Why Women Should Not Be Allowed In Combat
March 21st, 2005 | Published in Culture, Politics | 267 Comments
Update 1/13/09: I’m amazed people are still finding and commenting on this. So for the record, I’d like to say I now disagree with this post. While I agree that some women are weaker than men and it has certain disadvantages, I believe women should be given the equal right to be in combat and defend their country, as long as they can pass the same standards as men.
* * *
[The following has been adapted from Robert Bork, Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline, pp. 218-223]
The two main arguments feminists advance for women to be allowed in combat are:
- Putting women in combat is crucial to women’s self-esteem and to men’s respect for women. (That has never been true in the past and it is impossible to see why it should be true now.)
- Combat roles are important to military advancement.
There are also significant arguments against putting women in combat as well—arguments that are far weightier than the above ones. However, in our culture the rights of women are increasingly put above the importance of human life (this can be seen most horribly in abortion). Therefore, feminists may shake off these arguments with their illogic and emotional fury by stating that their right to be in combat outweighs the damage they do to military readiness and fighting strength. However, the arguments must still be put forth:
- The inevitable result is that training standards are lowered, and then the facts are then ferociously denied. This has already resulted in one pilot death (Navy Lieutenant Kara Hultgreen) [I am sure more have resulted, as this book written in 1995]. Also, David Horowitz offers specifics:
- “Gender norming” is now the rule—women are measured against other women, rather than against men who outperform them.
- Even though West Point officially says there have been no negative effects from the admission of women, the sworn courtroom testimony of a West Point official says that women cannot perform nearly as well as men and that the men’s training program has, for that reason, been downgraded. For example, men are no longer required to run carrying heavy weapons because women are unable to do that.
- Even if a man is willing to lead women in combat, even the thought that it might not be suitable is sufficient to end your career. This happened with Lt. Commander Kenneth Carkhuff who was recommended for early promotion due to his “unlimited potential … destined for command and beyond,” but after a private conversation with his superior officer that his religious views made him doubtful about putting women in combat, though those views also required him to lead women into combat if ordered to by his superiors, he was discharged.
- Due to such threats as the above, career officers do not speak about the performance of women in combat positions, because to do so puts them at great risk of discharge—especially if they mention anything regarding women not performing as well as the men. This is an extremely dangerous policy and will result in the loss of lives and possibly wars.
- In physical fitness tests, very few women could do even one pull-up, so the Air Force Academy gave credit for the amount of time they could hang on the bar. Female cadets averaged almost four times as many visits to the medical clinic as male cadets. At West Point, the female cadets’ injury rate in field training was fourteen times that of men, and 61 percent of women failed the complete physical test, compared to 4.8 percent of men. During Army basic training, women broke down in tears, particularly on the rifle range.
- The pregnancy problem. Navy ships have had to be recalled from missions because of the pregnancy of female sailors. A male and a female sailor on the aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, both married to others, videotaped themselves having sex in a remote part of the ship. There had been thirty-eight pregnancies since the crew went aboard the Eisenhower, fourteen of them after the ship was deployed. Only someone who has never been with troops could not anticipate this result or fail to realize that it will be a major problem forever. The troops in question are very young, at an age when their hormones are, to put it mildly, fiercely insistent.
- Effects on morale can be particularly adverse. The presence of women among male troops weakens combat readiness. All-male units in the field experience bonding that enhances unit cohesion and effectiveness. When women are introduced, men stop relating to each other and begin trying to attract the women. Men can quickly become on less-than-friendly terms with a mini-war over a woman. Nor can morale be improved when accusations of harassment are always a threat. An accusation of sexual harassment by the woman, even if unproven, would severally damage the man’s service career, and both the man and the woman are acutely aware of the fact.
- The Israelis, Soviets, and Germans, when in desperate need of front-line troops, placed women in combat, but later barred them. Male troops forgot their tactical objectives in order to protect the women from harm of capture, knowing what the enemy would do to the female prisoners of war. This made combat units less effective and exposed the men to even greater risks.
Our military seems quite aware of such dangers, but, because of the feminists, it would be politically dangerous to respond as the Israelis did by taking women out of harm’s way. Instead, the American solution is to try to stifle the natural reactions of men. The Air Force, for example, established a mock prisoner of war camp to desensitize male recruits so they won’t react like men when women prisoners scream under torture. There is a considerable anomaly here. The military is training men to be more sensitive to women in order to prevent sexual harassment and also training men to be insensitive to women being raped and sodomized or screaming under torture. It is impossible to believe the both efforts can succeed simultaneously.
Therefore, it is clear that mindless feminist ideology is inflicting enormous damage on the readiness and fighting capability of the armed forces of the United States. Every other career is open to women. There is no reason why access to combat roles, for which they are not suited, has to be open as well. But political intimidation by radical feminists is so powerful that there seems little prospect that the continuing feminization of the U.S. military can be reversed. At least not until some engagements are lost, or won at unacceptably high costs, and women and the men who tried to protect them being coming back in great numbers in body bags.
March 24th, 2005 at 7:55 am (#)
Politcal pressure by radical feminists? You mean, women can vote now? (Kidding!) I think that the threat to American security by feminism is highly overestimated: better to worry about our troops facing American-made weaponry at the hands of former allies, or the threat to morale by corner-cutting military contractors, higher-paid “private security forces” (cough*mercenaries*cough) in their midst, hyperextended deployments, diminished medical care for the wounded, backdoor drafts of IRR troops, lowering of physical/medical/academic standards to meet recruitment goals…
Honestly, you point your finger at men more often than women for exacerbating the problem, and most of your issues seem to be the caused by an extreme gender imbalance rather than anything inherent to women — but the hammer falls on women as a group nonetheless. I have a question: would it be acceptable to you if there were all-female divisions in the military, rather than mixing them? And if the female troops proved more effective in combat, would you advocate for banning men from combat positions? I ask, because it seems that you are projecting “natural roles” upon different genders, and in doing so, forgiving men for the having the same indiscretions you curse women for displaying.
March 24th, 2005 at 11:33 am (#)
I would not want an all-female division. Females do not prove more effective in combat–but, of course, if the evidence was different then some of Bork’s arguments would be incorrect.
Personally, however, I would argue based on the biblical view of men and women, and that the men should be protecting the family and the women should be talking care of the children/family while the man is away.
March 24th, 2005 at 8:00 pm (#)
When mixed together, both men and women “prove” ineffective in combat. Men have been proven alone, while women haven’t — there is no “proof” until there is a “test.” I suspect they would operate in a radically different way — but who’s to say who would be more effective at fighting others and keeping fellow soldiers alive?
Since your post wasn’t just channeling Bork, but rather stating your own opinion, it seems our arguments are two ships passing in the night… I think we need very little “biblical view” in the way the American military is run.
April 12th, 2005 at 10:28 pm (#)
“Personally, however, I would argue based on the biblical view of men and women, and that the men should be protecting the family and the women should be talking care of the children/family while the man is away.”
Seperation of Church and State applies to the military as well. So take your personal views and mute them. Not all agree with the “biblical view”, because if im correct, that for christians, not the land.
All i can see is a inferiority complex, i mean common, men do not nessisarily perform better than women, and to say as such, is just unbased and biased. Since there has been more men in the military over its life span, and the natural biased of some of its officers and head officials, its no wonder the statistics stand as they should. So instead of making such a ‘to do’ out of women in the military, maybe you should go on this logic: “If she can cut it, she is in” just like we do with the boys. Hey, im sure women can figure out how to fire a gun, probably alot better than you can make a point. So in simation, Women SHOULD NOT be treated differently, nor should anyone. Give each the same chance, regardless of race/sex/religion. If you keep that kind of additude about women, YOU might be at home cleaning, for a lack of a caring woman to be nice and do it for you.
April 28th, 2005 at 11:14 am (#)
“i mean common, men do not nessisarily perform better than women, and to say as such, is just unbased and biased. ”
No it’s not. Look at any physical tests of both men and women. On average, the man will significantly outperform the women.
May 3rd, 2005 at 11:09 am (#)
“On average, the man will significantly outperform the women.”
the key word is average. the military should allow the few women (and there will always be a few who preform overagverage, just as some men will preform underaverage) who can meet the standards have the opportunity to protect the country if they wish.
January 19th, 2006 at 10:36 pm (#)
Women must be allowed to serve in military combat!!! We have equal rights to men. This article should not say some of the things it does. Women can be just as good as men. WE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO SERVE IN MILITARY COMBAT!!!
February 6th, 2006 at 3:00 pm (#)
I think it is quite clear that MOST women cannot perform as well as men. Did you even read the article most women could not even do one pullup… In some ways I agree with Lauren in that if a woman can meet the same standards that the men are required to meet (without the standards being lowered) then she should be allowed to defend her country if she chooses. Furthermore if a division of women can outpreform a division of men then yes men should not be allowed in the military. However i think we can all agree that physically the majority of women just cannot compete with the men and as such it would be highly unlikely that a division of women could in fact outpreform a divison of men. Ultimately since male divisions are more effective than female divisions, male divisions are more effective without female members, and female members are less effective than male members I see no reason why females should be allowed in the military. If an able bodied male was a disruption to the division and causes more harm than good he would be let go in a similiar fassion though not necessarily her fault a female who can meet the male standards unfortunantely does more harm than good and thus should not be allowed.
February 7th, 2006 at 12:14 pm (#)
I think if we want to go into combat, we should. We have every right to go. We know the risks of fighting in combat. Some get raped or violated. They know that it is a possibility. We are in the military to fight for our country. We will take every risk to make that happen. God bless every woman in the military!!!
March 4th, 2006 at 2:18 am (#)
Hey Rian nicole. 65,000 stand-up commedians out of a job, and here you a feminst is trying be one. The military is not a right ,but a privilige to serv. the military is not obligated to give you a job.
The good lord created man the way he did, and the woman they way he did. There is no changing about it. Women are not suited for combat. other countiries have attempted it, and found they had to abort from it because they saw they were losing the stinkin war. bottom line. History just repeats it self with this issue.
March 4th, 2006 at 11:59 pm (#)
I am getting ready to do a speech about this so i have read many different aspects. I think that women should be allowed in combat in the want to be and are able to do everything that is required. I read on this site that most women could not even do a pull up but on another site i have been to said that 75% of 41 women were able to do everything that a man cold do
March 5th, 2006 at 9:53 pm (#)
I am writing a paper on this subject and have found this thread very helpful. Thanks to all that have contributed! Personally, I think that the military is working well the way that it is set up now. In that women are allowed, just not in special forces, direct combat, ect. I am not a traditionalist by anyone’s standards, but in this case I believe there is no question. As John Walsh said, serving in the military is not a right but a privelage, as are most professions. I do think however that a few select all-women squads should be tested, because, contrary to what I have read here, in Israel I have heard that thier “special forces” are all women platoons due to the debatable fact the women in general are better at multi-tasking and therefore make better fighter pilots as has been shown here in America. As far as the relevance to this topic is concerned, I’m not exactly sure…
April 15th, 2006 at 10:15 pm (#)
Im doing a speech on this and i would like to also say thankyou for putting your opinions i go to highschool and we test every person in the gym class on physical fitness and i have not seen one girl not able to do at least on pulll up. that fact is clearly untrue. I believe that there should be a test and if women can pass they should be able to be in it. obveously the women that tryed to be in and couldnt do a pull up werent trained and werent prepared im a 16 year old girl that doesnt work out and weighs 130 i can do 8 pull ups when told its all a matter of drive and they should be looking for those women who have that drive not shunning them all out and not giving any a chance.
April 23rd, 2006 at 11:03 pm (#)
I’m doing a required project for my highschool. If i do not pass i will not graduate. I chose “women in combat” for my topic. I am in the delayed entry program for the United States Mairne Corps. I will serve my country and do so proudly, and along the sides of my fellow Marines… including women. Women can handle it, if they want it. I believe that if the standards are raised in boot camp to what the men have to endure that women are more than welcome to give it a shot in my book. As far as crying on the gun range or not doing a pull-up, train until you can handle it. And if you can’t then you’re out, just as the men do if they can’t take it.Thank you. Semper Fidelis.
April 25th, 2006 at 6:20 pm (#)
You can take an ordinary man and make a soldier of him, but you have to have an extraordinary woman to be a soldier
its obvious that school girls can do 10 pushups. but can a 130lb woman or even a 160lb woman carry a 245lb man a mile? oh yeah…by the way she has to defend both of them at the same time..people get hurt…you have to carry fellow troops long distances. most women cant. that simple, its not about who has what “RIGHTS” its about who can meet the physical standards. most women cant and its sad to say that most men cant nowadays but hey guess what? men train hard and long for the chance to go to the military….you think we should fill his spot with a woman who thinks she has the “RIGHT” to go?
April 27th, 2006 at 8:30 pm (#)
“its about who can meet the physical standards. most women cant and its sad to say that most men cant nowadays but hey guess what? men train hard and long for the chance to go to the military….you think we should fill his spot with a woman who thinks she has the “RIGHT†to go?”
She DOES have the right to go, and who says that the military is so full that they will just replace an able-bodied man with a woman? Why couldn’t they take both? I’m not saying that the military should just let in any silly girl because she thinks it will be fun, no. I think that if a woman can meet all of the same standards as a man then she should be allowed to fight. So if women want to fight in combat then they’ll just have to work harder and earn it. “Most” can’t, but what about the ones who can? Why turn down someone who is willing and able to fight and risk their life for our country?
Anyway, in these times of war, combat consists of mainly strategizing, bombing, and shooting- and it doesn’t take incredible strength to fire a gun. Skill, yes, and a level head, but these things can be learned. And yeah, people get hurt, but a woman will be able to handle it if she is physically trained to, right? If they can make it through the same training, then the same rights should apply. And who cares about the ones who can’t- because they won’t make it, will they?
Let’s give the ones who can a chance.
May 19th, 2006 at 6:02 pm (#)
i do believe that women should be allowed in combat. We live in america and anyone in this country should be allowed to do whatever they set their minds to. If i wanted to fight in combat and serve my country i should be able to. Why should the women stay home and take care of the children and men get to go out and be the hero. The equal rights amendment to the constituion stated that everyone has equal rights including gender has not yet been passed and i think we should improve this and strong able women should be allowed in combat!!!
June 3rd, 2006 at 6:10 pm (#)
To me, women are their own person with their own opinions. Who are other to say that they can’t join the combat. Women arn’t stupid. They know what thay are getting themselves into. If they want to join the combat then they should be able to whether one agrees with it or not.
June 26th, 2006 at 11:54 am (#)
I just got in a ”debate” with my friend about this issue. I wish I would have read this prior to the instance…
“Most” women may not be able to keep up, but for the ones WHO CAN, why should be deny them the right!???
As for the men being worried about protecting the women with extra care… that’s on the man’s will power. DON’T blame women for that.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:43 pm (#)
i agree with lauren there are a few women who can meet the standards and those women should be allowed to protect their country if they so desire. David also has point as far as the men protecting the women, thats on the mans willpower. oh and by the way not all women are emotional basket cases, and some of us acually enjoy shootting. About the pull-up thing if you cant do it than train till you can and if its to hard than out you go, just like the men who cant. i think that some men dont want women in combat because they are afraid that they just might shown up by a women.
June 26th, 2006 at 9:37 pm (#)
I think women should be allowed in combat; however, I am a big fan of seperated both sexes in combat and special forces. I think mixing both sexes might cause too much weakness. If we seperate both sexes, we might achieve something better and more effective?
July 19th, 2006 at 9:39 am (#)
Agreed.A single sex combat team will likely be more effective than a co-ed. Reasons being stated by Bork, the sexual attraction thing, mainly. However, even if the women underperform the men in terms of physical strength as the main reason,there are ways to counter this. Perhaps lighter weapons or equipment? Besides,it seems to me that bork is basing his views on the ‘natural’ roles of me and women.If the women can withstand the training, and coose to join the army, why not? They can be utilised in battle, and depending on the other sex all the time is rather inferior to us women, i feel. I mean, would you want to rely on others all the time knowing u can’t serve the nation and let others do so? So give women a chance in combat) ‘Skill, yes, and a level head, but these things can be learned. And yeah, people get hurt, but a woman will be able to handle it if she is physically trained to, right? If they can make it through the same training, then the same rights should apply. ‘So yeah, it ultimately depends on the women. ROAR!!
November 1st, 2006 at 12:59 pm (#)
There seems to be a common reoccurance of this argument that most women do not perform as well as men in physical tests.
I would like to ask you a question: Why do you believe these differences occur?
Think about this: There ARE women out there that become just as physically capable as men, correct?
This means that the biological tools women need to perform physically are there. So, why do most women choose not to use these tools?
The answer is simple: Sexist and biased gender roles, which are created by this type of view that ‘women are weaker.’
This fact that most women are outperformed physically by men is perpetuated by this sexist mindset you are advocating. Right now, there is a social mindset that women should not become physically strong, and that is the very reason why most women are outperformed, NOT because of a biological difference.
Allowing women in combat will begin to break down these gender roles in society, making it more common for women to be physically capable, therefore adding skill to our military.
November 7th, 2006 at 9:49 pm (#)
Ok, here we go… I’m a female in the Army and i outperform most guys. I almost max the APFT (Army Physical Fitness Test) on guy’s scale. I run 1300 min 2 miles, i do 59 pushups in two min, and 99sit ups in two min… I can also do about 5 pull ups. I’m currently training to get better/stronger. I attended Airborne school and i earned my wings being one of the few females that actually made it though the training. I can run with 30, 40, 50lb of equipment longer and faster than many guys in my battalion.
However, i do not think women should be allowed to serve in combat. IT will create unwanted pressures among the males and might lead to unwanted sexual relationships. Also, men and women communicate differently and in mostly male team it would create communication gaps/misunderstandings… etc. IT does not take away from women’s rights, nor does it take away our liberties. Those women that are fighting for this right, are they they ones who will go to combat? Are they the ones that can hack the same intensity men can? What about natural physical differences between men and women? Just because men do it doesn’t mean women should want to do it as well….
November 15th, 2006 at 2:42 pm (#)
Women shoud be allowed to be in combat they have a better state of mind and figuer ot thing out things faster than men!
November 30th, 2006 at 4:25 pm (#)
I am 13 and I do swim team. I am in alot better shape than alot of women that try to join the army. I think it is quite sad that most women can only do 1 pull up. I don’t think the bar should be lowered for women. We can be tough! If women want to join the army then they should pass the men’s standards and not wimp out because “they are pysically weaker.” I don’t see why women should not be allowed to be in military combat positions if they can pass the physicall test. We have the right to serve our country!
November 30th, 2006 at 10:14 pm (#)
My friend and I are doing a debate on “Women should not be allowed to fight in combat.” I am also going against my boyfriend, which is really hard. We have a few good reasons as to why they shouldn’t 1:Sexual Harassment 2: Women are easily persuaded 3: Men or naturally more strong and physically fight. Please does anyone have any other good reasons?
December 6th, 2006 at 10:19 pm (#)
my friend and i are also doing a debate on why “women should not be in combat” and we think that another good reason why women should not be allowed in combat is that the military lowered the standers on the qualifications and preformence level that women had to meet in order to join, it is not logical to say that if we don’t let women in, that it is not equal rights, because the standerdes are not eqal. and who said someone has the right to fight in combat? even men don’t make the cut. fighting in combat is a priveledge to protect our country. (key word for all you feminist is “priveledge” not “right”)Also, i dont know this for a fact, but don’t you think that if there was a small squat team sent in agianst the ememy of only 5 people, and four of them were women, that if the 20 other men they were giong up against would have a far greater advantage than if it were five men? not to say that five men agaist 20 would win, but it would not be as easy a victory. lets say that they capture the one man with the four other women, and five men atack each women. lets also say the take them away and rape and beat them on camera to show to the one man held hostage. if i were a man i would be more prone to give up information if it were women they were hurting, rather than men. just think about it. and feel free to respond.
January 16th, 2007 at 1:53 am (#)
Now while this is sligtly off topic.
If men and women are created equal and women can produce the same physical qualities as men. Then why not have mixed olympics?
Why have mens and womens, these ppl would be the elite of the elite in the physical sense.
So why are they not mixed?
Do women produce the same times for the 100M sprint, swimming, weight lifting as men?
My point is that we make exceptions so that its fair for women to compete whether it be the olymics or training for the mititary.
Can this really be denied?
With regard to a mans willpower in his need to protect women. It is also society who puts this pressure on a man.
Peace
January 31st, 2007 at 9:18 pm (#)
Women should be able to fight for their country if they want. If a women can meet the physical standards, then why shouldnt they be able to honor their country and stand beside the men that are trying to do so as well. Men aren’t born with a 6 pack and big biceps. They have to work for their strenght. Women are able to do the same. Yes, many women wouldnt meet the physical standards, but that is because its not something they want to do. Not every women wants to run out and fight, but the ones that do should have the opportunity. This is not an all men country. There are women and men. So women and men should have the same options.
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:31 pm (#)
As long as women are able to make the physical standards that are required, then they should be allowed to be in the military. Women are just as capable as men.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:56 am (#)
I don’t know a whole lot about war and womens rights to being in war. But from what I’ve been reading and what’s been said I personally think that a women’s place is where her heart and God guides her. If it is in the military then God guide her and may St. Michael protect her. I have been thinking about joining the military, but I know that in the future I wnat to have kids and who am I to prevent life from happening who is any one to prevent that? I am not a feminist, but I do believe that women have right to do what their heart desires them to do in a postive way. Don’t let that be misleading there are some things women can not do, but I think that the fact of the matter is that men under estimate the strenght of a women. Yes God made men to be stronger then women so they can protect the females, but the world today and socity have changed that now men are not polite or considerate to a women now a days it’s hard to find a decent man who will actually treat a women the way she was meant to be treated. I think that is part of the reason why women think that they can do just as much as men because, not to blame it all on the men, We have all forgot what it is to true love as a friend and as a person God created, we’ve thrown common curtsey out the window and have started treating people like crap. I do have say some women think they can do it all, they so by thinking they can be in combat with the others they think their invinceable. A woman was created to keep the man company, to be fertile and multiply. As said in the First book of the BiBle Genius. so I am not joining the military to do just that to keep the man company and take care of our children while still fulfilling my other dreams. Sorry if this goes on a tangin.
March 2nd, 2007 at 1:48 pm (#)
The military is privilege
What about situations in which there is a “Draft” is the military a privilege then?
I don’t want to take part in this debate because I’ll start typing and won’t stop, but I had to comment on that military privilege commment. And I am patriotic.
March 20th, 2007 at 7:04 pm (#)
All of these femenists need to just shut up. If women can do anything men can do (and I’m not pushing Men over women I’m just trying to prove a point) why don’t we have mixed professional sports teams or olympic sporting events? Why are men competing against men and women against women? I mean even college sports are separated. This talk of women in combat is so dumb. Women should be allowed in the military but not combat for PROVEN reasons.
March 25th, 2007 at 11:39 pm (#)
There is a difference between a feminist and a self-confident female. I am a female in the military, I am physically fit and do outperform 90% of the men in my squadron. I AM treated differently, I HAVE heard every lame pick-up line there is, I AM more intelligent, and quicker on my feet than most and yet I am incapable of performing the same tasks as these boneheads? I think NOT–I can carry a 230lb man over a mile. Am I still incapable….oh did I mention I do look like a female and I work with other females who are capable of the same and still maintain their sexuality ( Not manly women)? No, I am not the average female, but I am looked at like a belowar female just based on gender and it is bulls*it! There are men out there overweight, sexual predators, overall worthless men that get the jobs over me. WHY? Because I am fragile woman? Say that to my face and see who wins. It is ok to make assumptions but don’t put down the people who are actually out there protecting your freedom. Your freedom to say women shouldn’t be in combat, think about that. Get to know someone in the position you are so against and I bet you will think differently
March 26th, 2007 at 8:27 pm (#)
Wow, Ladies. Not doing much to help your own cause here. Several of your arguments seem to be along the lines of ‘We have the right to fight, so let us in!’ Try having a at least a vague or general idea of what you’re talking about here. Here goes me trying to solve at least one of the issues raised by Bork. THE STRENGTH ISSUE:
Ah yes, the strength issue. It seems to get dredges up every time someone brings up the women in combat line. It happens to be one of the few valid points I think can be made against women in combat. Men are stronger than women. So says the world, so it must be true. But if I may quote from the following link:
“The strongest men are stronger than the strongest women, and the weakest women are always weaker than the weakest men, but in between are legions of men and women who are strength equals.” This would explain the separation of the Olympics, the ‘strongest’ men and women. I personally have younger twin siblings, a boy and a girl, and from personal experience (this is the lament of a mercilessly tortured older sibling) , I can assure you that they are strength equals. If anything, Katie is stronger. Also, studies do indicate that, if trained correctly, women can shorten or close their physical gap with men. According to stats, weight training can increase your strength by 72% during the first four weeks, regardless of age or gender. Also, current technologies are gender neutral. So women carry lighter guns. As far as I’m concerned, If you get hit in the head with a bullet, your probably still gonna die. However, until war fare moves completely into the realm of virtual reality, or until geneticists create super-humans, I agree that physical strength is still important in combat. However, when is the last time you heard of a soldier having to do pull-ups in the front lines? Also, the thing about the lady pilot, Navy Lieutenant Kara Hultgreen. This is taken directly from Robert Bork’s texts, yet it is no in here. Hultgreen believed that there should only be one standard, and was forced into combat by political pressures, and her death is not one to be used against women in combat, as she herself did not want to enter into combat unless she passed the same standards as the males. I would go on more, but I am already taking up too much space. Hopefully, this has cleared up, at least partially, at least one issue on women in combat. My personal view is that yes, women should be allowed in combat, but they would have to pass the same standards as men. (Of course, this is only one of the many points that have to be resolved.)
May 18th, 2007 at 10:30 am (#)
” legions of men and women who are strength equals”? That’s ridiculous! On the the n.y. city police dept. physical, men have to bench press 92% of their body weight. Women have to bench press only 53% of their body weight. Can we have some honesty please? The difference in strength is huge. Put political correctness to sleep. If any of you fems out there want to put this to a test, let mew know. We can go to any high school, pick males and females at random and see how they compare physically. All bets taken! Please dare.
July 27th, 2007 at 1:42 pm (#)
Why can’t we just have it so that men can’t join the military if women are so distracting? Makes no sense, right? Well, it seems here that it’s the men that can’t control themselves. The women shouldn’t be banned just because the men in the military can’t handle working or being around women on the job. I can understand if the women aren’t in enough physical shape for a position, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed to join that certain spot. The standards are made by men, so how do we know that the women won’t do an excellent job on the battle field or the ship just because they couldn’t do enough pull ups? It’s actually really rediculous to ban women. How dare you say there are plenty of more jobs out there for women? Every job should be able to hire a female or a male. Feminists go out of their way and sometimes act out of line (from your point of view) because they are so outraged at the ignorance still going around. They have had it, and personally so have I. I have no intention to join any forces, but I know women who do and these bounderies have to be taken care of. I hope you understand where I’m coming from and that there needs to be equal rights for every job.
August 13th, 2007 at 8:10 pm (#)
The majority of the responses of Bork’s argument seem to be by folks who have NEVER had any kind of military experience. I am an Army ROTC Cadet attending Capital University. I’m gonna make this straight to the point! There are many responses here saying things like “Women Can Be Equal!!!” Well listen to me as a man who has experience in a REAL military environment. I do not disagree with the fact that women have the potential to be as strong or stronger then men. However, I have never seen a woman in the Army who demonstrate that the have the ability to handle or exceed the amount of physical activity that a man can. Not a spec of evidence that a woman can do the same things period! The reason: physiology. If God or mother nature wanted women and men to be the same then we would all have TESTOSTERONE, and none of us would have ESTROGEN. There are also psychological differences between the sexes that allow men to cope better in extreme environments, the kind of environments where people are cut to ribbons in blink of an eye. I’m a psychology Major so I do have some credentials in this aspect of the dispute, but thats a different topic. Its just nature, deal with it. Men and women should use the advantages to the max. thats why we are different to dive life’s workload so that men do what they do best, just as do women. Woman have advantages that men don’t, mostly psychologically and intellectually.
November 20th, 2007 at 12:55 pm (#)
I strictly believe women shouldn’t be allowed in the military, if they’re not up to the same qualifications as men then they should stay the hell out.
It’s like art… if your not up to the specifications then don’t do it, and even some guys are out of shape in the service, they need to get out too… anyway ladies are great otherwise… lazy guys piss me off.
November 20th, 2007 at 12:59 pm (#)
one more thing… i do a military boot camp, and i smoked both women and men in the service… im 16 ok, my physical abilities were much higher on weights, cardio, and strength training… not one of them even came close to competing.
December 16th, 2007 at 5:28 pm (#)
The feminists claim combat service is a “right.” Nonsense.
A battlefield is not a boardroom, a courtroom or an operating room. WOMEN DO NOT HAVE A “RIGHT” TO SERVE. Military service for volunteers is a privilege; for draftees, it is a duty. No one has a “right” to serve, a civilian idea equivalent to having the “right” to be a doctor or lawyer that has no place in the military, whose principal purpose is to kill the enemy and destroy his capacity to fight.
I was married to a Marine that had women in his squadron. The only thing those women did was make the squadron weaker and cause problems aboard ship. My husband’s unit was assigned to an Air Craft Carrier and he was an ordnanceman. The women in the Ordnance shop could not lift the bombs they had to load on the F/A-18s. They did not learn or know the things they needed to, to succesfully load ordnance on the aircraft without the help of the men – how is that advantageous to ANY military unit.
Women can be in the military, BUT THEY HAVE NO PLACE IN COMBAT ZONES.
December 17th, 2007 at 11:21 pm (#)
i am also like many doin a project on this topic… im doin mine for my term paper in english class… i think that women should do what they want… women might be smaller and have some strength disadvantages but women are just as capable as men to do anything they put there minds to…
women should be allowed to do anything they want in the military…in america we are suppose to have equal rights no matter the race sex or anything else that might make us different…so why can men do things in the military that women are not allowed to do? doesnt seem right to me… but my opinion…
but if i do think that women have every right to do whatever men do… thats why we live in america and have the rights we do… and thats why women want to be in the military to keep america how we are now…
December 21st, 2007 at 5:15 pm (#)
Here’s one last thing about the strength issue…
In general, men ARE stronger than women. I’m sorry ladies, but it’s the truth and you know it. Out on the front lines, we’re talking about life and death situations, and all of your “I got the right to fight” just ain’t gonna fly. I’m all for equal rights between men and women, seeing as I am a female, and I plan on going into the military some day. But sorry, I just don’t give a damn about our so-called “right to fight” if it endangers my life, and more importantly, the lives of my fellow soldiers. If I can’t hold up my own end out in the field, than I am a risk to the entire group. Ladies, remember that it’s not just YOUR life that your gambling with out there, but your squad members as well. Are you prepared to risk other peoples lives for the sake of your egos? How many of you actually plan on entering the military? How many of you are trying to allow women on the front lines so you yourself can actually go out there and fight on them? Ladies, if you’re just trying to right some “sexist injustice” that you feel has happened, and haven’t actually looked into the reasons of WHY things are the way they are, and you don’t actually plan on going out to fight on those front lines that you’re do adamant about being restricted from, than you have no place saying a word. If you’re the incredible hulkette, and can pass the strength requirements for men, if you aren’t a liability to your fellow soldiers, if you CAN hold your end up, then I have no problem with you being on the front lines. But don’t go crying foul play just ’cause boys and girls are built different. This isn’t some chauvanist rule, it’s there to keep our soldiers alive, and I know everybody wants as many of our boys as is possible to come home safe. There are enough dangers out there already without making it so they can’t rely on a fellow soldier to do what needs to be done. Of course, I’m only 14. I’ve never actually seen military combat. I’ve never lived in a war zone, or seen what’s needed to survive out there. I’ve posted comments here before, and then went out and did more research, changed my mind a bit, and this is what I’ve come up with. If any of you disagree with what I’ve said, and can prove me wrong, than I’ll change my mind. But I just don’t think commando Barbie’s gonna be able to do the job right. So, ladies, if you can pass the strength requirements needed for men, and do the job right and just as well, than go for it. If not, than stay out and shut up.
February 7th, 2008 at 8:12 am (#)
I’m doing this topic as a research project as many people might be doing. I honestly think that women should be allowed in combat situations only if they can handle the situation and that they meet the physical requirement that have to be met. I’m a 17 year old high school student and I plan on joining the army and I’m going to be a linguist and I also want to be able to fight in combat situations. I think that I’ll be able to handle the situation and the physical standards. I also agree that this isn’t a right, this is a privilege that can be taken away, but if women can meet the physical requirements, they should be allowed. I read that men also abandon their mission in combat to protect women that might get captured, I think that men need to mind their own business and stick to the mission. But my moto is: THOSE WHO BREAK THE RULES ARE CALLED TRASH, BUT THOSE THAT ABANDON THEIR FRIENDS ARE EVEN WORSE THAN TRASH. I know that what I just put in the sentence before that last one goes against my moto, but they need to stay out of a womans business. I also think that even if some women can out perform men, that women shouldn’t have to do less because they can’t do a pull-up, they should train until they can do that pull-up. I train every day and I’m getting close to my goal of 5 pull-ups, man they are evil. I personally am a master at blades, I can throw them and always hit the mark. I think that women should train themselves before thinking of entering the military in any branch, because there will always be a great need in the physical strength of women and men together. I agree on the separation of men and women in squads, this’ll keep men not worrying about the women and keep to their mission or what ever they have to do. Us women that want to be in combat also know what we’re getting ourselves in and we’ll always take that risk if we need to. But those that can’t handle the situation need to not join in the first place.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:16 pm (#)
I personally think that if a women is able and willing, she should be allowed in combat. However, females should be forced to meet the same requirements as men or shouldn’t be allowed into the military at all. It is true that most men ARE stronger than women, both physically and emotionally, but there are those few cases where women can meet the standards. So, all I have to say is: If you’re tough and comitted, go for it. If not, don’t waste America’s time.
Thank you. God bless America and the USMC
February 10th, 2008 at 6:28 pm (#)
Someone show me how the inclusion of women in combat or combat related roles has improved our military effectiveness and I will re-think my position that it has not. Do we all agree that military effectiveness is the most important issue?
February 17th, 2008 at 3:21 pm (#)
How sad that we’re even discussing these issues. No decent person should ever want to see a woman die in combat. No one should ever want to see children losing their mothers this way. End of story, the rest is intellectual BS. Woman propagate life, that makes them more precious-that’s why women were first given the life boats on the Titanic. This is why men protecting women makes sense, not the other way around. Wow, chivalry really is dead. Where are the real men on this blog making the chivalry argument? Who gives a crap about all this strength training debate?
February 23rd, 2008 at 6:40 pm (#)
Francesca, the reason why us men don’t use the chivalry tactic is because there’s nothing that ticks off a feminist more than the idea that men are supposed to protect women (and that takes away from the current issue). I agree with you, I open doors/pull out chairs/carry things for women, but the reason most men do not is the result of the feminist outcry. That being said, what so many of you fail to realize is that we are talking about matters of life and death, not something that should be discussed casually with salary/job opportunities. I’ve heard many times that women should be allowed to fight if they want to… well not if it risks the lives of many other soilders. Your beliefs on men and women do not merit putting our troops’ lives at risk. I’ve also heard, if women pass the same standards as men they should be allowed to fight… this is ignoring much of the information in this article. Did you all miss the part about the risks of women in combat outside the physical strength issue? Bottom line is that men will react differently if women are in combat with them. Many of you say that this is the men’s fault, and you’re right, but does that make it any less true? We live in an imperfect world, and no matter what men SHOULD do, they WILL act in a way that jeopordizes the troops. Like I said, this is a matter of life and death we’re talking about, and you have to be a realist in this regard, whether it’s the men’s fault or not… that’s what’s going to happen. That’s why they’re denied the right if they meet the same qualifications. What many of the feminist posts I’ve read seem to not understand is that women ARE allowed in the military, they are not banned or excluded from this as a career option. There’s just one thing they aren’t allowed in, and studies done by people much smarter than you or I deteremined this as the safest method. Another thing no one seemed to comment on was the pregnancy issue… a VERY compelling argument in my opion. You can’t just pick and choose the issues you want to address so it makes your case sound better.
I want to personally thank each and every man and woman in the military who is defending my right to voice my opinion. God bless every single one of you.
February 23rd, 2008 at 6:49 pm (#)
I would also like to add that I don’t see an good argument against an all-female division. An all-female division would negate many of the reasons why women aren’t allowed in combat, and there is a good argument out there please let me know. Of course this would have to be tested to see if it was effective before I would support the idea, but in theory it seems to melike it would work just fine.
March 2nd, 2008 at 7:59 am (#)
Women should be barred from military combat units because women lack the strength and endurance needed for combat duty.
March 2nd, 2008 at 8:55 pm (#)
First, let me say that I am in the military and do have experience with female soldiers. In my experiences, training is significantly degraded by the presence of female soldiers because of the strength issue. The current battlefield is not full of robots and satellites. Instead, it is the infantryman kicking in a door to search a building that is the norm. Strength plays a huge issue still on the battlefield. Weapon systems are HEAVY. Lighter weapons for females are less effective weapons. Soldiers routinely have to carry loads of up to 75 lbs for days, not including the 23 lbs of body armor.
Women require medical attention in training up to 6 times as often as men. Women have less dense bones and are more susceptible to chemical/poison attacks (rate of death is higher). All of this points to women not being physically able (in general) to deal with the stresses of combat operations.
Many posters have said that “if some women are able to pass, then we should let them fight.” This is incorrect. The military runs on being uniform, especially in combat operations. Units pack their gear in all the same way, eat the same food, and dress the same way. Differences become very apparent in this environment. Female soldiers (especially in groups of 95% male soldiers) are …. different. They stand out. They are not part of the group because they are different. Right or wrong, it is the truth. Since they are different, they are not treated like just another part in the big military machine. Rather they are a special piece that must be preserved and protected, rather than expended when the time comes.
I do not think that a all female division will ever be attempted due to the costs of such a unnecessary test. And all female squads are just unnecessary due to plenty all male squads. Support positions for women, yes. Away from the front lines and closer to the admin offices are the best place for the female soldier who wants to serve, and not put her brothers and sisters in harms way.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:07 am (#)
I’m a veteran and I have had experience with female soldiers. Women actively seeking out and destroying the enemy (that is real combat)is not a good idea. The women who argue for it need to join the military and spend a good 4-6 months in a combat zone. I think they’d have an entirely different view if they did. I don’t give a damn about strength or mental ability to cope with pain, loss, stress, guilt, or atrocity. If you’re a mentally and physically strong woman who can meet the standards, you should be proud of yourself, but does that mean you should be in combat? NO. I’m tired of women who spout out rhetoric like a broken record player, but refuse to examine the facts that really matter. Since ancient times women have been kept out of combat because they are valued, not because they are inferior. Women are our mothers and our life givers. Most male animals will protect their females, because they know without them their species will not survive. In this same way the human male wants to defend and protect his life givers. Is this a woman’s fault? HELL NO! But that doesn’t make it any less true. Show a group of men footage of a woman being physically abused and I guarantee you most of them will be very angered by it. Now imagine those men are soldiers in a life or death combat situation and they’ve just witnessed a fellow female soldier killed or wounded in action. What do you think happens? Do you think that benefits anyone? Oh and by the way, I don’t know if any of you know this, but our enemies DON’T surrender to female soldiers. It hardens their resolve and makes them fight to the death, which only leads to more killing. Stop with all the intellectual bull butter and look at the reality of it! There are plenty of positions open to women in the military, but direct combat should not be one of them.
May 3rd, 2008 at 7:23 pm (#)
Still, the effectiveness of the female divisions in the Tamil Tigers should suggest that in certain roles women are just as effective in military combat. They may not be able to carry a wounded man for miles upon miles but the tasked they have been assigned to are executed professionally and with the sort of mental steel you would expect of any other fighting force.
I think that relying on history as so many here have done in their arguments suggests only that introducing women into male positions and roles on the battlefield doesn’t work. Allow for a little innovation and look around at where women have been effective in struggles. From Algeria to Asia and South America, women can be fighters with steely grit.
May 25th, 2008 at 11:19 am (#)
If women want to, sure they can. They have the right to go if they want to. But they have to be aware of all the risks. Rape, violation. Mabey some studies are holding the goverment back by throwing in a female division. I guess some people find it… unethical.
June 3rd, 2008 at 9:37 am (#)
all this women in combat is messed up! if women want to go in combat let them but i agree with alot of people women need to train themselves before going into combat. they will need to be fit and ready for almost anyting in war.it seems as though men think we aren’t as strong and fit as them! i dont thnk that men need to be so judgemental about how women are in combat, they deserve the right to go if they want…
August 1st, 2008 at 12:18 pm (#)
You know our country is full of femenist ideology when they are pressuing our military to get our women killed in combat for the glory of women in power. We should be a Nation that goes to war to protect our women and children. What good is it for a man to go to war, what is he fighting for, the latest Ipod or HDTV?
September 17th, 2008 at 1:16 pm (#)
women can protect themselves if they are taught, just like men. yes, they do stand a risk of rape, but that is for the woman to concider. if she signs with that in mind, then it is no longer an issue. men need to get their priorities straight if he neglects his duty to fight or flirt with a female solider. men should worry about the women just as much as they should worry about their men. if the women couldn’t handle it, they wouldn’t be there.
i am a women (tada!!!!) and personally, i am sick and tired of all the men telling me i couldn’t do what i do. i am here now, so suck it up and know that this is the 21 century. everything is changing.
September 28th, 2008 at 4:40 pm (#)
First off, I think that it is completely stupid to keep women out of combat areas just because some men can’t “control” themselves around her, or because they aren’t responsible enough to make the right decision during a battle situation. You aren’t supposed to let things like emotional aspects get in the way of doing your job, and if you can’t adhere to that, then you shouldn’t be in the military. Women should not have to suffer for the lack of self-control, so to speak, of a man.
Second, though it is MOSTLY true that women cannot be as wise in choosing their decisions during high-pressure times and may not be physically up to the challenge, this is not to say that EVERY SINGLE WOMAN IN THE WORLD is not. It is extremely stereotypical. there are many men who are not “military material”, and there are some women who have hand-to-hand skills in combat, and excellent marksmanship. Strength is not an issue, a bullet flies out of a gun with the same speed regardless of the gender! What the army should do is accept any woman, and they be required to pass a man’s physical fitness test. If a man cannot be trusted with a woman, then the woman should not suffer for it by being banned from certain positions.
October 3rd, 2008 at 2:44 pm (#)
I believe that women and men should be treated equally i allso believe that if a women wants to stand up for there country and be a hero too. then its her right to do so. so people trying to say we cant go into the miltary because they think well get hurt, men can get hurt the same way there facing the same battles everyday.
October 20th, 2008 at 2:38 pm (#)
Well hi everyone reading this, and thank you to all those you serving in the military ect…. I believe there is only one answer for this question. Why should there be all these wars going on any way our country was made to have peace and for people to respect one and other wither you are a female a male or what ever! Im currently debating on this question in my history class and i have decided that women should have the equal opportunity,right,privilege as men do to go into combat. Although the so called standards are low for women and so called most women can not achieve the standards why should they be turned down? All in all women are just proving the fact that we are just trying to protect our country and we feel that men should not have all the responsibility to do so. Just think what would happen if only men could join …. what would happen if half the men in the world died in war, not only would the population decrease without men you can not produce children for our future. By the way I’m only 15 and i think my opinion is one of the strongest on here tell me what you think send me and email: purple_outback_dog@yahoo.com
Thank you,
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:07 pm (#)
I think that some of these arguments are good, and others are crap. First of all, to all these girls who keep popping in here, do you want to join the army? Do you really want the right to fight, get spattered in the blood of your friends, your own blood, the blood of your enemies? DO you really want the oppourtunity to get shot at and almost killed, do you really think that you can physically compete with a man, and then carry him if he gets hit? DO you really want the right to get raped by your enemies? Didnt think so. The truth is that everyone of the girls who makes an argument here, pulls it out of a pile of crap. Its funny how Feminists are so quick to point out with pride how women have contributed and how women should vote, and how women should be women, and be different from men, but then they turn around and shout that their should be no difference. Women should be the same as men, women should be allowed to join the army, women should can do everything a man can. Truth is, no they cant, I’d like to see a girl fertilize an egg with a sperm cell. If women can do everything a guy can, well go to it, we men will just sit back and let the women handle everything. We’ll see how the world works then. Just an Amazon society. Women can’t compete with men on any basis. And to whoever it was who made the comment that women have the tools to be just as physically capable as men, thats crap. Women have a smaller muscle mass, a lighter bone structure, and less dense bone structures. They arent able to handle as much physical strain as men. Women are shorter, weaker, thinner, and not as capable of physical labor as men. However, women can do amazing things that men can’t. Women know how to love, nurture, and raise children. Who does a child run to when he/she falls and cuts their knee? In most cases the mother. Women are biological mothers, home-builders, and care-takers. They excel at these things because that is how they were made. They are biologically made for these tasks, men are made to be physical, warful, efficient and logical. That is why the bond of marriage between men and women is so important. A partnership balances out the biological differences. NOw this hits upon a different argument all together. But the point is, and this relates to women in the military, that feminists are unable to recognize the physical, and biolocial differences between a man and a woman. Do not become blinded to the differences of humanity during your search for equality. Do you really want everyone to be the same? Just imagine it. It can’t possible happen. Everyone needs to recognize the differences between men and women. LOok beside you in the workplace, does that person looks just like you? Can they do the same things as you just as well? NO their are differences.
Brief touch upon a point that i saw in someones response, ah yes, it was this – “Seperation of Church and State applies to the military as well.” by Chad Ellis. must be an aethiest is my guess. Well, Chad look it up, their is no legal stature of seperation of church and state. Seperation of Church and State is an IDEA brought uo by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to a local Baptist church. The idea is to prevent a theocracy, not to deny the 1st Ammendment to anyone who mentions religion in relation to government. By demanding that he does not make a religious statement you are attempting to deny him the right of speech which allows you to say what you said, and you are denying him his freedom of religion. So as far as that goes you can officially recant your statement as it is not based on fact, merely an ideological misconception. Also, I agree with the statement made that you told him not to say. My understanding of the Bible shows me that women are supposed to be caretakers, not warriors. They are not forced into this position but it is natural for them. However in some exemplary cases God specifically chose women to lead his people, ie. Deborah who was a Judge of the ISraelites.
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:10 pm (#)
I apologize for the grammatical errors made in that response. It was written in a hurry.
December 9th, 2008 at 6:13 pm (#)
i firmly believe that women should be in combat. Women under times of extreme stress and panic have shown great tenacity and heroism. I doubt any would contest women best fit for birthing children and raising them. If you look at it from that perspective they go through more pressure each than a soldier would during 20 years of service. Putting women in combat will always be an argument that exhaust both sides but there will be a day when all people see that women could hold their own and stand ready to defend our nation just as easily as the next man.
December 10th, 2008 at 4:47 am (#)
First of all let me say that I have’nt read all of the responses. There are too many of them. However, I want to point out that most of the female responses are sadly indicative of the current mindset of our nation. The vast majority of the reponses that I have read are made from the viewpoint of “me”. What’s fair to me, my rights, my opportunities . . . and so on. We must remember that the only purpose of the military is to protect our freedom. It is not supposed to be a social laboratory. The subject discussed should not be “What is fair to women” but “What is in the best interest of the security of our nation”. It is down right redicules that we are not considering the natural basic reality and human nature of mankind. It is a fact that in the basic make up of a man he is the protector and provider. Is this fair in our overly PC culture today? Maybe not, but that doesn’t change the fact. If two men are fighting side by side the human nature of a man will draw strength and confidence from the comradeship of the other. Conversely, a man and a woman in the same scenario will generally result in the human nature of the man drawing him to be protective of the woman and be distracted from his resposibities therefore placing the lives of both of them at greater risk. Now understand that while I believe that this basic makeup is dominant it is not always so. But we have to ask ourselves this question: If the prvious statement is correct, how many lives in jeopardy are we willing to except in order for a few women to have the opportunity to experiance combat?
December 10th, 2008 at 8:33 pm (#)
there are so many fucking idiots posting on here, it’s unbelievable. and are ANY of you over 20 years of age? why are people arguing with 14, 15, and 16 year-olds? it’s ridiculous.
a couple of things. #57, “robert garcia,” our country is not just fighting for “women and children” – WE ARE FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM. seriously, don’t do me any favors.
there is so much bias and so much stereotyping going on it’s disgusting. “men want to protect their women” and “women are nurturers”… ever hear of a man murdering a woman? ever hear of a woman abusing or killing her own children? are these not exceptions?
don’t fucking tell me who I am or what I’m “supposed” to do. I’ll do as I damn well please, thank you very much, and anyone else with half a brain and any sense of individuality will too.
also, to #62, you stated asked if women wish to be spattered in the blood of their friends, enemies, etc. probably not. but do men? this isn’t about who wants to or doesn’t want to. it’s about “can” and can’t.”
also, if a woman wants to fertilize an egg by herself she can go to a fertility clinic. she doesn’t need you to fuck her to get pregnant, she just needs your sperm. and either way, in sex it takes two to tango.
January 6th, 2009 at 10:43 pm (#)
To number 61:
There will never be peace in this world. I mean, even animals fight. However, I do wish for peace. But that doesn’t mean I am going to go blabbing off about it like a little child.
Also, we aren’t so much as fighting as protecting our country. Remember the attacks on 9/11? They would continue to happen if our brave soldiers.
In a way, you might want to rethink about this “war”: is it bad, or are the enemies trying to kill us bad?
January 9th, 2009 at 12:55 pm (#)
In response to response number 66. I find it without any benefit to this argument anything you have said. It appears through your language and statements to me that you have not bothered to present any facts, merely lambaste the factual statements made by others. Your entire response is not in line with the rational debate and thought discussion here, therefore I kindly request that you explicitly state some facts besides random insults and statements such as “don’t fucking tell me who I am or what I’m “supposed” to do. I’ll do as I damn well please, thank you very much, and anyone else with half a brain and any sense of individuality will too.” I have no idea who you are or whether your a male or female, but I have a guess, anyway, I digress in my thoughts…
“also, to #62, you stated asked if women wish to be spattered in the blood of their friends, enemies, etc. probably not. but do men? this isn’t about who wants to or doesn’t want to. it’s about “can” and can’t.”” Truly a statement torn from its context in your response. However I wil give you the benefit of stating that perhaps this statement was unclear. This statement was based on the concept of women having a greater contact with their emotions. I apologize if you find this untrue but I wish to emphasize the lifestyle, roles, and activities of men and women as we age. It is very consistent, if not entirely consistent, that men grow up with a mentality to push past emotions, i.e. not crying when your hurt, dealing with problems on your own, playing rough sports (girls can to, I will concede, but it is RARE). Men grow and develop their sense of logic, endurance, and emotional control as a form of “Survival of the fittest.” women, myself not being one, I can’t truly say how you feel or develop, however, from my observations, it seems evident and common to me that women tend to develop and grow in a very different manner. Women become more in touch with their emotions, their sense of belonging in a group (men do to some extent but are more able to exist as a lone individual), and they are not pushed into contact competitive sports or other contests of strength and injury that force them to push past pain and self injury.
Needless to say, noone wants to be spattered in blood, however, the whole statement was meant to reflect on this past paragraph and the idea that men are in better control of their emotions in situations of injury or physical stress. Thats all.
January 12th, 2009 at 6:21 pm (#)
Rights,rights, rights! Geez, I am a woman myself. I once thought, hey! Women are equal! We should be allowed in combat! BUT, think of the circumstances. When a woman is captured, that gives the enemy an advantage. Especially if she is young or a mother. The majority will react far more strongly, as if proven in a few cases. It is true that some women can do what a man can. Really, thats great! But look at all the positions open to women. Why fight so strongly for just one little position of combat? We are far better abled in intelligence and other operations. The majority of women today really are NOT suited for combat. We were simply built differently. It’s not a matter of equal rights or sexual discrimination. It’s facts. Honestly, the womens rights group? Get over it and go work on the Wage Gap we have. That’s a REAL problem to deal with. That actually INCLUDES sexual discrimination. Women in combat? It’s a no go for me. We can do everything else, it won’t kill us to not be in combat. You girls can go get yourselves and others killed in other creative ways. But just drp the combat thing.
January 12th, 2009 at 7:34 pm (#)
This shouldn’t even be debatable. Any sane, reasonable male or female will tell you that men are stronger than women.
All the other points you guys have made are valid, reasonable, and highly relevant too. But to me the argument is over once it becomes clear having women in combat roles puts the entire unit in unnecessary danger.
But I just wanted to point out the following to the ladies on here who seem to believe it is their “right” to serve in combat with men. Aside from all the excellent points to the contrary already mentioned, it isn’t a right.
Our Constitution charges the federal government with the responsibility to defend the United States. It is well established in constitutional law that the government CAN discriminate on the basis of sex if important governmental interests that are furthered by substantially related means are at stake. see (Craig v. Boren). Further the Court ruled in Mississippi University for women v. Hogan that “exceedingly persuasive justification” can legitimize discrimination on the basis of sex.
I’d say, and I believe the Court would agree, that the national security interests of the United States outweigh women being denied their “right” to serve in combat. Which is why nobody has filed a successful suit against the DoD for this policy.
January 13th, 2009 at 12:31 pm (#)
I entirely agree with 69 and 70. 69 you make an excellent point!
January 13th, 2009 at 1:00 pm (#)
wow, bork, im ashamed for you lol, might as well just right this and ask why? we just made a huge streak of points, and btw, i found this while researching through google, probably why most people have found this still
January 13th, 2009 at 1:01 pm (#)
sorry, not bork, read the wrong thing, joshua
January 13th, 2009 at 1:09 pm (#)
one more thing for the sake of saying it before i go and probably do more web surfing, it isnt about rights, rights are dictated from the Constitution and are from the philosophy of the rights to life, liberty and property. Therefore, women dont have the right to serve in the military, and neither do men, its a government occupation, and a career with a specific and violent task. No rights about it.
January 14th, 2009 at 1:25 pm (#)
With so many facts infront of you, really girls, how much more do you need? We’re girls, we can’t have EVERYTHING. Look at all the things we have now. How greedy must you women be? We can have babies, there have been many great women heroes and leaders. We’re best known as the intelligent ones. Leave the men to what they are best suited for! War, heavy things, leading in combat. Now, really please just drop this matter.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:03 pm (#)
honestly if you think about it women have harder jobs then men they have to take care of their kids they have jobs and they clean the house and most of the women cook too. While men have jobs sometimes take care of the kids and barely do no housework and people think we SHOULDNT be in the miliatry!! Women do more then men do and probally the only reason most men are stronger ect is cuz they have all that free time to work out excersie ect..
January 15th, 2009 at 2:04 am (#)
Chantal,
Seriously? First of all, you’re forgetting to take into account that men do most of the outdoor work. I don’t know where you live, but here in Michigan the men do the outdoor work. Cleaning the gutters in the fall (from leaves) and the winter (from ice and snow), we mow the lawn, we do the landscaping, we shovel the snow, we mine our coal, we fish our oceans, we cut our lumber, etc. And we don’t complain about it. We just do it.
Also don’t forget that women for the most part are the ones that are anal about the house being clean, hence why they do more of the housework. I understand the argument that men don’t want to and don’t do housework. The reason is simple…men don’t mind living in somewhat messy houses (hence the term “bachelor pad”).
That aside, your assertion that men are only stronger because we have “more free time to work out” is flat out wrong and displays a complete ignorance of human physiology. Men are stronger because of testosterone, which builds lean muscle. Any average man is stronger than the average female. Not because women are inferior, but because of our hormones.
I do not deny that women are valuable and necessary to society. Hell, even more so than men. Women are the reason civilization even exists. Without women, men would not even bother to build houses, cities, or nations. The old American West is a great example of this, it was the frontier until women arrived and civilized the west.
Women are more valuable to society than men, which is the reason why we don’t want our women in combat. If a society was to lose half its women, the population would never recover (see Ireland). But a society that loses half its males can recover in a generation. The fact is one man can impregnate 50 women in as many days. One woman cannot have 50 children as easily a man can. Thus, women are much more valuable than men.
This isn’t sexist. It is a fact. Men, despite whatever you want to believe, value women highly. And rightly so. Women make the world what it is, you are responsible for civilization. You are the reason why humans exist today. Without your life giving bodies, your nurturing abilities, and your compassion, mankind would be in sad shape. We need women. But for different reasons than we need men. I don’t see why it is wrong to acknowledge this. That isn’t to say we aren’t equal, we are. But we have different strengths and must use them to continue to progress as a nation and as a world.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:08 am (#)
Also, I don’t understand feminists sometimes. They argue for women to be respected they need to have the “right” to do everything men can do. They say that is the only way men will respect women, thus the only way women will be seen as equals. While wholly disregarding biological factors that make that impossible.
And by doing that, they necessarily must sacrifice the virtues that make women as a whole valuable in ways men can never be as a whole.
For the Fellas:
It’d be like a football team great as airing it out trying to run it when they aren’t built to do it, while the other team is awesome at stopping the run. Why play into their strengths? Don’t try to be something you’re not.
January 19th, 2009 at 6:35 pm (#)
personally, i would like to give a firm handshake, and high five, to jack, and janelle, i think we officially kicked this discussion’s ass. take that feminist liberals.
January 19th, 2009 at 6:41 pm (#)
hahaha, sorry, im a right-wing conservative, a little past where ur putting me in the political spectrum lol unless u take me for biased or a nazi, then im totally not, i hear others ideas and consider them. i just disagree
January 20th, 2009 at 8:15 pm (#)
This whole argument of biological differences is not an argument at all. These are an assortment of claims being made to further advance the socially constructed roles that we try to fit men and women into.
First of all: for those who claim men are naturally stronger than women, lets take a step back and think about the larger context which surrounds any facts or statistics you can spout out. As children, boys are encouraged to be rough, play outside, climb on things, eat as much as they can to be strong men when they grow up. They are encouraged to wrestle and get into fights. Girls, on the other hand are given dolls and tea sets, taught to be calm and not get dirty. As they get older, they are taught to control what they eat to maintain a pretty figure. And with all of that, you expect a girl to be as strong as a boy? That isn’t about natural abilities, that is about conditioning.
Second: Women who do not fit into these preconceived social roles, and do like to play rough and were allowed to play rough can be just as strong as men. Think of women’s rugby teams. Those are some fierce ladies who could hold their own with a man. They love their strength and develop it. That doesn’t make them less feminine, less of a woman, or any other such nonsense. Strength is beautiful.
Third: for those who claim women are more nurturing than men, thereby cannot kill a person in combat let’s once again take a step back. Sure, if you take a woman, put a gun in her hand and tell her to kill someone she will probably hesitate. However, the same reaction would happen with many men. The Army exists to TRAIN you. You do not walk in a killing machine. You are broken down and built back up to become a soldier. When a woman has the same training as a male soldier, the outcome would be the same. This isn’t some biological or neurological difference.
I have read countless articles detailing the reasons why women should not be in the armed forces, from menstruation, to pregnancy, to disrupting comroderie between men in the unit, to women are not strong enough, to women need to be protected because of our life-giving powers. Each of these claims is invalid in at least one way. The inaccuracies of the past need to be cleared out to make way for the truth. So what if a woman can be a mother? A man can be a father. Both parties have an equal chance to screw it up. A woman is not naturally predisposed to be “anal” about the house being clean–she has been taught that she must clean or she is a failure. I personally am a really messy person but that makes me no less of a woman than my friend who is a neat freak. Let’s stop looking at qualities and unquestioningly gendering them. I want to be valued for my skills as a person, not for my “natural” talents as a woman. Haven’t we moved out of the 50′s? I can open my own jars and clean out my own rain gutters, thank you very much, Mr. Jack.
February 7th, 2009 at 2:49 pm (#)
Women and men… this has been a topic forever. Wheather your talking about rights or anything. Women should be able to fight in combat. Not all women are as srong as most men, but there is that small number that are, and i belive if they want to fight they should!
February 10th, 2009 at 11:20 pm (#)
I am a Marine Corps Combat Veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom. I served in the 2nd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion during the invasion. In my four years in the military, I saw and experienced the breakdown in a unit when women were in it.
I participated in a MEU (marine expeditionary unit) work-up (a work-up is where the MEU gets trained and tested to do certain tasks before going on deployment). I was put into a group of Marines and we were told to be the OP4 (opposition forces[to break it down Barney style we were the "Bad Guys"]) against the MEU. There were about 15 to 20 Marines in this little ad-hoc unit, and it was made up of several different MOS’s (military occupational specialties) i.e. cooks, supply clerks, Infantry, admin, etc. There were 5 females in our unit, and within days, our structure and discipline went right out the window. It was really the men’s fault, because they let their “emotions”(or dicks) get in their way of thinking(although the females were also jockeying for attention as well). I was one of three guys that were in an infantry unit prior to doing this training op, and after what we saw, there is no way that we would go into combat with a female in my unit.
Granted, it was a training op, and our make shift platoon commander was a Staff Sergeant from administration, who really had no clue on how to run a combat unit. But, as the article stated “Effects on morale can be particularly adverse,” the presence of women among male troops weakens combat readiness. All-male units, in the field, experience bonding that enhances unit cohesion and effectiveness. When women are introduced, men stop relating to each other and begin trying to attract the women. Men can quickly become on less-than-friendly terms with a mini-war over a woman.” During the training op, there were several altercations that broke out between a few of the males who were trying to get with a certain female.
Two of the females had sexual relations with two of the males, and one of those couples had sexual relations several times. One of the females who flirted with the Staff Sergeant got out of duties several times. I really can’t remember, but I don’t think that she served one hour of fire watch (guard duty, but during the night) the whole time we were out there. I had never seen anything like it before, and when I look back on it, it could have been a great sociology experiment. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that all of this happened……in a week and a half.
I do agree that there are women out there who are fully capable of serving in an infantry unit. They have throughout history. Look at Queen Bouddica or Joan of Arc. There are numerous accounts of women fighting in wars. But in today’s society (American society) it is just not possible. I am all for notion of making an all female fighting unit. I think that it would be great, but to integrate them into the male units would be a disaster waiting to happen.
The training op set aside, I have seen the horrors of war first hand and its not pretty. It is physically and mentally exhausting, parts of it traumatizing, other parts were a blast (it’s kinda crazy but, yeah I had fun in Iraq.). So if a female wants to go through that then all the power to them, but there has to be some changes made to their training regimen to prepare them for what they will encounter in a combat situation. The physical fitness standards need to accommodate the physical strain that they will experience. I could go on forever with this but if they did create an all female infantry unit I am sure that they would institutionalize their training.
So GI Jane pick up your rifle, put your boots on, and lets go to war. But because I think with my dick when your around, you have to fight with your fellow female marines. Sorry about that.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:39 pm (#)
yeah drummer 401 why to tspeak your mind
U rock dued!!
February 12th, 2009 at 10:07 am (#)
I am doing my senior project on womens exclusion from combat units. this was very useful, thank you!
:D GO BRONCOS!
February 25th, 2009 at 8:20 pm (#)
They absolutely should. I would definitely consider infantry forces. As citizens, we have a responsibility to our country, how is it fair that I am not allowed to carry out one of those responsibilities, if I really want to?
March 1st, 2009 at 1:49 am (#)
I am a combat veteran of OIF 2 and spent one year of my life in Iraq. I am currently a police officer and have been since 2001. This post will be short, sweet and to the point. Women should not be in combat period. It is not that women cant handle it. Its not that men can’t handle it. Its that men and women can not handle it together. Remember high school (for those who are not still there) it is the same thing. Take out the fact that MOST women are weaker than men which is true.(sorry to the feminist get over it) The situation presents a danger to the life of both sexes. Currently I am employed in a male dominated field and I do my job very well and can hang with the best of them. The difference in being a police officer and being in combat (besides the increased danger of combat) is I go home at the end of shift. I have a life outside of work. In combat you do not. You are there 24/7 it becomes your life. The drama in high school is nothing compared to the drama of a co-ed unit in a combat zone. Many careers and lives have been destroyed due to adultry, false alligations of sexual harrassment, actual sexual harassment, prostitution of women in a combat zone etc. So my advise ladies is not just to put on your aprons and get in te kitchen. Many women do “mens jobs” well but do not comment with the “I have the right” bullshit. Do not preach about something you could not possiably have any concept of what-so-ever.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:50 am (#)
Sorry for typos its late and I am tired!
March 4th, 2009 at 1:30 pm (#)
Ok so im on this because im also doing a school project, well essay. For all of you who believe women are stronger sry its kinda hard to believe. My fiance is in rugby, and im a hippie that doesn’t believe in violence. I can still wrestle her to the ground without even trying.
I also have a friend who is in the army and he had to carry his buddy who got shot in the side a mile and a half. My girl friend cant even pick me up for more than 30 sec’s
I think women can join the army because their knowledge and caring nature gives comfort to all the men. But, NO women should NOT be combatants!!! Their caring personalties cannot take another persons life even if they have to.
March 10th, 2009 at 8:48 pm (#)
hey, wow people are still posting here, nice, lol. 81 i would definetly like to here how all of those reasons independently are invalid, however, have u tried putting em all together? combine each of those and they form a strong strcuture of basic differences between men and women that make it evident that men are more suited, naturally, biologically, physically and mentally for the armed forces.
March 26th, 2009 at 10:58 am (#)
what i think that women should be able to fight in the military like yes men have provin they are the stronger sex but look at loads of women out their like their pretty tough big women so dont put tehm through a pity test give them the same test as men if they pass good luck to them and im 13-14 years old doing this for a project and i think some of these comments were pretty sexist
March 26th, 2009 at 12:06 pm (#)
I think woman should totally be in combat. I am 14 and currently in a program in my school called the J.R.O.T.C program. And I am loving it. I soon want to join the military myself as you can tell, and I don’t just want to be an aid. What I want is to be in combat. To prove to myself and family that I am capable of doing anything.
March 27th, 2009 at 10:51 am (#)
The main issue of this op.ed. is that men outperform women physically. As if military personnel were all grunts that pick up heavy loads all day without using their biggest weapon; their brains.
This is the year 2009, not the year 1909. The military as it stands, is far from “pick this up and shoot that gun while running with 100lbs of gear”.
Aside from that, a soldier is prepared physically to perform tasks that may have vague instructions on the combat field. I doubt any amount of physicality will allow you to strong arm your way through most modern day circumstances.
Not only that, the possibility of having inter-squad relationships might reinforce the protection instinct. You are more apt to protect a mate than protect a friend. It’s just the way of things. This has been elaborated on in countless books, as well as history itself, but I see people are still thinking in terms of “self superiority” then real world experience.
And if physicality were an issue, why would we let men of small stature in?
March 30th, 2009 at 10:36 am (#)
Women in combat is a never-ending debate most people belive women can’t be in combat because they are weaker then men but there is often more reasons then just brute strength, but an example of brute strength is only 7% of women can meet a pushup score set at 60 while 78% of men did. Women from age 20 to 30 have the same aerobic capacity as a fifty year old man. Many women are smart if not smarter then men but combat is not the place for them. Many women have claimed to be as tough as men and only to have a failed one woman broke a one hundred and fifty two year record of being the first female to go in the citadel and she collapsed from heat exhaustion not making the cut for the school. FAILURE
April 15th, 2009 at 12:44 pm (#)
I personally have served beside several women; they are great to have for advice and are well skilled at doing their jobs and I trust them to fight beside me in base defense but in the field however, when I am wounded and I want someone to come get me, I want it to be a PJ who is a hardcore physically imposing man. I want to know without a doubt he can drag me a mile or more, I want to know that if he has to climb something to get to me he can. Women like to argue that they are just as strong as men, and I have seen some tough women, but when it comes down to the wire, are all women stronger? No. Do I want to take the risk of having a women being the one to drag me? No. Do I want to know we are making lighter weapons because women can’t carry the same ones? No. If as a women you can drag me a 210 pound man a mile in the desert sand I say “Hooah!” to you joining the military. The military is not a right, you have to work for it, if you want to see yourself dressed in the uniform then pass an equal standard PT test. Women should be allowed in the military, but combat is something that I would rather not see them in not until everyone who joins can pass that PT test and I know without a doubt that the women next to me can drag me a mile in the sand, Until that day comes keep training.
April 21st, 2009 at 7:41 pm (#)
I think that women should be in combat. With the proper training, we are just as strong as men. I did some research, and does anyone know if this website is even a reputable source? If the person who wrote this made up statistics or if there are facts behind them? I say look at the cold, hard evidence, from training, strength levels, everything. I believe that then and only then, will you find the truth.
April 23rd, 2009 at 9:17 am (#)
I am reserching this topic for a speech at my school. I would like to put in my own comment as well. First off, YES i am 15 and YES i am a freshman but i am a GIRL who acts way older. second, i plan to be apart of the Air Force either after high school or after college. i have been in an argument with a boy at my school for some time. the topic is “Who is more superior men or women?” it has been going on sence i picked the topic “Should women be allowed to serve combat in the military?” i am pro on this topic. However, I do agree on some of the con points. Like I have read above there are several men how say it takes testosterone to fight like a man. I find that statement completely false. When i fight i don’t take the pussy move and go for the crotch. I throw a hard punch and they go down. So yes a woman can fight like a man. Another comment was that women are not as emotional strong as men. That also is false in my eyes. First off, i have been shot before after the pain went away i started to laugh about it. Every time i get hurt i laugh and find it funny as hell. In conclusion, those of you who say women are inferior, sorry about my terrible spelling i’m in a hurry, to men well thats your opinion. As for me i agree to allow women to serve in the military.
May 7th, 2009 at 12:39 pm (#)
Women in the military would just be crucial. I disagree that women should be the military. Why? Because military combact aint a place females. Back then in the 1960′s women didn’t fight, men fought. It should be that way and it still should be..
May 13th, 2009 at 6:47 pm (#)
I AM a fenimist liberal, but I agree wholeheartedly with the opinion that women should not be permitted in combat or other hazardous duties. I take offense to the remarks made earlier, as if all feminist liberals shared the same opinion about this.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:36 pm (#)
I am reserching this topic for an english paper, but want to say that i agree that women should not be in combat. i am in JROTC, and want to be Army infantry. in jrotc, the fitness standard for males, is 42 push-ups, 52 situps in a minute, for females, it is only 19 and 52, and most of them can’t do that including the ones joining the military. also, the battle feild is no place for a woman. i DO NOT mean they should stay home, but just not be on the front lines. i am all for equal opportunities, but the military, is different from being a doctor or lawyer. it takes alot of physical strength, and determination. i dont mean that not all women could make it, i know quite a few, but many have the determination, not the strength. also, there are alot of jobs in the military women are more suited for than us guys, because they dont get frusturated al easily as men. but then again it is only comment from a 15 year old.
May 31st, 2009 at 9:04 pm (#)
Women should be allowed on the battlefield and here’s why:
How can it be fair that women are allowed to hold high positions as Colonels or Generals with the ability to command men and send them to fight and die for all Americans rights when our society deems it necessary to keep women from being allowed to do the same? How can we continue this hypocrisy? How can we say that our daughters are more important than our sons? Men have been dying for the United States of America for centuries. Should men continue to fight and die (not to mention being maimed for life) only to someday come back home to compete with a woman for the same job? And then to hear women like Lis Wiehl talk about how women are still being treated as second class citizens? Give me a break!
What benefit does the male, who would die in battle, stand to gain from a society where half of the population (who ironically is exempted from death in battle) doesn’t feel the need to honor, in some major way, this “gift of death”? Instead, this “half of the population” would prefer to complain that they “rightly deserve” the same rights as the one who would gladly die for them? Whoever thinks situation is fair or moral – please stand up!
Are males thought so little of today that we, as a society, have no problem sacrificing them like lambs to be slaughtered while we show our daughters they are more worthy to live? This is a serious immoral duality that our supposedly politically correct society should change – NOW!
If women are to have completely equal rights then I say they should be allowed to die on the battlefield just as their grandfathers, fathers and brothers have done – and continue to do! Then and only then will women be deserving of equal rights! Until that day begins, society will continue to show that men are less worthy of living than women.
I will even go so far as to say that just as affirmative action was created to help minorities, the same principles should be used in filling the ranks of our armed forces. If the correct percentage of women do not voluntarily join the armed forces based on the percentage of population, they should be conscripted until the amounts are equal to the male military counterpart. If this fair play is not acceptable to society then male veterans should be given rights above the women they have served. We can start by giving preference to a male veteran, when returning home and applying for a job, over a female civilian!
Since we think we’re a fair society I say let’s prove it and be completely fair!!
May 31st, 2009 at 9:26 pm (#)
What’s really sad about some of the comments here from some of you men – your statements show that you’re willing to do the fighting and dieing for your country (where half of the citizens are women) and you fool yourself into believing this is “correct and superior male mentality” thinking that women will respect you for this. Most men today remain naive and unaware that the women they are willing to die for ARE NOT willing to die for them! Not only are most not willing to die for your rights but many will gladly show you (by their actions) they owe YOU nothing for your ultimate sacrifice.
Now don’t you think it’s about time you wake up (MEN) and stop drinking from the cup of “early 20th century male stupidity”?
September 10th, 2009 at 11:08 am (#)
Maybe you guys should ask the opinion of front line infantry men.
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/field-mess/49168-should-women-allowed-combat-roles.html
If you want to lower standards and the efficiency of the armed forces go ahead.
September 19th, 2009 at 8:03 pm (#)
people get killed because woman are not strong enough and that is why they are still not aloud in our great countries great special forces. Woman are for home not for combat and should not be aloud in and hopefully soon won’t be
October 27th, 2009 at 7:18 pm (#)
I have just read part of this so maybe i need to read on before this is published but i would like to argue #4
when i was 11 i could do 9 chin-ups true i can no longer do that but if i was determined in let me say a month i could be doing 12 chin-ups every 2 hours, Marines are required (last time i checked) to do four before mess hall which is about 2-3(?) times a day. if a woman is determined she can do what ever she wants.
posted by a young lady who supports equal liberty et rights for ALL people, with out sexism, racism etc.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:22 pm (#)
do u have a works cited for this?
November 19th, 2009 at 12:25 am (#)
It’s sad…
Feminism is destroying our family and this nation.
This country should no longer be UNITED but rather should be split in 2: the west for the feminists and all those RADICAL liberals who I believe are Anti-Americans and the east for the conservatives and moderate conservatives.
Don’t you guys see that we have a bigger war happening at home than abroad?
I HATE feminists!!!!
Let’s all divorce those bastards and leave them alone. That’s all they’d deserve if it weren’t for Jesus claim that marriage is for life!
No wonder Paul recommends to avoid getting married in the first place!
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr….
November 19th, 2009 at 12:34 am (#)
102. Dan
Dan,
It’s all in the big book pal.
As men, we are asked to love our wives like Jesus has loved the church (Jesus gave His life for us); it was never asked of women to love their husband sacrificially but rather to be submissive to us.
The problem is NOT just the feminist women. There are a lot of guys nowadays that haven’t had a chance to work, not even once physically as we are built for as men. They are, in a sort, some kind of wimps who just go with the flow, just in case they would be disliked by a bunch of females at work.
Yes, women should stay at home (with a few exceptions). If they don’t feel like staying at home, they should marry some tom boy and live their feminist lesbianism in Alaska where our normal kids would be forbidden to visit.
November 19th, 2009 at 6:33 pm (#)
There it is Dan,
You hit the bullseye. Bottom line. What we have today is a total freak show, that sends a chill down my spine. It kills me when I read or hear how great women in combat is. All because of the late 1960s.
Thank John
November 19th, 2009 at 6:34 pm (#)
I stand corrected, I meant Pete.
John Walsh
November 30th, 2009 at 1:56 pm (#)
Women should not be alowed in the military.
They are incompitent and severy handicaped when demonstrating the physical demands.
Same in Paramedicine. Women are a hndicap. I refuse to pair with a woman partner. She can’t keep up CPR, she can’t lift the heavier patients etc.
Even in school, the only reason women could do the chair stair lift tests is because they were paired with men..
Keep women out of the military.
Keep women out of the air force.
Keep women out of CEO posistions.
Keep feminism out of America.
You were made to reproduce, not to rule :)
It’s biology, deal with it…..
December 3rd, 2009 at 12:14 am (#)
Many time combat veteran here, still active duty.
Heres the plain simple truth. Women should be able to be in combat units AS LONG as they meet the same requirements as their male counterparts. The horrible truth is that they are not held to the same standard. Even the generic physical testing requirements (push-ups, sit-ups, run time)for females are lessened. This is the norm and easily found in documentation. They military preaches complete equality, but it is not so. Bottom line is I would go to combat with any woman that meets the same requirements that I and everyone else must meet. If you cant carry or drag a 200-250lb comrad out of harms way please dont try to sit in a convoy with me……woman or man.
December 3rd, 2009 at 2:28 am (#)
AMEN!
Women ARE inferior to men (in general) when you look at things from a physical point of view. There have been studies to show that women can preform under much less stress than men (no I don’t have a link or source or whatever…if you care enough..find it) and combat is, in my opinion, THE SINGLE MOST STRESSFUL AND INTENSE thing one can go through.
We have the greatest army on this earth in America, and there is there really a reason to ruin it with all this feminist bullshit? The women who walk around in their fancy little suites or whatever and go from place to place looking for something sexist to sue or bitch about simply because they are 1. Lesbians or 2.On a 5+ year dry-spell, need to shut up about this…well…it was nothing until they oppened thier big mouths.
Women COULD create all female units of the armed forces if they were able to uphold the same standards as men, but the truth is that just doesn’t happen. Geneticaly women are the weaker sex in alot of ways, and simply because a few CAN beat some men doesn’t mean all women can it simply means they are “super-women”. There is a reason in the Olypics that they have Girl teams and Men teams, it’s becasue women are physicaly less powerful. If the point of an army is to have more strenghth in weapons and soldiers then shouldn’t we only allow the best of the best in ours?
Even if a women can compete equaly with enlisted men, she would undoubtedly be a huge distraction!Women can have all the jobs men can, that don’t require PHYSICAL stranghth. They can doctor and lawyer all they want, but no ARMY…and i’d say no police or firefighters (not firemen anymore huh?) but thats just how the world is becoming….
December 7th, 2009 at 2:53 am (#)
Cmon ladies; give it up, we know you dont want to be considered less of a human beign but draw the line somewhere.The moral issue of this is the largest point.I dont care if u cant lift a bullet but when the enemy is threatining to rape you its probobly the most horrific moral disaster among the troop. on that note the mini wars for women are very true in groups.
Get real
Maybe an all women troop, i would be for that, but no mixing AT ALL
December 14th, 2009 at 9:51 pm (#)
Oh contrare, my dear friends, my ex boyfriend whom I still converse with as friends is undergoing training at AIT as we speak (or type) and since I am writing a speech on this, I got some facts on women in the military and I do believe it may knock you right between the eyes. In JOSH’S post he states in his 4th reason that “few women could do ONE pull-up”. Well, I for one am an average physically fit woman of 18 that definately is capable of doing more than a few pull-ups. If you’d actually enjoy me video-taping myself to prove it, email me – ill do it jst for kicks and giggles-
I go to an apostolic church and definately have morals. Though I do not wear skirts, like they choose to, they believe it is modest, though I believe it is not your salvation [ticket to heaven] so i forgo all that nonsense.
[KJV] There were women in the bible that God led to killing leaders in the military- JAEL look it up.
ANYWAY, my friend Thomas Steele – gave me some statistics of women in the military as of now- he told me there were many women outdoing him in the mile and two mile- getting 4:50 and 11:33 two mile- performing 21 pull-ups easy- WHICH BTW pullups are not included in PT tests, they dont do pull-ups- they only use pull-ups to workout- There is an 86% PASSING RATE OF WOMEN AND A 56% PASSING RATE for men for PT scores, He claimed watching men drop during pushups and women pushing on- Nael, performing 72 pushups, 106 situps all in 2 minutes. He says women are treated no differently than men either in there- which means they are yelled at and pushed to their physical limit- SO BOYS the question is not WHO IS THE STRONGER SEX, but WHO CAN GET THE JOB DONE BEST?
Wouldn’t you say now?
[PS. After graduation I myself am joining the reserves]
HOPE YOU LIKE THEM APPLES, please get your facts straight too JOSH, those were HORRIBLE statistics~
Chao
December 14th, 2009 at 9:59 pm (#)
PS- i do agree extreme feminists have destroyed homes.
Many women I know today enjoy staying at home with their families & being submissive, I believe men in homes are the head of household, and I would love my husband and never try to out-man him or make him somehow feel inferior- But the idea tht all women must conform to one way of living and being stay at home moms?
Wow, way to restrict someones rights and ambitions.
December 19th, 2009 at 1:26 am (#)
Many people have responded to this article saying it is a woman’s right to fight in the military. Many others have responded saying that to serve is not a “right” but a priveledge. This is of course, very true. And so I ask, why should women not be as “priveledged” as men? Why aren’t they good enough? If a woman can perform at the same (or better) level than a man, then why are they not “priveledged” enough to actively defend their country on the front line?
I’ve asked many questions, hopefully someone can answer them for me? Thanks
December 19th, 2009 at 1:34 am (#)
Sorry I just remembered another point
“You were made to reproduce, not to rule :)”
- Paramedicalman
Women were made to reproduce, that is something we have over men but that’s not the only thing we CAN do!
I am no feminist but that point simply outraged me. I am a Christian and the Lord did make women for that purpose but with many other purposes in mind too. This Paramedicalman even goes so far as to say that women should be kept out of CEO positions. Women may be somewhat weaker physically but many of the tests that people keep referring to have also proved that intellectually and mentally, women are often better capable than men.
I’m sorry to have gotten so carried away but Paramedicalman you need to open your eyes! This is not the 15th century for goodness sake!! This is the modern world, come join it!!
December 19th, 2009 at 2:32 am (#)
Ruby, first of all, I’m also Christian, and Eve also made to give Adam company :P
Now, back to topic.
It has been proven, by both live tests as well as chemical tests, that females are far more capable than males when forced under extreme psychological pressure. They are also -generally- better at organizing than most males, I’ve even seen that in day-to-day life.
Females have also been recognized for keeping to their task in hand, whilst many males would get distracted from performing tasks, so women are only one of the many distractions for men in battle.
I would like to end my comment, by stating that most women can beat most males at multitasking, and even looking out for certain objects, or just anything out of the ordinary. Due to years of being forced to be ‘stay-at-home-wifes’, they notice kids doing things easily, they have fast reactions when noticing something thats not normal, and other jobs an mother would normally perform.
So if you put these ‘skills’, into a warlike scenario, think about what they could achieve above many men.
Also, please look at the following link
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&gid=205405074274
It is a Facebook group about women on the front lines. It has some interesting arguments on it.
December 24th, 2009 at 3:44 pm (#)
Well a little about me, I was attached to a Marine unit sent to Iwo Jima during World War II. The physical standards of the military back then were MUCH higher than they are today. So persoanlly, I doubt most people men and women of today would be able to go through the training I went through. But since the combat has changed since I was in along with technology i would say thats ok since the gear you carry today is a lighter weight than ours was and battles are fought much differently than ours. This debate has been around for many years now. It’s not a question of putting women in frontline combat… its the amount of heart that individuals have to want to go. The drive, determination and sheer willpower of individuals that wins wars. Strategy helps along with technology but boil it down, if the troops aren’t up for it no amount of strategy and technology can help you. So if a woman wants to fight let them, but being a war veteran myself and knowing what happened then, I’m not convinced that a woman would have been able to do the jobs that we did then, at least the women of my era. So my answer is to let women form their own combat units and prove themselves. If successful, merge some units together and give it a try. If the success rate drops with the mixed units, give the ladies their own units and leave it at that.
January 6th, 2010 at 11:48 am (#)
I think women have all the rights to joint the
Armed Forces if that what they want,but if they
are raising their kids, that should come first
I feel that the government should have some
restrictions regarding this. The life of your kids
should always be first
January 15th, 2010 at 7:14 pm (#)
I am a 14th year old women who wants to be in the army. I actually have been training football with men and I can do the same stuff as they can.
I think that women should be allowed in combat if they want to. Actually women can be a lot more useful in the army than people think we are. We are intelligent and even strong enough to help in the army. Actually I know women who are in the army (not the U.S. army) and they are very capable of doing everything they are required.
I actually have shotguns in my house, and my dad and I go to practice and believe me those guns are heavy, but i still can carry them. I believe that if I train enough to reach the standarized score I will if im up to it.
In my case i will never be able to join the army because a few months ago they found a chronic sleep disorder called Narcolepsy which enables me to join the army.
In the case in which they said that men loose concentration trying to save women in combat well dont loose concentration and believe me women are capableof defending themselves and if not it was their choice to join the army and when we join we know the odds or the consequences and we accept them.
January 31st, 2010 at 12:13 am (#)
now lets hear from an actual infantryman..4 years in the line 101at airborne..2 year in a lrsu unit..airassault..airborne and a bunch of other schools..laides..god bless ya…i know of no women i have met military or not who could be a light infantryman..period..u aint been there u cant comment..its all speculation…its a miserable..gut wrenching,, physical job …its brutal and filthy..always too hot or cold..raw shoulders blisters inside of blister..i started basic training w/ 260 young men..we graduated..160..or so…we bathe together ,,shit together…and some of us died together..both the airborne school and airassault school have dropped there standards so women can graduate…our combat load 116-150lbs depending on the situation..hump 10 klicks the then dig in almost every also a myth that the average gi is 6 foot 200lbs more like 5 10 170lbs ..u dont build muscle mass in the infantry…i could go on and on nature is nature biology is biology..any question u go to the source…huaaaa…
January 31st, 2010 at 12:15 am (#)
some typos there but u get the jist
February 1st, 2010 at 2:02 pm (#)
Women, should not be allowed in the army, period. They are not designed for it. Women talk about equal rights non-sense. Women want all the rights of men without the responsibilities. And anyone dissenting this fallacy in common sense is silenced, along with the usual tirade, of girls can do it too, bullshit. Women are equal to men, etc. Women are equal as human beings but not in function. This is a big fallacy in the feminist mindset, which keeps reinforcing the notion that women have to equal in men in function too, and that they are not equal to men unless they ape men in all functions. And it is pointless arguing with women because they will not understand under the current feminist mindset. While women are keen on adopting male functions female nurturing functions are getting neglected.
February 3rd, 2010 at 5:50 pm (#)
All you naysayers are pussified manginas or stupid women who need to GET BACK IN THE KITCHEN!
February 9th, 2010 at 12:52 am (#)
This is not fair at all. I am a girl and I’ve dreamed of being in Combat after BCT, but women are not allowed! I think if women want to take the risk, they can. I would be one of those women getting out there. I think they should try it (again) .
February 9th, 2010 at 12:57 am (#)
Nick and blah : That’s a horrible thing to say, I think. And I’m sure most women would agree with me. We do belong in the Army, and women don’t spend their lives in the kitchen. Even if you’re exaggerating, I hate being referred to as like that. We’re not maids and I don’t think it’s fair. Life ain’t fair, whatever! Women SHOULD be allowed in the army and women ARE allowed in the army, so deal with it. Everyone is equal, men should have no greater power over women. I can beat alott of boys at my school (that are older than me)in arm wrestling, weight lifting, baseball(softball)and probably run faster than many. Girls should not be underestimated, we have power too. So shut up.
Thankss.
February 16th, 2010 at 4:47 pm (#)
im a gurl and i was thinking about goin in hthe army wen i get old enough and i think that women shouild be able to go into combat if they wont to. i no theres that risk of getting shot and killed but that could happen if your over there anyway. i mean you have a risk of getting shot as the boys in combat! so i dnt see why they wouldnt let us be in combat. oh and dnt women also have to do the some combat training as the boys have to do??? ok buh bye!! :))
February 17th, 2010 at 1:00 am (#)
I believe women should be allowed to fight in direct combat and special forces, as long as they pass all the same physical tests as the men, without lowering the standards. i am currently writing a paper on this, and i found the same results as earlier mentioned “75% of 41 women were able to do everything that a man cold do.” i also think if women were allowed that it would save many young men who don’t want to be drafted into the war. sure there is possibility of women getting raped if they are captured and become POWs but there is the same possibility in the streets of New York or Boston. and anyone who talks about that unit cohesion bulls*** is dumb. i have read that mixed units are very cohesive and are some of the most productive units out there. If women were properly trained the have great potential, and if they can meet or beat the standards and are clearly better than the men going for the same spot then they should be accepted. Don’t just say oh well she is not a man so she cant do well in the infantry, or whatever the case may be. the military should realize that and take the people who are best for the job no matter what gender they are.
February 17th, 2010 at 8:50 pm (#)
I believe women should not be apart of combat, but should be allowed to be in combat support MOS’s. I am a former Marine Grunt and I hightly doubt that women can do what we grunts can do. I weighed 108 pounds entering the Marine Corps and hiked 20 miles with a pack on my back that weighed 80 pounds. I would love to see a woman try that and not break while doing it. I did two tours in Iraq and the gear alone weighed 70 pounds patrolling in 130 degrees of heat all the while fighting. If a woman can do all that, which there maybe VERY FEW if not NONE, then by all means. It’s not just the trainning that they have to pass. Trainning can only go so far and is very different from real-life situations. I know first hand. Gender does play a very large role in combat. I’m not trying to be sexist, women should be kept in combat support jobs. If they want to be in combat then they should choose jobs that directly support the infantry, i.e. motor transport, Radio Operator, or maybe even artillary. I know for a fact that women cannot be a Basic Infantrymen, Machine gunner, Sniper, Recon, or Mortarmen. Each MOS carries a great deal of weight and takes a lot of discipline. I want to see a woman be in the field for three weeks with no shower, and carry all the weight and still be combat effective. Face it women in general cannot do that.
February 26th, 2010 at 7:25 pm (#)
I saw a post from Meghan on Jan. 19, 2006 that says “We have equal rights to men… WE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO SERVE IN MILITARY COMBAT!!!” I almost threw up, because the whole point to this debate is really, “can women perform to the same standards as men?” Someone else wrote that women who meet the standards should be allowed, which I would say is true, just like a man who doesn’t meet the standards should not be allowed. When people bring rights into a life-or-death situation as combat, it makes me so pissed. I would not want somebody (man or woman) who can’t perform to be next to me in combat; their right to be there, at that point, would mean absolutely nothing to me. And the whole part about lowering standards, when has that ever helped the advancement of anything, and my nation’s military is one entity that I would not want to stop advancing.
With all that said, “combat” these days isn’t the same combat as 90 years ago, in the trenches. Most missions don’t require you to run up on your enemy and possibly fight hand-to-hand, which is a result of out advancing military (smart bombs, longer reaching missiles, umanned aircraft and robots). However, that doesn’t mean standards are any less important, and every “person” should be required to pass the same high standards.
February 26th, 2010 at 8:08 pm (#)
I think it is completely rediculous when women (or anyone) try to justify women being allowed in combat by using comparisons such as sports, multi-tasking (wtf, dec 19, 2009 post), running faster than men (which will be good I guess when you screw something up in combat), heart/perseverance (which is only good if ability matches). And this business about lowering the standards; hey, I was good at legos when I was ten, maybe I should be an architect, but maybe they should lower the standards a little bit, so I can pass architecture school (or engineering). Once that’s done, would you want me to build the bridge you drive over to work every day? And please do not make reference to a specific point in my post when you yell at me about something I wrote; the whole point of this article is that overall, women aren’t as combat effective, not because they can’t do a pull up, or PMS every month.
February 26th, 2010 at 9:32 pm (#)
I am in the military. I serve in the United States Army. I can do my job better than most men in the military. I just spent a year overseas. In my job in the Army I do not go on missions. But my best friends did. One was just about five feet and was a gunner for our commander. She wore her gear and her weapon was the size of her, but she did her job. It is not about your physical strength. It is about heart and your ability to put yourself out there. I worked over twenty hour days for most of the year. I word very hard to meet the army standard. I am physically fit enough that if my fellow soldier went down next to me I could carry him or her to a safe place. Your mind is focused on the mission and your fellow soldiers life. When the rockets come in you are accounting for everyone, and everything. You are ready to fight. Scared as hell, yeah. I have not met anyone in my army career that is not scared. Man or women. I know when you see that casket go by as you salute a fallen comrade,and later see what happened to the vehicle. You will cry. It does not matter if you know them or not. You still get your stuff and continue mission. Everyone is stressed over there. My personal opinion is don’t say anything until you have served with a women by your side fighting with you or even a medic trying to save your life. A communications person making sure you can talk to the unit if something happens, and that one that sits in the gunner set ready to fire to help save your life.
I don’t care what gender, race, or what sexual preference you have. If you are a good soldier I will fight with you and for you. I know everyone has their own opinions, but think a little harder when you put them out to the public. I spent a year in Iraq so you could feel that I don’t belong in the military.
February 27th, 2010 at 9:22 pm (#)
Anna has a very good point.
February 28th, 2010 at 9:43 pm (#)
Well anna, what was your job over in Iraq. It depends on the job you where doing that would tell if you could do your job better then most men.
March 21st, 2010 at 5:00 pm (#)
Are you kidding. This isn’t even a question. Yes most women are weaker than men but there are some who can be as strong or stronger than any man. Who are you to deny a women a job in the military because she’s a woman. If a woman can meet the same physical requirements and she’s willing you people are stupid to deny her a job in the military. That’s like turning down money because it’s from a doctor. Go figure. I am a girl an plan on joining the USMC and being in the infantry. Send me a friend request if through xbox live if you have a comment. Saphira117
March 24th, 2010 at 1:08 am (#)
Look… I have read all 137 of these responses and I still have not changed my ideals.
As a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom I have been through LOTS of shit ,I was in a converstation with a superior officer when suddenly his head exploded from a snipers bullet. I have been “Sprayed with the blood of my comrades and my enemy”. I have taken many lives. Women are the weaker sex. Its not deniable! And somewhere on this page I read that lighter guns do the same damage. HA! I have shot both and TRUST ME when I say that the lighter the gun is, the less damage it does. When a woman is on the battlefield it jepordizes everyone in her squad. Men naturally have an instinct to protect them. That is a gift from god. Also, All you Feminist liberals need to shut the fuck up. If you have no intention to join the military then leave it be. The so called “Right” to be in the military isn’t a right. It’s an honor and a duty. I have carried a commander from a building and had to run him ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE LCP so that he could get medical assistance. War is some crazy shit. My great grandfather died in ww2 on Guadalcanal. My grandfathers brother died in Vietnam from a boobi-trap. I know the costs of war. Ive seen men dismembered by land mines, and torn to ribbons. This is all very physiological stuff. I understand that women want more rights but they cant have it all. We as men find it to be our duty to protect them as the life givers. Just please understand that war is not a joke. It’s not like a video game. You only get one life and there is NO reset button. I hope this helped.
March 31st, 2010 at 9:45 pm (#)
Look I’m a male and I believe that women fighting in the frontlines is not a case of un-equality but rather military efficiency. Women can be as strong as men, biology proves their frames are weaker but when it gets down to it they can and will do the hard yards. With that in mind most women are not a physically strong as men, the gear that marines have to carry weighs metric f— Tone. Then you have to walk in it for hours on end, it’s not for everyone.
The biggest problem with women serving in the military is how men react to a wounded woman, instinctive (and this is essentially programmed in to us by nature) a man will want to protect a woman in these situations. I would not let myself leave a woman to die, I couldn’t do it. Next is the treatment of women as Prisoners of War. What can and will be done to women, Rape is sickening, no one should put themselves willingly into that situation, and I could not leave a woman who might end up in this situation, once again a protection issue.
The military is not a business (ok arguable) it has to be run as smoothly and efficiently as possible, women should have equal rights, but the consequences are a case of Humanity. Some women might say, I could deal with being raped, but in truth it is very unlikely. It is such a physiological ordeal that is underestimated, women end up resenting themselves and hating their bodies afterwards (case studies). I as a gentleman will not and could not ask, even if a they volunteered, a woman to put them into such a situation. Thank you for your sense of patriotism but to me it does not balance out.
March 31st, 2010 at 9:50 pm (#)
all of these people who are saying women should serve in combat your not being righteous. and i know that people are going to say they arent trying to be but the truth is you are. women are not the same as men and never will be there is no way around it. we have different body makeups women put through the same training as men women will not ever be stronger it isnt possible im not saying this to be sexist its a fact. people can say its not true but it is. i do believe the man has a natural instinct to protect a woman it isnt will power it was how we are programed. you can say its the 21 century but that doesnt change anything.
April 10th, 2010 at 2:37 am (#)
Ok, men, what if YOU were a women, and you wanted to fight in combat, and everybody was telling you, oh you can’t, your a women, I think you would be fighting for your right just as we are, I don’t think there is anything at all wrong with women in the army….if anything, props to them, more power to us women, and the army should be happy, atleast there’s people out there that actually want to do something and fight for our country. Let us fight, we want it, so let us, you get to fight, why can’t we??
April 20th, 2010 at 5:58 pm (#)
Women have shown through tests and battlefield reports that they simply do not have the neccassary physical and mental abilities to perfom in combat. It is not about equality or rights. It is not that they are unequal. It is that they are so radically different than men in that area, that they should never be considered for combat.
April 22nd, 2010 at 7:21 pm (#)
this was helpul
April 23rd, 2010 at 12:34 pm (#)
I do believe that women have equal rights and blah blah blah, but honeslty ladies, you think you could handle it? All the blood, guns, bombs, killing of childrene everything that goes on out there? I’m a woman and yes I’m strong for who I am and what I can do, but reality check, We just don’t belong. We are equal to men and everyone else in this world, but leave it to men. They were built for fighting, not us.
April 25th, 2010 at 9:22 pm (#)
I want to respond to all the people that so far said that a woman “is not made for fighting”, “doesn’t belong in combat”, “is not physiologically or mentally fit for killing”, etc.. I am a happilly married, 41 years old woman, with 3 kids (all daughters!). I have always been exceptionally fit, exercise for 1 and a haf hour everyday (rain or shine)can do hundreds of push-ups, sit-ups and also can do 17 pull-ups at once. I still have a six pack (even after the pregnancies) and only 15% body fat. At the gym, I can perform at the same level, lifting the same ammount of weight as the best guys. Mind you, I don’t look excessively muscular, but I’m VERY strong. Ok, enough about my physical attributes. Having raised my three darlings, who are the ultimate tomboys (thank God!), I’ve had to deal with a lot of blood, broken arms, broken teeth, etc.. And guess who ALWAYS handled everything? ME! Why? Because my husband simply faints at the sight of blood… Poor guy, it’s not his fault, he just wasn’t made for that! And he is a guy! Now imagine if, just because my husband can’t stand seeing blood, I made the assumption that all guys are like that! And besides, when I was 23 and 31, respectively, I fought two potential rapists! I was attacked by men, I fought, and I won! They ran away! They were taken completely by surprise when I overpowered them in the fight! And why? Because most male attackers expect that the ‘poor, deffenseless’ girl they are assaulting will just scream for help and not fight back. And let’s put and end to an old myth that in pre-history the girls didn’t go hunting. They did! That is, until they had their first baby, around age 13, then they would stay at the cave/camp and tend to their babies, who had to be nursed by their mothers, since NO MEN could do that! So that’s the truth, the men were not physically capable of feeding a newborn, but the women were more than capable of going hunting. Especially because HUMANS are one of the weakest predators (no big teeth, no big claws, slow and weak) and we depend much more on our intelligence than on our physical strength. Just to close this argument, there is no species of carnivores/omnivores where the females don’t hunt. In some of them, like lions, the females are better hunters than the males. I know I drifted away from the topic (women in combat), but I had to make these points. And let’s be fair, I have no experience in the military, but I believe deep in my heart that I would fight an enemy soldier to the death to protect my country, the same way I fought two guys that tried to rape me.
April 26th, 2010 at 4:30 am (#)
Delight…
You just have to understand that combat isn’t a right.
It’s a duty.
If a 200lb soldier was wounded, could you carry him to the place where he could get proper medical attention?
If you were in a Humvee talking to your good friend and suddenly the they just exploded along with that side of the car, would you be able to remain calm.
If you had to carry two 75lb 50 cal snipers up to a higher point in a warring city, could you?
You must understand that it is not only a phycological battle, but a physical one. Lives are always at stake and if you cant perform to a point where you can do all of the above, well you really need to reconsider where you stand in this matter.
April 26th, 2010 at 4:31 am (#)
Sorry about my grammer.
I’m really tired
April 28th, 2010 at 6:47 pm (#)
Thank you James.
Women need to realize that no matter how many “Pull Ups” you can do or how physically fit you are, there’s no way in hell a woman can carry a 200lb man out of a battlefield with weapons and cargo on thier backs. We’ve obviously been successful winning wars from way back with just men, SO WHY CHANGE IT???????????
April 28th, 2010 at 9:01 pm (#)
Katrissa…
It’s really sad to hear a woman put women down like that. I can’t blame you, because women/girls have been taught for so long that men/boys are stronger and better than they are that they really believe it. The same thing happened to blacks way back until the 19th century, when the whites, to justify the unjustifiable, made everybody believe that blacks were ‘different’ and ‘inferior’, so it was ok to keep them in slavery. Lots of blacks believed themselves to be inferior and that they could never aspire to fill the positions occupied by white men. Things change, the world changes and maybe (hopefully in my lifetime) there will come a time when the female sex will perceive itself as strong and powerful. It’s like Bernard Shaw said once: “A woman has to perform twice as well as a man to be thought half as good”. And on the other hand, I don’t know any guy that could carry a 200 lb man plus weapons and cargo. There must be very few ‘guys’ out there who could do it, certainly not the average soldier. Yes, it’s the true that the strongest man in the world is stronger than the strongest woman, but there is a large ‘overlap’ and I’m absolutely sure that even if the women who could meet the standards are not numerous, they exist nevertheless. God blessed me with three daughters, whom I love very much, and I always tell them never to believe that they are not capable of doing something just because they are girls.
May 3rd, 2010 at 4:51 pm (#)
I was in the military. I worked with a group of guys, and we got along pretty good. One day a girl showed up. After that we didn’t hang out to much, she turned us all against each other. We are animals, therefor we have basic instincts. In a combat role, its really a bad idea. Everyone on here says “you have to be fair”, “treated equally”. Would you let a mentally challenged person in the infantry, even if he can perform like everyone else? Some of you say yes!! Because we couldn’t deny them, it wouldn’t be fair, because they want to serve their country to. On the battlefield we have to be the best combat ready group. We still have men to fight, so we don’t need to bring in an equation that could possibly hurt others.
Is it fair that a man wants to fight, and if a women is introduced into his squad, he has to rely on her if he gets hurt. Its okay to be fair, but not at the expense of others, that in itself isn’t fair.
A mentally challenged person wanted to fight, he would be denied because he would do more harm than good. The same as a female, it would cause more harm than good.
May 3rd, 2010 at 4:53 pm (#)
Oh and did i mention that a woman’s physical fitness test is easier than the man’s. I don’t think that’s fair, see it can play on both sides.
May 3rd, 2010 at 5:13 pm (#)
How come a females insurance is cheaper than mine? its called legal discrimination. Because statistically men have more accidents in vehicles. How come you feminist don’t fight that one? oh i know. Because it doesn’t deal with you. As long as you are granted everything, nobody else matters. Its understandable that things have to be fair, but you are not always going to get what you want. Whats fair for you is not fair for someone else, and vice versa.
A woman in combat is fair for her, but for everyone else its not.
May 10th, 2010 at 10:52 am (#)
Richard, I completely sympathize with you regarding the insurance companies. They decide on how much you’re going to pay based on your gender, on the likelyhood that you have, because you’re a man, to be involved in a car accident. Their decision in not based on you as an individual, but on the stereotyped image of men. If you are a very careful driver, who is very unlikely to get yourself into a crash, you will see my point. I am a woman and I think that when I was a little younger (I’m in my forties now) I would be as suitable for combat as any average guy, based on my strength and physical fitness. And btw, I’m a veterinarian, who’s performed many surgical procedures, so blood doesn’t bother me one bit!
May 17th, 2010 at 2:44 pm (#)
Richard, I do agree with you on insurance it is not fair, and they should fix it but however just like it frustrates you with paying more it frustrates woman because we aren’t aloud to do things that you are aloud too.
May 18th, 2010 at 12:32 pm (#)
women in USMC have much lower pft standards. Why not recruit the best? 8yrs of service in USMC never saw one female marine last one mile on formation runs. AND THEY GET PREGNANT! Marines giveing birth in combat zones? pull your head out of your…..
May 18th, 2010 at 12:43 pm (#)
check olympic scores. the proof is in the results. the best the world has to offer the men and women are miles apart, no pun intended.
May 19th, 2010 at 6:02 pm (#)
If it is not broke, don’t fix it.
May 20th, 2010 at 3:33 pm (#)
i would like to point out there is no equal rights amendment, it wasn’t ratified.
May 20th, 2010 at 3:43 pm (#)
just read this
im a gurl and i was thinking about goin in hthe army wen i get old enough and i think that women shouild be able to go into combat if they wont to. i no theres that risk of getting shot and killed but that could happen if your over there anyway. i mean you have a risk of getting shot as the boys in combat! so i dnt see why they wouldnt let us be in combat. oh and dnt women also have to do the some combat training as the boys have to do??? ok buh bye!! :))
exactly why they shouldn’t be allowed into the military, here is what it would sound like if she made it
Sound off
Likkke im hereee and sruffzzz look im herrreee
uhhh push upps aree hard can som1 help me, or can i do thm on mah kneeees?
May 26th, 2010 at 4:23 pm (#)
To the above ^ Nick ^…
If you really are a girl, then I’d have to say you can do them on your knees if you please. I wouldn’t deny you of that, but come back when your legal and no one will have to go to prison court.
June 5th, 2010 at 3:56 am (#)
There is also other factors to consider such as medical limitations. There is no female corpsman on the forward operating bases in country so that would complicate things as far as more female specific medical care. When out on patrol, there is sometimes the need to stay out for several days at a time which isn’t much of an issue when it comes to the need for males to be treated but it would complicate things for the care of women. There is alsa long periods in which one cannot shower for weeks at a time and I would imagine that this would particularly put women at risk of infections.
I believe that the enmy would consider women as a game prize in the battlefield because of the males protective instincts toward women in our country. they would tortue them as well as rape them. They view women as inferior and our female soldiers would be no exception.
June 8th, 2010 at 8:25 pm (#)
Does it TRULY matter how strong you are in the army? If so, how can that be true. Being smart is all you need with a bit of strength and cunning. Women should be aloud in combat, no matter what the stupid weaknesses each gender may have, but either way a women who trys to do 40 push ups and does, does better than a man who does not try because he thinks he is “stronger” and does 40 clumsy push-ups. The point is we’re all human and all that matters is fighting for our country.
June 15th, 2010 at 1:10 pm (#)
You are missing the point mouse. Back in the day, who hunted? the men. I am talking about basic instinct. With woman there is no camaraderie, and that is needed in a war zone. You have to make all these adjustments, like i said, if women can be involved in combat, i say mentally challenged people should be to. Being to fair reverses itself into being not fair.
July 26th, 2010 at 3:46 pm (#)
hell, i wanna join the army, because my grandfather died in the army, i never knew him and he died when my dad was ten, so i wanna join the army because it will be fun and girls dont get the respect they deserve, i want to redeem the women name, WE DESERVE RESPECT
September 30th, 2010 at 12:21 pm (#)
I cant believe half of you. Yes is it wrong they cant serve in combat, yes in many ways! But none of you take a split second to actually process what serving in a “Combat Role” means. This means very long extended periods of times stuck with one another, tempers flare every fricking second. No sex for amazingly long periods of time. AND YEAH PHYSICAL STANDARDS! Yeah women have things to offer, but people honestly can you just think about what this cause does, more than what it means. People wanna make shit right, but don’t actually care to see what it does.
At SOI, The School of Infantry in N.C. you got all the guys, the Infantry guys, than you have right across base MCI, Marine Combat Training, for any other job other than infantry, a standard required by the USMC where female and males go. It only takes a few weeks for these Marines to start having sex! Cause theres nothing to do!
If there was females in my unit, and we got sent out to who the hell knows where in Afghan, and where stuck out for months, I PROMISE, the guys and girls would be screwing, completely throwing off the chain of command, the ability to make the right decisions. If people don’t believe this, you have not been in the military, and if you have you cant lie about what would happen.
Im finished with this, sorry females
October 7th, 2010 at 5:42 pm (#)
i(my personal opinion) htink that if u r a women that god did not make u to be put in wars. he made u to b a unique women doing house work or something like that. he actually made noone to fight but because adam and eve did wut they did he said that all men should fight. do u see women anywhere in that line? yea i did not think so. so bottom line is that women should not be put in wars. thanks for reading my comment. i hope u understand
October 11th, 2010 at 9:53 am (#)
okay so yea ill agree that some women, if not most, cannot measure up to the guys, but there are some. There are some that are just as good if not better. In this article it says that the men get distracted and tend to not focus or do things they wouldnt usually do when they are by themselves. This may be true but i guarantee that that is not all men. Most of them are capable of being friends and would never look at them in this way. It also says that we arent strong or durable as the men. Women are capable, maybe not all, but alot of us. We fight to fight for our country, to defend it, and so on. There ARE women out there that are willing and able to do just as good, if not better than men.
October 14th, 2010 at 6:16 pm (#)
I’m doing a debate on this and this has helped me see all sides of the argument!
thanks to everyone!!
Thanks you Joshua Sowim for the specifics and the name of the school!
You are awesome!
I believe Women should be allowed to fight IF they can pass the same (not lowered, or changed in any way) standards.
October 15th, 2010 at 12:13 pm (#)
After reading many of these posts, I see many of you dont realize that women are already in combat zones. I served in Iraq along side the men, with none of the issues brought up. I was in the field for 2 weeks without a shower and never got an infection (bird baths duh!) The face of war has changed, there isnt as much of a “front line” as there was in wars past.
While I am not fighting that women be allowed in the Infantry, there are many positions for women that aid the military, but put them in as much danger as men. How about the female Marines that search females in Iraq because the men, due to customs are not allowed to? Men were getting blown up because they couldnt search women. Oh yeah, James T
I have seen blown up men and handled myself just fine. I was trained as a medic to look past emotions and do whatever I could to save a life.
Oh and last point, I did more push ups than many of the men in my unit. PT standards meet the physical differences in the sexes.
October 18th, 2010 at 7:21 pm (#)
Why do you think there are no women in the NFL or NBA? There are obviously differences.
October 23rd, 2010 at 8:41 am (#)
It seems to me women, in the modern age, are always trying to be like men, always trying to prove themselves worthy in the eyes of men [and themselves]. Perhaps deep down they really wish they were men?! I think it’s like Sigmund Freud suggested, it all comes down to penis envy and the fact women are devoid of a penis which causes this universal inadequacy and insecurity amongst females and thus they are forever trying to over-compensate by claiming they’re as strong or as fast as men or as competent or as tough in battle as men which is of course totally absurd and completey unproven; Just because a woman says something doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the truth because if you don’t believe her she’ll cry and call you a sexist pig etc.etc. If this were the case I’m sure Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar or Napoleon would have had female troops! But they didn’t and these brilliant male commanders achieved brillaint victories using male troops only. Women were around as cooks, hangers-on and camp whores. Women are made to have babies not made to go into battle, they’re a liability and a distraction for the true warriors- THE MEN. WAR IS A MAN THING!!!
November 4th, 2010 at 8:05 am (#)
Physical Fitness test, everyone in military must take one and pass it with fifty points. But, how can a woman pass her fitness test if she is exempt from half of the tests? A woman has the choice if she wants to run the mile or do forty pushups, so how are they going to pass when they can choose if they want to do half of the test or not? Most men say women are unable to complete half of the test because they have small frames and do not have the endurance to run for two miles or doing forty pushups. In reality, any woman could out run any man any day; and then pass the men in the pushup part of the test. Yet, there are to still no equal rights for women when they have to do the physical fitness testing. Men have to do, a two mile run, and then carrying a hundred pound of gear well crawling throw the mud. But women are exempt for the cause the “don’t have” the endurance or the physical strength to carrying a hundred pound bag of gear. Yet, most women can out run a man, carrying a heavy a bag of gear and still have a little bit of energy to crawl throw the mud. Women shouldn’t be allowed to choose if they want to do it or not, they should have to do it, just like a man would be able too. It unfair to treat a women different than a man, they should be treated in the same way, and they should be have to do the same training as a man would have to do
Next, how would women be able to train properly if men are always saying “Women are too big of a distraction for a man to train properly and they need to be kept away from the men?” Women pose as a distraction to a man, because in a man true nature he feels as if he should protect her and keep her out of harm way. Yet in a combat zone a man wouldn’t be able to do that and he could end up getting himself killed trying to keep a woman safe. Not only that, but men would do anything for a woman to get some “play”. They would even ignore most of their orders just to make sure they look good for a woman. Most women do not go to war just to get away from their husbands, and then to hook up with some random soldier. Science has proven if there a woman working a long side a man, he will be distracted. But why should women get in trouble for it? Shouldn’t a man get in trouble for it? After all it is him who not listening and only paying attention to the females next to him. Women are capable of living with a man, and not being as distracted as a man would get. Females are just as capable as protecting themselves as any another men could do. They are able to live with men, and not pose as big as a distracted as every man says there being. The big issues with being coed is to be with a woman, but the females over in the military did not the military for a relate ship they join so they could serve and protect their country.
November 5th, 2010 at 3:13 pm (#)
Meoooooooow. (;
November 5th, 2010 at 4:06 pm (#)
Zach- nov 4th 2010 “.. any woman could out run any man any day/most women can out run a man..” WHAT PLANET ARE YOU ON !!! Does that include running faster than Carl Lewis or Usain Bolt ?!!
November 9th, 2010 at 9:46 pm (#)
As a student of a sexist school I’ve noticed a lot of things you have not realized. Women are perfectly capable of combat just as much as men. They are able to react much more accurately in a high stress situation and please, they wouldn’t cause that many issues regarding the men. Every distraction is a tick of the brain in which a person becomes engrossed in the thoughts or confusion of an item or situation. A women could not become a whole distraction in a militia of men.I would say more and go in depth but i have to cut short for i have a paper to write for my english class
November 15th, 2010 at 7:37 pm (#)
Let me explain something here ladies about the male mindset to you. We are bound by mother nature with an instinct to protect women. Men are designed for this purpose both mentally and physically. When a man see’s a woman injured or threatened with death, that overwhelming instinct kicks in and she become his priority regardless of any personal cost. With intense mental training this urge can be desensitized and laid dormant. However, this instinct can never be gotten rid off, only contained, and can resurge at any moment during combat.
Israel’s army experienced this first hand when a coed squadron recieved female injury/casualties. The men immediately became enraged and lost all sense of tactical ability. As a result they ignored the appointed objective in order to get the women to safety. The women became a distraction (at no fault to them) the moment injury occured if not before.
Any good man is defined by his ability to protect and provide, having been bound by nature to do so. While physical ability does play apart, the real issue is that when women ask to be allowed to fight in war, they are also asking men to do the impossible. To disregard any notion of something that is melded into the very fabric of who and what they are, it simply cannot be done.
The bottom line is, like it or not, women are a distraction on the battlefield. Understand that men are not trying to make you ladies feel inferior, we just dont want you to get hurt or killed. War is messy, there is no glory, only the stench of blood, dirt and death…your not missing anything.
For those feminists who disagree, if men are no longer to be a womens protector/provider (a role in which he is most suited) then what purpose does he serve?
November 19th, 2010 at 8:33 am (#)
Seriously, I think that the women who try to go into combat and can pass the physical test, should be able to do it. They know what they are getting into, they aren’t just waking up one morning and declaring that they are gonna try to go into comabt, they’ve researched and they know the consequences. So if we women think it’s right for us, and we believe we can handle the things thrown at us, then we should be able to go into combat!
November 27th, 2010 at 7:13 pm (#)
[Admin note: I'm leaving this comment up just to show what dumb bastards people can be.]
You dumb bitches. You will be raped by your own comrades. Why isn’t that obvious to you?
Leave the fighting to the men. The battlefield is no place for women or children.
If you really want to help your country and help your men, take care of everything else.
You aren’t strong enough physically, your emotions are too erratic to be dependable in life or death situations, and your lack of testicles renders you risk-averse, putting the lives of other soldiers in harms way.
Know your place. It doesn’t matter what you want. You will be a hindrance, not a help, and only foolish countries are willing give their enemies an advantage during a war in order to keep their women quiet.
Shame on all of you.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:23 pm (#)
Give Us the same rights. Every other job is available to us, so why shouldn’t this be as well? We are just as good or even better than men. We posses more brains and knowledge and that is a huge benifit when it comes to war and the military. We go through the same training, the same drills, we eat the same food, share the same base, and march in parades together. Yet when war comes the men get to go, and where do we get stuck… in offices or being a truck driver. Why can’t we have the same previlage to fight for our country instead of watching on the sidelines. We could be a huge benifit to combat situations because we would increase the numbers and would be able to help defend the land of the free.
We can’t fight because everybody is afraid that we will get raped or that we are too weak to carry our own load. You know guys get raped and abused too. And just because we can have the babies, its the guys who are needed for the reproduction process. So why not make them stay home too, since we need them to reproduce. We are equal to guys. Anything that they can do, we can do it too.
I want to serve my country, and I am not afraid to die for it. I will do whatever is nesserary to make sure that America stayes the Land of the Free. Give us a chance to prove ourselves, we can help bring our nation to the next century. Let us have a chance to defend the land that we call home.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:54 pm (#)
Commander this is for you. Shut the Hell up. You said that we need to know our place. Well where exactely is our place, at home popping out babies, cooking dinner, and waiting on you hand and foot. That is a load of bull. Too long have we been on the sidelines. Too long have we been the “servants” to you. Too long have we been waiting to show who we really are. We can fight and help win the war. Just because we want to help serve and project our country we are consdered dumb. Well how about you guys, you willing go over seas and get blown up does that make you dumb too. Or does that not count for you because you are a guy instead a girl. Again that is a load of bull. Why are we considered dumb, weak, and stupid when we are smarter then men. We can do whatever a man can do.
Yes we have emotions, but it is emotions that keep us on alert. We can control them. Let us fight and die for our country. I am willing to lay my life down if it will keep America Free.
How does our “lack of testicles renders you risk-averse, putting the lives of other soldiers in harms way”? Just because we have a chest, how are we putting others harm way? Its men like you who need to stop thinking with their dicts and finally relizes that women are just as good as men and that we should be treated as equals. Instead of fighting against us fight with us. That way we could overcome the real enemy. Why are men so against us fighting alongside them? Is it because they feel threatened, less manly, or what. We deserver the chance to defend our country instead of waithing on the sidelines.
December 1st, 2010 at 6:44 am (#)
Gunnery Sergeant B,
Commander only wants to cause trouble, he is a troll nothing more. I would have thought that would have been obvious to you. A waste of energy, honestly.
Moving on….
Gentlemen, our sisters here cannot understand our mindset on the matter regardless of how we try to explain our reasoning. They have become so intent on the matters of being treated as equals, even in war, that our intentions (even if they are good) will never reach them.
But I will try one more time….
Ladies, so long as men are the dominant gender in terms of numbers and ability for military service you are simply in the way on the front lines. The problem isn’t necessarly with you, it’s us, we are unable to control our protective tendency’s towards females and that will NEVER change. One could call it the “Big Brother Syndrome.” Funny thing is, men almost never actually realize they are being protective in situations regarding a preceived threat.
Simply put, men do not see women as comrades in arms, but more along the lines of a little sister. Knowing this ladies, exactly what does a big brother tend to do when he sees his little sister being bullied or harmed? Answer that question to yourself and hopefully begin to understand what many of us men (even if poorly by most) are trying to say.
However, I would venture to say ladies that you should be careful what you wish for in this matter. There could very well come a day where men no longer care and beholden you to the very same standards without exception. Everything a man is expected to achieve in both action and ability will also be placed upon women. When that happends none of you ladies have a right to complain as we men yielded and granted your request, equality in all things.
Remember, just as the bad is tossed away, so is the good along with it. All standards and special exceptions made because you are a woman will also be gone. Think about what your asking, sometimes being treated the same is far worse than being treated a little different.
December 1st, 2010 at 12:43 pm (#)
wemon should be in the military because they have an equal right as men to fight for what they believe in. Everyone does, so why not wemon? they have the right to ote so why not the right to fight for what they beileve in. so i think ive made my point.
December 2nd, 2010 at 7:41 pm (#)
Douglas: I understand that men have the “Big Brother Syndrome”. I know that men are naturally protective over women and that you dont want anything to happen to your “little sisters”. But isnt your sister someone you can trust. We would defend our country and our “brothers” with honor. We are not afraid to stand for what we believe in. Why would we complain if we get what we want. We want to be treated as equals. Give us a chance and you will see that we are able to be the best soldiers we can be.
December 6th, 2010 at 5:00 pm (#)
I have trained with many woman in the Marine Corps, and the majority of them cannot train at a level that should be required. not because they are weaker but because they are built differently. for instance womans hips are built differently than mens and almost every female Marine i knew had hip problems during our combat training from the long runs and hikes with large packs. again through no fault of their own, its just that women cannot perform like men they arent built too.
December 11th, 2010 at 4:09 am (#)
Gunnery Sergeant B,
It’s unfortunate but the solution isn’t that simple, as the issue happends to not only be ingrained by gender but also reinforced but culture as well. So, I will set aside my own personal opinions and lecture based on pure logic.
Okay…
Truth be told, women are capable of doing the majority of what a man does with a few exceptions; which are for the most part situational and based on the differences between the limits of male & female physical ability. However, when all is said and done, both genders are capable of running up the hill, so really isn’t much of an issue in the end.
Now, when it comes to cutural upbringing and gender subconcious instinct things become a problem. Men are often cuturally raised to be (and measured by) how successful they are when protecting & providing for their families. Combine this upbringing with the “big brother syndrome” inherent in a males subconcious mind (which is also nutured by culture), what forms is a mans sense of self worth.
So, when a women insists on participating in a profession or action traditionally reserved for men, the male becomes uneasy as it imposes on his sense of purpose. This results in strong opposition as he refuses to willingly acknowledge or allow (if he can help it) her request. The process of thought for the guy usually being “It’s too dangerous for you, I wan’t you to be safe, that’s why I’m here”.
For women to be treated equal in dangerous situations, they would have to somehow establish themselves as one of the guys (snowball chance in hell) and generations of cutural upbringing would need to change. Even then, subconcious tendencies for the guys are still likely to remain.
December 14th, 2010 at 3:14 pm (#)
Question.. what does doing a pull up have anything to do with being a good soldier? There are other ways to build/test strength and a pull up just seems irrelevant.
December 14th, 2010 at 11:31 pm (#)
A pull up in and of itself has really nothing to do with anything. Its just another way of us guys saying we dont trust a womens ability to carry an injured 200+ pound comrad out of a combat zone.
December 20th, 2010 at 6:25 pm (#)
i dont think anyone of you realize that women and men in the military even makes a diffrence. everyone is pretty much the same. yea we have diffrent body parts and diffrent emotions but we all pretty much want to do the same thing be in the military to fight for our country and if you cant see that then your BLIND. im very young and even i understand this. AND GUESS WHAT WOMEN ARE ALREADY IN THE MILITARY DAAAA!!!!!
December 22nd, 2010 at 3:26 am (#)
Swing and a miss…
India, obviously you haven’t the slightest clue what this conversation is about.
January 3rd, 2011 at 9:41 pm (#)
women arent built for stregth like men they dont belong in combat and i think it would be distracting for all the male soldiers to have women acting like they can do the same thing that men can is simply stupid men and women are very different especially with the muscle size and height difference its just stupid to say women can fight as good as men
January 5th, 2011 at 12:55 am (#)
There are some women that can handle anything thrown at them. And men being sexist doesnt help any. Its been proven that women have been helping a situation in Afghanistan. Some women are stong enough to be in combat! And i think that women should be able to be in combat if they can pass the mens test. And i also think its rediculous that there are different tests fo women and men. It shouldnt matter. Women that want to be in combat no about the danger and risks theyll have to take.
January 5th, 2011 at 12:59 am (#)
Ok nobody is saying that women can fight as good as men. Yes we all no that men are born fighters. most MEN would be able to shake off and not be distracted by a women saying ya i can fight as good as you or i can shoot better then you. some women are born fighters to and one day men just have to realize it and let it go.
January 5th, 2011 at 3:07 am (#)
Women shouldn’t be in combat roles, but if they ever are, they need to be required to preform at the same level as a man. This isn’t about prejudice its about natural limitations that all species have.
On average, a man can out preform a woman in physically demanding situations. Someone could argue that this doesn’t matter and that any woman can run up a hill. But the issue here is how fast? For how long? Any woman can do a pull up. But can you pick up and carry a 200 lb. man into cover to save his life? My point here is that a woman could do these things, but its more likely a guy could do it better. That isn’t sexist, its reality. The male body and mind is meant to compete and struggle. Think about puberty. The things that happen to the male and female body. Guys grow more muscles and get large amounts of testosterone pumping thought there veins which is being produced in the mans testicles. Women grow larger breasts and begin menstruating while the female hormone estrogen, produced in the ovaries courses through their blood. Men also begin to grow taller and larger then women. My point? Women, as nature intended, get ready to be mothers. While men turn into physical machines to hunt, work heavily and fight to protect there families. i.e. women and children. My point here is that women don’t have the balls, literally, to be as effective as men. For those of you who state that men have to work for a six pack and bulging biceps are forgetting that there are different amounts of these two growth hormones in men and women.
As children, humans are very smiler. But think back to puberty. Why the hell did guys gain a few inches in height and muscle mass? Why is it that on my swim team that had both girls and boys doing the same training and exercises did the boys team get faster times in ALL of the races? They had the same training, smiler diets, but the men out preformed the girls. No amount of social conditioning can make that huge of a difference physically, and hell yes some girls were faster than I was. But when you compared the times of girls and boys that had very smiler training, boys were still faster.
It’s the same in nature. The male part of the species fights and kills for dominance while the female part prepares to tend to the children This is integrated into the human mind and brain from birth and beginning development. There is obviously a heavy amount of nature over nurture going on here. I guess what i am saying is that gender roles exists because of natural tendencies rather than as social constructs. After all, man was a bit more animal than he was a sentient, society forming being not to long ago.
Is it sexist? Nope. Its natural.
Does it mean that women should be slaves to men? Absolutely not.
Does it mean women can’t vote? Not at all.
My conclusion? Women are not meant to fight. I believe that men and women are equal in all respects except the physical limitations that exist in EVERY species. My point? Women and men are different. There is a chromosome that says its so. Genetic hard wiring that can’t be changed. It makes a difference, and this is where I am getting my answer. Just as how I physically can’t give birth to a child. That a hell of a difference. There are natural roles that frankly can’t be broken. I am not saying a woman can’t fight, but that I believe a man could do it better because that’s reality and it’s the natural balance and order.
BUT, as I stated before, these differences should not make any gender enslaved or beholden to the other.
But, if women are allowed in the military then she should have to go though the same physical tests and adhere to the same protical men do when dealing with members of the opposite sex.
I feel that this document describes the best way to go about it.
To Gunnery Sergeant B
It’s not about being the best soldier you can be, but being the best soldier out there. Any weakness in any fighting force will be exploited and used against it. Female battalions will be singled out not only by men in the same army but men in other armies. I believe that this is what Douglas was saying. You will be asked to preform at the same level as a man in any situation in the military and progressively in every situation life will throw at you. If you think that its not tested enough so you can’t say for sure look at the history of the world. There is a reason it hasn’t changed much and the mindset that women are inferior to men has lasted so long and persists today. When lives are at stake no military should ever take that risk.
Please note that i am trying to remove my emotions from this topic as much as possible and analyzing it from a logical point based on my own observations.
January 5th, 2011 at 3:26 am (#)
Another issue i just thought of is in the case of a draft. The draft isn’t active now, but lets say it becomes active in the future. How many women would want that for not only themselves but other women? Basically, would you want every able bodied young women to go to war? Basically, pick a young girl of the streets. Would you want to send her to possible death, dismemberment, and torture? Because that’s what women are asking for. To have brothers and sisters of a whole generation go and fight and die and experience the hell that is war. This is not about the “right” to serve. Its about human life.
Maybe you could handle it, but could that girl preform just the same as a boy in the same situation, and would they want to?
January 5th, 2011 at 3:41 am (#)
Also, Gunnery Sergeant B. what knd of statment is this?
“We posses more brains and knowledge and that is a huge benifit when it comes to war and the military.” You said that in post 179.
You just made the statement that men are dumber than women, and yet you say men and women should be treated the same. You made a complete generalization of men in the same way you say men generalize women. I think maybe you need to drop you sexist ideals before you complain about your situation. And you boast the ability to control your emotions.
January 5th, 2011 at 10:35 pm (#)
When it comes to physical limitations between men and women has a lot to do with differences in musculature. On average a woman has roughly 60% – 70% strength that a man has. Yet, it has been proven that pound for pound a female is just as strong as a male.
So why do men constantly out perform women in physical ability? The answer is simple, our gender differences are more than skin deep. A man has 30% – 40% more muscle mass than a woman, allowing him to perform much better. Also, because of this, a woman in hand-to-hand combat rarely gets more than one shot to knockout her male adversary before simply being overpowered.
However, if she is an experienced fighter and knows how to use his strength against him, her chances of walking away are far better than they otherwise would be. So, knowing this, if women are to make good soldiers they would need to be taught how to deal with opponents who are bigger and stronger than they are. I.E. sending a woman into a brawl between men without proper training is not a good idea.
I would also venture to say the physcological differences do play a part in the making of a good soldier and a great one. What I’m getting at is basic aggression. Women tend to be more passive aggressive using humiliation and taunts, while men are far more physical, often using their fists rather than words. However, I will mention that further studies are needed to actually prove if tendencies between passive or physical aggression has a real effect on the factors at play.
January 18th, 2011 at 9:20 am (#)
Ok Eli, in regards to my statement that I made in 179 this is what I mean. Look at the facts women are smarter than men. Take the Act for example women had the highest scores out of everyone who took the test. Yes men may posses the strengh to perform slightly better, but when it come to combat it is not just the strenght that matters it is the brains. Because what the point be if you have all the strengh yet no knowledge of what you are doing. This is why I think that we should be able to fight side by side so that we will have both strengh and brains.
If we go through the same training we should be allowed to fight and die if neccesary in order to protect our country.
January 20th, 2011 at 5:10 am (#)
In the end Gunnery Sergeant B, this will all be a mute point for argument. Regardless of outcome, the very thought of women fighting on a battlefield leaves a bad taste in our mouths. I suppose only time will be the true judge on this matter.
I must say, this matter has me deeply concerned. I come from a very old family of infantry and sailors who has served the US military since the civil war. The stories my uncles and grandfather have told has me convinced that war is not somthing women should wantonly partcipate in, let alone any man.
“No one should ever wish for peace more than a soldier. For thay are the ones who must bear the deepest wounds and face the untold horrors of war.”
– Unknown
January 21st, 2011 at 11:15 pm (#)
http://www.beyondmytwocents.com/2011/01/16/women-should-not-engage-in-direct-combat-simply-because-of-the-way-they-act-nowadays/
written by a women.
February 18th, 2011 at 2:09 pm (#)
Many People have made the comment that the original biblical roles dictate that men should go off and fight and women should stay home. However, can anyone pull up a verse that says this? In Biblical times, women traditionally were not the ones who fought in wars but many other traditions from this time period have been outdated, not because it goes against Biblical principals, but because they are ancient traditions that modern times and technologies have out-dated. It goes against the traditional roles of women to allow them in combat, but it does not go against the Bible itself.
In World War II, many women fought secret battles as spies on either side, including Christine Granville, Germaine Devalet, and Katherine Zalenska.
Throughout history, many women disguised themselves as men to join the fight including Dona Catalina de Erauso, Sara Edmonds, and Deborah Sampson.
Other women who fought on the front lines include Manto Mavrogenous, Belle Reynolds, Mary Lindell, and Lieutenant Jane A. Lombardi.
All of these women prove that with proper training, any woman could measure up physically to most men. And although many men tend to think more with their dicks than with their heads, this problem could easily be solved with all female combat units.
I agree that combat is more of a privilege than a right, but women should have the right to decide what they are willing to sacrifice for their country. Any woman that can measure up should be allowed to fight for her country, not barred to protect men’s self esteem.
February 20th, 2011 at 2:13 pm (#)
As a woman I feel women should be allowed to serve their country in any way they feel they can, but must prove to do well through proper training. If that includes being in combat then so be it. But also as a woman I know that the military front lines are not a game and for a woman to serve there she needs to be a hard woman willing to take a beating and still run with the big boys with out complaints. Their should be no descensitising of men to accomodate the needs of women when this issue comes into play but the descensitisation of woman should be considered. If she wants to play with the boys then she better be one of them or suffer the consequenses. If she can learn not to be so sensitive then sexual harrasssment won’t be an issue if she thinks she is tough enough to fight then she should be tough enough to prevent herself from being raped. and to prevent pregnancies all women serving in the field of combat should be provided with the proper birth control as a requirement, not an option. Monthly pregancy tests should be issued to ensure that she and only she is going into combat. If you wanna fight for your country there will be requirements, sacrifices, and prices to pay. But it is up to the individual if that is what she wants.
February 23rd, 2011 at 6:31 pm (#)
Wow! This is a great article! I believe women should not be in combat, they can do anything they want besides that. The only thing I don’t agree with is the one pull-up thing. I think what it is is a pull-up with full equipment. Then that would be hard. Don’t think a normal woman could do it..
Anyway, thanks for the great article!!
February 28th, 2011 at 9:40 am (#)
Obviously I have not read ALL of the comments but I have most of them. The general consensus I have gotten from the different points of view are as such. Those against women serving believe that women can not live up to the same standards of men, when women have been in the front lines (this has been tested) that men will put the well being and the need to “be a hero” above that of the mission, also that women, since there has to be a quota of women, are replacing able bodied men. This is just to name a few.
What I have gotten from those that are for women serving is the following: they have the right to. Also that there are select women out there that can perform as well or better than the average male. I beleive I also read something about women being better at multi-tasking (if someone has the time could someone show me where I can find the research behind this, you should not believe everything you read on the covers of magazines in grocery stores).
Now lets look at these. FOR: Has clear, concise, logical reasons against it. AGAINST: Equal rights, should be able to, there are women out there that can cut it. Now for my opinion (although you might have been able to guess it from the slightly biased above paragraghs.) If in fact (I am not saying this is true just hypothetical) women can NOT compare to men, if they drag down the standards that are there to accomodate them, or if they in fact just by being a women (which is not a bad thing) effect the battlefield negatively then I have NO idea how anyone could think they should be allowed to serve. Based on what? They FEEL they should be able to? They have RIGHTS to serve?
The military is unlike any other organization there is. The object of the military is to win wars, maintain peace, and protect their country. The military does not care of you WANT to serve. It does not care about your feelings. Its only job is to win. Allowing women to be on the front lines because they WANT to even although it could be the difference of many lives is absolutely ridiculous. This is not a glass ceiling argument or an Affirmative Action matter. This is about winning wars and losing as few lives as possible. Why people can not see this is beyond me.
I DO NOT HAVE PROOF that women are substandard or drag down the standards of men and that is why I am not taking a stand point on this. I merely want people to see that women felling they have the right to fight is not a good argument. Its frivolous and actually quite childish if you ask me.
I am in the military. I have seen the effects of this controversy has had on it. This can only be resolved when people are able to get over what they feel and present hard facts. If someone can lay down some concrete data that all this co-ed military business is in fact saving lives I am all for it.
I am going to end this comment here. I can go on and on all day about this. Really, all I want is that people stop thinking that having the right to join the military is a valid point.
March 7th, 2011 at 10:08 pm (#)
A couple of points that folks aren’t mentioning…..
Factually, women can become pregnant. This can pose real problems for a combat squad. For instance, if a woman gets pregnant right before a deployment tasking, she’s getting taken off the deployment immediately. That open position now either gets filled by a disgruntled soldier who wasn’t planning to deploy so quickly in the first place, or the position doesn’t get filled, leaving the unit less effective. What’s worse is that a woman could become pregnant while already deployed to hostile areas. Sense the military does not provide medical capabilities for births in deployed locations, the woman would be taken off the line, once again, leaving the unit less effective.
Also, the majority of women have monthly periods. Fact. Concerning the anatomy of a woman, her estrogen levels increase during her monthly period. It’s clear that estrogen is closely linked with women’s emotional well-being. Depression and anxiety affect women in their estrogen-producing years more often than men or postmenopausal women. Estrogen is also linked to mood disruptions that occur only in women — premenstrual syndrome, premenstrual dysphoric disorder, and postpartum depression……mood changes are not good in combat situations.
Also consider this. If we’re going to make the military fully equal in opportunity, it would only be fair if women had to sign up for the draft also. If a draft were to happen one day, do we really want thousands of women who are unqualified to perform their combat duties to be defending our country. I think not.
March 19th, 2011 at 12:03 pm (#)
I have been an avid athlete my entire life, and i have competed in cross country among others. there are two teams one male one female. they are each awarded awards amongst themselves but you race on the same track at the same time. i can honestly tell you that i have NEVER been beaten by a woman. i have never been close to being beaten by a woman. women are smaller than men. women weight around 130 if they can lift a military pack and carry gear that ways as much as them plus carry a wounded comrade on their back then its fine… but they cant. you cant let civil rights get in the way of being militarily able. if that were the case then we should allow mentally handicapped people, crippled, and people with communicable diseases into the service as well.
I think that women do have a place in the service… i think that they can be nurses, secretaries, or in intel. i do not belive that they have a place on the front lines, or anywhere on submarines, or aircraft carriers.
i have also spoken to a few doctors on the subjuct and they have told me that women are not physically as strong, their bones are weaker and more prone to break, and they are smaller…keep in mind that these are female doctors telling me this…
March 21st, 2011 at 11:34 am (#)
no, combat is a mans job. they are suited for it women are not. it one of those things that one gender does better than the other. women you all can hae babies and make sandwhiches better than us men
March 29th, 2011 at 3:11 am (#)
Men are way stronger than women. Watch this youtube video of the strongest woman in the world losing easily to these 2 average sized men in an arm wrestling match. The last guy in the video only weighs 160 lbs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uS2VTJs1Jus
The woman in the video is Jill Mills, one of the strongest women in the world. She is not only one of the strongest women in the world, she is also one of the strongest women in the known history of the world. She won The World’s Strongest Woman Contest 2 times and she is undefeated in powerlifting competitions against other women, and yet she easily gets dominated by this 160 lb man who is nowhere near being the strongest man in the world. There are millions of men who are stronger than this guy, and he still manages to dominate the strongest woman with ease, without even trying all that hard.
Not only are men much stronger and faster physically, but men also have more stamina, stronger bones, faster reflexes, and even a higher tolerance for pain.
March 30th, 2011 at 2:43 pm (#)
Go to war first, experience it, then comment.
April 1st, 2011 at 9:49 pm (#)
i served in co ed units and i did not see the females performing as well as the average male soldier. sorry but the females just weren’t capable of carrying the loads that were required for extended field training. and like mo says “go to war first, experience it, then comment”.
April 10th, 2011 at 4:55 pm (#)
So many opinions these past few weeks from people that have never even served in the military. The military is not in the world of civilians. It’s purpose is not to be fair. That said…
Majority of women flop out in basic training due to stress fractures and mental instability. These are on lowered expectations of what men do as well. It is a joke to even consider women for positions in any of the special combat divisions. Most men can not handle the extreme physical and emotional demands of being (and even getting into) these units. Most training required is unknown, and for good purpose.
Besides the physical and emotional needs that women lack, the drain on the government could be massive. Many combat roles require units to be in the field for weeks to months at a time. If women are being raped on base, what do you think is going to happen off base? Hell, even if it doesn’t happen, the complaints and lawsuits will be flying in. Between lawsuits, massive training and new protocol it could cost the government billions.
Few things to think about.
1) A female POW in any other part of the world.
2) Your son dies because a group of militants wont surrender to women.
3)Women bringing children into the world in hostile conditions.
4)Women bringing children into the world while coping with post war stress.
I am so sick and tired of all the women today with dick envy. Simply put, we are not equal, as much as you want us to be. Doesn’t mean men are better than women. What ever happened to yin and yang?
April 11th, 2011 at 2:37 am (#)
Have you ever played paintball with women? If not, try it and then see if you still want to charge them with your nation’s defense.
April 14th, 2011 at 8:34 am (#)
I am currently doing a research paper on womens rights to fight in combat. I believe that if a woman puts herself in a mans position then she will face the consequences however, a woman can do a mans job just as good sometimes even better. The standards should not be lowered and if a woman wants to be in combat should pass the set standards as men do to.
April 19th, 2011 at 11:44 pm (#)
The feminists and their supporters, weaned on a diet of “GI Jane” and “Tomb Raider,” apparently believe that women are as capable as men in combat – and now demand that women be allowed into the ground combat arms and special forces. They’ve seen special effects in the movies that show gals that look like models, but fight like Rambo and they “know” it is real. Women have forced their way into the formerly male worlds of the “silence service” (submarines) and combat aviation, and they’ve brought their homosexual pals along with them – to the detriment of combat readiness, cost, common sense, and the safety of the men next to them.
When presented with mountains of evidence that contradict their receieved wisdom and world view, they simply pretend the evidence doesn’t exist.
OK, fine… done arguing, let the know-it-alls into combat arms – with one caveat: the “I am woman, hear me roar” types have to serve in all-female units. No leaning on male soldiers to get the job done when the going gets tough, no men to do those dirty and back-breaking jobs they now do.
GIve each of these Rambolinas a ruck with 80lbs. of gear, 20lbs. of body armor, a weapon, and tell ‘em to do a timed forced march of say, 20 miles, following which they will attack the enemy without hot food, showers or adequate sleep. I’ve made this challenge to numerous would-be female combat soldiers, and not one has accepted it… let alone doing something like clearing tunnels with just your wits, a flashlight and maybe a sidearm, or assualting and taking down a block of fortified buildings.
Gals, let’s see you break track on a tank, or sling 75lb. artillery shells all day. Do it without men’s help, and maybe I’ll take your boasts more seriously.
Women want combat? Let ‘em – just don’t force men to die alongside them to prove a feminist’s point.
April 20th, 2011 at 12:24 am (#)
Jennifer, are you really interested in doing well-researched paper or just in confirming feminist talking points? If the former, read:
1. “The Kinder Gentler Military” Stephanie Guttman
2. “Women in the Military” Brian Mitchell
3. “Coed Combat” Kingsley Browne
You speak of “doing the job as well as a man,” but with all due respect, do you really know what jobs men perform in the military in battle or even on the line? Can you do the following? Be honest – no cheating. If you can’t do the tasks listed, you fall short of the mark, and would endanger your fellow soldiers.
1. Can you “hump” (carry in a pack) 80-100lbs. of gear, plus body armor and a weapon, for 15 miles over rough terrain? Can you do it without falling behind the men in your unit? You are expected to carry your individual load, plus whatever components of crew-served weapons are being trasported. If you can’t do this, and go into action once you reach your operational area, you aren’t fit to be a combat infantryman.
2. Are you willing and able to fight and kill your enemy in hand-to-hand combat if necessary, using the butt of your rifle, a spade (shovel, a knife or even your bare hands?
If you aren’t, you have no business being in the infantry.
3. Can you haul heavy crates of artillery shells all day, and transport and set up your battery of cannon, using sledges, shovels, and other heavy hand tools? Can you fill and stack sand bags – hundreds of them – without a break? Once your battery is set up, are you prepared to handle 75 lb. artillery shells continuously for hours on end? If you answer no you don’t belong in the artillery. BTW, artillery troops sometimes have to fight as infantry (see above).
3. Are you prepared to live in your tank, service it, and fight it out in the field, sharing a space no bigger than the cab of a pickup with several other people? Can you service diesel and/or turbine engines? Can you break track using giant wrenches that weight upwards of 50lbs.? Can you load into the main gun tank gun rounds, which weight over 70lbs.? Are you prepared to eliminate your waste in a helmet, in front of your crewmates, because it isn’t safe to exit the vehicle? If you answered no, you don’t belong in tanks. Tankers also fight as infantry at times.
4. Are you fit-enough to complete the selection requirements for special operations, i.e., Army Rangers, Delta Force, Green Berets, Navy SEALs, USAF pararescuemen and combat air controllers? See published PT standards. These guys do all of the jobs infantry do except faster, harder, and under more hazardous conditions. They also frequently operate alone, in pairs or in small groups behind enemy lines. If captured, they expect to be tortured, killed or abused. Can you lie absolutely still and remain silent for as many as 12-24 hours in a camoflaged scout/sniper position,stalking a target? You can’t leave your position to urinate or defecate; that is done in situ. Selection for the famed British SAS is so tough that men are often killed tring out for it. Special forces trainees are called “snake eaters”… why? Because they have to prove they can live off the land, no food packed in. That means they eat snakes, insects, rodents, etc. Sometimes they can’t have cooking fires, because it is too dangerous – so they eat this stuff raw. Can you sit still while leeches, insects and snakes feast on you or crawl over you? Are you prepared to live in the jungle, desert or other remote areas, as special forces do, without access to the comforts of civilization? Are you prepared to be hungry, cold/hot, uncomfortable, bored, scared out of your mind, cut off from reinforcements and possibly without rescue or resupply of food or ammo? If you answer no, you don’t belong in special operations.
Lastly, are you prepared to risk your life and limb, for missions which may not be well-defined, or even make sense? Are you willing to kill your enemy, sometimes at close range? Can you tolerate the screams of the wounded, seeing your buddies disemboweled or otherwise horribly maimed? Are you prepared for the possibility it can happen to you? Are you prepared to see the person next to you beheaded by shrapnel or burnt to a crisp by an anti-tank rocket or incendiary bomb? Are you prepared to listen to the wounded begging for mercy? It isn’t like the movies, where the hero either dies quickly and relatively painlessly in battle, or survives intact. In real life – soldiers are horribly maimed but live. Many need prosthetic limbs, ostomy bags, or a dozen or more operations to repair (or attempt to repair) horrific burns, blast injuries, and the like. Some soldiers are alive, but confined to a hospital bed for the rest of their lives in a vegetative state unable to feed or care for themselves, even to enoy life. Are you prepared to suffer post-traumatic stress syndrome, nightmares, and flashbacks to battle for the rest of your natural life? Are you prepared for feelings of guilt, sadness, numbness or debilitating mental illness that may cripple you permanently? Are you prepared to lose your innocence forever in a cause that might not even be just? If you answer no, you don’t belong in combat.
April 21st, 2011 at 11:25 am (#)
@ Matt W
Honestly, the stupidity in your post is IMPOSSIBLE to deny. You write well, therefore I will assume that you are not completely mentally incompetent, but rather lack common sense. I will chose only one argument to address, as I do not have time to address such a ridiculous post in full.
“Honestly, you point your finger at men more often than women for exacerbating the problem, and most of your issues seem to be the caused by an extreme gender imbalance rather than anything inherent to women — but the hammer falls on women as a group nonetheless.”
I honestly cannot see how you actually believe you make any sense. Almost all combat troops are male and they are the ones accomplishing the bulk of the mission. Therefore, it is completely relevant how women in the unit affect the men in the unit. Should we jeapordize the effectiveness of 99% of the troops to be politically correct for 1% of them. I’m sorry, but war is one thing where your fantasy land ideologies cannot be implemented without the loss of much human life. In other words, the focus is on how women affect men rather than what is inherent in women, but it is irrelevant to this argument. Would you suggest an all female unit (or at least 95% comprised of women) would be effective in combat? Do you believe that it could overcome a combat unit comprised only of men? From your posts, you might actually answer “Yes”, but the true answer is resoundingly no. There is no question that women are at a great disadvantage in close combat, and that does happen in modern warfare believe it or not. Guns jam, ammunition depletes, etc. For instance, the presence of breats inhibits the woman’s movement in close combat, and it is ironic that the breasts are also symbolic of the woman’s natural role of reproduction and nurturing. You violate the laws of nature, sir, by pushing your impractical ideology. I believe any reasonable person will hold it as a given that more than 9 times out of 10, a well trained male unit would defeat a well trained female unit. Therefore, if men are neccesary to combat and make up the bulk of combat forces, it is certainly relevant how the women affect the men. Do we want a unit of men who would have otherwise had cohesion through comradery to lose all of that to try to impress the woman in the unit, simply to be politically correct and try to make men and women equal in things where they are clearly not. I’m sorry, but ignoring logic and what’s infront of you for impractical ideologies is a child’s trait. Despite your age, your mental development is only in the childhood stages, else you would not make such ridiculous arguments.
To conclude, men in combat are neccesary, it has been like that for thousands of years. An all woman unit will almost never defeat an all male unit, given both are well trained. From this, we can then deduce that men are neccesary and more important to combat to women. With this being said, it is completely relevant how women affect men in combat. Therefore, your argument against the author that he only focuses on how women affect men, rather than what is inherent in women, lacks any logical basis. It is also important to point out that if you ask a sample of women whether women should fight in combat, you would find that at least half of them would say “no”.
(Also, you mentioned the woman’s vote. I know I said I’d only address one argument, but this will be quick. While I cannot with a straight face argue that “women should not be able to vote”, it cannot be denied that most women do not vote based on any important issues. Studies have found they are much more likely than men to vote based on looks and personality, rather than what that person can do for the country. This country turned from a prosperous and moral society to one that is bankrupt by welfare/warfare, and one that is corrupt by vice because out of nowhere over 40% of the population was given the power to vote, despite the fact that they were uninformed. Call me sexist, but it’s the god’s honest truth.)
April 25th, 2011 at 1:03 pm (#)
women should not be allowed in combat .
April 27th, 2011 at 7:42 pm (#)
You guys are missing a crucial element in your basis that women should be allowed in combat. Men are physically stronger than women. While both of us have testosterone (hormone that induces muscle growth), testosterone levels in women are typically 5 percent to 10 percent of those in men. Meaning that men will develop more muscle and more bone marrow than woman. Saying that there are few woman out there that can do the things men can do is a valid point, however letting them in and kicking out the other woman is being unfair to the other women. I know I’m being hypocritical of myself, but the entire political correctness of gender norming is a double-edged sword. While lowering standards for women produces less physically acceptable soldiers, however not lowering standards promotes political backlash on those in authority. All in all, the only people you have to convince are Congress, for they decide on this matter.
April 28th, 2011 at 9:10 am (#)
Well, heres the short and sweet for those who can’t look through it. I’m a charitable, friendly young man. I am not in the military, instead but a lowly paramedic. But don’t think I have not studied this issue. I have been studying it my entire life. I have studied reports, I have studied studies. I have a intimate knowledge of the physical differences between a man and a woman, and it grows every day as I ascend through my med. school classes.
My beliefs are very simple. Men and women should both be able to serve in the military. If, and only if they meet the same standards required of any other active soldier. I know women with such mental and physical fortitude that they cow over any soldier I have met. I also know men who are fragile, emotional and vastly lacking in logic. I am not saying there are no gender differences, but there are exceptional and inferior specimen of both sides.
As for the debate about men acting differently, I really think thats a fault of how we raise our little boys with our little girls. I am, as stated, a man. And I can state, with full confidence, that I treat men and women in the workplace and in danger the same way. I protect my people, I make sure we do things professionally, and I make sure everyone does their job and gets out without injury if possible. Before you think I don’t know how to handle it when its blood, screaming, pain, take a look at the start. If you think Paramedics don’t have to deal with men, women and even children dying on our hands in a triage situation, you really don’t know what you’re talking about. Maybe there are not bullets flying over our heads, but sometimes there are other dangers on scene just as potentially fatal, and the chance that with every patient, you may make a mistake that ends your career, or worse, you catch something that ends your life.
I am a man, and I don’t care if it is a man or woman by my side in my workplace, as long as they do their job right. I honestly don’t think the military should be any different.
May 2nd, 2011 at 2:18 pm (#)
Okay people thats start from square one please thank you i want to bring up the point of having sex here. okay here we go, put your self in the shoes of a army grunt/jarhead. you are getting attacked from all sides by al qeada terroist u are under heavy machine gun fire and artillery and you are taking this shit day by day night by night and u dig ur self a foxhole and its done so its ur turn to sleep so u go to sleep and ur a waken by some one crawling into ur foxhole u open ur eyes and there a woman is in ur foxhole crying cuz she cant handle the pressure and all she wants is some comfort some thing to remind her of home so thats say u havnt had sex in 2 years and she wants some comfort wat i are u in reailty gonna do thats stop all this bullshit about political controverse that join the rest of the world in reailty ur gonna fuck her and get ur all of ur squad killed cuz when ur in the heat of battle and ur getting attacked u wanna save wat matters to u most and since u have emotions with that woman and if she is dying and getting shot ur gonna say fuck it and try to go fucking rambo and get ur whole fucking squad blown to shit and wat was the cause of that mistake the woman of course its human nature to fuck and kill so how do we take that fuck part away we take woman out of the ? they can do and other job why combat the arnt physicaly and emotionally ready for combat leave the killing to the ones who can handle it the man not all man not strong men but army strong men u hear that not army strong woman but men thank u for ur time
May 2nd, 2011 at 2:44 pm (#)
okay one more then i just realized not picking on any one wat about pms for women huh it is proving that there mode can change on a dime that could kill ur entire squad
May 2nd, 2011 at 8:35 pm (#)
I have viewed the opinions of nearly everyone publishing their thoughts on this article and considered the following ideas; First, that women can not meet the physical standards that are needed to perform in combat and secondly that women are entitled because of the equal rights that our country stands for.
I too, am doing a project on women in combat. I feel I should state, yes, I am a female. I have always been a physically fit individual, I would even go as far to say that I am amongst the percentage mentioned above that is “above average”. Fortunately, my parents have instilled many of the competitive virtues they retained while in the military into their children, myself included. With this being said, minimal was not a word my parents chose to teach me. The idea that “just enough” was something my father especially could not bare to face. Thus, he groomed me into the woman I am today, an agressive, highly competitive, alpha female. Upon joining the United States Army, I trained vigorously from the age of 12 to be physically adapt to the conditions in the Army, fighting overseas or our nations boundaries. I am in the best shape of my life, recieving several acknowledgements for my hard work ethic and physical standing. With everything that I had worked for, I learned the very hard, cold blunt truth that, at 5′ and 113lbs., Carrying a 200+lb. male while wielding my M-16 and protecting both lives of myself and the soldier slung across my back, was more of a challenge that I ever could have prepared myself.
Endless days and nights spent in the gym, falls in the dirt, carrying family members while sprinting several yards, dodging the shots from my father, could never have prepared me for what I faced during my training.
I would like to think that of all women in the military I can personally say, I tried. I did everything, bulking up, everything I possibly could and I succeeded in certain aspects, but unfortunately something like that could absolutely not be done by someone my size and my weight, even with the percent of body fat and muscle I had.
Addressing this issue front on has been a hard obstacle for me and many other women to face, yet I do not feel that women in combat should be prohibited from seeing the important aspects of combat life. Additionally, this does not mean that women officers should not be able to be the leaders within combat. Food for thought.
May 15th, 2011 at 8:14 pm (#)
I have been reading these posts and find them quite amusing. People who are advocating that women be allowed in combat arms are either naive or never spent time in the military.
I was among the first recruits who integrated with women in BCT in the seventies. Women had problems completing long marches, carrying heavy loads, and performing basic combat tasks. They spent most of the time in sick call because of injuries and cramps – or they did not want to participate in training that day. The men never complained because this is what we expected of women. Also, there was an abundant supply of sex; so we kept them happy.
I am not saying that all women are slackers. There was one woman, I remember, that graduated top of the class. She was an exception to the rule. Btw, she was very pretty (blond and blue eyes) and probably would have never made it in combat arms because she would have attracted a lot of unnecessary attention from males. I am thinking of Private Benjamin. LOL.
If women want to join combat arms, they must meet the same standards as men on the APFT, cut their hair, avoid getting pregnant (it cost $300,000 to train a grunt), shower and crap with men, no crying when reprimanded, and endure sexist and crude jokes. It is all about bonding. HOOOAH!
All the women who posted that they are equal to men, here are a several tests to prove your metal. At midnight, park your car on a highway and walk a couple of miles in the dark. Do you feel equal? Another test, look at this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPM1TO_al84) and tell me how you feel. Do you feel equal? One last test, open your legs and look down. Do you feel equal?
Women who wish to join combat arms, think long and hard. This is not a popularity contest. GI Jane was a movie created by Hollywood liberals to further their agenda. This is about killing and being animalistic. Because you are a woman, no man will ever trust you to cover his six and carry his 200lb + body from the field if he is wounded You will always be the weak link. is it worth it?
Currently, women are performing exceptionally well in branches outside of combat arms. They have made excellent contributions and sacrifices for this country and deserve our ultimate respect. Let’s keep it this way and end this nonsense.
V/R
Former Army
May 16th, 2011 at 12:03 pm (#)
I am a Sophmore in Highschool and I am doing a Bioethical Project on “Should Women Be aloud in Combat” and You Guys helped me out a lot! This Quarrel is very interesting. I have found Pros and Cons right here on this page!
“People who are advocating that women be allowed in combat arms are either naive or never spent time in the military.”
I am going to Use this Quote! ^_^
May 18th, 2011 at 6:33 am (#)
I am a women. So, of course, I know women. We are weaker than men, in most cases. We have softer emotions. I believe it is dangerous for women to fight in combat because it could destract the men. Men have a protective sense over women. It was God-given. And I agree with Renee. Women don’t belong in the kitchen, but we shouldn’t take out rights too far.
June 3rd, 2011 at 7:03 pm (#)
Having served in the Army in combat, and in an infantry unit. I wholeheartedly agree that putting women in a ground combat situation is going to increase the danger to the other troops. I first hand have seen the crying, the falling out of runs and marches. I have seen women who were considered exceptionally fit not able to keep up. Then came the whining that we were trying to go too hard on them. The saying was. “Your only as fast as your slowest man”. The problem is our slowest man was twice as quick. Lack of speed on the battlefield kills. How about now shower for weeks on end? Happened all the time in my unit. While G.I. Jane was an interesting movie. It was just that. A movie. The reality is physically and mentally we are vastly different. The point of how men react to a woman as far as competing is very true. You take a young male soldier that hasn’t seen any other women in weeks and a woman who is normally considered unattractive becomes very attractive. I’ve seen it before. You can call this an opinion. This is fact I’ve seen it first hand. Peoples lives shouldn’t be endangered over someones feelings and fairness. If that’s sounds harsh combat is even harsher. And death is beyond harsh. I’m sure the pandering politicians will get young men and women killed in the name of fairness. They always have and always will.
June 3rd, 2011 at 8:04 pm (#)
40% of women cant even throw a grenade far enough without blowing their asses up. The problem with saying “oh as long as women meet the requirements” is great in all but since women are joining the requirements are being greatly reduced. Because if they weren’t lets face it hardly any would make it.
only the top 5% perform at what the average male does. Thats pretty bad, but hey lets make our military into one of those pansy ass ones and lets go lose some wars, I’ve lost faith in America quite awhile ago.
June 4th, 2011 at 12:32 am (#)
I agree with the common sentiment on here. I do believe if a woman can pass the SAME standards as a male then they can at least be considered for a combat role. The feminists that argue that they are equal and combat is just pulling a trigger are ignorant and moronic. It includes hard physical training, long marches with heavy rucks, and being able to pull that trigger without hesitation. If the feminists want women to be treated equally, then they can be by having to pass the same PT requirements as the men. Enough of weakening the physical standards and combat readiness of the US military.
June 7th, 2011 at 5:40 am (#)
Hey guys. Im doing a paper review on this and I really need help. My themes is that Woman Shouldn’t Go To Combat.
Please help me and email me with things about it.
e-mail: georgie0714@hotmail.com
Thanks For Your Help:)
June 11th, 2011 at 10:34 pm (#)
The question should be; Why shouldn’t women be allowed to fight? I’m only 16, but in my JROTC program at school I outperform most of the guys. I can do 7-10 full lock-out pull-ups on average, I do 40 push-ups, sit-ups, a variety of crunches, flutter-kicks, etc. every night. I am currently building my endurance so that I can run a good full marathon, and am also working at lowering my mile times. I am a natural fighter, and do not shy away from hand-to-hand combat. I am on the rifle team, and am the top shooter. Oh, and on top of that I always make all A’s, even in advanced classes.
Physically, mentally, and emotionally I’m capable. Not just by the woman’s standard, but I could easily pass male standards with a couple weeks of high-intensity training. And I know I’m not the only one. Women know the risks. If we wish to serve, and are able to meet all the standards, then we should be able to serve. Especially considering that it would be easier for women to go undetected, since men do not see us as a threat as much as other men. Everyone runs a risk in joining the military. If someone is willing to take that risk and give everything to defend their country, then why should they be stopped?
June 12th, 2011 at 2:32 pm (#)
@anna,
I have served with alpha women (very few) like yourself, but Combat Arms (Infantry, Armor, Special Forces, Artillery, Engineer Corps) is a different beast. Think about this: If a women and a man were wounded a few yards from one another and bullets were flying, who would a male soldier rescue first? Would a male soldier leave a wounded female soldier behind to accomplish a mission? What happens when a male and female soldier are attracted to one another on the same mission? Would a male soldier put a female soldier on point? When men come from the long tours in the field there is a lot of testorone flowing. Seeing a woman when hormones are running wild is like a tiger eyeing a steak. When you kill you feel animalistic and you want a release. You don’t care how the woman looks, you just want meat. There would be a lot of sexual harrasment and rape. Why would you want to put yourself in that position? I have no problem with women soldiers in Combat Support (Signal Corps, Military Police, Medics). However, Combat Arms is not a place for women.
June 12th, 2011 at 11:50 pm (#)
Hahaha
WOMAN SHOULD NOT BE A PART OF ANY INFANTRY. Im all for women being behind the lines of direct combat but having women out there with the guys is a horrible idea.. And one of the main reasons for this is men do not act rationally with woman around there for they can not properly do their jobs. Do you think a woman would have anything to offer a group of soldiers? I am not opposed to women being a part of war but giving a woman a gun and sending her out with a platoon of soldiers is a aweful idea. She is mentally and emotionally unfit to fight along side a male comrad.. Not to mention war itself is an ugly grueling task that most aren’t prepared for especially the women these days. The way they act and the games that they play you better believe I don’t want a modern day woman fighting beside me.
We have been a successful military for years why now do we have to potentially sabotage our success because all of a sudden woman want to participate in war? I think its outrageious and rediculous and it should not ever be acceptable.
June 13th, 2011 at 12:25 am (#)
By the way, I fought in 2nd reg for 7 years and everytime a girly came into our camp she was a target for rape and harrassment and you better believe the things that were said and the gestures that were made were not flattering at all. So many guys wanted sex so bad they didnt care who she was aslong as she had a hole bewteen her legs… Many times guys would get into arguements and altercations because a female would make a random appearance in our unit my experiences show that females only cause problems between the guys.. War is not like average day life.. Your not out there for fun its a job. Im so sick of hearing people say women should be allowed to fight when they have never once had to shoot at someone or see one of their best friends get killed. The battlefeild is no place for a woman or a weak minded being if this country plans to stay on top things need to change and some things need to stay the same. Keep woman off the battlefeild.
June 29th, 2011 at 1:05 pm (#)
Women are weak, they cause the men to fall behind due to us having to carry their weight cause they cant hold their own.
you girls just wanna have equal rights so your you greed your way into the situation even if it means certain death and imperfections in the teams performance.
fuking stupid!
MENAREBETTERTHANWOMEN.COM
July 19th, 2011 at 4:41 pm (#)
Hi, I have no experience in the military, but I find this thread so interesting that I wanted to include my opinion… I think women should be allowed in combat–just not with men.
So far I’ve seen three compelling arguments against women being involved in combat:
1. Women are physically weaker
2. Women will ruin the camaraderie dynamic, putting the rest of the unit at risk
3. Women are sexual targets to the enemies
The first point makes sense: generally, women are physically weaker. However, there are women who can pass the men’s recruiting tests. There aren’t many, but there are some equally capable women. And if a woman is disciplined enough to meet those physical standards, then surely she is functional military material.
The second point I completely understand. I know that when you try to put a woman into a group of sex-depraved men and expect things to run their usual course, you’re going to find some problems. The woman will likely be sexually harassed, the men will start fighting over her, and the whole cohesion of the group will be ruined. This is why women should have separate units.
The third point is the most compelling to me: women are targets to the enemies. A woman is probably at much greater risk of abuse and death if she is captured, simply because she stands out from the other soldiers, and is stereotypically vulnerable.
Okay, I agree that women will have a lot more trouble than men if captured. Any woman going to into combat should be aware of this. But if a woman is willing to take this risk for her country, why not let her fight?
I understand that it’s easier to keep what has been working so far and have men do the fighting. But the reason I argue for women to be allowed in combat is that I believe in equal opportunity, and I think that having women in combat can work out if done properly: have separate units for women, make sure they pass the men’s requirements, get their heads shaved (so at least enemies don’t notice they’re women until they capture them), and treat them like any other solider.
By the way, I am by no means a crazy feminist or even someone interested in joining the military. I just think that ideally, people should have chances to pursue things that interest them, regardless of their gender.
(Still, having no experience in the military and having a biased woman’s perspective, I know my opinion isn’t the most valuable… Despite this, I’d like think what I have said here has at least some truth to it.)
Peace!
August 3rd, 2011 at 2:03 pm (#)
Hey All, the arguments here are a great volley, with men logically winning (no women in combat).
However, for you die hard feminists, who think emotionally and not logically, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary on your views that women she be equally admitted into combat situations; I have a simple yet effective test that would end these feminist arguments.
Modern day infantry divisions are well schooled in close-arms and hand-to-hand combat. For war, this is where the rubber meets the road.
I say we inaugurate a stateside coed MMA league. That’s right. These women (privileged princesses) who think they can fight just as good as a man will be pitted against some of the best male MMA fighters in in the country.
This will prove among other things, 1) they are committed to the rigorous training that is involved in preparing for a fight.
2) they can kick a$$ just as effectively as a man.
This would be a litmus test to the nation that women can hold there own in combat.
The reality: Every woman would have her a$$ exceptionally beaten and handed to her on a platter. No woman would effectively beat a man in a prolonged fight. Ok, maybe one, but that is not an effective hope for the feminists.
The good thing is, the women would be beaten in the safety of their own country and not subject to additional humiliation, by being sodomized and raped on the battle field.
This would also serve as an object lesson and a full-on referendum that women DO NOT BELONG IN COMBAT.
I am belted in Jiu-Jitsu, so what female is going to make me open my first can of “whip-a$$”?
August 3rd, 2011 at 6:37 pm (#)
Okay, Most people on this page are wrong because they don’t have a right to serve because they will endanger the men around them. They are trying to hide and women accidentally shoots gun and kills guy in front of her. NO if they are equal go serve the USA with a women unit then men unit because just because these idiot women want to go have equal rights doesn’t mean they can endanger the men. Women will only hold us back. MARK MY WORDS: The day we have a women president i will move out of the USA.
August 6th, 2011 at 9:25 pm (#)
I am not a sexist or do I mean to be rude but everyone is entitle to there opinion I’m 21 years old I’m a typical feminine dainty female . I am like my gender role and I am happy to be that way . I’m the type of female that would never get into a physical fight with another person to me two women in a physical fight is not ladylike! I would rather be feminine. I remember in highschool I hated sport never made an effort I remember a guy making a comment saying I don’t have the balls! And I felt like saying yeh I don’t because I’m a normal feminine female! The boy who made that comment was obviously raised by a masculine mother ! and under the influence that women should be rough
Like men. Having women in the army etc sends this message and men get influenced and treat women rough like men which I hate ! I don’t want to be treated like a man ! I like it when men open doors for me etc It does send a wrong message having women on combat , army etc Im from Australia by the way. Everyone is entitle to there opinion
August 16th, 2011 at 5:58 pm (#)
Men and women are built differently. What matters to me, is “If I get shot, can my squad mate haul my 200 pound ass back to camp? or not. The military is a physical job, front line combat is a very physical job. A rare few women may be capable of achieving the level of fitness required to do it, but they are few and far between. I don’t give a dam about what they feel they are entitled to, or if they somehow got it in their head that they have a “Right” to do anything they want, regardless of their ability, but combat is reserved for me for obvious reason. To think otherwise is just feminist propaganda and it will result in inferior military standards and higher casualties.
August 16th, 2011 at 5:59 pm (#)
“Reserved for men”
August 23rd, 2011 at 2:56 pm (#)
I am a 15 year old girl. Why are feminists these days trying to become men?? They say “I can do anything better than a man, and can still maintain my femininity. I am far smarter and wiser and more physically fit than these dumbos. WE CAN DO IT!!”. Why can’t yall just figure out men are better at being men than you? Why can’t you try to be a real woman, instead of a poser? Real woman know how to defend themselves- but are never on the offensive (one who started it) side.Real woman are confidant but not revoltingly proud.They ought to be at home taking care of children, because family is far more important than your country (and if you would rather abandon your kids than protect them, your priorities need to be rearranged). Why would you forsake a noble calling like that just to prove you can do something men can? Now, I DO know that single woman don’t have families to be concerned about and are joining the military for reasons other than proving they CAN, but can’t you find another way to support your country without being a distraction to the men ,like community service? (I mean, being part of the military is pretty much the only career that can be all male(I know it isn’t). Can’t we ladies just think of a cooler job than being in the military, like making robot-soldiers so less people get hurt/killed?)
August 24th, 2011 at 11:39 pm (#)
women are easier targets to kill and rape. they are also harder to maintain…
September 4th, 2011 at 12:13 pm (#)
“They ought to be at home taking care of children, because family is far more important than your country (and if you would rather abandon your kids than protect them, your priorities need to be rearranged).”
Protecting your country IS protecting your children. It won’t matter if women were at home taking care of their kids if the country ceases to exist or if the kid’s future rights are jeopardized.
If women are able the meet the standards required to be in the military, they should be admitted. I don’t believe that weak women should be allowed in the military just because they feel they “have the right”.
If the men could focus on their duties, it wouldn’t matter if women were there. It’s called SELF CONTROL and DISCIPLINE. Which I had believed were qualities possessed by most people in the military, but based on what many of you have said, apparently I was mistaken.
And Ivey, it’s girls like you who prevent us women from being treated equally. I hope you enjoy reaching your aspirations of having children and staying in the kitchen.
September 5th, 2011 at 8:10 pm (#)
“Protecting your country IS protecting your children. It won’t matter if women were at home taking care of their kids if the country ceases to exist or if the kid’s future rights are jeopardized.”
Frankly, if I were given a choice between my mother dying or America being conquered but my family being safe, I’ll chose my family. And wouldn’t it stress the poor kids enough, their mother off to war; them never knowing if she’s ever coming home?
I agree with you about the weak woman insisting they join, though.
“If the men could focus on their duties, it wouldn’t matter if women were there. It’s called SELF CONTROL and DISCIPLINE. Which I had believed were qualities possessed by most people in the military, but based on what many of you have said, apparently I was mistaken”
Yes, but the trouble is that most men don’t have self control or discipline (which is a very good reason for them to join the military, although they will still be tempted from time to time)
I won’t be in the kitchen all my life, and I am all for women’s rights. I think woman should be allowed, I just think no woman should choose that path (I’m a pacifist, have you noticed yet? :) ).But just because I don’t think woman should be in the military doesn’t mean I’ll be in the kitchen :P I’m going to be a ambassador, and I shall probably be killed in a very painful way, as well.
September 6th, 2011 at 3:24 pm (#)
If you are going into a career, because of which you believe you will be killed, won’t your kids be stressed because they won’t know if you will be coming home?
By mentioning discipline and self control, I was also trying to get the point across that women should not be blamed just because men are distracted by them.
Alright, whether or not to support war is your choice. But when attacked, what would you do? I wasn’t talking about the U.S. starting a war; I was talking about defending our country when it is threatened.
David Bryan:
“Okay, Most people on this page are wrong because they don’t have a right to serve because they will endanger the men around them. They are trying to hide and women accidentally shoots gun and kills guy in front of her. NO if they are equal go serve the USA with a women unit then men unit because just because these idiot women want to go have equal rights doesn’t mean they can endanger the men. Women will only hold us back. MARK MY WORDS: The day we have a women president i will move out of the USA.”
Where are your stats on women not being able aim well? I grew up going to a shooting range, and am involved in a rifle team. I have NEVER caused any injury to anyone, because I know how to aim and handle guns properly.
And good. If a woman is elected, move out. We don’t want you here, you sexist idiot.
September 11th, 2011 at 12:37 pm (#)
***Men and Women are Equal in their own rights***
Lets look at the facts here, not the opinions, or the emotions. F A C T S. The FACT is that most women simply and genetically cannot even come close to being as physically strong and tough as an average man. WE are built differently because WE have different biological purposes, with very FEW exceptions to that rule. That’s the first FACT. Secondly, it had already been PROVEN by FACTS in this article that the presence of women in combat can make men forget about their objective in order to save the woman, again ANOTHER genetic factor; in humans, MEN ARE THE PROTECTORS. Unless they plan on creating a whole entire army of women, that alone is reason enough to not allow women even REMOTELY close to battle. Do you argue that a Female lioness is the hunter of the pride? NO, because it’s a female doing something she was BIOLOGICALLY meant to do! How about a man sacrificing his own life for a woman he doesn’t even know? Same difference! Your the carriers of children, we are expendable, YOU are not! Thirdly, women are more costly in terms of health care for the military, and have higher rates of injury (Another FACT) than men, due to their less robust physiology. In combat related training, female injury is sure to be high, with higher cost to YOUR tax payer dollars!
In closing, I would like to point out that there are a very FEW exceptions to this rule, and DO NOT believe for a second that “G.I. Jane” is a good example of a woman in combat. That was a FILM. Not REAL. A woman that size would NEVER be able to make it through S.E.A.L. training, it is mathematically impossible. I’ve seen SEALS training, it takes every physical fiber they have to make it through their training, and the FACT is that only a woman bodybuilder or a genetic anomaly would have the muscle fiber to even have a chance.
Accept that we have our places and that both sexes serve EXACTLY 50% of the total that it takes to make life and survive as a species! I will defend a womans right to be the only sex that gives birth, the only sex that can truly nurture a child and make everything better with a soft touch and a few kind words, I will even ADMIT that women have more neural connections in their brain and are better at Multi-tasking, it is a FACT. They also see the color red better, have better senses of smell, and do MANY MANY other things better than men! Please stop thinking men are sexist for looking at the FACTS when it comes to women in combat….
****Let’s get back to us being men and you being women and let’s enjoy one another and stop going back and forth over who is better, we are EQUAL in our own rights!****
September 13th, 2011 at 6:55 pm (#)
I am currently in the military, in a combat related job and I think it would be benefical to give my “two-cents”. Bare with me however because I am in the infantry and I’m not as intellectual as you all seem on this website haha (so dont make fun of my spelling and such).
A little background about me, I’ve been in the infantry in the Army for 4 years now and have been to Iraq and Afghanistan and have seen plenty of combat. I strongly believe that women should be equal, but I also believe that we cannot, in some places women are superior to men let it be care, hospitality or what have you and men are superior in other places, and I think one of those is combat.
The Army recently let me take a “break” to go to school for a semester so I could get the ball rolling on getting a college degree and in my Sociology class a women did a presentation on Women and Combat. Obviously I had questions to ask or a scenario I gave her. This scenario is what I’ve done and asked if she could do the same, and it goes like this. Can you being 125lbs, carry 90lbs put on throughout your body (body armor, explosives, mission essential equipment, ammo, water, grenades, flashbangs, uniform, boots, pistol, etc.) get dropped off in elevations on average of 7+k (thinner air, making it a lot harder to walk/run) move 6k at a fast walk/jog, hit your objective and either kill or capture your target, do the mission objectives, then walk another 1-2k go back home, then workout out too maintain your physical readiness, and do that everyday, no days off. Another one would be could you take me who at first was 180lbs, then with all my equipment I weighed 270lbs, that just got shot and I’m lying in the open, could you drag me behind cover for a medic to work on me and save my life. Could you shoot a 14 year old boy who has an AK pointing at you? She looked at the ground and said no. This women was in the Air Force and had a hobby of running half marathons. In these scenario’s I’ve also seen men struggle, they still completed it, but they were struggling.
Then you must think of the sexual harrassment/rape accusations that will come with it. Lets face it, us men are horn-balls, especially with war and adrenaline running through our veins, its our mindset that youre not gonna get rid of haha. Not only that, now youre gonna have to give girls seperate bathrooms and living areas costing more money.
You will also take away the brotherhood from us, WHICH IS CRUCIAL. Without that bond between men, all will be lost. Guys around my unit said they would just quit if they let women into our unit, it would be just as if you put girls into fraternity, it just doesnt work.
Men would not be focused on the mission and would be focused on the women to either impress them, try to get laid with them, or protect them. A unit that one of my friends was in Iraq with got into a firefight one day at a certain place at a certain time that had women in it. When they took over a building to have cover and concealment during the battle, a women soldier went into a corner of the room and didnt move. I’m not saying its a fact, but out of sheer experience alone and the expeience of others, its dangerous to have women side by side with men in combat.
Combat is a man’s place, and it is our deepest honor to have that place to protect women, thats what makes us feel like men, to make sure you’re safe, please don’t take that from us. Again, I’m not a sexist or a shovanist and I think women should be equal but you can’t be in combat, just as we can’t bear children, even though theres no way in hell I want to anyways haha.
Another thing is, lets say they make a all female division. Put it up against an all-male division, we are already ahead of the power curve, and once you remotely start to compete with the males, the males will do whatever it takes to be better, you can’t out-do us even if you all took steriods.
I hope I didn’t offend anyone in this, I had no means too I just thought you would be interested to hear from someone whose in a combat related job in the military :)
September 28th, 2011 at 1:35 am (#)
There is not a single thing women can do better than men, let alone combat. Women are followers. They want to do what man has already done but don’t do anything on their own. What an inferiority complex!
October 4th, 2011 at 5:13 am (#)
Its a duty as a citizen to protect your country no matter what gender you are. If someone came and attacked our country today I am gonna fight to protect it regardless waht gender I am. There are alot of guys in the world who think that women can’t do anything, some guys care about their safety other guys are just plain sexist, they think they are just superior to women, men like that are nothing but IGNORANT! Women can do things just like any man can, God never said that women couldn’t join the military and fight for their freedom. There are alot of nice men in the world and alot mean one’s,but God created all of us equal, and we should be entitled to the same things,if a woman wants to be in combat let her if she passes the same tests they would normally give to a man, she knows there is a risk of being captured but let her fight if she wants, there is nothing wrong with that!
October 9th, 2011 at 2:57 pm (#)
I think girls get fed so much fiction in movies like “Kill Bill” and the like that they actually believe they are stronger than men. Please. Then let’s do away with women’s leagues and sports and just have them join the boys, maybe after that we can think about the military.
As far as all those references to other military, look again. The Israeli’s took women out of combat because it didn’t work, and so did the Russians. Only special roles. So this answers the idea that some few women are stronger than some few men.
Women are not being denied the opportunity to prove then can be in combat, if they were any good they would have been in a long time ago and we’d be using that model. Women have had to participate in wars all the time and have done well in certain situations. Usually these are characterized by revolutionary circumstances, like there was in recent history, in Nicaragua and El Salvador. Large number of women were in combat alongside men, but for that matter so have boys, which is about the level. So they have not been denied the opportunity, they have failed the opportunity, except in certain extreme cases where there is a shortage of manpower or when the revolutionary motivation creates a camaraderie not found in professional (mercenary) fighting forces, or in desperate defensive fighting where you have no choice but to fight whether your’re in uniform or not.
And please no more references to god. Which? Whose god are you talking about? In any case any I don’t know any holy scripture that doesn’t clearly have different roles for the weaker sex.
October 15th, 2011 at 8:24 am (#)
dont forget the one time a month calling that last a week, basicly women are a hinderance on the front lines.Also, give me an example of one girl who has reached these standards of men..women should never be allowed in volunteer combate roles.
October 16th, 2011 at 5:55 am (#)
I think girls get fed so much fiction in movies like “Kill Bill” and the like that they actually believe they are stronger than men. Please. Then let’s do away with women’s leagues and sports and just have them join the boys, maybe after that we can think about the military.
As far as all those references to other military, look again. The Israeli’s took women out of combat because it didn’t work, and so did the Russians. Only special roles. So this answers the idea that some few women are stronger than some few men.
Women are not being denied the opportunity to prove they can be in combat, if they were any good they would have been in a long time ago and we’d be using that model. Women have had to participate in wars all the time and have done well in certain situations. Usually these are characterized by revolutionary circumstances, like there was in recent history, in Nicaragua and El Salvador. Large number of women were in combat alongside men, but for that matter so have boys, which is about the level. So they have not been denied the opportunity, they have failed the opportunity, except in certain extreme cases where there is a shortage of manpower or when the revolutionary motivation creates a camaraderie not found in professional (mercenary) fighting forces, or in desperate defensive fighting where you have no choice but to fight whether your’re in uniform or not. So, yes it’s been tried, many times, in fact I think feminists like to talk about the mythical amazonian women warriors. Whether real or imagined I think it’s no coincidence that there are no surviving cultures using this model of society–they just went extinct!
And please no more references to god. Which? Whose god are you talking about? In any case I don’t know any holy scripture that doesn’t clearly have different roles for the weaker sex.
Shocking, men do think they are superior to women–at being men!
October 25th, 2011 at 6:29 am (#)
Women should be allowed in battle. There are too many of us in this world and surely war can cut down on the number. Some say if a child had a bomb strapped to him/her then the female would try to risk her battalion to save the child. But if she realizes its hopeless she will take action. Im not saying she wont choke and be sad about it. I mean hell who wouldn’t.
What happened to Jessica was tragic but that does not mean you have to keep the rest of the females in this world from being who we want to be. I am 15 and I’m going to be Marine. i will be in battle or fight until I die for the right s for females.
October 25th, 2011 at 6:40 am (#)
Those men who think that females shouldn’t be in battle obviously don’t have a wife or a girl friend. try telling her she cant do something and watch her prove you wrong. Females are harder to crack if they put their minds to it. Maybe thats just me. But I have men and women supporting me on both sides. My friend Monte who’s 19 said that females should be in battle they’re as stubborn as a mule. Small but use full.
November 3rd, 2011 at 2:12 pm (#)
I want to see an all women division. i want to know how they would react to the combat stress, the physical stress ,and the emotional part of war and combat.i want to know what theyll feel and howd theyll react when their aav gets hit by an IED or a bomb and they loose a whole squad of women. combat is not easy or they wouldve let women fight along side with men along time ago. Kaitlyn Potter you are only fifteen. lifes to short to make it even shorter by giving up your life for this ungrateful country. dont get me worng i am not an anti american. i have been wanting to be a marine since i was five. these are my last couple of months of school before i swear in and you should be grateful that men are the one being placed on the frontlines not women. it is easy to run a couple of miles do some push ups, sit ups, and pull ups but thats not combat. nothing can prepare you for combat until you are actually there. combat is not a beautiful thing, it is full of death destructuion and horror so where would a womens wormth and beauty have room in all of this. im not saying to give up your dream of becoming a marine. if you want to be in combat go for it but youll find out soon that combat is not a thing to look forward to unless you really have nothing else to look forward to like me
November 4th, 2011 at 7:29 am (#)
THEY ARE ALLOWED.!
November 10th, 2011 at 12:12 pm (#)
Women are not allowed in complete combat roles olny support units
November 10th, 2011 at 9:02 pm (#)
So from what I’ve read of this argument (I haven’t read all of it, it’s like a million bagillion words long!)there are many good arguments for both sides in this.
First thing. I wanna make somtehing clear when I present my points in this argument. I AM NOT A FEMINIST. In fact, I find them kind of annyoing always ranting on & on about rights & equalities yadda yadda yadda.
I’m on the pro side, but a little differently. Women should be allowed to at least TRY to prove themselves to meet the same requirements of that of men. I’m not saying that women should be compared to men here. I’m saying that if they meet the REQUIREMENTS, they should be let into whichever unit they tried for.
This presents another issue on the women’s side of things. For the areas they aren’t allowed in, that automatically means they can’t even try to qualify for it! In my opinon, yes, the (ahem) VERY large majority of women can’t meet up with the standards already put on paper intended for men only. Whay most people fail to realize is that there is an very SMALL percent of women who DO actually meet the requirements. The tests monitored to , say, get into the Special Operations Pararescue Jumpers doesn’t allow women to try to pass it. Because the people who made the test looked at women & all the problems associated with having women, & they wrongly assumed that every women therefore is the same & brings all the same problems. I cannot express in words how wrong that is.
I confess, I’m only 15. Hormones raging & brain not yet fully functional. :|. But it is a dream of mine to be a PJ. But everywhere I look, no matter how recent the information, it keeps on saying Women are not allowed. I have my heart set on this & I guess my only hope as of now is that by the time I’m of legal age to join the military, they’ll have the rule changed that women can be allowed to participate alongside men as long as they meet the requirements.
November 30th, 2011 at 8:13 am (#)
Meow c:
November 30th, 2011 at 8:17 am (#)
@Ethan
Don’t be a sexist pig dude~ Women can “handle” anything men can. So I’m going to shove that gun we “can’t handle” up your ass \m/
December 4th, 2011 at 3:45 pm (#)
I wonder how many people in society giving opinions on whether women should serve in combat, actually served even in the military? I think every person over the age of 18 should be required to serve at least three years in the military. Then when people give their opinions, they will actually have personal experience to make their suggestions. Until then, if the women who are serving and have been serving this country in the military want to serve in combat and are prepared to give their lives for this country they have a right too. It is working fine in other countries.
I actually served and have seen grown men cry, when the bombs started hitting right outside and inside the bases in Afghanistan. I had three in my unit, become conscientious objectors when they got over there and realize this was the real deal, put up or shut up, causing a big issue with the protection of our unit. When you lose men, you do not have the full circle of protection you need and because they could not carry ammo, we the other Soldiers, including the women had to not only protect the rest of the units back who were able to fight, now we were completely responsible for the protection of these cowardly men. Stop making this about gender, the rules centuries ago were made by men for men. The good old boy system still exists. You can allow gays to serve in combat openly now (and I am not against gays serving, but again to show the hypocrisy of a gay man serving freely in combat, but not women), but you want to limit a woman’s right?
Weakness can be found in both men and women, say whatever you want. No one has ever carried my ruck, Armor, weapon, or any equipment I needed to carry for me. Although I have issues with my shoulder at this time, when I am in peak condition, the highest number of pull-ups I did was 30 and that was at 157lbs. I had an NCOIC (female), who could beat any males in PT in our unit and she always performed at the mens standards. She could do over 90 push-ups and over 100 sit-ups and run in approximately 11:30 mins for the PT test. We all admired and strived to be like or better than her including the males. I went to WO school with a male dominant Special Forces group and at the end of the course I beat two of them on the PT test by their standards, they caused us the PT ribbon, not this woman.
If you think the enemy or terrorists are not using women to try and kill our troops, you are sadly mistaken, this is become a growing thing among them. Keep up the old antiquated standards we have and continue keeping our women from combat and training for it. The way wars are fought now, it will eventually come down to using the women in your units, but will they be prepared because of your stereotypical beliefs? Let us pray we do not have to get to this.
Just the opinion of an old Army woman, who is not a feminist, who always was and is willing to give her life for this country.
December 15th, 2011 at 7:03 pm (#)
First of all, God made man and women equal in value, but very different in function. I very highly respect any woman who honorably served in this great nation’s military. Having said that, i very strongly believe that women should not be allowed to serve in ground combat in the U.S. military. This is for two primary reasons: first, men are overall more capable of fulfilling the role of soldier on the battlefield than women, and second, the presence of women greatly hinders the combat effectiveness of the men they are fighting beside.
The cold hard fact is that the basic role of men is to fight and protect that which he loves. Hence he was given the physical attributes to fulfill this task. Men are without comparison stronger than women; it is not even debatable. This is proven by the very fact that the U.S.physical fitness standards for women are drastically lowered than for those of men. I am not denying that there are women out there who are stronger or faster than some men, that would be naive and foolish of me. However, to base a decision as crucial and deadly as women in combat over a few rare exceptions is also naive and foolish. Men were created to fill their role effectively, far more effectively than women.
As to my second point, the very presence of women in combat alters the warrior’s mindset into a protector’s mindset towards the woman. This is not the man’s fault. We were created this way, once again, to fulfill our role as protectors. The man cannot be blamed for how he was wired, just as the woman cannot be blamed for how she was wired. This is why little Johnny is blowing up dirt with his J.I. Joe while his sister Sally is playing family with her dolls.
Women were naturally created to fill a specific role just as men were, and this is by no means a bad thing. It is how we were made to operate. Women should not be in combat because men are physically more capable of getting the job done, and men’s attitudes are altered by the presence of women during combat. May God bless all who fight and die for our great country.
January 2nd, 2012 at 11:48 pm (#)
What about women fighter pilots? Or women in tanks? Or in one of those planes than can snipe people from five miles away?
January 8th, 2012 at 5:11 pm (#)
I love my husband dearly, would do anything for him, but he is also very unique in the sense that he is a big strong guy who doesn’t have a cave-like mentality. Overall, though, I can’t say I’m a huge fan of men in general as the male counterpart of our species. They tend to say really stupid sh*t all the time, can’t really have a deep conversation with most of them, they can’t multi task worth a damn (god forbid you ask them to do more than one thing at a time), they seem unable to look and see the potential danger of doing something really stupid and pointless, they’ve done a horrid job of running the world for the last few millenia. When around a pretty girl, their normal IQ levels tend to drop about 20 points, and they have an overall inability to understand a woman’s mind (nor her body for that matter).
However, in saying that, they most certainly do have their uses. They’re usually extremely funny (whether laughing with them or at them), often times brave to a fault, they are absolutely indispensable as fathers both physically and emotionally, and they have a natural urge to protect. They are much stronger than women physically, which is helpful when moving houses, opening jars, needing protection when someone tries to break into the house, but most notably, they never seem to hesitate when defending their country.
If God forbid my husband was at war, and was injured, I would find a little more comfort in knowing he was surrounded by strong men who could carry him to safety, cause I know that most women can not do this. But this does not mean that if a woman can pass the proper testing, that she should be denied the chance to fight on the front line simply because, statistically, women have not been able to physically measure up in the past.
There are exceptions to EVERY rule…. i.e. my husband not being a typical neanderthal.
Look at it this way, you can have a few one-off’s with women being strong enough for combat, but you will NEVER have a one-off of men having babies. But just because men will never have babies, does not mean we should just write them off after the deed is done.
Test everyone equally, find their strengths and use their strengths in the appropriate roles. It really is that simple.
January 11th, 2012 at 7:34 pm (#)
I would like honor all those who sacrificed their lives for women to advance in the military-the unborn.
January 16th, 2012 at 9:26 am (#)
I guess I just don’t think a lot of these “general” arguments are true across the board, which is what makes all of this patently unfair. My belief is solidly that women should be allowed to try to compete if they are capable, which some truly are. Lets be honest. Very few women OR men are physically strong enouogh to fight in combat, which is why less than 1% of Americans are soldiers. It is also true that the human body male or female can become very strong and is very adaptable if there is a desire. Additionally,There are many qualities in women (the right one) that make us prone to being excellent warriors.
I will come right out and tell you here that I am currently a candidate for OCS in one branch. I happen to be very tall, (5″10) 155, and very very strong, because I train regularly and run and hike daily. I am 29 years of age, and more physically competent than most men I know. However, like most women, I am more flexible than most men, which can make me less succeptible to injury. I may have slightly lesser upper body strength than my male workout buddies, but substancially more lower body strength than those same men. (That’s typical of women due to our average body-types which favor lower body strength.) Also my cardiovascualr endurance is higher than most of my male friends, including male friends I have who are currently enlisted.
Since pregnancy is being mentioned over and over, I will state as a side note that I have been married for 6 years, have two children and have no desire to sleep around with younger men I dont know. I know this is uncommon among millitary females, but after my second pregnancy I had a hysterectomy and as a result I am sterile anyway. I do not have periods, and I cannot get pregnant. Again, I know that I may be very very rare, but my whole premise here is that there are exceptions to the thinking that no woman can be like a man, or as strong, or as commited to the singular purpose of defending the nation at war. I would argue that is not always true…and further that by passing on a woman like myself…you would be missing out on other qualities such as the fact that I speak Farsi, or the fact that I have two engineering degrees.
Mental health is obviously very critical. The argument that women are not “protective” is CRAZy to me. I feel like the most useful asset that I have is that I am very protective. Very, very protective. I also would argue that women do a better job of expressing and purging their emotions in healthy ways instead of sitting on feelings. Thats kind of a basic and generally accepted fact, and one which would lend itself to our NOT flipping out under pressure. Other generally accepted facts about women: we are more patient, more resolute, and endure pain better than men. We are generally more capable or remaining still, and focused for extended periods than men. Um, hello?
Look, I understand that there are downfalls. I do. But men have downfalls too (ego, excessive agression, etc.)I can even look back at myself and say that I can see my own potentially damaging quality. I happen to be quite pretty. I can understand how that might be a challenge in an arena that is male-dominated. I will also say that the more men become used to having me around, the less likely they are to focus on the fact that I am attractive, and the more likely they are to notice that I am bright, and kind and strong and useful in a pinch. It all comes down to respect, whether it be in an office or in combat.
January 19th, 2012 at 2:22 pm (#)
As a female who currently serves I can tell you that mixing men and women in direct combat would not be good.
Until one knows what requirements are needed in order to fulfill the demands for combat, it is best not to assume that women can do just as well as men in general.
First, even a fit woman is not as strong as a weak/average man. A 20 year old fit woman’s lung capacity is the same as an average 50 year old man’s.
It has been argued that when women are allowed to compensate their lower body strength into their training (to undo male’s upper body strength advantage), they end us as strong as men. The problem with that is that in combat, one does not have time to figure out how to efficiently coordinate this. What is needed in combat is long periods of endurace with the strength to carry your battle buddy to safety. If a woman has to coordinate her lower body strength to do this to equal a man, it is an impediment to the unit and could endanger lives. There is no suitable replacement for upper body strength during combat. Maybe in the gym or in some of these men/women’s strength studies, but not in combat.
Unless one can somehow change men’s instincts, favoritism is a danger in intense combat situations. Mixing males and females in this could cost unit cohesion and endanger lives. I am talking about overcoming natural urges and instincts of men to protect women when there is danger. As a woman currently in military, I can attest that this is very difficult if not impossible to train out. While one can argue that this may only happens sometimes, it only takes one time to destroy a mission. Unit cohesion is essential and many who have not been in the military do not understand this and think that men and women will operate flawlessely in this regard with the snap of a finger. They wont and it will cost us.
The potential for favoritism will go up when men and women mix in combat and that can create resentment which would affect unit cohesion and effectiveness.
These are the issues that are routinely ignored when discussing mixing men and women in combat. They cannot be taken lightly and if people want to keep experementing, it could cost more lives than necessary.
It is what it is, and thinking we can just change this is not as simple as we think.
January 25th, 2012 at 10:39 am (#)
Yes I know that a woman cannot out do a male in combat. Its just common knowledge and fact. Though I see nothing wrong with a woman doing more then her best and giving it her all. Why would we reject the ones who are willing to push themselves past their limits?
I strive off pushing myself beyond my limits. Im a sixteen year old female. Im joing the Marines as soon as I graduate. I’m not questioning myself if I really want to. I know I want to. If I can acomplish making it into infantry, then thats exactly what I’m going to do.