Do you think that women should be allowed to serve in combat roles in the armed forces? If so, why/why not? And do you think that standards should be lowered to accommodate for female recruits?
English
#Offtopic
-
If they can meet the standards of men, then sure. Torture/suffering should be disregarded. They know what they're risking.
-
Why would you want to serve in a combat role in the first place?
-
I would be interested to hear what a woman who has been in combat would decide. Most people on this post haven't had any combat experience, and the ones who have bring some logical points.
-
3 RisposteModificato da PirateZack: 12/30/2015 9:59:13 PMFirst off, women have lower physical standards than males. For example: army: Male push ups minimum- 42. Women push ups minimum- 13. 2 mile run minimum for males is about 16 minutes. 2 mile run minimum for women is 18 minutes 54 seconds. So they should have to pass the male standard because combat doesn't give a shit if you're a women who has lower physical standards. The male standard is there for a reason and when men don't pass it, they don't make the cut. Why should women get lax standards for the same job. Then, from first hand experience in both combat and garrison as a Cav Scout, I've seen women cry when yelled at in uniform. Females getting pregnant and getting special treatment for it. Women get pregnant to avoid deployments. Women get pregnant while deployed after being shot at once. I've seen all men banned from the single shower on the patrol base for 2 hours per day because a single female was on the COP. Women complicating matters when you have to pee or shit while away from plumbing. Women complaining when you have to change or disrobe for legitimate reasons in the open. Females complaining about sexual harassment if they don't like anything somebody says. False -r[b]a[/b]pe accusations when they're caught banging officers. Lowering standards because they can't meet the male standards. Having different grooming and hair standards based on gender. Having menstrual periods which warrant special treatment. Having elastic stretchy parts on their uniform pants which men don't have. Combat doesn't care about your special needs and saying it's 2015 or wanting to be "inclusive" isn't a valid reason for changing. It's politics.
-
8 Risposte
-
Yes, women should be able to choose for themselves.
-
4 RisposteInb4anomaly?
-
1 RispondiI've seen a woman cower in fear while being shot at....in training! Worst part is she was an officer! I've seen a woman fail to drag a 230 ibs. man (full combat gear) and fail to drag me a 290 ibs. man (full combat gear) resulting in all 3 of us being KIA. (Training) ......But I've also seen a woman engage back while 2 of my male counterparts cowered in cover. (Actual combat) Point is they should have to uphold the same standards every other man in combat roles have to. They should also not be given special treatment in training when signs of cowardice show in training, and be immediately removed from a combat role. Honestly the standards for combat roles should be higher than other jobs anyways.
-
1 RispondiThat's for them to decide. They should be allowed if they want to.
-
6 RisposteModificato da MissusMcLovin: 12/29/2015 6:11:14 PMIt really depends on what "role" they are playing. Can a 105lb woman drag a 200lb man out of the line of fire? Maybe, but realistically probably not. Can a woman drive a truck or tank as well as a man, sure they can. Can a woman haul around a 60lb pack, sure, but probably not as long as the average man. Biologically speaking women are built for child birth,our hips , shoulders, backs everything has evolved to carry and give birth to children. We are not built for war, not all of it at least. I'm not saying women shouldn't be allowed into combat roles. I'm just saying not every women can do it. The same way not everyone who can throw a football belongs in the NFL. As far as women not being able to handle it mentally, that might be the one aspect women excel at. We talk about our feelings and statistically are more inclined to seek help. So there ya go,I'm sure I'm going to catch hell for this opinion. Long story short if the woman can meet every requirement then let her in, no standard should be lowered. She should be able to do everything the man standing next to her can do and no less. If she can do that then go for it. Edited to add : this actually goes both ways, not all men are suitable for combat roles either.
-
They should be allowed to, but the standards shouldn't be lowered to accommodate them. We don't half-àss Freedom here in America. *muffled eagle screech in the distance*
-
1 RispondiI am a white, straight, cis-gender, right handed, omnivorous, suburban, middle class male and I feel offended
-
I don't think women should have to fight wars...
-
Sure. They're probably super soldiers when their menstrual cycle. I remember when I pissed off my old girlfriend and she nearly popped off my shoulder. :'( I could've been a better person! But it was too damn late for a change! Ummm....anyways, I'm all for women troops; if they can pass the same requirements as a man, then hell yeah.
-
8 RisposteStandards should not be lowered. If they pass the same test as the men, they should be allowed to.
-
Yes... Just as long as they meet men's standards.
-
The argument that "women's minds can't handle war" has to be one of the worst arguments I've ever heard. Most men's minds can't handle war either, that's what we call PTSD. Humans are complex, you can't decide that an entire gender is suddenly incapable of doing something. If women complete training under the same regiments and standards as their male counterparts, there should be [i]no[/i] reason for them to not be able to serve their country.
-
I can't even comprehend the reasoning to not allow women to serve, I mean it's 2015 getting close to 2016; gender should not be a determining factor anymore...
-
WHEN! THEY! GIT! GUD!
-
There should be a battalion of couples.
-
It doesn't matter to me.
-
Standards should in no way be lowered Doing so would effectually handicap ourselves
-
Hell yea. I never -blam!- with army bitches. They be coming back from training lookin like they gunna beat yo ass. Imagine brolic ass scary women with a gun? The perfect killers. Women are already masters of psychological warfare, but put a gun in their hands and train them, they're the deadliest -blam!-ing creatures man has to offer. Shit if other countries don't want them America will gladly take all you badass women over here. Just remember we cool when yiu dominate the world.
-
5 RisposteDidn't the Marines recently publish a study that showed an all male unit was much more effective than a mixed unit?
-
Make them sign the draft and meet the same standards as men then I'm fine with it.
-
4 RisposteWomen should be able to serve in combat roles , if they wanna serve are country then let them serve, they should have the right to serve just like men do to protect our country