The Instigator
lucky613
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
ExiOrca
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Should women be allowed in combat?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/11/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 762 times Debate No: 31186
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

lucky613

Pro

I believe women should be allowed in combat roles because firstly that would mean more soldiers in combat. Women make up 14% of the army. Secondly Men and women have the same training. And finaly women deserve the same equality as men do. Men and women were created to be equal not to have men be treated better than women.
ExiOrca

Con

I thanks my opponent for this debate.

I will debate that women shouldn't be allowed in combat.
First, the physiological difference between the two sexes. The physical characteristic, weight, shape, muscle, anatomy between the two genders have been scientifically studies and measured and men have been proven to have an advantage compare to women. This is not a political opinion but a scientific proven statistic. This is also applied in the military as the expectation for women joining the army is different, sometimes lower, than that of men.
Secondly, combat here means the "combat zone" where soldiers kill each other through brutal method. The term combat does not equal to military. Women in the military means women working as nurse, airplane pilot, navy,... While women in combat means women literally carry a gun and shoot other other people on a dangerous ground. Referred back to my first point, the combat zone can be a brutal place and soldiers have to march carrying a big heavy backpack for days, weeks and even months. Women would not be able to accomplish this.
Thirdly, mental difference. Women have a different response to stress than men. When approaching stress, men trigger the "flight or fight" response whereas women trigger the "tend or befriend" due to their maternal characteristic. Moreover, women tend to think more into the detail than men. In the battlefield, where killing and blood is a normal scene. This can cause a lot of stress on women. Also, women need mental support, and the combat ground will not be able to provide her that. [2]
Fourthly, pregnancy and sexual harassment. It is well known that in a normal society, women get sexual harassed. So then on the combat ground, where rules are not as strictly forced, sexual harassment would become a dangerous thing, not to mention the event that women soldiers got captured by the opposing force. Pregnancy is pretty much self-explanatory.

[1]http://www.oregoncounseling.org...
[2]http://www.clareharding.com...
Debate Round No. 1
lucky613

Pro

For your first argument Women can be as equally as strong as men. For your second argument the combat zone is a very dangerouse place and women tend to hand stress and violence way better than men. This is not an opinion it is a proven fact. For your 3rd argument what you said about women is a good thing. The details can hep women stratigize on what move to make and how to make it. Men are not as easily able to do that as women. And for your final argument, Men can be sexualy harrased too. It is not only a women thing. Men might not be able to get pregnant but they can be sexualy harassed. You can't train anyone for sexual herassment, but you can definently prepare them. And so women do not get pregant they can get birth control pills. I believe my oponents arguments are invalid.
ExiOrca

Con

--Refutation---

"I believe women should be allowed in combat roles because firstly that would mean more soldiers in combat. Women make up 14% of the army. Secondly Men and women have the same training. And finaly women deserve the same equality as men do. Men and women were created to be equal not to have men be treated better than women."

In your opinion, you say women should be allowed in combat because that means more soldiers in combat. However, what would more soldiers benefit us? More deaths? Quality over quantity. Your statistic of women making up 14% of the army is non-relevant to the resolve as we're talking about combat zone and my second point has mention that. Your third point is also invalid. While men and women were "born" or "created", it can be easily measured or proven that most men is stronger than women as referred by my first point.

--Rebuttal--
"For your first argument Women can be as equally as strong as men. For your second argument the combat zone is a very dangerouse place and women tend to hand stress and violence way better than men. This is not an opinion it is a proven fact. For your 3rd argument what you said about women is a good thing. The details can hep women stratigize on what move to make and how to make it. Men are not as easily able to do that as women. And for your final argument, Men can be sexualy harrased too. It is not only a women thing. Men might not be able to get pregnant but they can be sexualy harassed. You can't train anyone for sexual herassment, but you can definently prepare them. And so women do not get pregant they can get birth control pills. I believe my oponents arguments are invalid."

I concede that a small number of women are indeed strong as men. However, your point that women handle stress and violence way better than men is false. Women, when stressed, they need emotional support whereas when men stress, they only need to take a step back or withdraw to recover. In this article [3], they talk about how women have more stress than men in workplace due to several reasons. Women feel stress because they are stuck in an repeating working cycle without time of relaxing. Also, women have to deal with children and has a bigger family responsibility to that of men. And your point of women handle violence better than men is just ridiculous and you have no explanation for that. Your counter argument against my 3rd point is that women, being a heavy thinker, can think of better strategy than men. This is not necessary true. Most of the generals in the past, being men, think of amazing tactics. Also, we're talking about soldiers whom job is too follow their leader. Being a heavy thinker will just likely suffer you more on the battlefield. And your argument against my fourth point: Men can be sexually harassed too. So? Men don't really care about getting sexually harassed. That's the point. Men don't go reporting to the higher up when we get sexually harassed whereas women have more case of sexually harassed reports. How are you going to prepare people for sexual harassment, that's like saying I will train my kid to be bullied.
"And so women do not get pregant they can get birth control pills."
Are women soldier suppose to keep a lot of pills on the combat zone? This is a battleground. Soldiers can be captured and face the risk of torture. If they decide to rape the women, I highly doubt that the taking birth control would not be of use anyhow.
Debate Round No. 2
lucky613

Pro

lucky613 forfeited this round.
ExiOrca

Con

Nothing to add here.
Debate Round No. 3
lucky613

Pro

lucky613 forfeited this round.
ExiOrca

Con

Nothing to add.
Thanks for the debate.
Debate Round No. 4
lucky613

Pro

lucky613 forfeited this round.
ExiOrca

Con

Extend all arguments
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.