• 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

  • Yes, and they should be integrated with the males

    Votes: 44 46.3%

  • Yes, but keep their units seperate from male units

    Votes: 11 11.6%

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

    Votes: 25 26.3%

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

    Votes: 6 6.3%

  • Other....

    Votes: 9 9.5%
  • Total voters
    95
Redress said:
That would be relevant how?
Click to expand...

Running some figures, lets assume that 10% of the 5600 person force was female.

Therefore, the impact of 108 pregnancies to that unit would be 19%, not 2%, and the impact of the pregnancy on the males of the unit was 0%.

Now, I just assumed the number of females was 10%, if the number was smaller, more than 20% of the females in the unit were disabled.

That's significant.
 
Redress said:
So, since your argument seems to be based on physical ability, is it safe to assume that if both men and women had to achieve the same standard(the ones currently required for men in the infantry), you would support women in combat?
Click to expand...

No. That's only one aspect of the issue.

However, since the highest standards should be applied to ensure the best candidates are chosen, naturally the military would tend to de-select females for combat roles, and naturally the women will immediately file a sexual discrimination lawsuit in the nearest federal court. So naturally, the presence of females in uniform implies a distinct lowering of standards.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Running some figures, lets assume that 10% of the 5600 person force was female.

Therefore, the impact of 108 pregnancies to that unit would be 19%, not 2%, and the impact of the pregnancy on the males of the unit was 0%.

Now, I just assumed the number of females was 10%, if the number was smaller, more than 20% of the females in the unit were disabled.

That's significant.
Click to expand...

No, there were 5600 women, of whom 108 got pregnant, for 1.8 %. Chech the linked articles I got the numbers from. To repeat, not 5600 soldiers, 5600 women soldiers.
 
Redress said:
No, there were 5600 women, of whom 108 got pregnant, for 1.8 %. Chech the linked articles I got the numbers from. To repeat, not 5600 soldiers, 5600 women soldiers.
Click to expand...

Okay, then my original position is still valid...ie, 0% of the men suffered the preventable disability of pregnancy.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Okay, then my original position is still valid...ie, 0% of the men suffered the preventable disability of pregnancy.
Click to expand...

How many suffered from preventable issues affecting the performance of their duties compared to women?
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Not as many women can meet those standards, so those standards are sexist. Didn't you know this? Haven't you paid any attention to the nonsense that's happening throughout American society as the myth of female "equality" steamrolls over all challenges, no matter how much sense they make?
Click to expand...

No, I was too busy pulling my weight and being one of the guys. I don't like different standards, they give rise to a lack of respect between peers. In fact, I'm perfectly okay with working a lot harder than most of the guys just to be treated like one of them.

I'd say that the majority of women who want to go into combat are far more like me than they are a playboy bunny.

Though, they might still have great legs (running is awesome for that).
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
The real issues are that the military isn't cop-land.

Cops go home every night, soldiers spend days weeks months in the field.

That's an important difference right there.
Click to expand...

Except that women have been going on enlistments, serving side by side with men, since WWII. Somehow, they seem to have managed.

I think it's interesting how some of the men NEED us to stay on the pedestals...and so do some of the women.

I don't get why women would be invested in proving that women are less competent than men...unless they want men to continue under the delusion that we're soft, sweet, delicate and need them to pay for us.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
That should be fun for you, except you'll probably be groping a lot of 80-somethings, and wishing for hot runners with recurrent knee injuries.

:2razz:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I am hoping to eventually land in sports rehab, rather than a hospital. I've done plenty of clinical observations, so I have an idea of where I want to go with it.

Wonder if they need a physical therapist at the Playboy Mansion? Those girls are always posing in uncomfortable poses for long periods of time. I am sure they could use some professional help, to keep their bodies in balance and prevent injuries. I am sure my wife would understand.........
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I can't imagine why any woman might consider you hostile to women...

:rofl:

Maybe the problem isn't "the bitch women."
Click to expand...

There was a thread awhile back where I and another talked some about how the language tended to be more hostile towards women, and no one could understand what we meant. I think what you just isolated is a good example of what we were talking about back then.
 
Should females be allowed to specialize as infantry in the military?
Click to expand...

No. Terrible idea. A combat zone is no place for a woman. Sorry, that's not sexism, that's reality.
 
Redress said:
There was a thread awhile back where I and another talked some about how the language tended to be more hostile towards women, and no one could understand what we meant. I think what you just isolated is a good example of what we were talking about back then.
Click to expand...

Truthfully, I'm not sensitive. I've been called a bitch too many times to count, and I don't get heated about it. It typically has happened when I have gone to the mattress with someone who started shi'ite with me, and I won. Thus, I'm a bitch. But, some things are kinda unmistakable. Like, um, Scarecrow's issues with women.

FWIW, some women ARE bitches, IMO.

Others of us just aren't scared to compete fairly on an equal playing field.
 
Last edited:
Its difficult question because despite the fact i think there are a minority women pefectly capable of doing so its difficult to not see the majority of male troops acting differently to them.When it comes to safety we cant jeopodise peoples lives for the sake of political correctness.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I'm sure it would be just like being an OBGYN...seen one vah jay jay, ya seen em all. ;) You can tell the wifey that. LOL
Click to expand...

"No honey, I wasn't cheating on you. Her labia was out of balance, and I was just massaging it back to its normal biological place.....with my penis."
 
WI Crippler said:
"No honey, I wasn't cheating on you. Her labia was out of balance, and I was just massaging it back to its normal biological place.....with my penis."
Click to expand...

"Sweetie, I wasn't even LOOKING at her ass. I was feeling the tear in her gluteous maximus. She's just one big MUSCLE to me, not even a woman at all."
 
Catz Part Deux said:
No, I was too busy pulling my weight and being one of the guys.
Click to expand...

How'd you get on the force?

Sometime, somewhere, a woman had to be put on the force, so they lowered the standards, and you benefitted.

Don't matter what you like, it's what they did.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Except that women have been going on enlistments, serving side by side with men, since WWII. Somehow, they seem to have managed.
Click to expand...

Oh.

Damn, those gals are sure good at hiding. I spent two months under the Sea of Japan once, and never did I or anyone else see any women on the ship. Yet here you are claiming they served side by side with us.

One of us us wrong.

Catz Part Deux said:
I think it's interesting how some of the men NEED us to stay on the pedestals...and so do some of the women.
Click to expand...

Nah, we need someone else to mop the floors so come on down offa there, I tell 'em.

Catz Part Deux said:
I don't get why women would be invested in proving that women are less competent than men...unless they want men to continue under the delusion that we're soft, sweet, delicate and need them to pay for us.
Click to expand...


Don't have any idea where you got to there from where I posted. Whatever. Fact of the matter is that fewer than ten percent of the structural designers and engineers in the country are female. Many of those females are busy rushing off to Human Resources with every imagined complaint they can think of.

Where the myth that there's no gender based differences in mental abilities is a mystery. The myth that there's no gender based physical competency issues is purest nonsense. Why these too myths should dominate national law to the extent is does is purest corrupt politics.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Oh.

Damn, those gals are sure good at hiding. I spent two months under the Sea of Japan once, and never did I or anyone else see any women on the ship. Yet here you are claiming they served side by side with us.

One of us us wrong.
Click to expand...

Logic is probably not your strong suit. Women serve on most if not all combat ships currently. Women have been serving on noncombat ships for quite some time, and doing very well.

Women have served in combat zones since I think at least Korea in some capacities. Just because women where not on the sub with you does not invalidate what you quoted.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Hey, it's your made up statistics, not mine.
Click to expand...

I took the numbers from a link Talloulou provided. If you do not like the numbers, blame her. Sorry they are not convenient to you.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
How'd you get on the force?

Sometime, somewhere, a woman had to be put on the force, so they lowered the standards, and you benefitted.

Don't matter what you like, it's what they did.
Click to expand...

I wasn't on the force. I did street level intervention with gang members for 8 years. I know what I know from working directly with cops for the past 15 years, the last 10 years as a trainer of police officers.

So, in short words since that appears most effective with those of lower intellect: I dealt with the same criminals, WITHOUT a gun and a badge, and WITHOUT use of force.

See if you can process that in your cephalopod brain.
 
Last edited:
Catz Part Deux said:
I wasn't on the force. I did street level intervention with gang members.

So, in short words since that appears most effective with those of lower intellect: I dealt with the same criminals, WITHOUT a gun and a badge, and WITHOUT use of force.
Click to expand...

And apparently you don't need a gun or a badge to handle Scarecrow.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Fact of the matter is that fewer than ten percent of the structural designers and engineers in the country are female. Many of those females are busy rushing off to Human Resources with every imagined complaint they can think of.
Click to expand...

Non-sequitur. Perhaps you should have studied logic in college.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
I spent two months under the Sea of Japan once, and never did I or anyone else see any women on the ship.
Click to expand...

Well, that explains your mad skillz wit da wimmenz.

My boyfriend has done 14 years in the Navy, 7 of them as a nuke. Somehow, thankfully, he avoided turning into a complete misogynist. Maybe it was that he wasn't rejected by both men AND women.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom