When I was in the Navy, there were certain jobs that a woman could not hold, simply because they were women. I never had a problem with that. A smart person, man or woman, knows their limitations. They also did not allow women on all ships. Now it is my understanding that women can hold any job that a man can. I don't see where that serves a positive purpose.
As a couple of the other answers said, many women are not physically capable of the things men are.
Equality is a great thing, and if the woman in question can physically qualify for the same military role as the man beside her, there should not be a problem. However, I do not believe that, if a woman does not want to be in a combat position, she should be required to take that job in the name of "equality". An unfit soldier, man or woman, dilutes the effectiveness of the unit, and will have a negative effect on morale, which is crucial in a combat position.
Ability to perform the task at hand should be the top consideration, gender aside.
As far as the feminists, I wish they would quit the blanket assertion they have held since the 1960's, that they speak for all women. They don't.
2006-09-27 03:52:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If I was told that I would have to work alongside women in my infantry company, I would reclass as soon as possible until I found an environment where sexual tension and harassment were non-issues.
I have seen (and personally know) of 5'6" and 125lb men in the infantry I wouldn't trust to carry me out of the line of fire. The physical requirements are often cited as justification for keeping women out of combat arms. There are enough examples of women in modern combat, from fighting in the VietCong to being snipers for the Red Army in the Second World War, to give lie to the notion that women can't fight.
It's not the fighting that I'm concerned about per se (though the IDF ceased putting women in frontline positions after the Six Day War in 1967 because they found Arab men would not surrender to Israeli women) ... rather, it's what happens in peacetime. The military has enough problems with sexual harassment and rape (witness the service academies; witness bad recruiters) to not fan the flames even further by putting teenage girls in the same restrictive and closed environment as teenage boys.
Segregated units are the way to go if women are going to be incorporated at all, or in very small units where they are not indoctrinated so throughly to become inclusive "tribes". MP units are a successful example of this. A place like Force Reconnaissance or the Ranger Regiment would be catastrophic for women and the organizations both.
Until the various societies of the world are truly egalitarian and moral restraint exceeds the temptations of the flesh, it is best if women are kept from being thrown to the wolves, not because they can't fight, but because they shouldn't have to fight the very men they should be calling their friends and comrades.
2006-09-27 12:54:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by Nat 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I have been hearing this question since I was in. I understand that there are exceptional women out there but there are darned few who would be able to physicaly keep up on a modern day battlefield. The equipment is very heavy and is not proportionate to a woman weight. Simply, a man at 175 pounds is working hard to carry the 50 pound combat load a woman is going to have to work that much harder at 125 pounds to carry the same 50 pound load. Add in the fact that men have heavier/denser muscles and bones and a pelvis designed to carry more weight and take the abuse better it becomes even clearer.
Finally, not many women are going to have the strength to lift and carry a fellow soldier out of harms way in a firefight.
I do think there are a lot of military jobs that women are well suited for. Front line combat just isn't one of them.
2006-09-27 03:21:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by medic 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Personally, I believe that if women want to serve, there should be separate academies, boot camps and battalions for them.
It is a distraction for men and women to undergo training and then serve side-by-side in the same company.
There is no evidence that a 5'6", 125lb woman can't do the same thing as a 5'6", 125lb man.
And its been reported that women can be just as fierce (if not more so) in a fire fight.
There is also evidence that women can endure more pain than men.
I support a woman's right to fight for her country.
But there should be separate divisions for the genders, not just because of any sexual conflict, but also emotional attachments.
War is hell - and it doesn't help if some guy is emotionally attached to his female buddy, she gets shot and he breaks down in the middle of combat.
2006-09-27 04:30:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by docscholl 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Times are a changing here on the front. Women are on or very close to the front. Front line units are almost a thing of the past. Women are on convoy duty. They make great gunners. Same training as men. Many of the same jobs. Most woman and a lot of men would have a hard time on the mountainous terrain here in Afghanistan. And you would really be surprised how much a properly trained woman can carry. I'm 6'4", 205lbs and most of the women in my unit can firemans carry me. Women in the infantry? Probably not, although the Russians had successful female infantry units during WWII. But close up service and support heck yes.
2006-09-27 04:21:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Equal rights require equal responsibilities. If women want the benefits of being in the military, they need to accept the drawbacks as well. Conservatives will always find a way to oppose change, that size argument was also used to oppose allowing the enlistment of Asian Americans. If that doesn't work, they'll just look for something else.
2006-09-27 07:38:02
·
answer #6
·
answered by rich k 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
regrettably, she pronounced, inspite of the severe choose for women individuals militia and civilian cops, their share become progressively reducing, and there have been few women individuals national Police experienced. interior the disarmament, demobilization, reintegration, repatriation and resettlement (DDRRR) programme, the undertaking become to make women individuals’s concerns critical to all activities. cloth on gender themes become dispensed to workers, and outreach become undertaken in Lubero and Kamina UN seems pleased with woman militia workers no longer something has unquestionably replaced the employer of war, now women individuals purely have the acceptance as to permit them to advance a militia profession, very resembling how affirmative action become created to enhance journey point and so compete on a point footing. I propose you seem up and understand the variation between the militia and civilians with the aid of fact they do no longer look to be legally the comparable entity. Do you think approximately having infantrymen an acceptance of homicide?
2016-10-18 01:47:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by freer 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think if they are shot the question of if they are safe has already been answered, if I were shot and had the option of a person beside me not shot man or woman I'd take it. The military is suffering needing recruits, if a woman feels she can fight let her fight when the battle is broght to our front door she will have to fight anyway.
2006-09-27 03:09:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by BOISE_DD 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
NOW DAYS THERE ISNT REALLY FRONT LINES. AS A PATIENT ADMINISTRATION SPECIALIST IN THE ARMY I COULD BE WORKING IN A HOSPITAL OR A FIELD HOSPITAL OR GO OUT ON MISSIONS. WOMEN CANT BE INFANTRY AND I UNDERSTAND WHY. SURE THERE ARE SOME GUNG-HO SUPERWWOMEN WHO THINK THEY CAN DO IT ALL BUT THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT MEN CAN DEAL WITH BETTER. AS A WOMAN IN THE MILITARY I KNOW THAT NO MATTER WHAT YOUR MOS YOU CAN STILL GET HURT SND STILL BE ON THE SO CALLED FRONT LINES AS SOME CALL IT. IN THE BIBLE DID YOU HEAR OF WOMEN ON THE FRONT LINES NO THIER JOB WAS TO TAKE CARE OF HOME. I APPRECIATE THE FACT WOMEN ARE ALLOWED TO JOIN AND THATS FINE WITH ME. PPL JUST NEED TO LEAVE THINGS ALONE. NOT EVERYONE IN THIS WORLD IS GOING TO BE HAPPEN.
2006-09-27 04:55:59
·
answer #9
·
answered by mrscbaumgardner 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
I don't think there is any place for women on the front line. This is especially so in a war against the Moslem terrorists, who disregard the rights of women and hold them in such contempt
2006-09-27 03:32:16
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋