Women in the military

Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by Bjarki, Feb 14, 2009.

  1. Bjarki

    Bjarki Registered Member

    Do you think armies should recruit females?
    On a voluntary basis or even as part of a general mandatory draft?
    On the frontline or merely in support of the frontlines?

    In my opinion women should get the same rights (and plights) as men, but the thought of women fighting on the frontlines against their will (as part of general conscription) makes me somewhat uneasy. So in all honesty I don't know. :stare:

    I found this piece of info on wiki, pretty interesting stuff:

  2. Xeilo

    Xeilo Registered Member V.I.P. Lifetime

    I have no problem with females being in the military, but don't think they should be on the front line, for the same reasons. Females would just make the males have a different state of mind during missions when they come under fire.
  3. ILOVEUSA911

    ILOVEUSA911 Registered Member

    I agree. Most men are raised and have a natural instinct to protect women. I can see where it might be difficult for them to see a woman in danger and not want to protect her. Or see a woman killed and feel like they should have done something more to protect her, when there was really nothing more they could have done.

    Having said that, I have no doubt women could do the job and get er done.
  4. Xeilo

    Xeilo Registered Member V.I.P. Lifetime

    Also the fact that there could be more going on if women were out with men and for a long time, sex would most come into the picture. Then what would happen, men would start fighting over woman and worst case she could become pregnant and would have to be sent home and then they would have to get a replacement.
  5. ysabel

    ysabel /ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5

    As long as someone is qualified to do the job, one's gender shouldn't be a problem. If the presence of women in combat is so distrubing to a male soldier, then it's a training problem with his discipline. Imagine if the enemies find this out? All they need to do is send their females to the front line.
  6. PretzelCorps

    PretzelCorps Registered Member

    Gee, which should I choose.... Defend my country from invasion... Get laid... Defend my country... Get laid...


    I think women have every right to step up to the plate, provided they're absolutely sure of what they're getting into and that they're capable of doing what they are tasked --> It's the responsibility :)rolleyes:) of the men to keep it in their Goddamned pants.

    Men need to stop treating women like commodities.

    Women need to stop allowing themselves to be treated like commodities.
  7. pro2A

    pro2A Hell, It's about time!

    My thoughts are this. Women are emotional. Combat is hell. The two don't mix. I believe they can be useful in military support roles i.e. medical, supply, and intel. They are simply too emotional for infantry or other combat positions when the going gets tough. Combat positions should be left to the men.
  8. Wade8813

    Wade8813 Registered Member

    I'm unsure how I feel about it. I have absolutely no problem with women being in the military - although in today's military, there are no real front lines, which means women will be in the line of fire, at least to some extent, unless we keep them out of Iraq/Afghanistan entirely (which doesn't seem like a good solution).

    It seems unfair to restrict women in any way, but all of the evidence seems to indicate that men are hardwired to respond to women in distress, which could interfere with military operations.

    1. I'm pretty sure that trying to override something that's genetically programmed into people can be harmful psychologically. Not to mention the fact that it might not even work. And the fact that it might be a good thing for men to have.

    2. There's a big difference between a woman who's on your side, and a woman who's aiming a gun at your face.

    This has NOTHING to do with men not being able to keep it in their pants.
    Women in general may be more emotional than men, but not all women are more emotional than all men. So that doesn't hold up.
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2009
  9. ysabel

    ysabel /ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5

    1. But is it really genetically programmed? Or isn't it more culturally programmed?

    2. Still, it is being ruled by emotion. When you're in combat, you're supposed to not have to deal with that interfering with your goal.
  10. PretzelCorps

    PretzelCorps Registered Member

    It's also genetically genetically hardwired into most people to run like fucking hell when things that make you die start flying past your face.

    I don't think it's a question of "will women affect performance?" Why couldn't a woman just be treated as another team-member? If, hypothetically, a soldier is actually going to drop everything, and sacrifice everyone else to save the woman, is that person really fit for military service?

    Sure, it's a noble idea, but keep in mind that a woman that actually successfully joins the military isn't going to be a woman that wants to be protected by the big, strong man when the shit hits the fan.

    I quote:


Share This Page