Changes

==Should this Article be Renamed, or just Restructured?==

==Should this Article be Renamed, or just Restructured?==

The more I think about it, it seems that the original purpose of this article was to present an opinion piece that would show women to be unsuited for close-combat positions in ground forces.  It's obvious that women have been and will continue to serve in all branches of the military, and will always be appreciated for serving their country.  There's a lot of value in having an article titled "Women in the Military" expand on the history of how women have served since the Revolutionary war, and the changing nature of how they've been able to serve.<br />One section of the article could then be titled "Controversy over the suitability of women for combat roles", and Ed's points expanded on there.  --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 20:48, 1 May 2008 (EDT)

The more I think about it, it seems that the original purpose of this article was to present an opinion piece that would show women to be unsuited for close-combat positions in ground forces.  It's obvious that women have been and will continue to serve in all branches of the military, and will always be appreciated for serving their country.  There's a lot of value in having an article titled "Women in the Military" expand on the history of how women have served since the Revolutionary war, and the changing nature of how they've been able to serve.<br />One section of the article could then be titled "Controversy over the suitability of women for combat roles", and Ed's points expanded on there.  --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 20:48, 1 May 2008 (EDT)