• 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!

What's your opinion on female soldiers?

How do you feel about female soldiers?

  • Like them, GI Jane is HOT

    Votes: 13 26.0%
  • Like them, but not on the front lines

    Votes: 10 20.0%
  • I'm a realist, I don't like them

    Votes: 5 10.0%
  • Potato

    Votes: 22 44.0%

  • Total voters
    50
She can survive. What do you think women did prior to pads/tampons? They made do with what they had. If the woman wants to do the job, she won't let something like her period prevent it.

And you still failed to recognize the fact that men need more food overall than women so even if she needed a little more during her period, she would still likely not be any shorter on food than the guys. It would not be any more performance affecting for her than it would be the guys.

There are plenty of reasons to keep the majority of women out of combat, just due to not being able to physically do the job. Trying to make excuses involving a period (which we can control with drugs, implants, etc.) is just plain nitpicking. Plus, the majority of our guys are not out for weeks or even days at a time without food and water or other provisions. Not in the wars/conflicts we are currently involved.

Gee whiz, lady. I' just saying that being at 98% ain't enough in a leet unit. And tomorrow, or soon enough, I'll be hearing all about how terrible periods are. And when I hear that crap, Ima tell 'em "talk ta roguenuke!"
 
Gee whiz, lady. I' just saying that being at 98% ain't enough in a leet unit. And tomorrow, or soon enough, I'll be hearing all about how terrible periods are. And when I hear that crap, Ima tell 'em "talk ta roguenuke!"

Good, tell em. Most women who have been in can tell you that there are much bigger concerns than your period. Even from just my experience on a ship.

And if 98% is enough for the men, then its enough for the women. Not all the men are going to be at 100% just because they don't have a period if facing the same conditions you described before.
 
Good, tell em. Most women who have been in can tell you that there are much bigger concerns than your period. Even from just my experience on a ship.

And if 98% is enough for the men, then its enough for the women. Not all the men are going to be at 100% just because they don't have a period if facing the same conditions you described before.

Hey, lady, you ain't gonna trick me into saying periods ain't nothin'. Are you tryin' ta get me killed?
 
Hey, lady, you ain't gonna trick me into saying periods ain't nothin'. Are you tryin' ta get me killed?

What are you talking about? People are what they are. In the military they are tools. Well equipped, well trained (hopefully, for both) tools. We adapt and overcome. How exactly would a woman being on her period be more likely to get you killed than the guy having to go without cigarettes or the guy who lost all of his socks/water or got injured dropping into a zone?

You run out or forget bandaids, you make them. The same is true with things like pads (shouldn't really be using tampons when there is a chance that you can't change them for more than 8 hours, would cause many more issues). Planning ahead is the best way to deal with such issues. Pads easily fit in the many pockets we have and for most women, they could get by with 3, maybe 4 as backup for a couple of days (about how long a period would be heavy enough flow to be a concern). It is easily preventable for a woman's period to become a real issue if she were in a combat unit. Most likely not any worse of a situation than a heavy smoker running out of cigarettes because of being out for the same amount of time (and don't tell me that this isn't a problem, I know many men in the military who smoke and who get irritable going without for so long, particularly days, the length of time it would take for a woman on her period to face real problems because of it.
 
GI Jane is hot, puhleeze.....

Soldiers are soldiers. If they are capable, then it would be foolish to turn them away on grounds of them having a vagina. Still wondering about female Navy SEALs though.
 
What are you talking about? People are what they are. In the military they are tools. Well equipped, well trained (hopefully, for both) tools. We adapt and overcome. How exactly would a woman being on her period be more likely to get you killed than the guy having to go without cigarettes or the guy who lost all of his socks/water or got injured dropping into a zone?

You run out or forget bandaids, you make them. The same is true with things like pads (shouldn't really be using tampons when there is a chance that you can't change them for more than 8 hours, would cause many more issues). Planning ahead is the best way to deal with such issues. Pads easily fit in the many pockets we have and for most women, they could get by with 3, maybe 4 as backup for a couple of days (about how long a period would be heavy enough flow to be a concern). It is easily preventable for a woman's period to become a real issue if she were in a combat unit. Most likely not any worse of a situation than a heavy smoker running out of cigarettes because of being out for the same amount of time (and don't tell me that this isn't a problem, I know many men in the military who smoke and who get irritable going without for so long, particularly days, the length of time it would take for a woman on her period to face real problems because of it.

Huh, what?

Oh, yeah... I'm listening. I was. You were talking about periods. Go ahead...
 
Huh, what?

Oh, yeah... I'm listening. I was. You were talking about periods. Go ahead...

Proving how easy it is to distract/lose a guy from a particular "conversation" by just bringing up details of the menstrual cycle.
 
Proving how easy it is to distract/lose a guy from a particular "conversation" by just bringing up details of the menstrual cycle.

You're so smart.
 
Hey, Muddy, take notes.
 
Stupid poll is stupid, for bajillions of reasons already explained. Sex object or women are inferior? Hmm. I vote potato.

Women can do anything they... qualify to do. And there are some women who can qualify to do almost anything in the military. Probably not a majority, as has been mentioned, but if they can do it there's no reason they shouldn't be allowed to.

But this is a really weird one...

Same standards and, for infantry, the female must do something to prevent her period. Bleeding costs too many calories when they are few, the mission is long and there's no logistics. We can't carry extra gear (nor adjust uniform packs for such), even one person, and we cannot carry extra calories.

I'm sure that sounds bad, but I've been (airborne) infantry and obviously someone bleeding is a problem. We're hungry, we're tired and we've got 10 klicks tonight - bleeding would make such miserable and maybe impossible unassisted, from the additional exhaustion.

ps. Poll is useless.

Women are built to do the ole' clean out once a month. I've actually had my iron levels tested before and at the end, and it hardly changed. It was very solidly in the healthy range both times. I don't feel more tired either. I admit I want a pizza a bit more than usual, but I won't die if I don't get it. I'm sure your average soldier wants all kinds of things that they can't have.

Women need a lot less food than men. A LOT. In biological terms (and this is typical of most primates), males need slightly more than their environment typically provides, and women need dramatically less. So even if women actually did require more calories during menstruation, it would still be a lot less than a male requires.

There are also products to deal with menstruation that would cause virtually no strain on the military. No waste, an entire day of management, dirty cheap. Not a problem.

In reality, most women don't spend all day being miserable from their period. Mostly hardly notice except when they have to actually change out whatever they're using.

Menstruation does not impair a woman. If it does, then she has a medical problem, and her finesses in light of that should be assessed like any other medical problem.
 
I admit I want a pizza a bit more than usual, but I won't die if I don't get it. I'm sure your average soldier wants all kinds of things that they can't have.

I'm not talking about the average soldier. I'm talkin' about two weeks on what's in the ruck you jump with. And you have ambushes to conduct, klicks apart, every night.
 
I'm not talking about the average soldier. I'm talkin' about two weeks on what's in the ruck you jump with. And you have ambushes to conduct, klicks apart, every night.

There is no reason a woman on her period can't do that, if she could do it before her period.
 
There is no reason a woman on her period can't do that, if she could do it before her period.

It's freezing cold, raining and you get little sleep. There's no point in changing into the spare uniform in your ruck because it's wet too.

Like that, for two weeks, and a minor bleeding/discomfort can become mission jeopardizing. It's like starting with a minor injury. I think if I bled and had other discomforts, it would have made it perhaps unbearable.

Anyway, given that such impacts must be evaluated in real world conditions and with respect to individuals, how about we look at something more concrete. Like, for example, how does the Israeli government do it. Are there segregated standards, are elite infantrywomen on the pill/other, are there any elite infantrywomen...
 
Last edited:
She can survive. What do you think women did prior to pads/tampons? They made do with what they had. If the woman wants to do the job, she won't let something like her period prevent it.

And you still failed to recognize the fact that men need more food overall than women so even if she needed a little more during her period, she would still likely not be any shorter on food than the guys. It would not be any more performance affecting for her than it would be the guys.

There are plenty of reasons to keep the majority of women out of combat, just due to not being able to physically do the job. Trying to make excuses involving a period (which we can control with drugs, implants, etc.) is just plain nitpicking. Plus, the majority of our guys are not out for weeks or even days at a time without food and water or other provisions. Not in the wars/conflicts we are currently involved.

A woman's period does pose certain concerns. Someone who is continually bleeding for a week or more is going to be very easy for dogs to detect, for instance. This would make covert operations behind enemy lines using female soldiers rather iffy.

Furthermore, correct me if I'm wrong here, but quite a few women tend to become physically ill during their periods. This could cause significant issues on an extended field op.

Would a female soldier doing physically challenging work in the field during her period need to take dietary supplements (iron, zinc, etca) to make up for what's she's losing every day?

Women need a lot less food than men. A LOT. In biological terms (and this is typical of most primates), males need slightly more than their environment typically provides, and women need dramatically less. So even if women actually did require more calories during menstruation, it would still be a lot less than a male requires.

Yes, because they're physically smaller and carry around a larger fat reserve.

However, neither of those facts really make for a compelling argument for having them go toe-to-toe with men in frontline combat.
 
Last edited:
It's freezing cold, raining and you get little sleep. There's no point in changing into the spare uniform in your ruck because it's wet too.

Like that, for two weeks, and a minor bleeding/discomfort can become mission jeopardizing. It's like starting with a minor injury. I think if I bled and had other discomforts, it would have made it perhaps unbearable.

Anyway, given that such impacts must be evaluated in real world conditions and with respect to individuals, how about we look at something more concrete. Like, for example, how does the Israeli government do it. Are there segregated standards, are elite infantrywomen on the pill, are there any elite infantrywomen...

Like I said, no reason a woman can't do that menstruating if she can do it not menstruating.

I really don't notice my period most of the time. Most women who don't have medical issues don't notice it much. And incidentally, a lot of medical issues are fixed by improved physical conditioning.

You think, as a man, it would be unbearable. I'm telling you, as a woman, and a woman who has talked to a lot of other women, it's a fact of life and it's not that big a deal.

Healthy women do not experience a decline in health during menstruation. Actually a lot of women I've talked to think they feel "refreshed" about half-way through their period. It's like a monthly spring cleaning.
 
The thing about a period that would worry me the most would be cramping, nausea and abdominal pain some women experience. I've met women that have terrible cramps that leave them in a lot of pain. I would be concerned that it may impact their abilities as a soldier/infantry if they started their period and experienced the listed conditions.
 
Last edited:
Like I said, no reason a woman can't do that menstruating if she can do it not menstruating.

I really don't notice my period most of the time. Most women who don't have medical issues don't notice it much. And incidentally, a lot of medical issues are fixed by improved physical conditioning.

You think, as a man, it would be unbearable. I'm telling you, as a woman, and a woman who has talked to a lot of other women, it's a fact of life and it's not that big a deal.

Healthy women do not experience a decline in health during menstruation. Actually a lot of women I've talked to think they feel "refreshed" about half-way through their period. It's like a monthly spring cleaning.


Dad, they're doing it again!
 
A woman's period does pose certain concerns. Someone who is continually bleeding for a week or more is going to be very easy for dogs to detect, for instance. This would make covert operations behind enemy lines using female soldiers rather iffy.

Furthermore, correct me if I'm wrong here, but quite a few women tend to become physically ill during their periods. This could cause significant issues on an extended field op.

Would a female soldier doing physically challenging work in the field during her period need to take dietary supplements (iron, zinc, etca) to make up for what's she's losing every day?



Yes, because they're physically smaller and carry around a larger fat reserve.

However, neither of those facts really make for a compelling argument for having them go toe-to-toe with men in frontline combat.

Proper product use would easily solve that. Not to get TMI on you, but menstrual cups can be used internally and left in there for 12-24 straight hours if need be. The military would only need to issue one per woman. A woman could handle emptying it the same way she handles other waste that could identify any other person -- probably by burying or other containment measures.

Depends what you mean by "quite a few." A healthy woman doesn't have significant symptoms during her period. I imagine it's pretty common for anyone in those conditions to get minor discomforting ailments like a headache or a stomach ache. A healthy woman doesn't experience anything that's any more significant than that. Some don't experience any discomfort.

A healthy woman also does not lose substantial iron. If her iron levels were healthy pre-menstruation, they will remain healthy during. Women are BUILT to do this. And they are able to do it without become ill.

But if it's some major concern, just put more iron in their rations. It wouldn't cost more -- or even as much -- as male rations, because women don't require as much.
 
Last edited:
Like I said, no reason a woman can't do that menstruating if she can do it not menstruating.

I remain skeptical of this claim. Periods hit some women harder than others.

I really don't notice my period most of the time. Most women who don't have medical issues don't notice it much. And incidentally, a lot of medical issues are fixed by improved physical conditioning.

True, but that is in "three square meals a day and in bed by 10PM" civilian land. When you're marching 10 plus miles every day over rough terrain in temperatures of 100 degrees or more, sleeping 2 to 3 hours a night (if at all), and living off of barely nutritious rationed food, things can change rather quickly.

We had three or four women drop out during basic training due to stress fractures in their femurs and pelvises brought on by nutritional deficiency and the excessively physical work load, and that was with three square meals a day and 6-8 hours of dedicated sleep every night. Real combat is much, much more strenuous; particularly for a dedicated infantryman.

"A little lost blood" might prove to be more damning than you might think.
 
I remain skeptical of this claim. Periods hit some women harder than others.

Yes. And a woman who has medical issues related to her period should be assessed like any other candidate with medical issues. But it is not the norm for women to spend their period sick.

True, but that is in "three square meals a day and in bed by 10PM" civilian land. When you're marching 10 plus miles every day over rough terrain in temperatures of 100 degrees or more, sleeping 2 to 3 hours a night (if at all), and living off of barely nutritious rationed food, things can change rather quickly.

We had three or four women drop out during basic training due to stress fractures in their femurs and pelvises brought on by nutritional deficiency and the excessively physical work load, and that was with three square meals a day and 6-8 hours of dedicated sleep every night. Real combat is much, much more strenuous; particularly for a dedicated infantryman.

"A little lost blood" might prove to be more damning than you might think.

A women who experiences something like that in basic must have had nutritional deficiencies LONG before she entered the military. You don't destroy your bones in a matter of weeks. That is not surprising, given the way women these days are pressured to under-eat, or eat things with little nutritional value.

Menstruation has nothing to do with that. An average woman loses 2 or 3 tablespoons of blood over the course of several days to a week, and that blood isn't even coming from her circulatory store. That's pretty much nothing.
 
Proper product use would easily solve that. Not to get TMI on you, but menstrual cups can be used internally and left in there for 12-24 straight hours if need be. The military would only need to issue one per woman. A woman could handle emptying it the same way she handles other waste that could identify any other person -- probably by burying or other containment measures.

Depends what you mean by "quite a few." A healthy woman doesn't have significant symptoms during her period. I imagine it's pretty common for anyone in those conditions to get minor discomforting ailments like a headache or a stomach ache. A healthy woman doesn't experience anything that's any more significant than that. Some don't experience any discomfort.

A healthy woman also does not lose substantial iron. If her iron levels were healthy pre-menstruation, they will remain healthy during. Women are BUILT to do this. And they are able to do it without become ill.

But if it's some major concern, just put more iron in their rations. It wouldn't cost more -- or even as much -- as male rations, because women don't require as much.

You might very well be correct. However, it simply strikes me as being a lot of extra (and frankly unnecessary) trouble and expense to go through for little to nothing in the way of tangible gain.

Even if every solution you have suggested does work (which is kind of questionable in the first place), so what? What explicit benefit do we male soldiers, or the United States Government in general, gain from having women in harm's way?

As far as I can tell, there is no gain. It's simply something the P.C. "powers that be" insist on ramming down all of our throats for the Hell of it.

Don't "fix" something that isn't broken.
 
You might very well be correct. However, it simply strikes me as being a lot of extra (and frankly unnecessary) trouble and expense to go through for little to nothing in the way of tangible gain.

Even if every solution you have suggested does work (which is kind of questionable in the first place), so what? What explicit benefit do we male soldiers, or the United States Government gain from having women in harm's way?

As far as I can tell, there is no gain. It's simply something the P.C. "powers that be" insist on ramming down all of our throats for the Hell of it.

How is it "a lot of trouble" to issue a menstrual cup instead of a jock strap?

What benefit does it offer the US government to exclude qualified women who are willing to serve?
 
How is it "a lot of trouble" to issue a menstrual cup instead of a jock strap?

We aren't issued jock straps. There's no need for them. There's no need for additional dietary supplements for male soldiers either.

Between R&D, production, distribution, and training in their effective use, you might be surprised at how much all of what you have suggested ends up costing in the longrun.

This is the government we're talking about, after all. "$10,000 for a hammer, $20,000 for a toilet seat."

What benefit does it offer the US government to exclude qualified women who are willing to serve?

If standards remain the same for men and women, the kinds of women you describe are going to be so incredibly rare as to be a virtual non-issue.

Canada has somewhere around 100 female combat soldiers in service, of which they have already managed to get 2 or 3 killed.

I mean... Why? What's the point?
 
Back
Top Bottom