• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Should women be allowed to specialize as infantry


  • Total voters
    95
British female soldiers getting pregnant in Iraq and Afghanistan - Digital Journal: Your News Network

US Army covers up an ‘embarrassment’ (Pregnancies)

It happens routinely enough to be considered a problem on many fronts. It causes sexual tension, it often involves married men who have wives back home, and it's a major distraction. I can't imagine a guy being on the battlefield worrying about the women he's sleeping with who is also on the battlefield.

It's just ridiculous and unnecessary. It has no business on the battlefield and it's commonplace enough that the repercussions of the behavior both on the home front and on the battlefield are too significant to ignore.

If I am not missing anything, it is 102 British women pregnant out of 5600 women deployed, or 1.8 %. I don't consider that a significant problem.
 
If I am not missing anything, it is 102 British women pregnant out of 5600 women deployed, or 1.8 %. I don't consider that a significant problem.

Well you might find it more of a specific problem if the guys in your unit were fighting over some chick and this carried over and start messing with the job you were there to do. Or if some guy was supposed to have your back but he's to worried about his sex partner to stay on task.
 
If I am not missing anything, it is 102 British women pregnant out of 5600 women deployed, or 1.8 %. I don't consider that a significant problem.
Probably much lower than a comparable sampling in the general populace. Sex and attraction can happen anywhere, from the whore house to the White House. It can also happen in any stateside military base.

Sex happens. Deal with it.
 
If I am not missing anything, it is 102 British women pregnant out of 5600 women deployed, or 1.8 %. I don't consider that a significant problem.

Well that's with the current rules that deliberately keep women off of certain missions and assignments.
 
Probably much lower than a comparable sampling in the general populace. Sex and attraction can happen anywhere, from the whore house to the White House. It can also happen in any stateside military base.

Sex happens. Deal with it.

And that's where we disagree. The last thing a guy needs on the battlefield is his pregnant girlfriend. :roll:
 
Well you might find it more of a specific problem if the guys in your unit were fighting over some chick and this carried over and start messing with the job you were there to do. Or if some guy was supposed to have your back but he's to worried about his sex partner to stay on task.

Old argument though. Women have been integrated in many military units, and it does work. Surprisingly, people are able to interact without sex constantly dominating how they act. Also, three are lots and lots of rules that are actually enforced(with pretty severe consequences) dealing with how service people do their job. Neglect can be a quick trip in front of the skipper, with 60 days extra duty, 60 days restriction to quarters, loss of one rank, plus half a months pay for 3 months being a common penalty.
 
Well that's with the current rules that deliberately keep women off of certain missions and assignments.

You have shown nothing to suggest the problem would get more severe if front line duty was a possibility for women.
 
And that's where we disagree. The last thing a guy needs on the battlefield is his pregnant girlfriend. :roll:

Pregnant women already are removed from any risk of combat as I understand it. A women in Iraq who gets pregnant is sent home. It's a tool some women use, that is at least not as damaging as guys accidentally getting shot, which is the tool used by men.
 
Old argument though. Women have been integrated in many military units, and it does work. Surprisingly, people are able to interact without sex constantly dominating how they act. Also, three are lots and lots of rules that are actually enforced(with pretty severe consequences) dealing with how service people do their job. Neglect can be a quick trip in front of the skipper, with 60 days extra duty, 60 days restriction to quarters, loss of one rank, plus half a months pay for 3 months being a common penalty.

Yes they have. And it has opened up a host of issues with men getting in trouble for having an affairs - they do face actual military punishment, women getting pregnant while deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc. Sexual harassment issues, men fighting over women, etc.

All of which can't be handled on the battlefield which is why women in most countries are kept off any units assigned for battlefield missions.
 
I see no reason why women can't serve, and be treated as equals, in the infantry. It might be a huge culture shock for some of the men to be confronted with their lack of "delicate little flower-ness", but we all have to grow up sometime.

Having said that, though, the physical standards for qualification should be the same.
 
Well you might find it more of a specific problem if the guys in your unit were fighting over some chick and this carried over and start messing with the job you were there to do. Or if some guy was supposed to have your back but he's to worried about his sex partner to stay on task.

Women already serve as cops and firefighters and somehow manage to fight their way through the irresistible sexual tension of working with men.

:roll:
 
Spare women from any possible harm, sex, and purpose?

No thanks. I'd rather not live under than Taliban
 
Even if you put aside all sexual distractions you are still left with the fact that generally the female body - in it's optimum state - is not as optimal as the male body for the battlefield.

Center for Military Readiness | Women in Combat
Since modern combat is more “high-tech,” why can’t women handle it?

A: In close combat environments, which fit the definition above, physical capabilities are as important as ever. Equipment and survival gear carried by today’s combat soldiers, including electronic weapons and ammunition, satellite communication devices, batteries, and water weigh 50-100 pounds—a burden that is just as heavy as loads carried by Roman legionnaires in the days of Julius Caesar.

Modern body armor alone weighs 25 pounds. This weight is proportionately more difficult to carry by female soldiers who are, on average, shorter and smaller than men, with 45-50% less upper body strength and 25-30% less aerobic capacity, which is essential for endurance. Even in current non-combat training, women suffer debilitating bone stress fractures and other injuries at rates double those of men.

To summarize an enormous body of well-documented evidence produced by physiologists in the U.S. and Britain, in close combat women do not have an “equal opportunity” to survive, or to help fellow soldiers survive.
 
The battlefield is not the place for political correctness and pretending there is no difference between men and women.
 
Although Kevlar helmets and body armor help recruits of both sexes survive injuries that were previously fatal, women are three to four times more likely than men to be injured in battle because of differences in bone structure, aerobic capacity and upper-body strength, says Elaine Donnelley, president of the Center for Military Readiness in Livonia, Mich.

Women's eNews - With More Women at War, Military Rethinks Vet Care
 
The battlefield is not the place for political correctness and pretending there is no difference between men and women.

Who's pretending? Women already serve in high-stress, high-danger jobs, and do so with commendable success. Not every woman is going to WANT to serve in a combat role, but why shouldn't women be allowed to TRY OUT to do so?

PC has nothing to do with this. I don't understand why some women are so averse to allowing other women to live life on their own terms.
 
For some reason, there are some that are averse to discovering that women can be just as tough as men. I don't really get it, personally.

Well it's not altogether irrational when most men I know are stronger than most women I know. If you talk about fine tuned physiques this becomes even more obvious. Clearly there are very fit women who can take down men who aren't optimally fit or men who are generally smaller. But in most cases you put a fit man up against a fit woman in hand to hand combat and the man is gonna trounce her. How am I supposed to pretend to not know this?
 
That is a private organization. They also have problems with gays in the military...

Center for Military Readiness | Problems with Gays in the Military

So you dispute their claim that there are overall differences in bone structure and upper body strength when it comes to men vs women? Or do you dispute their claim that women suffer more fractures and bone related injuries than men during training? Or do you just dispute their un-PC way of stating the claim straight up?
 
I guess I will share this somewhat personal experience to maybe provide some insight for both sides of the argument.

When I was deployed for OIF, I was deplyed to Al Jabr AFB Kuwait, as part of the ACE(air combat element) in support of the Marines on the ground. So I was not in a literal "combat" situation, but I was part of a support unit where women do serve. There were females in my unit, and females that were under my watch as a Corporal at the time.

We fought the good fight, accomplished our mission, and came home.

About a month later, one of my female Marines knocks on my door and her husband is with her. Apparently somebody told him, that she had been sleeping with one of our Sergeants in the unit while we were in Kuwait. I had no ****ing clue as to what the hell they were talking about, and I told him I never saw anything going on myself. However, after inquiring with some of my fellow NCOs, there indeed had been some hanky-panky going on between her and the Sergeant and somebody decided to run it up the chain of command and all sorts of **** happened, with people having to go in and give statements and ll this other garbage. The couple ended up divorcing over it, but somehow the Sergeant in question was able to avoid any punitive actions(as well as the female in question). Basically they couldn't charge on hearsey alone, and since neither one of them admitted to it, there was no evidence they were adulterous.

Did their sexual relationship impact our squadrons ability to perform its mission? No. Did their sexual relationship become a distraction to the unit, after it was made aware to the chain of command? Yes.

You can draw your own conclusions as to whether it would have affected the ability for us to execute our mission, had the chain of command known at the time, or a pregnancy ensued from the relationship.
 
Well it's not altogether irrational when most men I know are stronger than most women I know. If you talk about fine tuned physiques this becomes even more obvious. Clearly there are very fit women who can take down men who aren't optimally fit or men who are generally smaller. But in most cases you put a fit man up against a fit woman in hand to hand combat and the man is gonna trounce her. How am I supposed to pretend to not know this?

Hold the women to equal standards. I have no problem with doing so.

HOwever, I've also seen some scrawny, pencil-necked infantry guys. So, I think you have an overly optimistic view of what the average infantryman looks like and can do.

Israel does it. Are Jewish women inherently more badass than American women? I THINK NOT.
 
How am I supposed to pretend to not know this?
Faith in the God of Political Correctness will see you through.

( Don't Question, Beleeeeeve )
 
Back
Top Bottom