women in the front line?

Question

Why are women banned from combat .....That is half our Countrys power ....No wonder we can not win a war ....If you shut out half your power and skills (that being women) than you are only half as powrful....Is it fair to do that?

Answer 1

women are physically weaker than a man, and if captured will be raped and possibly murdered to cover up the rape

Answer 2

Well, first, it is an inaccuracy that women are banned from all combat. Women are allowed to serve as combat pilots, and on combat naval vessel.

To answer your question....I believe that all positions in all services should be open to both women and men. However, these positions should be open *only* to those who can meet the standards. The standards should *not* be lowered for women. There *are*, however, women out there who can meet those standards (even if a much smaller number than men), and they should not be prohibited from serving in such positions if they have the desire and meet the standards.

Also, two other remarks, not so much relating directly to the question, but rather to two of the justifications some people have used: To anyone who says that women are unsuitable because they can be raped....You obiviously are unware that men, as well, can be raped. Happens all the time inside prisons, among other places. And to those that say women "can't kill" and that "their actions are driven a lot more by emotion", or "women think with their hearts more than their heads"....This is not neccesarily the case. Both of those statements are generalizations and streotypes, and do not apply to all women any more than the opposite statements would apply to all men (which they do not either). I certainly don't think with my heart and my emotions. I think with my head, just like a lot of other people. And I know plenty of other women who do, as well. For that matter, I also know plenty of men who think with their heart and emotions. How an individual thinks is exactly that--How an *individual* thinks, not how every single member of an entire gender thinks.

Answer 3

Because it is a boys' club. It is very much oriented towards military combat. Women must make the standards required and survive boot camp. There is a lot of evidence that women cannot meet standards for firefighting and police work. I am certainly in favour of women working outside the home. I see nothing wrong with women becoming doctors, surgeons, architects, painters, curators, business leaders or Congresswomen. This is a different matter altogether. If they want to go on the front line, they will be subject to the draft, even if pregnant and married.

Combat is not about communication and teamwork, which are strengths of women. That is why women are so good at management. There is a higher risk of health complications and physical injury. Young children do not like their mothers to be away for long periods of time, as required by military service. Why do you think courts award custody of young children to mothers most of the time? What is she is breastfeeding? Also, the effects of radiation, war, violence and other atrocities would be devastating and the point about female POWS is very good.

Answer 4

you have a good point and as i have read the postings above i have to say that i do agree strongly with lt.wilson's (i think i got the name right) view point. on top of what he said however we all know that our bodies go through the monthly cycle which would likely be a nasty obstacle in combat.

however, having been in the active army myself for six years, i was able to do alot of things that most females even in the marines were not allowed to do (mout training) at the time. i noticed that while i was under alot of stress in life and training my cycle got kicked off balance and was usually later than expected and with that said i think if we were put under an incredibly stressful situations our bodies would likely adapt. also...there are medications one can take or be administered so as not to have your monthly period. So once that became acceptable and the women in the military who wanted to do so and acquire the physical requirements (upper body, and long running endurance with heavy loads) then sure why not allow the gal to go forth and fight? we already have female soldiers who are on the front lines anyway in Iraq for example as MPs and basically anyone who has to drive around (i.e. supply convoys, maintenance trucks, etc...) is on the front line for that matter.

another way to look at it in a completely opposite light from above is that i dont think that we would want females on the front line (or in a submarine either) because not only if they become POWs can they be raped but so could another soldier if that other male soldier becomes so desperate or crazed or whatever would make someone rape another person.

Answer 5

Women are not banned from the front lines, (ie. Jessica Lynch). I've done 2 tours in support of OIF so far, so I am not answering this with the media to support my answer, it's from my personal experience; I only refer to Jessica Lynch because it was well known. Now, there ARE, however, specific career fields that women are banned from, and for very good reason. Take, for example, TACP, they are the AF's front line guys. Given the conditions they are in, weeks, sometimes months out in the field w/o showers or outside contact, throw a woman into that mix, even an unattractive one, and some of the men will eventually lose sight of their mission out there. You can't put them in such a compromising position at a time like that. Also, men tend to have a "soft spot" for women, even if they are "one of the guys". A captured woman could be an easy negotiating tool against the men that were with her for the insurgents. It is not a sexist issue, it is plain and simple behavioral instincts.

Answer 6

lol. how like a man to place everything according to his logic. i wish what you're saying is true but not all women are built like men. if only things were that simple.

"If you shut out half your power and skills (that being women) then you are only half as powrful" --- yes and no. from what ive seen, women act with their heart primarily before their brain. too much expenditure on time and training to get them, i mean us, to the same level as men. and face it, we'll never be as physically as powerful as men.

i think you already know the answer to your question. you just need affirmation. but i have to disagree with you. it isn't fair but what you're proposing has a small probability in this type of society. and besides, women might not be in the battlefield but what do you think keeps the men in the field to survive? "what's a war for but to fight for the one's you love?".

nice mental debate btw.

Answer 7

As a veteran, I can only speak for myself in saying that I think it is a bad idea to have women in combat units. It has nothing to do with their courage because they have proven that by just entering the armed forces. However, aside from the distraction they would cause, they would be subjected to tortures beyond the imagination if they were captured. Make no mistake, a man would endure torture as well if captured, but I think there is a major difference in the anatomy that predisposes a woman to more servere suffering.

Women would be more valuable to our combat troops in supportive roles such as infirmaries, supply, and administrative duties. This would free the men to serve in the combat units. Using the equation that was standard when I served in Vietnam (1965-67), it takes about 7 to 10 people in support units for each man in a line company.

Let's keep our women safe from the horrors of war as much as we can but also keep them in useful functions that help every war effort.

Answer 8

There are some jobs that women are not allowed to do. I was told by my recuiter (USAF) that certain jobs where we work with the Army, like pararescue women can't do. It's not totally because women are typically not as strong as men. (That can be changed just with training) But because of things like periods, and being in a situation where the reproductive organ can be damaged, certain jobs don't allow women. No it's not fair. If a woman can pass the physical requirments for any job, then why not let them do it?

To everyone who says that women are more emotional and weaker and aren't able to kill as easily as men.... F U C K OFF!!! stop generalizing!

Answer 9

I agree with Lt Wilson's perspective. It has been scientifically proven that women (in general) are weaker than men. Most women can't meet the male pt standard especially when it comes to run times, plain and simple. I personally will not base to much on the rape argument. Men can be tortured too and as likely it is for an enemy to be cruel to a woman, it is just as likely for an enemy to treat her with exception i.e. Jessica Lynch. As the military becomes more technologically oriented, this argument will fall away, but until then I agree with the current policy.

Answer 10

Women on the front line.. no.. it is a mans instinct to protect a woman and i would be damned if my husband had to find himself in that situation.. Sometimes front line troops are dug in for many weeks and not that i am being sexist but men are far more superior at dealing with crap like that and what about the time of the month... i certainally wouldnt do it .. men are better at doing front line an what if she was pregnant?

Answer 11

Currently, women are not allowed to serve in combat mos (military occupation specialties) such as infantry, armor and special forces. Additionally, women are prohibited from serving aboard submarines.

I agree with the present policy. Combat specialties require a level of physical capability most women do not have. Additionally to completely integrate combat arms to include that hand full of females physically capable to do the job would be an unnecessary burden.

The military exists to fight and win our wars, not be a bastion of social equality. Now to the progressives this sees to be a ghastly unfair, anachronistic, doctrine meant to keep women in the kitchen.

To Military men (and women) it is a policy that makes sense

respectfully

LT Jason Wilson
United States Navy