I agree that it could affect the men in the troops but women have the same rights as men and if we want to fight for our country and show our american pride then we should be allowed to do that!!!!
To me, the idea that the presence of women in front line combat will have a negative affect on the men they serve with holds about as much water as initial arguments that blacks shouldn't be allowed to serve because it would cause a ruckus among soldiers. Maybe there will be some incidences at first, but, as with the presence of blacks, the soldiers will get over it. And we all need to as well.
People here don't seem to actually understand what the real issue of having women on the front lines is. It's not a political issue, and it's not even remotely about gender roles. The issue is that if you put women in the front lines, the men will take unnecessary and in fact quite stupid risks in order to protect them from harm. There have been extensive studies on this, and it's practically hard coded into the average male's mind to "protect the female". It makes perfect sense from an evolutionary standpoint as well, since face it... Men are disposable when it comes to reproduction. One Casanova could impregnate countless women assuming he forgets his sheep skin condom.
Anyhow, this military decision was based upon hard research which in fact puts the men at fault, so if anyone is truly ignorant of the facts, it's the fools out here stating that it's a sexist decision. Learn the facts, look up the research, and find the real reasoning for the decisions that are made before making broad, insulting, and untrue statements about them. Perhaps if more people were willing to take the time to do such, our Democracy would still be working. Sadly though, now days people just trust the media or politicians to give them their "facts" without regard for what actual research is done, if any.
So in the end, the current restrictions are fine. They do allow for some of the more combatant roles for women who actually desire it, but are designed to keep them off of the front line where they become a liability to the cohesion of the units.
Don't forget though, there are also further issues with sending in female infantry which can cause massive political backlash at home. Do you know what happens to soldiers who are captured by the people we actually go to war with? Do you want to imagine what they do to females that they capture? Think about the bodies being mutilated in the streets. Imagine if they were women now? Now imagine what would be done to them if they were captured alive.
No, Joe. That the question is even asked suggests 1) there is a discussion to be had and 2) an absence of unanimity of opinion. You can dismiss the counterargument as "ignorance" and turn up your nose. That's your right. But you might take a look at the about us page and consider weighing in more constructively on other topics.
I find it so easy to believe that there are still people in United States, in the world, that don't believe that women should be involved in combat. Is it some sort of sexist idea that makes people believe that women have no business fighting. Women have proven time and time again that not only can they fight as well as men but many of them better. People said slaves shouldn't have been freed. People said women couldn't help in the war. People said that the great fathers of our country were simply stubborn and ungreatful. Hasn't anyone realized that the more you try to hold something down the more likely it is to burst from your grasp. Don't let the Barbie Doll full you, we women have love for our country and we are not afraid to show it.
Thoughts
women in military combat
Submitted on May 8th, 2008 by AnonymousI agree that it could affect the men in the troops but women have the same rights as men and if we want to fight for our country and show our american pride then we should be allowed to do that!!!!
Get over it
Submitted on April 19th, 2008 by AnonymousTo me, the idea that the presence of women in front line combat will have a negative affect on the men they serve with holds about as much water as initial arguments that blacks shouldn't be allowed to serve because it would cause a ruckus among soldiers. Maybe there will be some incidences at first, but, as with the presence of blacks, the soldiers will get over it. And we all need to as well.
Not Sexism, Psychology.
Submitted on April 19th, 2008 by OgnamusPeople here don't seem to actually understand what the real issue of having women on the front lines is. It's not a political issue, and it's not even remotely about gender roles. The issue is that if you put women in the front lines, the men will take unnecessary and in fact quite stupid risks in order to protect them from harm. There have been extensive studies on this, and it's practically hard coded into the average male's mind to "protect the female". It makes perfect sense from an evolutionary standpoint as well, since face it... Men are disposable when it comes to reproduction. One Casanova could impregnate countless women assuming he forgets his sheep skin condom.
Anyhow, this military decision was based upon hard research which in fact puts the men at fault, so if anyone is truly ignorant of the facts, it's the fools out here stating that it's a sexist decision. Learn the facts, look up the research, and find the real reasoning for the decisions that are made before making broad, insulting, and untrue statements about them. Perhaps if more people were willing to take the time to do such, our Democracy would still be working. Sadly though, now days people just trust the media or politicians to give them their "facts" without regard for what actual research is done, if any.
So in the end, the current restrictions are fine. They do allow for some of the more combatant roles for women who actually desire it, but are designed to keep them off of the front line where they become a liability to the cohesion of the units.
Don't forget though, there are also further issues with sending in female infantry which can cause massive political backlash at home. Do you know what happens to soldiers who are captured by the people we actually go to war with? Do you want to imagine what they do to females that they capture? Think about the bodies being mutilated in the streets. Imagine if they were women now? Now imagine what would be done to them if they were captured alive.
Re: That this question is even asked...
Submitted on April 18th, 2008 by BenNo, Joe. That the question is even asked suggests 1) there is a discussion to be had and 2) an absence of unanimity of opinion. You can dismiss the counterargument as "ignorance" and turn up your nose. That's your right. But you might take a look at the about us page and consider weighing in more constructively on other topics.
Should Women Be Allowed In Combat?
Submitted on April 18th, 2008 by joe_is_in_the_r...That this question is even asked; shows the complete lack of awareness Americans have.
A "No" is complete ignorance.
Women in Combat
Submitted on April 18th, 2008 by AnonymousI find it so easy to believe that there are still people in United States, in the world, that don't believe that women should be involved in combat. Is it some sort of sexist idea that makes people believe that women have no business fighting. Women have proven time and time again that not only can they fight as well as men but many of them better. People said slaves shouldn't have been freed. People said women couldn't help in the war. People said that the great fathers of our country were simply stubborn and ungreatful. Hasn't anyone realized that the more you try to hold something down the more likely it is to burst from your grasp. Don't let the Barbie Doll full you, we women have love for our country and we are not afraid to show it.