• 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
Voidwar said:
Where to begin ?

Your logic does not hold.

"If a women" I think you meant "a woman" there right ?

If so, then you are again trying to present anecdotal individual evidence in a discussion of groups.
Click to expand...
Yes I meant "woman." Groups are made up of individuals, and therefore gross generalizations are inappropriate. I've already addressed this.

Further, It does not follow that she can fight just as hard as "a man", because you have generalized again, and the group you have generalized, "a man", contains many individuals who exceed the physical requirements to a significant degree. All it proves, is that she met the requirement, the rest, is conjecture, and inaccurate at that.
Click to expand...
You have a good point, but you undermine the war of the sexes in this argument. Since there is no way to test a soldiers battlefield mettle without actually getting them into real combat, the task conditions and standards requirements are the only filters we have. If a woman meets those then she is qualified, just like any man, to serve in an infantry role. My comment of "she can fight as hard as a man" is obviously misplaced here, however my case still stands.

So does this mean you would prefer to allow specialization but not subsequent assignment to an already predominantly male Specialized Infantry Unit ?? If so, the only practical application would need to be something along the lines of the "separate but equal" approah i touched on earlier.
Click to expand...
I've already stated my point on this. I have no problem with an all female combat unit.

Do you think men "in general" can do it faster and farther ? Remember. . .
Click to expand...
No, I don't think "in general" anything with regard to this argument. The only to assess this would be to actually compare an all female unit against an all male unit of the same size and operational capacity. Everything else is pure speculation.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Your post demonstrates a clear failure to understand the concept of ad hominem.
Click to expand...

Apparently, this facet of your ignorance is one of the deeper ones.

I certainly do understand ad hominem, it is latin for "at the man" or "to the man".

Lerxst's posting :

Lerxst said:
Your sexist, macho projections are too disingenuous to ignore. My weakness I suppose.
Click to expand...

Was an attempt to denigrate me, via falsehood, that had nothing to do with the topic of the thread. It was thus, ad hominem. Have we patched this hole in your knowledge of debating logic or will more study on your part be required ?
 
Last edited:
Catz Part Deux said:
My, how sweet and idealistic you are.
Click to expand...

Reality isn't subject to our ideals. Woman do not possess the physical or emotional capacity to withstand the rigors of an extended combat operation. Hell, most men don't either.
 
You know, we don't go around, trying to force our way into their knitting classes, and bridge parties? Why can't we just have our own thing? :2razz:
 
Voidwar said:
I certainly do understand ad hominem, it is latin for "at the man" or "to the man".
Click to expand...

And yet, you accused me of using ad hominems directed at you, twice.

Trust me, sweet britches. If I ad hominem you, you'll KNOW you've been ad hominemed.
 
WI Crippler said:
You know, we don't go around, trying to force our way into their knitting classes, and bridge parties? Why can't we just have our own thing? :2razz:
Click to expand...

I'd love to teach y'all to knit. I find it very soothing. :2razz:
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I think you have an overly optimistic view of women based upon your acculturization. First off, you haven't been hunters by need for thousands of years.
Click to expand...

Biological predelictions are passed through our genetics. Hunting and warfare is in the genes of men...it will take millions of years of automation and passivity to breed it out.

Secondly, I don't think you've ever heard a group of women sitting around trash talking their menfolk. Women are far filthier than men, hands down.
Click to expand...

Trash-talking your menfolk does not translate into the ability to withstand extended combat operations.

The idea of women as delicate creatures that need to be protected is largely a Victorian upper class construct.
Click to expand...

They're not delicate, but they're certainly more delicate than men.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
You mean the idea that women are delicate little flowers who are unsuited to violence? Heh.
Click to expand...

No, the idea that woman are emotionally and physically suited to withstand the rigors of extended combat operations as part of an infantry platoon.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
And yet, you accused me of using ad hominems directed at you, twice.
Click to expand...

Then I'll bet you did.

Why don't you provide the quote that I referred to and lets take a look.

Not my quote, the entire one of yours to which it refers.

I suggest you do this in a separate thread in General Political so as not to muddy up this one. Meet ya there.
 
Last edited:
Ethereal said:
Biological predelictions are passed through our genetics. Hunting and warfare is in the genes of men...it will take millions of years of automation and passivity to breed it out.
Click to expand...

This is based upon nothing. I know the chest beating makes y'all feel all manly and all, but there is nothing in written history that suggests women are incapable of warfare. Your culturally acquired biases do not equal historical proof.

Trash-talking your menfolk does not translate into the ability to withstand extended combat operations.
Click to expand...

Ready to Kill - washingtonpost.com

ORLY?

They're not delicate, but they're certainly more delicate than men.
Click to expand...

I'd say it largely depends on the women involved, and the men.
 
talloulou said:
The police are off topic. This is about the military. I can put that in a mod box if you'd like. No more police stuff, it's totally off topic.
Click to expand...
I can't believe you threaten to pull rank in a thread you are heavily invested in. Jeesh. :(
 
Voidwar said:
Then I'll bet you did.

Why don't you provide the quote that I referred to and lets take a look.

Not my quote, the entire one of yours to which it refers.

I suggest you do this in a separate thread in General Political so as not to muddy up this one. Meet ya there.
Click to expand...

Dungeon or nowhere.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
That's okay, sweetie. I think everyone's clear on what you've contributed here.

:2wave:
Click to expand...

Aye, a lesson for you on what is and isn't ad hominem, in addition to salient commentary on the topic at hand and the logical fallacies of others.
 
WI Crippler said:
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.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. I have no doubt that there are many women perfectly qualified to serve as infantry, and I applaud the courage and conviction that drives them to want to, but healthy young women are needed at home-- and any society that sends young women to die in foreign lands to protect young men at home has got its priorities screwed up and probably isn't much longer for this world.

WI Crippler said:
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 personnel though.
Click to expand...

I'm a big believer in the notion that everyone ought to have basic infantry training-- and that applies to women, too. Personally, I think we ought to provide as much combat training for our citizens as they're willing to put up with. And there's no reason to think that women are any less qualified to sling a rifle in defense of their home than men.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
You mean the idea that women are delicate little flowers who are unsuited to violence? Heh.
Click to expand...

When wounded and dying on Afghani plains
And the women come out to cut up what remains
Just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
And to your God a soldier.

That's Kipling. Women are wonderfully suited to violence. They're just needed far more elsewhere.
 
Redress said:
I cannot predict the future. I do not know if such would happen or not. I do believe that an imagined deterrent should not hold us up from doing the right thing.
Click to expand...

So, these things are imagined? They do not happen now?

19 year old men and women do not engage in this sort of behavior, so we should ignore it?

Ar eyou willing to lead infantry units into battle and face the consequences if these things come into play during a battle? Are you willing to confront the familes of the men and women who may potentially die when these 'imagined' deterrents pop up?

Are you willing to control the men of a unit and prevent atrocity the first time a female soldier in found raped? What do you think would have happened if those had been young women pulled off street corners in Iraq instead of young men?

Are you truly willing to face these things? Battle is not a kind or friendly activity and weaknesses and mistakes are exploited with absolute ruthlessness. Simply dismissing things because you do not want to acknowledge them does not mean that your enemy will ignore them in battle.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Absolutely not. I have no doubt that there are many women perfectly qualified to serve as infantry, and I applaud the courage and conviction that drives them to want to, but healthy young women are needed at home-- and any society that sends young women to die in foreign lands to protect young men at home has got its priorities screwed up and probably isn't much longer for this world.
Click to expand...

Read the Saga of Hervor.
 
gree0232 said:
So, these things are imagined? They do not happen now?

19 year old men and women do not engage in this sort of behavior, so we should ignore it?

Ar eyou willing to lead infantry units into battle and face the consequences if these things come into play during a battle? Are you willing to confront the familes of the men and women who may potentially die when these 'imagined' deterrents pop up?

Are you willing to control the men of a unit and prevent atrocity the first time a female soldier in found raped? What do you think would have happened if those had been young women pulled off street corners in Iraq instead of young men?

Are you truly willing to face these things? Battle is not a kind or friendly activity and weaknesses and mistakes are exploited with absolute ruthlessness. Simply dismissing things because you do not want to acknowledge them does not mean that your enemy will ignore them in battle.
Click to expand...


It can be controlled. That is what NJP is for. By the way, you underestimate our military. They are better than you think.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
You mean the idea that women are delicate little flowers who are unsuited to violence? Heh.
Click to expand...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlYJbEd0LVk]YouTube - Female submissions and knockouts[/ame]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom