about specifically marines. As far as US goes, US Navy in general and US Marine Corps in particular are elite forces. The Navy has the best pilots - only the best can safely operate from carriers - and the best ground combat crews, because space aboard is limited and the Navy needs quality, not quantity. Plus marine units operate in constant contact with the main Navy authorities. All this makes USMC a much better place to serve. Now, in US Army... there, of course, rape is less unexpectable.

...wait, huh? How is posting threads about rape and virginity linked to chauvinism?

Are the threads about men being raped? I mean really, does anyone tell a young man who wants to join the military, "You should be careful, you could get raped in the military?"

Does anyone make a fuss about whether a man is a virgin or not? When discussing sexuality, is a man subjected to negative or positive comments if he has sexual relationships? Is a female subjected to negative or positive comments for the same?

Wait, wait, wait...FINLAND still has conscription?! What for?!

I think Germany operates some form of conscription too. Israel definitely does. There was talk of bringing back National Service in the UK, But whatever the plans were they didn't get very far.

In fact, most of Asia, all of Scandinavia, Austria and Switzerland operate conscription. It's very very common.

There was talk of bringing back National Service in the UK, But whatever the plans were they didn't get very far.


This is mostly because the Army really, really, really doesn't want them. The British Armed Forces focuses a lot on quality of troops over quantity and as a result is generally recognised as one of the best trained forces in the world. Despite some of the recruitment and retention issues they have at the moment (the army is over-stretched and probably won't make it's recruitment targets this year), the last thing they want or need is to have to take care of and train hundreds of thousands of poorly motivated young adults who will be serving with them for a couple of years at most before returning to civilian life.

Are the threads about men being raped? I mean really, does anyone tell a young man who wants to join the military, "You should be careful, you could get raped in the military?"
Well...no. Though perhaps more should.

Does anyone make a fuss about whether a man is a virgin or not? When discussing sexuality, is a man subjected to negative or positive comments if he has sexual relationships? Is a female subjected to negative or positive comments for the same?
Okay, I see your point. It's definitely bothersome. Fear not, though. Society is getting ever closer to finally ditching these outdated concepts.

The imperian empire: Well, I can understand the other countries there. (Asian countries have political turmoil, Israel has unfriendly neighbors, Switzerland is a tiny country, Austria and Germany have long military traditions...ect ect...) It's just Finland I don't get. They don't have any reason--that I'm aware of--to really practice it.

This is mostly because the Army really, really, really doesn't want them. The British Armed Forces focuses a lot on quality of troops over quantity and as a result is generally recognised as one of the best trained forces in the world. Despite some of the recruitment and retention issues they have at the moment (the army is over-stretched and probably won't make it's recruitment targets this year), the last thing they want or need is to have to take care of and train hundreds of thousands of poorly motivated young adults who will be serving with them for a couple of years at most before returning to civilian life.

Point made. How did I miss that one. *slaps head*

The imperian empire: Well, I can understand the other countries there. (Asian countries have political turmoil, Israel has unfriendly neighbors, Switzerland is a tiny country, Austria and Germany have long military traditions...ect ect...) It's just Finland I don't get. They don't have any reason--that I'm aware of--to really practice it.

Well, Norway, Sweden and Finland were lynch pins in the threat against the soviets, which could be why they operate conscription. But this is way way outdated now days.

The imperian empire: Well, I can understand the other countries there. (Asian countries have political turmoil, Israel has unfriendly neighbors, Switzerland is a tiny country, Austria and Germany have long military traditions...ect ect...) It's just Finland I don't get. They don't have any reason--that I'm aware of--to really practice it.Russia? That reason only ended in '91, and considering current leadership of Gazpromland...

There are quite a few women sering in Iraq in the US Army...

Russia? That reason only ended in '91, and considering current leadership of Gazpromland...

Oh, yes, Russia. Of course.

Sorry, I'm a little too used to thinking of them as "Mostly Harmless."

Are the threads about men being raped?

Unfortunately male rape is one of those generally ignored topics in society. Not only do we make no threads, there is minimal research into the area, increasing numbers of rape myths and prejudices and even more reduced reporting and conviction rates. Hell, there are even some countries (Scotland I know for a fact, though they are changing it) where by the legal definition, men cannot get raped, it is classified as a different form of sexual assault which inevitably carries a lesser tariff.

And that's just when it comes to male on male rape, the situation is worse when you look at rape of men by women. Unfortunately when it comes to crimes generally and sex crimes in particular we still have a very gendered view of it, be it from the media to the law courts and through the academic research, women are consistently portrayed as victims of sex crimes and males will be consistently portrayed as the perpetrators.

Though I think it is important that women looking to serve in such combat roles need to pass the same physical requirements as their male colleagues even if this will generally mean you have less women serving in these positions (on average women are physically less strong). Although I think most women (in the armed forces) can pass the general Infantry requirements, I suspect this will start seeing an impact once you get to Commando and Special Forces (already most male army personnel don't meet these requirement). Although a few years back, despite not being allowed to actually serve in a Commando regiment, a female soldier did pass the All-Arms Commando course, so it is more than possible.

This is important for two reasons: firstly to keep the quality of the combat personnel to the right level but also on a morale level. The last thing you want is a perception of a two-tiered system and the only way your going to effectively integrate men and women in combat units is if you treat them both exactly the same, something that has to start right and the top and go all the way down.
I agree with that 100% I've always thought that should be the caveat to women entering a combat arms position.

And I agree with both reasons given. There will be pushback from some men (and even other women) who believe that infantry (ect.) is a man's job only. Making the PT standards the same will chut up the majority of the "can she really do it" BS. And of course, she does need to be able to do the job.

I think the point is that, in the U.S., anyway, women Marines don't do combat arms MOS's. No arty, infantry, pilot, etc is female. The Marines seem to be the last service to successfully avoid co-ed combat arms assignments.
They are fighter pilots. They can also serve in light infantry capacity in the U.S.

I think it's so quaint how some people in certain backwards countries are still having this debate.

Russia? That reason only ended in '91, and considering current leadership of Gazpromland...

yeah,in the Cold War we practised neutrality and bought weapons from both sides.after the cold war we still maintain conscription to have a reasonable sized army.as now Russia has put up wood tariffs.as we have been called ''the land of the green gold'',wood is our main export.now they're wresting about it and Estonia walked out of this conference of baltic people

Russia? That reason only ended in '91, and considering current leadership of Gazpromland...
I've heard the conscription in Russia is called "The balls tax", and nearly everyone who has a few thousand bucks available dodges it.
In Israel, conscription is much easier and cheaper to dodge - they don't need you if you're a wuss.
In China, it's a big privilege to even be able to get into the PLA.

So conscription today is pretty much a quirk of some special nations like Germans; you'd expect that after losing two world wars.

.
In Israel, conscription is much easier and cheaper to dodge - they don't need you if you're a wuss.


in israel orthodox jews avoid military service

www.movieshark.com

in israel orthodox jews avoid military service

Some, not all. It's the ultra-orthodox who you are refering to. They believe that Israel as a nation is against gods will, and therefore they see no obligation to serve a mortal-run Israel. The only Israel they believe in is the one that will be formed when the Messiah arrives.

Bastards. I can't stand them. They take all the protection that Israel offers, all the benefits of citizenship, and then don't pay the price everybody else does for those same rights. *growl*

On topic though, I am absolutely for women in the combat arms. As has already been mentioned, MPs see combat all the time, and that is an MOS open to women, where they do just as well as the men in the line units. As long as everybody has to achieve the same fitness standards, I see no reason not to integrate male and female soldiers in every MOS.

They are fighter pilots. They can also serve in light infantry capacity in the U.S.
I'm specifically talking about the U.S. Marines. They did not serve in combat arms MOS's when I retired. That means there were NO women pilots in the Marines, just as there were no women grunts. Tell me that's changed since 1995 and I'll retract my claim.

Until every male either learns to retract his penis through penis quigong, or, more gruesomely, has it cut off, and until every female suppresses their sexual desire in their way, mixed-gender units have and will have SEVERE problems.

Creation of all-female units, however, requires a sufficient number of them willing to serve in combat roles - which is rarely the case except in wartime (Iraq isn't a war, it's beating kids).

Until every male either learns to retract his penis through penis quigong, or, more gruesomely, has it cut off, and until every female suppresses their sexual desire in their way, mixed-gender units have and will have SEVERE problems.


Singularly untrue. Mixed gender units have done exceptionally well in combat. See 1948. Hard to imagine, I know, but when the bullets are flying, you aren't gonna look up from your foxhole and go "Damn she has a nice ass!"

LG's thread got me thinking. I know that there are many sci-fi movies, books and series where women get to be marines, engineers and pilots in mankind's military. Star Trek, Appleseed and Battlestar Galactica are a three examples. Now thinking about this made me wonder. Will there be women taking up those posts in the future without fear of being raped? Will female combat personnel turn from fiction to reality in the not too distant future?

Discuss!

Trivia. did you know that Gene Roddenberry was against the concept of StarFleet Marines? That's why, while he was alive, there were never any 'marines' present. all the fighting was done by 'security personnel'. they had Photon Grenades (TOS: Arena) and no marines present whenever on-ship fighting was needed. (TOS: Day of the Dove, Various times DS9 and the Enteprise D was boarded)

Starfleet Marines made their appearance on Enterprise. but where did they go after that?

Heck, RPG companies lost their licence for Star Trek Game Systems when they introduced StarFleet Marines.

Setulan:

When the bullets are flying, no.
And they indeed can do well in combat (not "exceptionally", though).

The problems start when the bullets aren't flying.

I'm specifically talking about the U.S. Marines. They did not serve in combat arms MOS's when I retired. That means there were NO women pilots in the Marines, just as there were no women grunts. Tell me that's changed since 1995 and I'll retract my claim.
Before 1995, actually.
1993 -- The Marine Corps opens pilot positions to women.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps_Women's_Reserve#Timeline

Before 1995, actually.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps_Women's_Reserve#Timeline
Well, she didn't get winged until 1995. That meant she probably didn't finish the CH-53 RAG until 1996, but your point is still valid and I yield.

Are the threads about men being raped? I mean really, does anyone tell a young man who wants to join the military, "You should be careful, you could get raped in the military?"
Probably because rape is used as a weapon in times of war and is more prevalent with women than men. See the current conflict in Congo. Men don't get raped as much as women during war, therefore the question raised in the OP seems valid without being sexist - implied or otherwise.

Does anyone make a fuss about whether a man is a virgin or not? When discussing sexuality, is a man subjected to negative or positive comments if he has sexual relationships? Is a female subjected to negative or positive comments for the same?

Society seems to show that being a young male virgin is equally as stressful as being a young female virgin.
And men can be sluts too - just depends on who you talk to.

They (Women Marines) don't have a nickname, and they don't need one. They get their basic training in a Marine atmosphere, at a Marine Post. They inherit the traditions of the Marines. They are Marines.
LtGen Thomas Holcomb, USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps, 1943

There are only two kinds of people that understand Marines: Marines and the enemy. Everyone else has a second-hand opinion.
Gen. William Thornson, U.S. Army

I dated a marine once. She was so very hot, yet batshit crazy. I found out the second time we had sex when she screamed at the top of her lungs to choke her out. I made a feeble attempt at it and ended up getting dumped.

I know this didnt contribute anything, but I just had to get it off my chest. Anytime someone mentions the marines I think about her.

I'm not sure about the Air Force or Coast Guard, but I know the Marines and Army have women barred from Combat situations, and several have been court marshaled for being in combat. They're certainly not barred from being in an Infantry Regiment or an Armor Regiment, but no combat for the women.

I'm not sure about the Air Force or Coast Guard, but I know the Marines and Army have women barred from Combat situations, and several have been court marshaled for being in combat. They're certainly not barred from being in an Infantry Regiment or an Armor Regiment, but no combat for the women.

The Air Force has female combat pilots, so does the Navy - it's actually been determined that women have an advantage in this area - they endure high pressure and high Gs better, are hardwired for multitasking (which is a requirement in a jet fighter) and their smaller size makes them a better fit in a tiny cockpit crammed with stuff (note that male fighter pilots are not usually large men).

In the Coast Guard, which is, essentially, a police force which patrols coastal waters and the Great Lakes (until war breaks out, in which case it goes to the Navy), women have command positions which would transfer to the Navy in time of war.

Will female combat personnel turn from fiction to reality in the not too distant future?

And one day, Personal Computers may even be connected in some kind of world-reaching network, allowing people to interact and share information over large distances... Maybe even more than 10 miles apart!

One can dream... *sigh*

I'm not sure about the Air Force or Coast Guard, but I know the Marines and Army have women barred from Combat situations, and several have been court marshaled for being in combat. They're certainly not barred from being in an Infantry Regiment or an Armor Regiment, but no combat for the women.
Check on what you think you know. Women have been fleet pilots in the USMC since 1996. They are USMC F-18 pilots. I don't know about USMC ground forces, but the Marine Corps Museum site says that 87% of all MOS's are open to women.