The Instigator
ESEJP
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
glowingdisco
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Why women shouldn't be allowed in combat.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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: 3/18/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,178 times Debate No: 31405
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

ESEJP

Con

I have this debate for my speech 180 class which is Debate and Argumentation and my group came got this topic to be in the prop position.
glowingdisco

Pro

Yes, women should be allowed in combat. Besides, what can a man do in combat that a woman can't?
Debate Round No. 1
ESEJP

Con

The first is, as we have already seen with the expansion of the roles of women, steady downward pressure on military qualifications " reductions in strength and endurance requirements in order to get numbers up. The second is the risk of harm to female personnel: he people we are likely to meet on the next battlefield are people who use rape and sexual abuse as actual tools of politics. In Iranian prisons, rape is a frequent practice. Women are raped before they are executed. In Iran, in Pakistan, in Afghanistan rape is a conscious tool of subjugation and it is something women will be exposed to. In the name of equal opportunity they will face unequal risk. And the third point, one I think we should give real thought to, is the stress on military families. So these are some of the reasons why women shouldn't be allowed in combat. Not in direct combat.
glowingdisco

Pro

On your first point, there is no need for the military qualifications to go down. If a woman feels as though she has a right to be on combat alongside her male soldiers, then she should have to work and put as much effort as they.

On your second point, rape doesn't happen only to women. Have you heard of rape within male prisons? Rape should not be only relevant to women because in the real world, it isn't. Besides, rape and sexual harassment does happen BETWEEN male and female American soldiers, so woman could possibly be exposed to any sexual mistreatment anyhow.

On your third point, the woman's family would only worry more if they had the same sexist viewpoint I am arguing. If a woman was treated as an equal fighter alongside a man, what is there more to worry about?
Debate Round No. 2
ESEJP

Con

ESEJP forfeited this round.
glowingdisco

Pro

I rest my case.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by ESEJP 3 years ago
ESEJP
Thanks. It really helps me in my points :D
Posted by Yraelz 3 years ago
Yraelz
I'm really not interested in taking this debate. But the way to win it is by advocating that no one should be allowed in combat. "No one" includes women but does not discriminate specifically against them. There are a lot of advantages to not having anyone in combat. For instance people don't die. Also vicious state making wars don't increase the Taliban's recruitment by 300%. Nations with defensive only armies are typically much more prosperous than those that have offensive armies.

Hope these arguments get you started. Cheers.
No votes have been placed for this debate.