January 24, 2013
-
Women in Combat
Good news ladies. Very soon you will be able to fight in combat again.
The military will have a new policy that will allow women to serve on the front lines of combat. Here is the link: LinkShould we allow women to serve in combat?
Comments (74)
I’m sure there are some women who could stand it better than some men, just as there are men who withstand it better than some women.
:/
If they want to sure, why not? I mean if they have just as much leadership, bravery, heroism, and skill as the next man I don’t see any reason for them not to.
I didn’t realize women couldn’t serve the front line. If I were a man in the military that would piss me off!
Fuckin A. Wars must not be going so well cuz we is bringing out the big guns.
Women should be able to do the things that men do if that is what they want
I think it’s a great idea. They don’t even have to use guns; they can just nag the enemy to death.
I wonder who the “we” are who believe they should be deciders of what women can and cannot do.
Ah, sweet equality.
yeah, because men have such a good track record with stamina.
someone may want to inform that dude that kitchens have knives and deboning knives work on more than chickens. If women want to be in the military, they should serve the same function as male soldiers.
Eowyn. That is all.
@BoulderChristina - I was a woman in the military, and it didn’t piss me off at all!
We should only allow those who want to and can.
:/
I don’t think anybody should serve in combat, because I prefer world peace. But there is no reason why women should be banned from it if it’s going to happen.
Shit
I don’t know about this one.
@TiredSoVeryTired - we need to make the physical standards equal so that we don’t get weak women in the first place. They can chapter them out in basic. There was nothing so scary or horrific as when they have a “W” on their helmets when getting ready to throw a grenade.
I don’t know about you, but for most of the time while I was in, I could pass the male standard.
Yes.
You know if women want to go into the military so bad, then they should have to do everything a man does. And if that means war I guess that is what they will have to do. Bro. Doc
The industry uses people for killing each other for their profit when producing guns. This is a male-made reality.
Why not? Equal rights and all that jazz.
No
What do you mean by “allow” women to battle on the front lines. Did equal rights go out the window and I didn’t notice?
I’m all for women in combat, as long ad they can handle the job just as well as any man has to. I don’t think you should force women into infantry units or units with direct exposure to combat, but if they want to go into these areas and show that they are capable of performing in combat, then why not. Experience in Afghanistan and Iraq seems to prove that women are largely capable to handle ground combat.
I’m all for equality, but if we are going for the goal of having equal rights, then there should be equal responsibility to defend these rights. With that being said, if the goal is that women and men have the same rights and opportunities, then women and men should equally share the burden of defending those rights and opportunities.
To me, this means that women should have the same responsibility to sign up for the draft as men.
I would but say to you all “impressive information”
Healthy Relationship with Griffrendez Szervezes
I’m not sure. If a woman gets captured by the enemy, who is likely to break down/give in more? In the future, if ALL women are required to be drafted alongside the men, who will produce the next generation….
I’m not for it.
From what I notice and have heard being an active duty military member is that society is more pumped up about this than women in the military. The chatter that I hear is that most women don’t want to be in combat. I don’t think its as much as women wanting something as it is society wanting them to be able to.
No. And I’m hoping that even with this policy, many combat arms MOS’s will remain closed to women.
Equal rights should not give women the right to endanger other peoples’ lives.
@BoulderChristina - I am a man in the military and this policy pisses me off.
1. Very few women in the military are actually pressing for this change, its mostly outside interest groups.
2. Women in the military ARE CURRENTLY NOT held to the same standards. 3. Women are physiologically weaker than men.4. Integrating units represents further supply/logistical issues.
Women want equal rights in the military? Let them open their own pickle jar.
yes,if they want to
hey, I heard theystill can’t go into the Rangers or Navy Seals.
If that’s what they want then absolutely. I heard about this yesterday, I had never realized women weren’t allowed to go into combat. I find it very strange that it took this long to pass.
I don’t think Men or Women should serve in combat….that’s why they invented the military robots and the robots could be programmed for World Peace, dang, I wish I’d thought of this along time ago
combat again? when were they allowed to fight in combat in the first place??
@npr32486 - As a military man myself, it would be my honor to go in combat with many of the women I have worked with for the last 10 years. They do the job just as good as I do. I really hope that, as you spend more time in the military, you will grow to become less closed minded and more cognizant of the reality that women have been fighting on the ground for decades with honor, and that this announcement is really just catching up with the times.
This day in age women are suppose to be equal to men so why should women be discriminated against like that? In order to improve and get on with our futures, change and modernization is a must!
I agree with the premise that if a woman can pass the same physical standards as a man she should be able to go into combat, (forget about if she wants to, men don’t get a choice in whether they want to or not, they’re told to go and they go.) however, I do feel that it will present a whole new set of issues for soldiers that may not be worth dealing with. does the reward surpass the risks here? I don’t believe so.
I think it wouldn’t be a bad idea, but we might consider it a prerequisite for them to have some form of long term birth control that is easily maintained. Pregnancy is the number one factor in what usually sends a female soldier back home from deployments. Expecting celibacy is retarded, I don’t care what your bitch is about it, humans will fuck. Enforcing preventative measures is far more effective than: don’t do it, or you’ll get in trouble. Other than that, Yeah, I don’t see why not.
I’m totally for it, always have been, always will be. My husband is Army Infantry, and while he did not deploy with women who were actually infantry, there were plenty of women of a different MOS who did similar work. He fully admitted one of the women there was more capable than him. It really just depends entirely on the person. If a woman is mentally fit and can handle the physical burdens of being part of the infantry, she deserves to serve that way!
It sucks that some people think women don’t belong on the front lines because of the (very small) risk of pregnancy. It seems to me that they are the ones held completely responsible for it. It DOES take two to produce offspring, one person just gets the shit end deal of it by getting pregnant and sent home. Don’t just tell the women to not have sex, tell that to the men as well.
As long as the physical standards for women are the same as men, and people regardless of gender are required to meet the same standards for physical and mental capability, I really don’t see this as a problem. I think that people are overstating the concerns regarding integration; similar concerns were raised during racial integration of the armed forces and that didn’t break our military as far as I can tell. It may take some time, of course, for the armed forces to adjust, but it can be done.
@thefittedsheet - OUCH!
@thefittedsheet - hahahahahahaha
@armnatmom - Realistically, there’s no way that all women would be drafted just like all men couldn’t be drafted. You’re not going to draft so many women that there aren’t enough to keep human civilization surviving. And, even if you didn’t draft the women, but drafted all of the men, you would still be left with the same problem, since men are 50% of what is needed to produce children.
Will this bring back segregation? Men and women fighting together is one thing, but what about the risks of off-duty fraternization?
Not sure if it is a good idea. We have already seen what the Taliban and al Qaeda do to our men when they are captured in battle. What further hideous things they may do to women are imaginations I’d rather not have….
I don’t see why this should be decided by gender.
I read an article that criticized that idea, because women usually have a weaker physique, because of their body size and -composition. Of course that is true – usually. There are other factors that played a role such as possible pregnancy, or even inability to handle stress. Obviously these aren’t issues for all women either. Sex and distraction can happen among men only too.
Why are people so stupid and generalize?
To me it’s quite simple: there are certain requirements a combattant must fulfill. Anyone who does can fight in combat, anyone who doesn’t can’t.
That said, I think no one should in any way be forced or strongly pressured to do dangerous things they don’t want to do.That’s simply inhumane.
@npr32486 - see my comment.
I have an acquaintance who while serving in Iraq, was engaged in a 24 hour intense firefight. She was told that she could not claim combat awards because she was female and that her action was not recognized – I gather this was typical.
Modern warfare does not recognize combat zones – all this new policy will do is recognize what is already pretty common.
If they want to … Go for it.
We should have a policy that allows women to fight when they’re on their period, deny them Midol and chocolate, and just wait for surrender from everyone.
@SlickRick297 - What’s your MOS?
@under_the_carpet - Is it really worth the financial, logistical, supply etc. issues to allow a select few women into combat arms’ MOS’s? If so then they should be held to the exact same standards; no separate berthing/shower facilities, no missed training due to female problems or what not, treated the exact same as the men. Yeah, that’ll ever happen.
Congratulations, now you’re ALL getting drafted.
@npr32486 - It’s a good question which can’t be answered with certainty
without seeing the numbers, but I think in the name of fairness and fighting sexism (which is negative for both genders) it is
worth it. And I agree, it’s what I’m trying to say. No gender specific rules, just rules for everyone, that are designed so that they cover all potential problems, and ensure a certain standard. (and yes, I am aware that probably not many women will be able to or would want to do that.)
@under_the_carpet - I have no problem with women in the military. However, placing them in combat arms MOS’s specifically seems stupid to me. Bullets don’t care about fairness and fighting sexism. Yes, there probably are some women that could do it, but the vast majority could not. The two; only TWO female officers who volunteered to try the USMC IOC (infantry officers’ course) both washed out. Other women in the military have commented on how they could not hack it. Why is there such a push from those who aren’t even in the military to see this through?
@npr32486 - well, I think because people are tired of gender-wars. That’s my reason.
Better yet, sign ‘em up for the draft.
Cuts down my chances for selective service immensely.
sure, why not. afterall, isn’t this what that pseudo-feminist insignificant twat, sandra fluke, was fighting for? oh wait. that was for free birth control. yes, women who sign on the dotted line should be able to engage in combat. they’re trained for it. fuck this equality shit. it has nothing to do with that.
Though a country needs an army..the idea of combat is very unattractive..furthermore i’m perplexed as why would someone want to choose such activity as shooting at someone else..unless they really believe in defending their ideas..also..the idea of “allowing” women is as unattractive as war itself…
Yes, but they should be held to the same standards as the men in combat.
sure, why not? If its her choice and she wants to then why shouldn’t a woman be able to?
As a Marine, male or female, you’re first and foremost a rifleman. However, the duties charged to infantry and other special forces do require a great physical toll on that of a woman, if not already instilled upon a male counterpart for as long as the Marine Corps has existed. It is nice to know that while these jobs are available, like all other jobs, the individual must qualify and perform, regardless of gender.
“Women in combat” is too generalized and only designed for that purpose of the media and to stir up those that drink it up in a second. If you ask a female counterpart from each range of jobs within our military world, their experiences and ambitions as a member of the military vary.
@npr32486 - That’s what I want to know!!! Ask anyone in the 03 or 08 MOS ranges!!!! I do appreciate the pull ups for females in the pft, though. Ought to be more subtle.
If that is what they want then sure…but I can’t figure out for the life of me why they would be in such a hurry to do it.
phhtt!
why do women always have to prove themselves worthy of everything?
look at these powerful examples:
The Trung Sisters
(c. 12 – 43 CE) were two 1st century CE women leaders who repelled Chinese invasions for three years, winning several battles against considerable odds, and are regarded as national heroines of Vietnam.
Catherine of Aragon
was Queen Regent, Governor of the Realm and Captain General of the King’s Forces from 30 June 1513 – 22 October 1513 when Henry VIII was fighting a war in France. When Scotland invaded, they were defeated at the Battle of Flodden Field, with Catherine addressing the army, and riding north in full armour with a number of the troops, despite being heavily pregnant at the time. She sent a letter to Henry along with the bloodied coat of the King of Scots, James IV, who died in the battle.
Colestah
In the 1858 battle of Spokane Plains in Washington, Yakama leader Kamiakin’s wife Colestah was known as a medicine woman, psychic, and warrior. Armed with a stone war club, Colestah fought at her husband’s side. When Kamiakin was wounded, she rescued him, and then used her healing skills to cure him.
Joanna of Flanders
(c.1295 – 1374) consort Duchess of Brittany by her marriage to John IV,
Duke of Brittany. She was the daughter of Louis I, Count of Nevers and Joan, Countess of Rethel, and the sister of Louis I, Count of Flanders. Joanna organized resistance and made use of diplomatic means to protect her family and her country. In the siege of Hennebont, she took up arms, dressed in armor, and conducted the defence of the town. She eventually led a raid of soldiers outside the walls of the town and demolished one of the enemy’s rear camps. She was an earlier patron for women, and a possible influence to Joan of Arc.
….and many, many more both of fame and the unsung warriors.
I think we should take a look at female ex-militants who have lost a leg, or two legs, or a life, etc… while not in combat. Risk during deployment doesn’t go away for those who are not directly serving in combat and as far as I can see, women have been serving/fighting for the US for a long time. Yes, combat may be different but women,overall, have not proven themselves incapable in the military so far. They deserve the chance to move up and to get the recognition, honor, and respect denied before this legislation. As many have said, requirements should be the same to ensure women can handle it. Having heard this over and over, and now said it myself, I would like to also say I am doubtful that many of the women with true desire to be in combat would want to be under-qualified or under-trained anyway.
Sick. No one should be pointing guns at anyone. STOP ALL WAR NOW!
Yes, we’d all love to quit fighting and sit and sing “Kum Bah Yah”..as long as there are greedy and evil people in the world, there will be wars. So peace isn’t going to happen, not everyone is nice. So for all you idealistic tree huggers out there, get over it.
Women have already been in combat roles for years, this “change” basically affords them the same pay and advancement opportunities as men. They will have to pass the same physical standards as their male counterparts for a given position, no double standard.
IF this country ever has a draft again, there will be a big push to make women eligible for the draft. Watch the feminists howl then.
Inevitably having women in advanced forward areas will be difficult. There will be issues of sexual misconduct, playing the “feminine” card, guys worrying more about their female counterparts and less about their objectives, inevitably there will be sex, co-erced, intoxicated, consensual or other, and allegations of harassment, rape, jealousy, etc., etc…This is just as dumb as having women in the sub service…most young servicemen have hormones raging anyway, so you introduce females into the mix..yeah, that’s smart. But you want Pandora’s Box, looks like you’ll get it.
Wrong Question. (Again) The question should be, “Why shouldn’t we let women fight in combat?”
People are looking at this from a volunteer standpoint, but that won’t always be the case. Once women begin to serve on the front lines, they will be required to register for Selective Service just like the men when they turn 18 because it has be ruled they they are equallly able to serve on the front lines. Your daughters and sisters will be subject to the draft whenever the U.S government decides we need more soldiers than the ones who have volunteered. Fighting on the front lines is more than being shoulder to shoulder firing bullets, being in desert foxholes, crawling under a hail of bullets. It also include fighting off dangerous reptiles like snakes, alligators and humongous spiders as you walk thorugh swamps. Is this the future you want for your daughters?
As I was thinking about this last night, I thought about the scripture Apostle Paul wrote, “And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting (Romans 1:28 NKJV).” I believe this is what has happened to the leaders of our country.
I think as long as they pass the same tests that guys pass then yes they should be allowed.
And when both Mom and Dad are killed or disabled send in the children.
@Cares2theWind@datingish - I wouldn’t say it’s women having to prove anything. More as, if you’re getting the same pay as me, why should someone not be put in the same danger that I went through? I’ve seen a lot of comments about women not being as strong as a man physiologically. While that is true, women Cana dn stereotypically have greater stamina than men. I say that if you’re willing to put that uniform on, then you should be willing to fight with that uniform on.