Should women be able to fight on the frontlines?

[Elfgore]

I just learned today that women can't fight on the frontlines in wartime, they can only be supporting roles like MPs and whatnot. So I think women should have a choice if they fight on the frontlines or not if they sign up, because I'm guessing some women want to fight on the frontlines but make it their choice. So just wanted to see what other people thought on the matter is.

 

[Wadders]

In theory, as long as they can equal men in all aspects of military life, then there's no reason why not.

However, problems arise when combining men and women in a war-zone I would think. Relationships would arise which would not be conducive for either soldier to do their jobs, or worse, rape would probably increase.

Then there's the whole issue of toilets and other facilities that cannot really be shared, as well as the idea that supposedly men act differently when women are at risk in war, doing stupid stuff (although i cant see why a man would risk himself for his mate any less than he would for a female soldier, but I'm not an expert...)

 

[Ryokai]

As a soldier in the IDF, (Go Givati Brigades!), I've heard a lot about this from the Karakal girls (the only infantry unit that allows girls in). The fact is, the average girl has smaller lungs and much less muscle mass than a man--frankly, they can't keep up with men in combat, giving them a huge disadvantage.

Obviously, there are exceptions to the rule--however, not enough of them to justify the expense and hassle of a frontline female combat unit--which is why even the Karakal infantry is always kept back from the frontlines during war.

 

[KingmanHighborn]

Honestly I think if your going to try and make this nation (The USA) a 'nation of equality' then women should be put on the frontlines wheter they want to or not, and no backing out. In fact when not if a draft is ever renacted here, men and women of age should be taken into military service, given the equal breakdown, and build up basic gives them, handed a weapon and uniform and set in to do the job.

 

[staika]

It comes down to that women are genetically smaller than men. What this means is that women soldiers in front line combat have problems keeping up with men in a combat situation. there are also different problems that arise such as the male tendency to want to protect females and as such if a female soldier goes down it's more of a shock to the male troops morale. But I like what were doing now with the military in terms of the women soldiers and I see no reason to change it just so we can say were politically correct.

 

[Javarock]

"male tendency to want to protect females and as such if a female soldier goes down it's more of a shock to the male troops morale. But I like what were doing now with the military in terms of the women soldiers and I see no reason to change it just so we can say were politically correct." -Staika

Completely correct. Im not sure when but were there not studys done that proved this?

Dunno.

EDIT:

Its not that I have anything againsit the idea its more or less the effect it will have on the others in the unit.

 

[0mn1p0t3ntg6y]

Why not? We had women's suffrage, and it was WAY too late but now they got equal rights. Let them fight some xenophobic politician's war if they want.

 

[TheIronRuler]

This topic has been rehashed countless times.
Where did you learn that?
What army are you reffering to, because not all of us live where you do.

 

[FalloutJack]

If they want to, sure. My cousin was in the army, so why not?

 

[itstimeforpie]

I'm in the canadian forces, in an infantry unit, there there was one girl on my infantry training course, and there was a female instructor, the way it seems to me is we allow them in the infantry if they can do the work, but its uncommon at least.

 

[Viking Incognito]

I think they should be able to.

 

[Dogstile]

Oh look, its this thread again.

As stated above, its because it has a psychological effect on the men fighting, plus women aren't built like we are. People who don't understand that should study the human body more. Men have bigger muscle mass, respond better to stress and fatigue and their are studies that prove all of this.

Sorry women, just sign up to the supply lines. Plenty of supply units see combat.

Edit:

Before I get quoted a gazillion times on "some women can handle it". Yeah, some, not all. The army tends to not want to waste time finding out. Its rare.

 

[Kevonovitch]

dunno what country your from, but yeah they already do here?

 

[Akalistos]

Sure they should. They can knock themselves out.

However, problems arise when combining men and women in a war-zone I would think. Relationships would arise which would not be conducive for either soldier to do their jobs, or worse, rape would probably increase.


Then there's the whole issue of toilets and other facilities that cannot really be shared, as well as the idea that supposedly men act differently when women are at risk in war, doing stupid stuff (although i cant see why a man would risk himself for his mate any less than he would for a female soldier, but I'm not an expert...)

For relationship... we are in 2011 dude. What about gays in the army, you think they won't develop one? Don't blame that on Women serving their country. Beside, the fact that they are on the sideline doesn't stop that from occurring in any ways. If one cannot perform his duty, HE or SHE should be put on the sideline.

I know rape still happen but with how many girls are in the military, I think that's when down a bit. Beside, if they are deployed to war even on the sideline, the equipment and facility are there. Think about this for a minute, do you think they are flew to a war zone when they are needed and flew back to their home or they stay in the camp?

 

[artanis_neravar]

As a soldier in the IDF, (Go Givati Brigades!), I've heard a lot about this from the Karakal girls (the only infantry unit that allows girls in). The fact is, the average girl has smaller lungs and much less muscle mass than a man--frankly, they can't keep up with men in combat, giving them a huge disadvantage.

Obviously, there are exceptions to the rule--however, not enough of them to justify the expense and hassle of a frontline female combat unit--which is why even the Karakal infantry is always kept back from the frontlines during war.

IDF is Israeli Defense Forces?

OT: Yes they should they should also have to sign up for the draft

 

[flying_whimsy]

"male tendency to want to protect females and as such if a female soldier goes down it's more of a shock to the male troops morale. But I like what were doing now with the military in terms of the women soldiers and I see no reason to change it just so we can say were politically correct." -Staika

Completely correct. Im not sure when but where there not studys done that proved this?

Dunno.

I'm sympathetic to this view; although having women not treated equally at any point still rubs me a little bit the wrong way, but I feel like this might be one of those instances where it's necessary.

There's also the potential harm women can face if captured, especially if fighting in a region where women do not have equal rights. I shudder at the thought of some of the tortures women could be made to endure that men are not able to face.

 

[masher]

Isn't the idea that a male soldier-of-war would most likely be tortured or killed, while a female soldier-of-war would most likely be raped, or something?

 

[FallenTraveler]

I just learned today that women can't fight on the frontlines in wartime, they can only be supporting roles like MPs and whatnot. So I think women should have a choice if they fight on the frontlines or not if they sign up, because I'm guessing some women want to fight on the frontlines but make it their choice. So just wanted to see what other people thought on the matter is.

I think this is logical actually, have the generally stronger sex out getting killed, keep the main ingredient to reproducing out. It makes sense to do it, now, is that necessarily right, who knows. I do know that men tend to rape each other less than they would a woman though.

Also, I am not trying to be sexist, it's just logical, have the "tougher" of the sexes go out and defend us. I fully support women in the military, but in times of crisis or worldwar, yeah, this makes sens.

Although, yes, if it is a womans choice to go out, then sure, let 'em. I think those women should be allowed to sign up for the draft then too.

 

[Dense_Electric]

Oh look, its this thread again.Before I get quoted a gazillion times on "some women can handle it". Yeah, some, not all. The army tends to not want to waste time finding out. Its rare.

The army tends to not waste it's time find - what? What the fuck is basic training then?

EDIT: But yes, I stand by what I've said. Strength, muscle mass, lung capacity, speed, whatever, are individual traits. "On average" or "typically" doesn't apply when you're talking about an individual person. If someone can do it, there's no reason they shouldn't be allowed to. If they can't, don't let them. It's as simple as that.

Now do you see how I did not once mention gender in that whole thing there?