View Poll Results: Should women be allowed to specialize as infantry

Voters
175. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, and they should be integrated with the males

    101 57.71%
  • Yes, but keep their units seperate from male units

    16 9.14%
  • No, but women should be given some basic infantry skills beyond basic training

    33 18.86%
  • No, women should never serve in a role where they may encounter combat

    15 8.57%
  • Other....

    10 5.71%
Page 76 of 88 FirstFirst ... 2666747576777886 ... LastLast
Results 751 to 760 of 877

Thread: Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?

  1. #751
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    10-26-10 @ 06:34 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,978

    Re: Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    The problem is that the reasons for such things as not allowing women the honor of serving in infantry(or gays to serve openly) are not logical. They come from deep, ingrained programming, and as such, logical arguments are almost always doomed to fail with these people.
    Well, I think the whole "protection of females" idea comes from two things:

    1. Patriarchy- keeping women oppressed so they can't compete with men,
    and
    2. Tribalism- keeping the bloodlines pure. In ancient times, allowing enemies around females was an invitation to rape and pillage; women ended up pregnant and bore the offspring of invaders.
    Now, of course, no woman has to remain pregnant if she doesn't want to, and we've kind of moved beyond the idea that foreign blood is contaminated, anyway, or that bearing the offspring of people who are different from us weakens us as a nation or a people.
    Even in ancient times, people just dealt with this minor inconvenience.
    Jews decided that Jewishness is passed through the maternal line. In many African tribes, nobility passed to the chief's sister's male offspring, rather than to the male offspring of the chief himself. Only by passing leadership on to his nephew could the purity and continuity of the royal bloodline be 100% assured.
    All over Europe, we see the genetic results of ancient plunder; this 'foreign' blood hasn't weakened the European people, it's strengthened them. The Black Irish- who likely have some Iberian blood- can withstand the sun without dying of melanoma, while those of unadulterated celtic blood are unlikely to live to old age without treatment for malignant skin lesions.

    Regardless, we should be beyond that sort of thinking today.
    Unlike some woman from a millenium ago (or a Southern Belle from two centuries ago, or a fundamentalist Islamic woman shrouded in hijaab today), I am not willing to cower in some dark closet and miss participating in the larger world, just because rape- and even impregnation by rape- is a possibility.
    That would be a foolish waste of a life, and we only get one.
    If all women behaved thus, it would be a ridiculous waste of strength and resources as well; we would not have won WWII without the aid and participation of females.
    We will not, as a nation, accomplish future goals, without women working side by side with men as equal partners.

  2. #752
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,592

    Re: Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?

    Quote Originally Posted by 1069 View Post
    Well, I think the whole "protection of females" idea comes from two things:

    1. Patriarchy- keeping women oppressed so they can't compete with men,
    and
    2. Tribalism- keeping the bloodlines pure. In ancient times, allowing enemies around females was an invitation to rape and pillage; women ended up pregnant and bore the offspring of invaders.
    Now, of course, no woman has to remain pregnant if she doesn't want to, and we've kind of moved beyond the idea that foreign blood is contaminated, anyway, or that bearing the offspring of people who are different from us weakens us as a nation or a people.
    Even in ancient times, people just dealt with this minor inconvenience.
    Jews decided that Jewishness is passed through the maternal line. In many African tribes, nobility passed to the chief's sister's male offspring, rather than to the male offspring of the chief himself. Only by passing leadership on to his nephew could the purity and continuity of the royal bloodline be 100% assured.
    All over Europe, we see the genetic results of ancient plunder; this 'foreign' blood hasn't weakened the European people, it's strengthened them. The Black Irish- who likely have some Iberian blood- can withstand the sun without dying of melanoma, while those of unadulterated celtic blood are unlikely to live to old age without treatment for malignant skin lesions.

    Regardless, we should be beyond that sort of thinking today.
    Unlike some woman from a millenium ago (or a Southern Belle from two centuries ago, or a fundamentalist Islamic woman shrouded in hijaab today), I am not willing to cower in some dark closet and miss participating in the larger world, just because rape- and even impregnation by rape- is a possibility.
    That would be a foolish waste of a life, and we only get one.
    If all women behaved thus, it would be a ridiculous waste of strength and resources as well; we would not have won WWII without the aid and participation of females.
    We will not, as a nation, accomplish future goals, without women working side by side with men as equal partners.
    How is it that everything -- everything -- comes back to abortion for you?
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  3. #753
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    10-26-10 @ 06:34 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,978

    Re: Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    How is it that everything -- everything -- comes back to abortion for you?
    The direction this thread has taken is that it is being asserted that "the purpose of civilization is to protect women and children".
    Protect women from what?
    Oh, yeah: rape by and unwanted pregnancy from foreign invaders.

    The fact that abortion is now safe and accessible is both relevant and apt.
    It changes the equation.

    Likewise, in the days when women were unable to control the number of offspring they bore and it was typical for a woman to endure nine to fourteen pregnancies over a reproductive lifetime, there was little possibility of women participating in the world outside the home as the equals of men. They were physically handicapped by pregnancy for the majority of their adult years.
    Again, technology now exists which allows women to control their destinies by controlling their reproductive functions.

    When it is asserted- as it has been many times on this thread- that women are not only not the equals of men but that they are mentally and physically inferior to men, discussion of modern advances that change this long-held belief and render it obsolete are certainly timely and relevant.

  4. #754
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:11 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    You both seem to be under the assumption that the reason women require extra protection is because they are weak, or somehow less capable of defending themselves. The reason that women require more protection from society is not because they are weaker, but because they are more essential to our survival as a nation. A society that loses a generation of its young men is hurt, but it will muddle through; a society that loses a generation of its young women is walking dead.

    Just because someone can protect themselves doesn't mean they don't need society's protection. And just because somebody can't, doesn't mean they deserve it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    Perhaps. Modern warfare is certainly lighter on military casualties than previous methods. But I believe the principle stands: a society that sends its young women off to die in foreign wars has broken moral priorities and is not much longer for this world.

    Exceptions, such as nations facing prolonged war on the homefront, noted.
    You are starting to see the flaw in your argument, but are not quite there. To serve in infantry requires a certain set of physical abilities, which are not as common in women as men. It also requires a certain amount of desire. The percentage of women in our society that have both are very small(< 1 % at a guess). Therefore, the idea that allowing women to choose to serve in infantry same as men is not going to deplete our society of women to a point where it is an issue.


    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    I have no problem with homosexuals serving openly in the military, or gay men serving in combat arms roles.
    Yes, it is an entirely separate issue. I simply think that most of the objections to both stem not from logic, but from an emotional reactions. I did not mean to imply that people against one would be against the other.

  5. #755
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,592

    Re: Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?

    Quote Originally Posted by 1069 View Post
    The direction this thread has taken is that it is being asserted that "the purpose of civilization is to protect women and children".
    Protect women from what?
    Oh, yeah: rape by and unwanted pregnancy from foreign invaders.
    That is what you would see through your uterus-covered lens, I have no doubt.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  6. #756
    Advisor Realist1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    11-27-09 @ 09:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    537

    Re: Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?

    Quote Originally Posted by WI Crippler View Post
    http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...le-troops.html

    That is the discussion that has given birth to this particular poll.

    I want to be clear with the question here. I am asking if you think females should be allowed to serve as infantrymen(persons?) in the military. That means, they are not a cook or aircraft mechanic who has some basic infantry skills gleaned from either boot camp, or extra infantry training like the Marines put all personnell though.

    What we are asking is if you think women should be allowed to be grunts.
    I know I'll be thought of as "out-dated" by this, but when I Served,,,the guys would've placed themselves into danger more often, if women were at risk. That's the Nature of Men...To protect the Women.

  7. #757
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    This may have been true at one time, but is not true in the modern world. The biggest thing holding up women being allowed to serve as infantry is getting past outmoded attitudes held by out of date people who don't realize the world has moved past them.
    Such as...

  8. #758
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    The problem is that the reasons for such things as not allowing women the honor of serving in infantry(or gays to serve openly) are not logical. They come from deep, ingrained programming, and as such, logical arguments are almost always doomed to fail with these people.
    Whatever. If that's what you think then there's no discussion to be had. You and the rest of the enlightened crowd can sit around a pat each other on the back for being oh-so-tolerant while us cavemen just renew our objections to radical changes in military policy based upon nothing more than PC politics.

  9. #759
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?

    Other than physical what can females bring to the battle field? I think they have a lot to add.

  10. #760
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:11 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Such as...
    Such as the idea that women need to have men protect them, as was suggested.

Page 76 of 88 FirstFirst ... 2666747576777886 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •