Poll: Women In Combat? Yea or Nay?

[DefunctTheory]

that's all i WANTED to do when i was in the navy... instead i got shoved in the engine room... though that had more to do with my IQ then my gender... but its not like they even offer special forces or combat to women straight up even though 'supposedly' we 'can'... i haven't seen it in reality -.-

excuse me i had dreams as a little girl to be fucking Janeway or Carter or (now) Fem!Shepard... reality sucks... its rather irritating to walk into a marine recruiting place and all the guys there look at you like you're lost... i thought we were supposed to be over this BS, given the right training women are just as physically capable and wanna know who in my boot camp/schools scored top on gun quals? the girls, not the boys -.- SCREW THIS SEXISM!!!

sure, i can make a million point on why it'd be 'smarter' to not and just stick with guys, but fuck that, we should have the same choices and given the same respect for them, not shoved in a goddamn engine room... i wanted combat medic, they threw me in the engine room, thank you Uncle Sam *flips the bird* -.-

Should have gone Army. At least they don't have that MOS shuffle bullshit.

Not that you could have been a Combat Medic, but at least you could have chosen something medical.

i know army's got something similar, but i'm from a navy family/town, so my choices were marines (which i WANTED!! but they only offered me secretary or 'drive a truck' -.-) or Navy, and since it was blatantly obvious they wouldn't let me do anything remotely holding a gun i wanted combat medic because all i ever wanted to do was go in with the marines and be a badass (ALIENS was my favorite movie growing up... i liked Dietrich) i could pass all the physical requirements, they just kept shuffling me around and i didn't have time to be pussy footing around... there's really no reason they should have been so pissy... but feh, guys and it was in indiana -.- ugh... but whatever, i don't have to deal with that now, i just hope my daughter has less of this bullshit, cause if she's anything like me she's gonna want to hold a gun, shoot the bad guys, keep her party safe and run with the boys being a badass too

its really jarring going from growing up thinking everything's 'fine' and open to you and there's no difference cause there shouldn't be, only to have it pretty much slap you in the face... hrm...

...

I think the Navy may have done you a favor.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

**snip**

Very informative.

I didn't THINK you could get a yeast infection that way, but honestly it isn't something I've looked deeply in to (since they fucking suck).

Um... not sure why you addressed the reply to me, though - I'm fully in agreement with you that "yeast infection" is a terrible excuse (and even if a yeast infection was possible, one of those hard-core prescription suppositories will take care of it).

You might want to send something to the people who argued that point in the first place, since you've just done an excellent job of pointing out why they're full of crap.

 

[Ikasury]

...

I think the Navy may have done you a favor.

-.-

so let me guess, if a guy said that it'd be all honky-dory, but because i say it in a a bit of sarcasm and through the eyes of a childish dream its bad? is that what i'm reading?

fine, i'll be 100 percent serious; i wanted to serve my country to the best of my ability, i wanted to give everything i had and find out the limits of my capabilities, i wanted to be on the front lines and save people's lives... it should not make a difference what my gender is and that should not be considered, AT ALL, in the process, i can shoot as well as any guy, i can do all the physical and mental requirements of the job just as any guy, there is no reason a woman can't do what a guy can, we should be offered the same positions not sugar coated and shoved off to the side to where its 'safe' or we're 'out of the way'...

what's the point in giving us heroines and dreams and the thought that possibly we can do such things when reality is we can't, and for what? the fact i have more genetic information the the guy sitting next to me? i have a higher pain tolerance then him? my reproductive organs are on the inside leaving me without an obvious external weakness? i know have to work harder physically but i can do the same thing...

i could go into detail about how i worked harder then the guys i worked with, how i HAD to work harder then them because i was treated as 'the girl' instead of an equal, but what would be the point... its fine for a guy to play black ops and get it in his head that shooting the bad guys is 'cool' and 'okay' and he can go join the marines with dreamy eyes and do that with nothing behind his actions but selfishness, but hey, if a girl says the same thing, hold up missy, you have overies, off to the office or sonar or some other sitting job for you, you're too delicate with those developed mammeries, plus they're distracting, go on and let the boys do the 'real' work *shoos*

the waves would be pissed...

 

[Lilani]

And contrary to your belief, instead of putting a bunch of "beasts in human guise" up against a wall as you put it; I'd rather keep them but keep women away so they don't get victimized.

Yes, and while we're at it why don't we institute a curfew for women so that they have to be home before dark, in order to prevent stranger-rape? And why don't we make it illegal for women to be drunk around others--that'll stop a lot of drunken rapes, amirite?

 

[Lilani]

Because war zones and your every day American life have so much in common.

You don't happen to live in Detroit do you?

I do not, but as others have said, in a situation where there are people within the military who are willing to rape fellow soldiers, it's a bit frightening the way you want to solve this problem is to take the women away. I mean, if they're willing to do that to female soldiers, God only knows what they're willing to do to female civilians. Those are not the kind of people worth anyone's defense, and they are not the kind of people we should be trusting with our defense.

 

[Yuuki]

Because war zones and your every day American life have so much in common.

You don't happen to live in Detroit do you?

I do not, but as others have said, in a situation where there are people within the military who are willing to rape fellow soldiers, it's a bit frightening the way you want to solve this problem is to take the women away. I mean, if they're willing to do that to female soldiers, God only knows what they're willing to do to female civilians. Those are not the kind of people worth anyone's defense, and they are not the kind of people we should be trusting with our defense.

Then start putting females into combat/infantry roles AFTER a solution to the rape/sexual harassment is found, not the other way around. But that that still wouldn't change women having drastically higher PTSD and fatigue/stress-related injuries (a ton of factual evidence has been put into this thread so far regarding that) putting them out of order faster than males. I would still be against putting women in such environments.
They are free to apply for support roles or any role where they won't face combat, but let men do what men do best and leave them to it...there is a critical job to be done, and the success of that job takes absolute priority over anything else like gender politics. This isn't a matter of equality/rights, it's a matter of life/death & national security.

I continue to believe that the overwhelming majority of people screaming about "gendery equality" when it comes to women in combat/infantry roles have absolutely no clue of the full implications, they live in some kind of ideological dream-world where men and women are 100% equal at everything.

There is SO much more to it than simply meeting the same fitness requirements. So much more...

 

[CHUD]

if a girl says the same thing, hold up missy, you have overies, off to the office or sonar or some other sitting job for you, you're too delicate with those developed mammeries, plus they're distracting, go on and let the boys do the 'real' work *shoos*

I'm with you. Certain parts of society is still stuck in the 50's - but at least they act as a good reminder of why women fought themselves free of such things. And in the end - with time - these chauvinist bastions will fall as well - it just sucks like **** for women in the meantime.

Hopefully our daughters, or at least grand-daughters, will be able to apply for bad-ass positions with no gender-BS given.

 

[chuckdm]

Women can fight. During WWII, there were quite a few women soldiers (hundreds of thousands of them at the very least) fighting for the Russians. They went into some of the fiercest battles like the Battle of Kursk or the Battle of Berlin. The Russian women proved that women could drive tanks, use sniper rifles effectively, use AAA guns and perform admirably well as combat medics. There are too many stories of russian women running onto fields, picking up wounded men and literally hauling them back to the field hospital for these stories to have been made up. Women are capable - but they're often told that they aren't.

This is the single best argument in favor of women in front line combat. Anyone who thinks they somehow can't do it, you're wrong. The russians have been doing it for nearly a century. Perhaps the best example is Lyudmila Pavlichenko, both one of the single most successful snipers in WW2, and the woman with the highest confirmed kill count in history at 309. Think about that. Most men in Iraq never achieve more than 100 confirmed kills today. This lady scored 309 kills, mostly with a freaking SVT-40, which was nowhere near as accurate at range as the Mosin Nagants typical of Soviet Snipers in WW2.

If the Russians saw the value of female combat troops in WW2, what does it say about America and western Europe that most of us want to keep them off Submarines and such, 70+ years later?

 

[Yuuki]

Women can fight. During WWII, there were quite a few women soldiers (hundreds of thousands of them at the very least) fighting for the Russians. They went into some of the fiercest battles like the Battle of Kursk or the Battle of Berlin. The Russian women proved that women could drive tanks, use sniper rifles effectively, use AAA guns and perform admirably well as combat medics. There are too many stories of russian women running onto fields, picking up wounded men and literally hauling them back to the field hospital for these stories to have been made up. Women are capable - but they're often told that they aren't.

This is the single best argument in favor of women in front line combat. Anyone who thinks they somehow can't do it, you're wrong. The russians have been doing it for nearly a century. Perhaps the best example is Lyudmila Pavlichenko, both one of the single most successful snipers in WW2, and the woman with the highest confirmed kill count in history at 309. Think about that. Most men in Iraq never achieve more than 100 confirmed kills today. This lady scored 309 kills, mostly with a freaking SVT-40, which was nowhere near as accurate at range as the Mosin Nagants typical of Soviet Snipers in WW2.

If the Russians saw the value of female combat troops in WW2, what does it say about America and western Europe that most of us want to keep them off Submarines and such, 70+ years later?

I didn't know "frontline combat" was about driving tanks, using AAA guns or firing sniper rifles from half a mile away (which btw even a teenager could do, given enough training) and treating injuries on the battlefield. If it is, sure, let women into those roles.

I thought this thread was about actual combat-heavy infantry roles like being in the USMC (United States Marine Corps). Women are currently not allowed to apply for a good freaking reason, they absolutely do not belong there. The kind of brutal physical torture on the body = most MEN start falling apart in just a couple of days. A women stands absolutely no chance.

 

[Costia]

There is an Israeli mixed unit named Caracal. So women can fight, there is no question about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caracal_Battalion
Their post army service injuries seem to be more frequent/severe than men's. This is mostly due to the standard training process being designed for a man's body build and needs to be tweaked for a woman. And by tweaked I don't mean made easier - I mean different.

Edit: not sure it matters, but I personally know a girl that served in Caracal. She's a normal girl, nothing extreme or physically special. Just a lot of motivation.

 

[PirateRose]

Attention: Sexual assault victims in the military are mostly men. Sexual assault in the military has really been going on for decades in the military, reports these days are bubbling up from clear back to Vietnam. But, because of the extreme shame put on a man being violated by another man, people try to pretend the problem doesn't exist. Men don't get raped! Only women do! These men are too scared to fully admit and press charges and the Pentagon won't address it. Women are more likely to speak up about it and fight the issue when ignored.

In a 2012 study, out of 26,000 sexual assault cases in the military surveyed, 14,000 were men. link [http://www.saveservices.org/2013/05/victims-of-sex-assaults-in-military-are-mostly-silent-men/]


So please don't use that lame excuse that women shouldn't join the military because they might be raped by sex deprived, stressed out men. With that logic, no human being should ever join the military because even men are at risk.

Bottom line, rape is not about sexual pleasure. It's about having power over someone else.

 

[Nghtgnt]

Before I have more words put in my mouth or get my morals questioned, I'd like to make something abundantly clear; I will not ever, ever, FUCKING EVER, defend a rapist.

Now where to begin; aside from rape, the military in general has a much higher problem with almost everything when compared to civilian population. I mean sexual assault, alcoholism/drunk driving, suicide, and other problems; and while not in sheer numbers, the percentages are higher. This is due to stresses that the job puts on us and at times our loved ones.

"In FY2010, there were 3,158 total reports of sexual assault in the military. The DOD estimates that this number only represents 13.5% of total assaults in 2010, making the total number of military rapes and sexual assaults in excess of 19,000 for FY 2010."

http://servicewomen.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/DOD-Releases-2011-Report-on-Military-Sexual-Assault.pdf

I recently read somewhere that lately the rate of suicides in the military is actually lower then the general population. Wish I could remember where.

As for the sexual assault bit, I'll just reference my earlier post:

Secondly, some people were talking about sexual assaults in the military - despite what the media and "documentaries" and politicians would have you believe, the military is NOT filled with rapists. In fact, the numbers are horribly misleading and you can find a pretty good analysis as to why here [http://rokdrop.com/2013/05/20/how-the-special-interests-are-sensationalizing-the-military-sexual-assault-issue-and-i-have-the-facts-to-prove-it/]. This isn't to say it doesn't happen, or that ANY amount sexual assault is acceptable, just that people are misleading the public.

 

[oZode]

It doesn't matter much since everyone's going to be piloting drones by 2050 anyhow.

While that is depressing, it is certainly the trend. Warfare is no longer running in with a rifle and shooting people, it is more sniping from miles away and piloting drones of many sorts. Much more based in infiltrating and precision strikes, with technology doing most the work. For that reason it is not a big deal to me. Even morseo when we get far enough into the future and nanofibre muscle suits or something makes physical requirements less a issue since gender don't matter when you can put on a suit that makes you carry have a ton with ease.

Take for instance how in halo the gender of a spartan 2 had no impact on the appearance of the character, only the voice. Sure with the sheaper 3s and 4s there was difference in the hips, the suit and genetic mods made up for the biological physical weakness a female is given due to the oppressive nature of nature.

Not that I consider halo realistic at all since by the year 2500 spartans sure as hell won't be the only things with genetic mods nor would marine infantry be practical at all. But alien drones vs human drones is no fun.

 

[Thaluikhain]

It doesn't matter much since everyone's going to be piloting drones by 2050 anyhow.

Er...yes, there will be more use of remotely piloted planes rather than ones with the pilot in the cockpit.

But, what difference does that make to the people on the ground? Infantry have had air support since WW2, they are still important. You still need infantry for a variety of roles your planes, piloted remotely or not, cannot fulfill.

 

[Boris Goodenough]

You still need infantry for a variety of roles your planes, piloted remotely or not, cannot fulfill.

What do you mean? Drones can't win the hearts and minds of the people? I say poppycock!

 

[CellarDweller]

As long as there's no diluting of the standards or bending of the rules (as there was with the first British female Commandos, they did the course in installments) and they don't end up becoming what we would call "the troop handbrake" and end up slowing everyone else down then why not.

Currently women (in the British Army) are allowed a shower every 3 days in the field, not sure how they'd get round this one.

 

[Karthak]

Women can't cope with frontline combat?
Speaking as a male, that sounds damn silly to me.
http://www.badassoftheweek.com/dahomey.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahomey_Amazons
http://aidanmoher.com/blog/featured-article/2013/05/we-have-always-fought-challenging-the-women-cattle-and-slaves-narrative-by-kameron-hurley/

For instance, the Mino, a military unit founded by the king of Dahomey that consisted solely of women. And guess what? They were a goddamn terror to their enemies, with a penchant for decapitation.