• 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
I much prefer the idea of women fighting wars and us men staying at home to safely drink beer in peace :)

I do think hot women soldiers should wear really short skirts and a sexy uniform ;)
 
I can see the run, but what do sit ups and push ups have to do with soldiering? If they get surrounded by the enemy, are they going to jump out, drop and do 50 in front of them?

Upper and lower body strength I suppose.
 
They probably have smaller than average boobs due to the physical fitness requirements.
 
I think their uniforms should include leather...:mrgreen:

Me too.

As far as the OP is concerned...I have no opinion that I can express here.

However, if he'd like to come to where I am...Fort Leavenworth... I bet he'd get a bunch of opinions on this topic. None of which he'd bargained for.
 
I'll be honest, they gross me out. I don't like them one bit.

First, it's a waste of tax dollars to give women guns and have them running around playing GI Jane.

Second, what happens if a woman is caught in battle? A woman is a liability out there.

Women are physically, mentally, and emotionally not cut out to be soldiers. For that reason, they have not been soldiers all throughout human history.

It's only in our modern, metrosexual era where Hollywood replaces reality that we are deluded enouigh to believe that men and women are exactly the same in every respect.

I have no problem with female soldiers and marines as long as they adhere to the same exact mental and physical standards as their male counterparts and do not get an special treatment. But I know that is not going to happen and the military will dumb down standards to make sure a quota of female combat troops is met.
 
Upper and lower body strength I suppose.

Good evening, Pero.

I sponsored a women's baseball team at one point in my life...my brother was the coach...and I'd stack those gals up against most men. They were just plain MEAN... :eek: :lamo:

They played at Firestone Field, and AP might remember that place from when he lived in Ohio....
 
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.
 
What is great is the progress in technology: Bill Gates is offerring $100,000 to anyone who invents the new condom. That's all we need in a condom: a package containing the two words associated with bad performance: "MICRO" and "SOFT". So, Sorceress, those girls were "stacked". huh? I am in line...;o)
 
I'll be honest, they gross me out. I don't like them one bit.

First, it's a waste of tax dollars to give women guns and have them running around playing GI Jane.

Second, what happens if a woman is caught in battle? A woman is a liability out there.

Women are physically, mentally, and emotionally not cut out to be soldiers. For that reason, they have not been soldiers all throughout human history.

It's only in our modern, metrosexual era where Hollywood replaces reality that we are deluded enouigh to believe that men and women are exactly the same in every respect.

I think it's fine. There's a lot more to the military now than combat. Now, there are legit concerns about women in combat but if you're "grossed out" (how old are you?) by women in the military that's your weird hang-up.
 
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.

Luckily a lot of Infantry and other line units carry tampons with them already right? Look, if the Israelis did it then obviously it can be done in one form or another, lets not talk about it as if its impossible to do.
 
Luckily a lot of Infantry and other line units carry tampons with them already right? Look, if the Israelis did it then obviously it can be done in one form or another, lets not talk about it as if its impossible to do.

In routine training, I suffered seriously many times from hunger and exhaustion. If any of those I were bleeding I don't think I'd have made it.
 
I'll be honest, they gross me out. I don't like them one bit.

First, it's a waste of tax dollars to give women guns and have them running around playing GI Jane.

Second, what happens if a woman is caught in battle? A woman is a liability out there.

Women are physically, mentally, and emotionally not cut out to be soldiers. For that reason, they have not been soldiers all throughout human history.

It's only in our modern, metrosexual era where Hollywood replaces reality that we are deluded enouigh to believe that men and women are exactly the same in every respect.

Holy crap! This is the most ridiculous post I have probably ever read here.


Oh that's right.

This is the guy that when asked to prove god exists answered 'If God wanted to prove his existence, he would do so. The fact that he doesn't should tell you something about the nature of God and religion.'

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...proof-evolution-garbage-7.html#post1061636331

LOLOL - this still makes me chuckle.

So God must exist because their is no proof that he exists...

...man, what's it like in 1953...cause obviously you are talking to us from that year.


Have a nice day.
 
I didn't vote because I can't do so intelligently

That's why I voted for Potato.

Basically, we'll see. I'm sure that many women will make quite capable soldiers, and that many will not. Not unlike men.
 
I can see the run, but what do sit ups and push ups have to do with soldiering? If they get surrounded by the enemy, are they going to jump out, drop and do 50 in front of them?

PT tests are supposed to be about measuring a person's individual physical fitness level at a certain age, not showing a person can do a specific task a given number of times. This is why there are differences in requirements between men and women, and for different ages. The sexes are different on average and people are different at different ages.

Run measures endurance and stamina, pushups measure upper body strength, and situps are supposed to measure core strength/stamina. It is all a very basic measurement of how much an individual is working out and putting effort into their workouts.
 
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.

You sure are not familiar with women. They bleed once a month. I've yet to see it stop many from functioning. If you think housework and child rearing is easy, allowing for numerous breaks and time to get "replenished", then you never pitched in much.

Women handle their cycle just fine. Iron tablets and vitamins.
 
In routine training, I suffered seriously many times from hunger and exhaustion. If any of those I were bleeding I don't think I'd have made it.

Of course not. But then, that's because you're not used to menstrual cycles. Best left to those who are.
 
Of course not. But then, that's because you're not used to menstrual cycles. Best left to those who are.

It weakens someone and we use close to 100% of our strength even just in training.
 
You sure are not familiar with women. They bleed once a month. I've yet to see it stop many from functioning. If you think housework and child rearing is easy, allowing for numerous breaks and time to get "replenished", then you never pitched in much.

Women handle their cycle just fine. Iron tablets and vitamins.

Well, I was married twice, ~7 years each. Shows how good your instincts are.

Fact is, when a unit needs 98% effort to pass and someone starts with that they will fail.
 
I'll be honest, they gross me out. I don't like them one bit.

First, it's a waste of tax dollars to give women guns and have them running around playing GI Jane.

Second, what happens if a woman is caught in battle? A woman is a liability out there.

Women are physically, mentally, and emotionally not cut out to be soldiers. For that reason, they have not been soldiers all throughout human history.

It's only in our modern, metrosexual era where Hollywood replaces reality that we are deluded enouigh to believe that men and women are exactly the same in every respect.

They can have a tendency to cause some unecessary difficulties wherever they're posted, but I think female soliders can and do perform pretty admirably in staff, admin, supply, and medical roles.

As far as ground combat goes, I am opposed to the idea on a general basis.

Female soldiers are physically weaker than male soldiers, more prone to injury, less aggressive, tend to massively complicate matters of morale and psychology among friendly forces on the battlefield, and are significantly more likely to face mistreatment if they are ever unfortunate enough to be captured by the enemy.

Absolutely none of these facts support the conclusion that women should be expected to fill frontline combat positions beside men under anything but the most absolutely dire of circumstances.

The Obama Administration's P.C. mania is going to end up getting a lot of good women horribly killed... If not worse.
 
Last edited:
It weakens someone and we use close to 100% of our strength even just in training.

It may weaken you. I've yet to see a woman weakened by it in today's society. Can you tell who is on her period?
 
Well, I was married twice, ~7 years each. Shows how good your instincts are.

Fact is, when a unit needs 98% effort to pass and someone starts with that they will fail.



Well, I'm not sure your age, but I can assure you, I've never found women to be hampered by their periods.
 
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.

You know what the major problem with this rationale is right, about women needing more food during their menstrual cycle because they're bleeding? Women need less calories than men first of all. Second, the blood isn't from one or two days, but is building up inside us over the cycle. Even if a woman did need a few more calories during her cycle or after or before, she still very likely wouldn't be eating more than the men.
 
You know what the major problem with this rationale is right, about women needing more food during their menstrual cycle because they're bleeding? Women need less calories than men first of all. Second, the blood isn't from one or two days, but is building up inside us over the cycle. Even if a woman did need a few more calories during her cycle or after or before, she still very likely wouldn't be eating more than the men.

Ok, I'll concede that I'm not sure how much the bleeding (and other discomforts) inhibit physical performace over a period of days with minimal food, harsh conditions and serious exercise.

Let's see if a female is overly affected. Let's take a generally physically qualified troop and have her jump into training for a couple weeks right before her period hits. We'll presume she loses her gear on landing (to simulate possible combat conditions) and, for now, no one has any supplements or other gear for period.

So, in she goes like a regular troop and let's see.

Point being, we can argue about its impact after the army makes some observations and runs some tests to ascertain the impact.
 
I'll be honest, they gross me out. I don't like them one bit.

First, it's a waste of tax dollars to give women guns and have them running around playing GI Jane.

Second, what happens if a woman is caught in battle? A woman is a liability out there.

Women are physically, mentally, and emotionally not cut out to be soldiers. For that reason, they have not been soldiers all throughout human history.

It's only in our modern, metrosexual era where Hollywood replaces reality that we are deluded enouigh to believe that men and women are exactly the same in every respect.

You are something else...

Women can be as ruthless as men. Women have the ability to be soldiers, and damn good ones. This whole undermining them and classifying them as unworthy is asinine.

Waste of tax dollars? Wars of aggression, Wars on intangible ideas (Drugs, Illiteracy, etc)....that is a waste. Women on the front lines are not a waste.

You think now is only time women were soldiers or in battle? Joan of Ark is something you should research.

Close minded thoughts like yours are really something...I tell ya
 
Ok, I'll concede that I'm not sure how much the bleeding (and other discomforts) inhibit physical performace over a period of days with minimal food, harsh conditions and serious exercise.

Let's see if a female is overly affected. Let's take a generally physically qualified troop and have her jump into training for a couple weeks right before her period hits. We'll presume she loses her gear on landing (to simulate possible combat conditions) and, for now, no one has any supplements or other gear for period.

So, in she goes like a regular troop and let's see.

Point being, we can argue about its impact after the army makes some observations and runs some tests to ascertain the impact.

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.
 
Back
Top Bottom