Should women be allowed in direct combat jobs??

Question

Just wondering what everyone else thinks. I've met some pretty fit women that could handle what we do in combat. And I've met alot of men that can't handle it. I wouldn't mind as long as the woman did her job without any problems.

Answer 1

YES

Answer 2

NO

only because women aren't as physically strong, and combat is extremely physical. If a woman can lift what a man can, then yes. Otherwise we are just putting people in danger fopr political correctness. (imagine a woman soldier trying to carry a male soldier to cover)

MISTY: this is not silly, an officer doesn't have time to sacrifice fighting capacity because a female soldier can't lift enough. And all men who go through the army must be able to lift sufficient weight, if women can do this, then fine. Otherwise, it's stupid.

In skills, men excell at combat, it's what we have evolved for. Men have better reactions, better spatial awareness, are stronger, and can handle more pain.

Women should still be allowed in any other parts of the forces. (the air force, the navy, engineering, communications etc)

Also, the army is an abuse culture. Women in the same situation would probably be abused as male soldiers are, and nobody wants that. The feminists who let women into combat would probably then criticise their own decision.

Answer 3

I think a woman should be.

The problems I've heard are that men often feel that they need to protect a woman. This makes them feel that they are not only responsible for themselves, but now they have to watch out for her. This may not be true, but for many men it's ingrained in them.

Also, the woman has to understand that out on the battle field she's genderless...she's a soldier. She has to do her job just like everyone else.

Many also say that women aren't as strong as men and couldn't carry a man off the battle field. Well, this is silly because there are many men who couldn't...plus you can usually get your others to help if needed.

The one thing that most people seem to ignore is what can a woman bring to combat that is uniquely female. Most of the military is so male oriented that they see a woman's view as a liability...or they miss it all together. Women are different then men in problem solving, multi-tasking, and just in the way they think. This could also have it's advantages on the battle field. A different approach, a different solution...something worth looking into in my opinion.

Answer 4

Yes, women are already allowed in direct combat jobs in New Zealand, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Russia, Nepal, and Norway.

If a woman can do the job, why wouldn't she want to serve her country? If she objects, she can do the same as a male objector.

I think we should have a draft and whether male/female, poor/rich, etc you should have to serve. We'll see how many wars we have when some of those old politicians have to see their children or grandkids come back in a body bag.

Here's what American women are "allowed" to do now in the US military:

*Today, women can serve on American combat ships, to include command.
-However women are not permitted to serve on submarines or to participate in special forces programs such as Navy Seals.
-Women are barred from serving in Infantry, Special Operations, Artillery, Armour, and Forward Air Defence.
*Women can fly military aircraft, but make up 2% of all pilots in the US military.
*So far the position closest to combat open to women in the U.S. Army are in the Military Police, where women man machine-guns on armoured Humvees, guarding truck convoys. *Although Army regulations bar women from infantry assignments, some female MPs are detailed to accompany male infantry units to handle search and interrogation of female Iraqi suspects.
*The US Navy, which permits women to serve on almost every other ship in the fleet,
-only allows three exceptions for women being on board military submarines: (1) Female civilian technicians for a few days at most; (2) Women midshipmen on an overnight during summer training for both Navy ROTC and Naval Academy; (3) Family members for one-day dependent cruises.

Good luck!

Answer 5

A lot of women answered yes.
I wonder if they really realize what goes on in direct combat if their answer would be still yes.

There won't be any place to file a sexist complaint or, feminist organizations to complain to, while in the fox hole where they've killed her com rad and purpose to use her and do what ever pleases them with her before leaving her to die or finish her off.

Sorry, the women do not belong in the fox holes along with the men.

Sometimes you need to drop your draws and use it right there in the fox hole.

Answer 6

As a woman who believes in equality, yes. But that thing is, some people believe that a man can handle anything. Gender bias is a bad thing, either way.

Answer 7

They should start sharing the responsibility of protecting and fighting for their country as they are now independant,developed women.

They cannot and should not be viewed as weak because they have broken that steretype image of themselves with the onset of feminism in the 60s.

If they are equal then they should fight in equal numbaers in the same conditions isn't it?

And look at the response frm a female here "they should only volunteer"

Why shouldnt they be drafted they are no longer matriarchs tending and caring for faimilies,they are empowered women thinking about themselves.

The answer to your question is they should be drafted just as any male citizen and they should have all female units.

Why because Soviet female units did amazing work in World War II its time this american independant modern woman started to to bite the bullet.

Answer 8

You're absolutely right. The women (and men) who can handle being in a war zone should be allowed to go there, if there must be war zones at all.

Answer 9

I agree basically with Alexandra (although I suppose women could be in certain technical positions) in saying that women's shouldn't as a general rule be in the military, but that would be only if gender roles were still relatively in place and tradition were applied to society. Since it's not, and since feminism has in short time constructed this "glorious 'equality,'" my answer is YES, women should be drafted and have to serve just like men do. If they want the benefits they should DAMN WELL shoulder the responsibilities.

Answer 10

From what I seen in BCT at fort jackson, co-ed units cause alot of grief and headaches that get in the way of the mission and causes alot of friction between the unit's members. If they can hack it, then I believe they should be allowed their own unit and kept seperate from the men.

Answer 11

Women don't need to be in the millitary. The whole co-ed thing screwed up our armed forces. Jessica Lynch is the only example anyone needs, she shouldn't have been there in the first place.