Women in Frontline Combat?

[Ampersand]

of course they shouldn't because no one SHOULD be in front line combat. =/

 

[Kurokami]

Recently Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard recently announced that Women being in frontline combat should be allowed in frontline combat as it is "realistic".

Link to Story [http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/gillard-backs-women-in-combat-20110412-1dc1f.html]

Personally I don't believe that females should serve on the frontline of combat. If a woman is in a combat scenario and gets injured it will more than likely affect the male soldiers psyche differently then if another male soldier was wounded and may cause them to make more rash decisions than they normally would.. In most cases women are not as physically adept as males, war is brutal and that requires physical skill that most women just have. But on the other hand if they can keep up, why not?

The media is semi behind the idea at the moment, but i wonder what will happen when the first female combatant to get killed is announced or one is captured an tortured?

The link above says that it would be "symbolic" if the men and women fought together, but i don't believe the enemy will think that way, I believe that they would try and target the women more than men KNOWING that it will damage morale more.

What are your thoughts on women in frontline combat situations?

First of all I'll agree with what most people said on here, women aren't weaker than all men and after the training they all get (one should hope) they are quite capable of carrying guns and taking/giving orders as need be.

On that note, I don't think you understand the bonding that many soldiers go through, several examples come to mind in the Israeli army where squads would risk their own necks just to retrieve a body.

I don't know what army you're talking about, but if they need more soldiers, they should consider everyone that's a member of their nation.

 

[Chaos Marine]

Interestingly enough, I was speaking to a local firefighter and he was telling me how they have to start recording the trials of new candidates to show what it involves after a case where a woman tried to sue the fire department for sexism. The following year when they were doing so, they recorded it and when the two women who applied failed to meet the physical requirements and were told no, one of them sued like the first year and the video was shown in court. A week later, one of the local TDs demanded the judge (Something she has no authority to do) re-evaluate the ruling saying the tests were unfair on women. Luckily the judge had a good head on his shoulders and told her no.

Technology has levelled the playing field in regards to gender in a lot of fields but to be honest, until power armour becomes feasible to supply in bulk, women don't have the physical ability to match a man's in war. Not without turning to performance enhancing drugs or taking up support roles.

 

[Bloodstain]

First of all: What?

Recently Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard recently announced that Women being in frontline combat should be allowed in frontline combat as it is "realistic".

[...]

In most cases women are not as physically adept as males, war is brutal and that requires physical skill that most women just have. But on the other hand if they can keep up, why not?

Please, next time, put more effort into your threads and make sense.

That being said, we can move on to the topic.
I am of the opinion that women should be allowed to fight in first line. I am a promoter of absolute equality, in all areas, including warfare. Trained soldiers won't be demoralized, they learn how to cope with such losses.

 

[AngloDoom]

Really, women should be allowed in combat. If soldiers learn to grin and bear the loss of a friend, they should do the same to a potentially unknown women. Unless we start introducing women to the front-lines, men are not going to be as used to seeing the death of a woman. While this is usually a good thing, it's an unfortunate fact of life for people in a soldier's position and the sooner they're used to it the sooner women can feel more a part of the army.

Unless we go through a potentially rough patch now, it won't change in future.

 

[awesomeClaw]

First of all: What?

Recently Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard recently announced that Women being in frontline combat should be allowed in frontline combat as it is "realistic".

[...]

In most cases women are not as physically adept as males, war is brutal and that requires physical skill that most women just have. But on the other hand if they can keep up, why not?

Please, next time, put more effort into your threads and make sense.

That being said, we can move on to the topic.
I am of the opinion that women should be allowed to fight in first line. I am a promoter of absolute equality, in all areas, including warfare. Trained soldiers won't be demoralized, they learn how to cope with such losses.

Equality in all areas, ey? Let me ask you a question.

A women get´s pregnant. The woman wants to keep it. The man wants to abort it.

Which one has the right?

 

[Frankster]

Was this the cute blonde? I'm not trying to diminish her, but if we're talking about the same soldier, the Bush Admin persuaded her to lie so that they'd have a modern day hero at the beginning of the Iraq war. She later said so. I believe she passed out during combat just after the last of her fellow soldiers died. So much attention went to saving her because Iraq was a hyperwar, a war for show. That was all to make us feel good about Bush Jr.'s little revenge mission/oil grab.

It was! And another poster said the name, we are talking about Jessica Lynch.

Aye, every aspect of her story was media driven and used for some political purpose, it was actually quite sickening imo.

Edit: As for diminishing, the media did a great job of doing that already by singling her out solely on account of gender and raising a non story into a story of heroism.

 

[kidwithxboxlive]

Yes and no.
This might sound very 1900's ish. But, in war there are things like body bits being blown all over the place, constant shelling, starvation.(i'm refering to battle of the bulge in WW2)I don't think women would have the mind set and capability to do it. But, if they want to do it and think they can handle it, they can knock themself out.... not literally

 

[Bloodstain]

-snip-

Equality in all areas, ey? Let me ask you a question.

A women get´s pregnant. The woman wants to keep it. The man wants to abort it.

Which one has the right?

Since it's neither only the mother's, nor only the father's child, but their child, none of them has more right than the other. If the child will be born, both will have to care about it equally.
So they would have to determine: Is it easier for the women to cope with a lost child, or for the man to raise an unwanted child? And what's better for the child itself?
Or maybe they could even agree to let the child be born, but without the man having to care so much about it.

These problems aren't a question of gender, but personality.

Is that enough of an answer for you?

 

[funguy2121]

What are your thoughts on women in frontline combat situations?

Women should be allowed in front line combat.

Our strength no longer matters - we have guns now.

And it has been proven that, given the same training, women are better shots than men. Sorry guys, we are just dexier than you. Like elves with bows.

Really? I would like to see that statistic.

Also, for me, it´s 50%-50%. On one hand, having only one gender has some pretty clear advantages. For one, there will be a lot less sexual tension (unless you´re a homosexual) which makes it easier for everyone involved. Sexual tension creates frustration. And being frustrated and angry in a place where you can get shoot if you make the wrong move is not good.

Also, women may have a lower pain tolerance then men because of GIRK 2: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=proteins-may-be-key-to-pa

But on the other hand, you might have women that are really fit and just as strong as any guy. Why shouldn´t she be allowed to sign up? Ofcourse, they will be far and few between, but still.

I dunno. Do the pros outweigh the cons? I dunno.

Work in an OR and then tell me that women have a lower threshold for pain than we do. Or give birth. Most of us are babies compared to them.

I don´t know what an OR is, so...?

Also, the old excuse "Well they give birth!" Well, you see, under pregnancy, the woman´s body builds up a ton of "happy"-hormones that reduce pain. When labor comes, she then unleashes those, and therefor is able to tolerate the pain. So that argument is nullified. Or do you have a source for your claims, like i had? Or are you simply pulling them out of your arse?

Sorry, mate, but you´re gonna have to try a little harder then that.

Ladies and gentleman, directly from Funguy's arse...

I looked up some sources, and it appears that, on average, men do have a higher threshold for pain than women. An OR is an Operating Room. Have you ever seen a "happy" pregnancy? It's Hell. I'd never describe a woman as "tolerating" the pain.

As far as sexual tension is concerned, I'd ignore the paintballers and look at what the posters on here who have actually served have said regarding paternalistic instinct and fraternization.

 

[Kevvers]

Well I wouldn't worry about it, in 5 years they'll have robots carrying the heavy stuff and in 20 years robots will be doing all the fighting anyway -- then the argument will be about whether it is safe to have humans on the front line.

 

[funguy2121]

Was this the cute blonde? I'm not trying to diminish her, but if we're talking about the same soldier, the Bush Admin persuaded her to lie so that they'd have a modern day hero at the beginning of the Iraq war. She later said so. I believe she passed out during combat just after the last of her fellow soldiers died. So much attention went to saving her because Iraq was a hyperwar, a war for show. That was all to make us feel good about Bush Jr.'s little revenge mission/oil grab.

It was! And another poster said the name, we are talking about Jessica Lynch.

Aye, every aspect of her story was media driven and used for some political purpose, it was actually quite sickening imo.

Edit: As for diminishing, the media did a great job of doing that already by singling her out solely on account of gender and raising a non story into a story of heroism.

The sad thing is, she appeared from start to finish exactly like a naive 19 year old woman who was unprepared for all this, not the lioness feminist icon that a decidedly anti-feminist government painted her as.

I say we go ahead and make the movie anyway, and just tell the truth. THAT would be interesting.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

What you're referring to is called "Nightingale Syndrome", and if soldiers are properly trained it wouldn't be a risk.
Also, you're assuming that ALL females are physically weaker then ALL males. Which is not the case. If a woman is apt and able, why shouldn't she serve?

No it is still a risk. Envisage a major, now in love with a lowly private, she is new in the force but they have agreed to marry after the war is over. However from higher up a command is given, a force is locked down in a HEAVY firefight, and will definately be destroyed unless support is given, if possible he is to help. Losses WILL be heavy, but many more people will be saved. Would he give the order? Maybe. Would his love for the private he is likely sending to their death influence him? Damn right it will.

 

[funguy2121]

Could you draw where the front "line" is?

Oh, if only I knew how to mess with the paint program. Basically, it would look like an infant took a crayon to it. Just picture that, OK?

I did mention this earlier. In a guerilla hornet's nest like Afghanistan, women will see precisely one metric shit-ton of combat regardless of "policy." So, while we sit in our homes and debate the reality and the morality of the situation, they're out there getting their asses shot at.

Captcha is a goddamn Little Mermaid song. I swear, wtf is up with the Escapist lately?

 

[Treblaine]

snip

Sorry but you seem to have misunderstood. In my previous post in this thread I popped down a few positions that women can excel in, but I don't consider anything involving close fighting to be one of them. So yeah, I actually think deploying women in mixed sex squads to Afghanistan is a bad idea.

Why?

Do you have any evidence that women can't fight in close quarters. I have graphic evidence that they can. Excuse the colour commentary and ridiculous music, this is demonstrative that all women don't fall to pieces under threat of life and death:


The soldiering in Iraq and Afghanistan is far more like police work than heated total war. One WILL get into gunfights, extremely violent combat but more often than not dealing with civilians who may or may not be 100% on our side. That is the side people have been going on about for so long, winning the indigenous peoples' hearts and minds. Perhaps a feminine touch is needed.

Women have proven themselves in policing for decades now, it's no great leap to extend that to anti-insurgency war fighting.

Why is it a "bad idea" to deploy in mixed sex squads.

We have already accepted homosexuals into the mostly male dominated military, so THAT element of sex interfering is already there and is no major problem.

But anyway. The "burly brute" is almost outdated on the Modern battlefield, with media and propaganda everywhere it pays to be fair.

 

[Zaverexus]

But on the other hand if they can keep up, why not?

This is the main point here.
I have absolutely no problem with women fighting on the front lines. If they meet the same requirements as men there is no reason they should not be allowed to fight.

 

[Drago-Morph]

Of course women should be allowed to serve.

And please, have you actually seen guys in the military? They're not all muscle-bound fucking Terminators. As long as the women pass the same required fitness tests then go nuts. If it means there are less women in the military then so be it, but actually banning them because they are generally not as strong (strong =/= fit/conditioned) is ludicrous.

I think the idea that men will suddenly become illogical apes at the sight of a woman in trouble (any more so then seeing a friend they've served with for years in trouble) is also a little bit of cock slap to the face of the guys who have been trained to deal with such situations.

Agreed. The emotional stress of seeing a woman injured can't be much greater than seeing a good friend injured. And strength doesn't really matter anymore; not only do we have guns, but there's this thing called "martial arts" that lets smaller and weaker opponents defeat larger and stronger opponents. Especially when the smaller one is more likely to be faster and more agile.

In modern combat, women can keep up with men just as well. There's no convincing argument as to why they shouldn't be put into combat roles. Give them the chance.

 

[eggmiester]

i say this alot on here, but it amazes me how a any thread on the escapist can turn into a good debate. so, my two cents:

to answer the few points to and for that i glimpsed, women can be just as good as men, BUT i agree that having men and women on the same squad can lead to sexual tension, which is not good. bromance? grand. female bromance? ( no idea what the term for that would be ) also grand . actual romance? can lead to rash decision's, distractions, or worse.romance is a no-no.

so, maybe keep men and women on different squads? any idea's? because i think we can all agree that we want a solution where as few people as possible can get hurt, even if it's not something we can all agree on.

 

[Zaverexus]

Could you draw where the front "line" is?

Oh, if only I knew how to mess with the paint program. Basically, it would look like an infant took a crayon to it. Just picture that, OK?

I did mention this earlier. In a guerilla hornet's nest like Afghanistan, women will see precisely one metric @#!*% -ton of combat regardless of "policy." So, while we sit in our homes and debate the reality and the morality of the situation, they're out there getting their @#!*% shot at.

Captcha is a @#!*% Little Mermaid song. I swear, wtf is up with the Escapist lately?

Oookay.
And to actually answer Treblaine's question: I assume the front line qualifies as anywhere in which direct combat is ensuing between the army and opposing forces.

 

[fooddood3]

I don't see why not, it's worked perfectly fine here in America.