|
I'm gonna start training my mother immediately! J/K, do what you want women. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Of course woman should be allowed to enter combat. As long as the consequences are known. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Definitely.
About the women being weak or nonagressive: If they want to be on the front lines, chances are
they're as aggressive as the guys. With physical strength, train them or don't allow the weak ones
on the front lines. Don't say none can just because a few can't.
About men being over protective of women: The guys need to get over it. Women can handle themselves
just as well as men can, some of them better.
Also, women would be good for dealing with the general populace, especially the females.
And why not? Yes, there are weak females. There are also weak males. There are strong males. There
are also strong females.
EDIT:
Added to the men being over protective of women issue, and the sexual harassment by men issue: Well,
then make all female platoons. Of course, make sure that they'd all be able to hold their own in a
fight with a male, and that they all have good endurance, but if there aren't any males around to
worry about the female, then it's not a problem. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Excuse me look around you they already are. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I believe the women of the United States should make their own decision. Women may be physically
weak compared to most grown men. Though their minds and character are completely different. Some
of those women have amazing traditional skills and combat ideas. It's completely fair altogether. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
It should be down to one criteria only. Can the individual do the job, if she is a woman so be
it.
As long as it is not for PC reasons then what is the problem? If a man cannot concentrate or cope
with that then he is not focused enough on the job in hand and should be out. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Heck yea, i have been in the marine Corps for about a year now and i know a lot of males that i
would be of more help in combat than them.... It is more difficult for a male to have a female out
in combat but it is something that will have to be warmed up to over time.
And in our war woman are a little more valuable when it comes to females in Iraq because there
females can not be searched by males or they are discriminated by the men in there country woman are
the only ones who can search them and make sure they are safe to pass... I will agree that there are
gender differences but women are better for some jobs just like men are. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Yes to defend themselves |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
They are good at slapping people so they should be able to |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I think that with all the equal rights there are these days, Why shouldn't it be fair for women to
fight on front line for what they believe is right?
If they are trained up and prepared, they would be just as good out there as the men.
It should be their own personal choice - if that is what they want to do, the Law should not be
stopping them |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Women are physically weaker than men. Granted, in recent history we've only had Mickey Mouse wars
that haven't exactly presented a big test of endurance to the soldiers, but you can't assume it's
going to be that way forever. The world is running out of resources. The next century may see
serious resource conflicts involving major powers. Physical endurance may become an issue again.
There's no easy way to measure it but it's doubtful women could as effective at soldiering as men.
Physical aggression is part of what makes an effective soldier and women simply don't have as much
of it as men. Look at the incidence of the crime of assault in society. Is it evenly split between
men and women perpetrators? Of course not. Men are responsible for far more assaults than women
because they have more physically aggressive instincts. You could say that physical aggression
doesn't matter so much any more now that we've moved on from swords and axes to automatic weapons
that only require a simply press of the trigger. Nonetheless, I still think physical aggression has
some significance in making an effective combat soldier.
The most important reason why women shouldn't be allowed to become front-line troops is the effect
that their presence has on males. Like it or not, males have an inbuilt protective instinct towards
females which cannot be suppressed. They will expose themselves to danger to try and protect the
females. This interferes with their efficiency as soldiers.
There is also a great risk that female soldiers will be subjected to sexual crimes either by their
own fellow soldiers or by the enemy. There was a study published the other day that showed that one
third of all women in the military had been sexually harassed. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No girls suck and they would just get killed all the time |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I have to disagree totally with what L-S-E has said. Women were at some point allowed to enter all
combat situations alongside men (cant remember what nations armed forces did this) and this was
quickly changed due to numerous (detrimental) psychological effects the presence of female
combatants had on the male soldiers (there are numerous articles on this on the net). I have to say
that equality really does have to take a step down in this issue as it is far more serious than say
- voting equality etc. When lives and more are at stake, certain lines have to be drawn. Now I'm all
for equality for women, its just that it needs to be accepted that there ARE gender differences and
that the most practical line has to be taken where military matters are concerned - it really isn't
down to "personal choice".
I'm not taking sides or discriminating against women, there are many circumstances where women are
more suitable than men and vice versa. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
19 Mar 2008 16:45
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
