Women in Frontline Combat?

[Kortney]

Of course women should be allowed to fight on the front.

There are a few misconceptions about why they shouldn't. Here are the arguments and I'll post my response below. Note I've had three brothers fight in the front lines as well as a Father, so I come from a very combat orientated family.

"Most women are weaker than most men and they aren't up to the test of front line combat".

This is probably the worst argument of the lot. First of all, if women were to join an infantry platoon then the standards of training would be exactly the same. Otherwise the unit would suffer. If the tests are the same, then the weak ones of either sex are kicked out.

The ones that are up to the test, whether they be male or female, are accepted.

It is also assuming that all men on the front lines are like the hulk. This isn't true at all. I know plenty of soldiers who are no more muscly than the average guy. They are incredibly fit yes, but sheer strength? It's not a requirement. Obviously they have to be strong, but you don't have to be immensely strong.

Also, it is forgetting the type of girls who would fight in the military. People think "females in front line combat" and they picture the girls from the O.C. Most girls I know who have served in the military could kick some serious backside.

"Men would act dangerously and risk their squad's safety unnecessarily to save a female member of the squad".

Bullshit. This is blatant sexism.

First of all, soldiers already act incredibly dangerously to save a squad member. All you need to do is talk to a soldier who has seen their friend go down and they would crawl across hell to get them. Making this person a female changes nothing.

Secondly, it is assuming that men would automatically care more about a female - this is nonsense. Friendship is friendship. They all spend a part of their lives together and in most squads, they all love each other (of course they would never admit this).

"Females would get raped"

This is barely an argument. Do you honestly think that lowly of your soldiers that they would rape a female squad member on the front line? Really?. So, if you were in combat and you had a female friend fighting with you, you'd rape her?

That's quite a leap. In fact, that's a huge fucking leap.

Realise here I am not trying to claim rape in the military doesn't happen. We all know it does and it's horrible. However the cause of this is having unstable, aggressive and probably mentally ill soldiers. The solution to this problem is not too pull all of the females off the line. That's like saying the solution to the rape problem in society is to ban females from walking around after 7pm.

"The enemy would target the females"

How, exactly?

You think they would mass co-ordinate a huge plan just to hurt a female? Bullshit. The people we are fighting are just as scared and disorientated by combat as we are. In small arms firefights, they kill people who are about to kill them and it is purely instinctual.

But, let's suppose they were targeting females.

So what?

You do realise that targeting certain types of your enemy has been happening for thousands of years? What's next, should we stop sending Lieutenants out on patrols because the enemy would rather kill them than a private? Of course not.

However, the main point I want to make is females are already fighting in direct combat. Just because they aren't sent out on combat patrols doesn't mean they aren't fighting. Ambushes are common place in Afghanistan. And yes, females have been involved in small arms firefights in Afghanistan and so far, they have acted outstandingly in combat situations. There have been no real life incidents that have occurred in battle that suggest women shouldn't be fighting. None.

---

To be completely honest, I believe people who are against having female serve in the front line are acting sexist. Whether it is sub-conscious or not, a part of their brain is saying "THIS IS WEIRD. THIS IS WRONG". There are no logical, valid reasons as to why females shouldn't be in the front lines right now.

I agree with the Australian Prime Minister.

 

[feauxx]

lots of bullshit

do you honestly think you can really make a point when you take someones words completely apart and then put them in a different context?
you ignored my points so why even bother to merge me into your quotes anyway?

First off, by labelling my post as "bullshit" you have just invalidated anything you could ever possibly say to me. If you are not mature enough to argue points without such childish tactics then you can go sit in the corner until you decide to grow up.

As for your "points", I did address them. If you actually read the post you would see that quite clearly. You simply choose to bicker about the format since I did not decide to address your "oh so special" pov directly and instead lumped them in with others who were making the same point.

Good day sir.

sir?
anyway all i did was snip the quote to avoid clutter because all i wanted to do was notify you that our discussion ends here. not because i'm special but you really went off in another direction and i have very little to say if you rip my point into little shreds.

 

[justnotcricket]

*snip*

All the points you have brought up have been clarified here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.276760.10762792].

No they weren't, which is presumably why you chose to 'snip' my post. Your idea of 'clarification' is...an interesting one. I've said what I wanted to say, and frankly have already strayed too far down the pointless path of arguing with a fool on the internet.

 

[The Night Shade]

Snip

Perfect,I personally agree with everything you just wrote

 

[The Long Road]

Mixing women and men in the same combat units is simply asking for trouble. Maybe the average male would not take on extra risk to save the average female and vice versa, but what happens when two soldiers become romantically attached or sexually involved? There's simply no way to say it wouldn't happen, because it's impossible for that to never happen. I've personally seen boyfriends run out in front of a city bus to get their girlfriends out of the way. I've seen girlfriends get beaten by drunken idiots while trying to get their boyfriends to leave parties. If you take that kind of attachment and put it in a warzone, things get ugly very quickly.

While this word is charged with extraneous and irrelevant connotations mostly originating in the Jim Crow laws, I could see women fighting in "segregated" infantry units. They'd have to have the same physical qualifications as a male unit, same readiness, blah blah blah... However, the logistics of creating separate units, facilities, and command chains specifically for female combat units are currently not worth the extra combat ability that more frontline units would bring. Logistics are already a pain in the ass; making it even harder for the dubious worth of a few extra combat units is simply not worth it. People are already complaining about military budgets (especially in the US), so why put extra money towards a goal that is strictly political?

The idea I'm trying to convey is not that females are inferior to males in a combat situation. That has never been proven and would be difficult to conclusively prove in any situation. My point is that the mixing of men and women in combat is a bad idea, and men just happen to already be 100% of our combat units. I guess history just kinda made this a "first come, first serve" situation.

 

[Midnyte]

When i was in the millitary, we had 7 girls in our company at boot camp. These girls were all in good shape, and seemed to be strong-minded individuals with the will to do anything. And then when we had our first march through the woods, 5 of the girls gave up 4 hours in and the rest of us had to split their packs between us, while they carried no weight whatsoever except for their rifle and basic combat gear. That march suddenly became 10 times worse for the remaining guys and girls.

However, the two girls that didnt give up their packs turned out to be two of the hardest working and impressive soldiers our lieutenant had seen, and years later became officers themselves. So yeah, im agreeing with a lot of people here saying that women should absolutely be let into the frontlines, but they have to be able to perform on the same level as the guys.

Just saying, that also counts towards other things than physical strength, such as getting undressed in front of the opposite gender.

The majority of our bootcamp was during winter, and during one of our marches we had to cross a big river. I.E swim. Now, obviously, you have to take your clothes off before you start swimming, but one of the girls simply refused to take her clothes off in front of the others. Apparently, her bra had a malfunction, and she didnt want to flash her breasts at everyone. Leaving everyone standing on the other side of the river, freezing cold, while she walked upstream to a shallower point.

It took her 10 minutes. 10 f***ing minutes.

 

[InnerRebellion]

I don't like the idea, because, if I saw a woman get hurt, I'd probably act more blindly in trying to make up for her pain. But if I saw another man go down, I admit it wouldn't phase me as much.

 

[DefunctTheory]

You do realize that almost all European countries such as Germany and britland have women in frontline combat....even the U.S.A. has them. I mean in the Afghanistan Invasion women were fighting with men in the German Army

Dude, women already fight on the frontlines in the Canadian Armed Forces, United States Military, and Russian Military, heck they are even in special ops in South and North Korea. Russia had women corps in WWII and they killed a HUGE number of Germans (One AAgun unit of the female corps held off a entire German tank division, they took out like 22 tanks using several AAguns when Germany attempted to invade Russia and they fought to the death as they eventually were killed by the Germans in a forward push).

Most countries have female soldiers, and even rebel/terrorist groups in various countries have female soldiers. Get wit the times dude, it doesn't matter if your a chick or a dude anymore. If your pointing a gun at the enemy you'll still shoot them down if they attempt to kill you, regardless of their or your own gender.

Plus in the Military you are TAUGHT to not get attached to teammates (Relationships can have you discharged, and in life or death situations you are taught that you can't stress over losses till the fighting is over) or to panic in any situation regardless of gender. Any soldier who is dumb enough to mourn more over a female teammate more than a male teammate is a soldier who isn't fit to even be fighting on the frontlines. Personal feelings aren't supposed to be factored into your actions, any soldier who can't act rational is the type of soldier who is likely to screw up and get people killed.

Most soldiers will even say they don't care, the only people who have a issue are the people who aren't fighting. Unless you're in the military and fighting beside someone of opposite gender...YOUR OPINION IS INVALID! (It'd be like saying you hate Pepsi when you've never drank pop in your entire life). So evidently I believe personally that everyone has the right to fight on the frontlines, it's your own choice and nobody should stop you from doing so unless it is PROVEN as a FACT by fellow soldiers that it creates problems. Till then we should all shut up, cry a river, build a boat, and get OVER IT.

No, we don't.

Well, in a hot minute we will. But not yet.

EDIT: Unless your talking about front line support, which is another ball game.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

n

actually we do, many women are over in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting with men

 

[Seydaman]

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.

Pretty much
It's not like we're running out into fields and hacking at each other with swords any more.
I think

I'm sure there will be some adjustment training, as there is with anything, but better start now rather than later.

Moar equality is never a bad thing, usually.

 

[bubba145]

There are some logistical problems that need to be overcome. For example, current Army regulations state that females must have access to bathing facilities every three days. You really can't provide that if you're a front-line unit. Since you're the first in, you're living off what you can carry, and it ain't much.

Even if you're stationed in a forward operating base, any combat unit are operating out of patrol bases for a month at a time (for the uninitiated, it's a spot that's way out of the way of major routes of travel, major terrain features, and close to some sort of water sources usually, occupied for no more than 24 hours) because the enemy needs to be found and killed, or the population needs a sense of security way out in the boondocks.

Personally, if they can work out stuff like that, and if the female in question can pass the male version of a pt test (currently, the female max score is failing or barely passing the male minimum score, and the new pt test they're coming up with is supposedly unisex, but I doubt it'll turn out that way) then why not ?

i just got ninjad in this debate. i also believe one of the reasons for this requirement is due to health reasons. woman are normally more prone to infections due to uncleanliness then men.

 

[Seydaman]

A'le huge snip

It always takes me back when I look at my thinking and realize how sexist/racist ect it was. That's probably a problem with me accepting arguments without thinking them through tho, need to work on that.
Great post, agree with you 100%
Internet high five?

 

[Kortney]

The front line, even the military in general but especially the front line is a masculine, male-dominated area. There are about 20 people sleeping in a room, sharing about three showers between them, and that's in the best of conditions. Operations are carried out with male intuitiveness, the operation of the entire group is through a male mindset because that's the way it works. Bringing a female in would not only make everything extremely uncomfortable, tense, etc. but would cause the operation of the unit as a whole to degredate severely.

People said the same thing about letting females on construction sites.

My brother has actually fought with females before, in front line combat. The girls were Afghani translators and ended up being ambushed several times and very quickly their position became a front line. They shared a hole in the ground for a toilet. One of the girls was given a medal.

How is this a problem? Does the concept of sharing go out the window when a female is involved?

And even if privacy is broken, as it was in the case of my brother's situation - so what? Sometimes war is like that. Females understand this just as well as you do. What's the matter in seeing the body of the sex you are attracted to? Gay men are in the military. Gay men are in environments where there is only one shower between 20 people - does that make it inappropriate?

As someone who went to an all boys boarding school, I can tell you that the male group mindset exists in full swing. And I can tell you that's the way the military wants their front-line groups to work.

Once again, you've not listed a single example of how. All this stuff you are saying could have come out of the mouth of a construction worker in the 40s.

And I'll also tell you the Australian Prime Minister is goddamn retarded and uses sweeping statements like "Men and woman are equal" which are utterly fucking meaningless. Because you know what? We're not. We're not equal, because we're not the same. An apple and an orange are not equal. They share many characteristics, but they're not the same and you're a fool if you pretend they are.

Sorry, but bucket loads of scientific research seems to continue to confirm that females and males are incredibly alike. The common belief at the moment is that society is the main factor in separating the two. There is a lot of truth in Gillard saying "males and females are equal". She does have a lot of science on her side.

We're more alike than you think. Most of our differences are purely societal.

A'le huge snip

It always takes me back when I look at my thinking and realize how sexist/racist ect it was. That's probably a problem with me accepting arguments without thinking them through tho, need to work on that.
Great post, agree with you 100%
Internet high five?

Sure! *puts hand on screen*

 

[bl4ckh4wk64]

Um, women are already a part of frontline combat. Granted, there aren't many women, and a lot of the jobs given to women are PR missions where they try and turn a town against the terrorists, but they're still there.

 

[Liudeius]

Wars use guns. CQC is something you really shouldn't get into, but when well trained, muscle is not as important. If anything women have an advantage as they would be smaller targets and have less body weight to move around (therefore more agile and perhaps better endurance).

 

[joshuaayt]

If they pass the same physical examinations, why the hell not? I will say that most women probably would find the physical stresses more difficult to handle, but we cannot do this by gender any more- I've met women who are more than a match for even well built males. Why don't we, instead, base entry level on those compulsory physical exams? That way, we'd allow capable women, and disallow the men who can't take it.

Mixing women and men in the same combat units is simply asking for trouble. Maybe the average male would not take on extra risk to save the average female and vice versa, but what happens when two soldiers become romantically attached or sexually involved?

Relations already do exist in the military, without input from women. A homosexual couple will take the same risks you just mentioned.

 

[Kamaitachi]

For this, I refer to Terry Schappert when I say that the military in not a place for political hanky panky. It's a death machine. It should only be changed if the changes make it deadlier and more resilient. Otherwise, fuck you and your politically correct bullshit.

Should women serve on the frontlines? Doubtful. Unless their physical fitness requirements are brought up to equal those of the men, fuck no. Even then, there is no personal space between soldiers on the frontlines, which means there will most likely be some sexual tension (regardless of most military women being very not-pretty). Sexual tension may reduce the military's deadliness.

I support everything this guy just said, why on earth would anyone make compromises and reduce combat effectiveness just so around, what? 3% of the female population can act all butch and boost their own ego's.

what is the world coming to, we're compromising our own protection from possible invasion (although unlikely in this current world state) just so we can be all FUCK YEAH, IT'S COOL TO BE A WOMAN.

 

[Liudeius]

Quote

To put it in the strictest military terms: *Boom* Headshot