Should Women be Allowed on the Front Lines?

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[color=darlviolet]I just saw this segment on the evening news about this subject. Plus the US congress is in the final stages of passing a bill prohibiting women in combat. Should women be allowed to serve on the front lines and I decided to see what the members of this board think about the subject.

I think they should. The United States (where I come from) is one of the few (maybe only) countries that doesn't allow female soldiers to serve on the front lines of battle.

The only reasons I can think of for them not to be allowed to serve in battle is the risk of becoming a POW and what some people would do with female POWs. I'm not going to elaborate because I'm sure most of you can think of what I'm talking about. That and the fact that we don't have as much upper body strength as some of the men.

One of the arguments I've been given with this subject is the fact that men get distracted, or they'd try to help out the female soldiers. Why bother? These women are your fellow soldiers and they went through the same training everyone else did. Get over it.

Another thing I was told is that some of the female soldiers like to try and get out of work. Well, just don't put them at the front.

Okay that's mmy take on it. Let's see everyone elses.[/color]

[eleanor]

[color=darkslateblue] Yeah, they should, but I could see the reasons why they shouldn't. The problem is that the argument you posted is pretty dumb. I mean... Dunno. Just seems like such a dumb argument. Please, let's hope that the guys fighting in the army are over their high school days.

Ok, so I could understand the physical aspect. Guys are just usually stronger than woman, but I know that some woman could definately become stronger then men. I mean, if they can past the same tests and trials men do, shouldn't they be able to?

All I can say is that the US is a naturally conservative country, so I'm not 'woah like omg' surprised. Personally I think the congressmen are doing this just because they think it's morally right, since they seem to favor that now. [/color]

[Patronus]

Yes, they should be allowed. If they were distractions, it wouldn't be their faults. If the male soldiers could not handle fighting for their country with women, then they should not be enlisted.

Same goes with homosexuals.

[Retribution]

[SIZE=1]Frankly, I don't care at all. Perhaps it would be a good idea, as our military is stretched pretty thin as it is. The distraction arguement has its points, but in the end is faulty. How could such disciplined men and women let passion get in the way? They've got alot of self-control, as you need it if you're a soldier.

My friend said that "men and women both had their ups and downs back in the day. You know, women had the period and child birth, but men had to fight and die in war, so it all evens out." I guess that's [mostly] true, except for women didn't have rights to vote, and were usually considered passive and subordinate to the man of the house.

But in the end, I suppose it's fine for women to serve in the military. I really don't know, but let them do what they want. They're being more helpful than detrimental, I guess.[/SIZE]

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[quote name='Lunox][color=darkslateblue'] Yeah, they should, but I could see the reasons why they shouldn't. The problem is that the argument you posted is pretty dumb. I mean... Dunno. Just seems like such a dumb argument. Please, let's hope that the guys fighting in the army are over their high school days. [/color][/quote]

[color=darkviolet]When's the last time you were around military guys? From what I'm witnessed aside from the married ones both male and female soldiers are rather shall I say juvenile.

I do agree that this argument is stupid. But don't blame me, blame congress. Everyone is so focused on making this country uber conservative lately. You can't even teach kids about sex anymore.

I can't think of anything to say right now. so I'll leave it here.[/color]

[Annie]

[color=#141416]Speaking in a woman's shoes, who is in the military, I say let women fight. If that is their motive to join the armed forces, then why hold them back? They want to kill, let them. We women need to let out some frustration every once in a while ^_^

Seriously, I know a lot of females whose sole purpose for signing up was to have the chance to fight. Women have every right to fight if they want to. The times have changed, men! Women are capable of doing anything they want, always have been, but were sheltered. If a woman decides she wants to be a "tough guy", then let her prove her worth.

Distractions? Well, if the woman is distracted by male soldiers, then she doesn't belong where she is. If it's an intended goal to distract the male soldiers--just because she's a woman soldier, then the woman needs to be put back in her house where she belongs.

War is just that; war. Fighting is just that; fighting. It shouldn't matter what gender you are; as long as you do your job.[/color]

[Harry]

(most) Woman are not equal to men in combat situations, no matter how much garbage they spew to the contrary. They should only be allowed in case by case situations.

[eleanor]

[i]When's the last time you were around military guys? From what I'm witnessed aside from the married ones both male and female soldiers are rather shall I say juvenile.

I do agree that this argument is stupid. But don't blame me, blame congress. Everyone is so focused on making this country uber conservative lately. You can't even teach kids about sex anymore.

I can't think of anything to say right now. so I'll leave it here.[/i]

[color=darkslateblue] I've never been around military people. But I assumed that if you have a bunch of gunfire and bombs coming your way you're not going to be staring at the girl next to you because she has big boobs. And I'm pretty sure that goes for the girls, too. That's what I was thinking when I wrote that, anyway.

I didn't...blame you, I was just saying the argument was dumb. America has always been conservative, it don't think it's really gotten 'more conservative', either. I'm sure 50 years ago people were fighting against taboo ideas that are now deemed as normal as well.[/color]

[Annie]

[QUOTE=Lunox]

[color=darkslateblue] But I assumed that if you have a bunch of gunfire and bombs coming your way you're not going to be staring at the girl next to you because she has big boobs. And I'm pretty sure that goes for the girls, too. That's what I was thinking when I wrote that, anyway.
[/color][/QUOTE]

[color=#141416]I'm telling you, BDU's (battle dress uniforms) do not flatter the figure at all ^_^ In fact, they make you look a few pounds heavier than you are.

1) You'd be surprised at some of the men in the military; they can be absolute pigs. I'm not trying to right or wrong anyone, but there are those few that are just unbelievable--even in dire situations. Makes anyone want to strangle them. It's like a group of friends, there's always that one jerk, one dork, one psycho, so on and so forth.

2) You're right. You wouldn't worry about if a girl has a nice body, or guy, if action hit. In fact, during BMT (basic military training), there was no attraction to the male flights/female flights whatsoever. We were all too busy worried about keeping our tails from getting stepped on. But we pulled together when it mattered. If you lagged, no one cared if you were a guy or girl, you were just as wortheless to the team. That's just a training environment; imagine a battle/war zone. Once your adrenaline starts pumping, it doesn't matter who you are; if you can handle it, you're one of the guys. [/color]

[Red]

[quote name='Harry'](most) Woman are not equal to men in combat situations, no matter how much garbage they spew to the contrary. They should only be allowed in case by case situations.[/quote]

Haha - how exactly did you come to that conclusion?

I know a few women who have joined the army and are now in Iraq. They went through the same training as their male counterparts, the same tests & the same troubles once they got there. How would being a woman make them any less capable in combat situations despite the fact that they've equalled (and sometimes surpassed) the men they're fighting alongside?

The entire argument of 'natural strength' becomes irrelevant once you put people through training. If they can pass, then obviously they up to the standard the army expects.

In terms of what happens when they become POWs; I'm sure that if somebody is willing to do something regarded as horrible to a woman, they would do something with relatively equal implications to a man. Maybe not using the same methods, but the desired effect would still be reached.

If anything I'm surprised this isn't regarded as highly sexist. It implies women aren't as capable as men, which through the years has been shown to be more than untrue.

[sbrebaby]

I am a woman and i dont think that men and women can do the same things, but if a woman is strong enough to do a mans role she should do it. we can have babies and i would love to see a guy go through natural birth. If a woman can do it she should be able to fight on the front lines.

[[Sound_Nin]]

Definitely. But about the POW thing, some people do the same (nearly) to male POWs. It's a very sexist thing to do, not allowing females to join up. I can't see why anyone would want to, but that's just me talking.
Anyway, who's to say that female soldiers aren't better equipped to some things that are useful in battle?

[Guest narutosaki]

it would be nasty to see girls wid huge guns and yelling like crazy while dey try to kill people

i rather not see them in war at all, unless theyre modeling in some soldier clothing (thats hot)

[Morpheus]

It's simply because women are "inconsistent". Men don't have the same issues. But I do believe women should be on the front lines. If you can use a gun then why the hell not?

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[QUOTE=narutosaki]it would be nasty to see girls wid huge guns and yelling like crazy while dey try to kill people

i rather not see them in war at all, unless theyre modeling in some soldier clothing (thats hot)[/QUOTE]

[color=darkviolet] Check your spelling.....

I really hope you're joking about that. Personally I think that these wars would have been much easier and over with if they allowed women on the front.... Or just sent the female spouses over seas.

Honestly, I think that unless you're infantry you don't have to kill too many people. Yes, they make you carry a weapon everywhere (Including having to take the damn M-16 into the Port-A-John) But not too many people have to fire weapons. They're more likely to cut themselves on the muzzle of the M-16 during a FTX (long story)

Mad Hatter's right about the BDUs (the DCUs (Desert Combat Uniforms) aren't that much better. Of course I know of some women (myself included) that think their guy looks good in uniform. But I've seen one of my husband's friends (really nice looking woman) in her uniform... not pretty. The maternity BDUs look even worse, but atleast you can wear them with sneakers. I'm just glad they got rid of those weird looking hats that you had to wear with the Class As (formal uniform) I just about died laughing at that!

I think that military personel (mine included) are just making up the BS about being destracted by female soldiers because they don't want to change things. I think that if a woman went through the trouble and agrivation of Basic Training and AIT (Advanced Individual Training) that she should be allowed to do the job she was trained to do.

Okay, new $0.02 in take it as you will[/color]

[Bloodseeker]

Equal rights, equal benefits, equal responsibility, equal punishment. If they want to be on the same level as us guys, they need to get the same thing that we do in all professional and legal related things. Its only fair.

If they can keep up with and perform at or above the level of the rest of their squad, I say let them go. Gender alone shouldn't be a factor here.

Edit: My mom just brought up the point of female hygine issues. All I've got to say is just rinse yourself off like they did in the old days! They didn't have all of these special hygine products until the last century or so, and they got along just fine!

[Godelsensei]

[quote name='Bloodseeker']All I've got to say is just rinse yourself off like they did in the old days! They didn't have all of these special hygine products until the last century or so, and they got along just fine![/quote]

Imagine walking, running, or trooping around all day with a bloody, oozing blackish sludge dribbling down your thighs and soaking into your clothing.

Now, please stop pretending you know what you're talking about. You're embarrassing yourself.

[Dagger]

On a side note, women did have to come up with makeshift "hygiene products" in "the old days." To build on what Godel said, imagine using a heavy cloth pad or (if you want to go really far back) a tampon made of grass. No, thanks. :animedepr

~Dagger~

[Annie]

[FONT=tahoma][color=#141416]Ugh, I agree with Dagger.

My job in the Air National Guard is phsyically demanding, but when it comes to "that time of the month", I just have to tough it out. I can't allow "it" to keep me from doing my job, or otherwise, I'm that woman who's the distraction. [/color][/FONT]

[DBZgirl88]

[COLOR=#004a6f]The thing is, warefare is carried out differently in different parts of the world. In many parts of the world, when a nation is at war, any man who is physically capable is obliged to fight. In others, they simply can volunteer to take part in war.

In the situation when a nation is selective about it's soldiers, and looking for those who can truly fight well, I'd say, women, who are usually weaker than men, should only be allowed to fight, if they are equal in skill and strength to the men.

However, when a nation needs many soldiers and men are obliged to fight, if some women volunteer, they should be allowed to fight. I read in Islamic history books that several women took part in battle with the prophet Mohammad. Archery was a highly valued skill at the time, and the prophet urged that both males and females be taught that skill. So in combat, most women would ride the horses, and use arrows, since they are slightly weaker, while men stayed on the ground using swords.[/COLOR]