Should Women be allowed to fight on the front line (Debate)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Woody34
  • Start date Start date
W

Woody34

Guest
Just state your answer and elaborate.

Also, im not a sexist, these views are perfectly valid in my opinion, im quite happy for equality in all other arears where realistic, its just this is a hot topic for feminists when i feel they aaren'tseeing the big picture, so i thought why not see some other views.

I personally feel no.
All the petty answers about shielding women from the horrors are a load of tosh.
There are two main reasons why i say no,

1. If anyone goes down wheather it is a 5ft 8" man or a 6ft 6" man everyone has to be able to carry them, and although some women could, the vast majority couldn't, and the few that got in would feel intimidated and outcasts seeing as there are so few women.

2. Men make irrational dedecisions around women that can jejeopardise other men or themselvesfs. Its not a womans fault, however, it is a mans natural response to protect the women after years of being told to.

There are also the lesser reasons like
Time of the month
possibility of strained relationships with other troops
the prospects are far worse if a woman was caught then if a man were.

Discusss
kdunn_a
I didnt mean the hight of the man/woman, i meant the person who is injured, if they fall then everyone must be able to carry them, and the vast majority of men would strugle to carry a 6,6 male so what i was saying is most woman couldnt.
 
now answer this, should women vote, should women have a say in anything should they hold office or do sports, anything a man can do so can a woman.
 
I agree with you and some of your points.

Keep in mind woman can control that time of the month...
Men can have strained relationship with other troops just as well.
 
infantry training and regiments of that nature are all tight knit groups of mates how are the women supposed to bond with the men the same way men will bond with other men ever heard the saying boys will be boys?
 
its proven than lets say a woman and a men hit an (IED) improvised explosive Device and the Girl only has superficial damage but it looks bad and the guy is missing his leg with greater chance of dying the person aiding if it was a guy would go for to help the girl first due instinct.

people that are in medical field know that and they trained to override those instincts.

specially when the war started i saw a couple of girls doing pretty dangerous jobs .

in other hand all female units would be a interesting.
 
As long as they can pass the same battle readyness tests, and can handle a warzone. Because right now, female physical tests are watered down compared to male of the equivalent age height etc
 
I respect your choice to open a debate on this but this is all but decided now. Women have just as much right to die for their country as men do. Furthermore, women are far better at specific tasks within the Army, such as sharpshooting, then men are, purely because they're able to concentrate for longer periods of time. Not a sexist comment. It's medical fact.

This is a real hot potato though and the argument 'the others would get distracted' just doesn't work. The Americans pulled these argument out of the drawer when they decided whether to admit African-Americans into the army. They're simply red herrings.
 
I think putting women on the front line is a really bad idea. You made my point within your question.
Men would make irrational decisions with a women fighting next to him. He would be more concerned with her safety. It's not worth jeopardizing the safety of everyone to make a point that a woman can do everything a man can do.
I'm not a sexist, I think women can do a lot of things better than men. Just as men can do something better than women. We all have roles in society and I just don't think women fighting on the front line is a good idea.
 
On an equality basis, the answer should be yes, however, I think that point 2 has a very strong logic to it.
Men would be far more likely to feel the need to stay with a wounded female that a male. I'm sure that the (non sexual) bonding in a unit is very strong, but I feel that the desire to protect a wounded woman would be more likely to override the "logic" of yelling "MEDIC" and moving on to get the job done.
 
I think that women should be given an equal opportunity as men to fight on the front line. I dont think a decision as big as that is taken lightly, and if a woman is passionate about doing so and is aware of the risks and dangers then she should be allowed to fight.
 
I always answer with this when the question of women in combat roles.

http://www.menstuff.org/issues/byissue/womenincombat.html

P.S. - I know women are in combat, which is cool, just not in combat MOSs, like 11B.
 
you've hit the nail on the head.Especially the idea of her being taken hostage.However, if a woman is willing to take on that risk, and she is strong and fit enough to pass the same tests that other soldiers in the battalion do, I don't see why not.
 
Back
Top