The Instigator
Marineboy21
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
tianyijoanna
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Women being combatantsin the U.S. Armed Forces

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 1 vote the winner is...
Marineboy21
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/4/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,399 times Debate No: 16288
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

Marineboy21

Con

Women shouldnt be combatants within the U.S. Armed Forces for many reasons. One main reason is if a woman becomes a POW then the amount of torture and other psyocological harms is exceedingly greater than that of a male POW. Please come up with a good argument.......I am looking forward to a challenge.
tianyijoanna

Pro

Women can be combatants in the US Armed Force, because join a force or not is a personal decision, women should have the same amount of rights to make decisions as men do. When deciding to join the army, women themselves will know what the consequences are, so even if the amount of torture and other psychological harms for female is exceedingly greater than that of a male POW, a woman can still be willing to serve her country. The amount of torture and other psychological harms that a woman may get after she becomes a POW shouldn't stop her making decisions by her own.
Debate Round No. 1
Marineboy21

Con

I understand my opponents point of view however, there is more to being a combatant that being a POW. Although the job for being a combatant is known, there is no way to train women for pyscological harms. Another point of why they should not that I would like to pronounce is that the privacy of women, while deployed, is next to none.

Women are believed to not be good combatants, due to moral and fear of women becoming POWs. Women should not be combatants because if a woman is captured she can be subjected to a series of sexual assaults such as rape and molestation. Another reason that women should not be combatants is because of the thought process of men fighting alongside the women. The male brain is "wired" to where if a female was shot, the men would abort the mission to go help that one soldier thus putting many lives in danger. If worse were to happen to the females, such as death, the men would be filled with rage/sorrow and act upon their own actions. This would then cause dysfunction in the unit and that would put even more lives in jeopardy. In other situations, the men would be demoralized as they relive the horror of a woman combatant being shot or killed. Men have an instinct to try to protect the women at any means necessary. Men will do stupid things in order to defend a woman that they see in danger. For example, if a woman was shot in the leg and was downed about 50 yards away from the rest of the men, the men will charge through hailstorms of bullets trying to help her. This would cause a bigger situation and a much harder environment for the men to react.
The new "nondiscrimination" law would affect all military branches and communities, including Army and Marine infantry, special operations, Navy SEALs, and submarines. Unlike workers who return home at night, military personnel must accept living conditions that involve "forced intimacy," with little or no privacy. This would be tantamount to forcing female soldiers to share private quarters with men—a situation that would be unacceptable to the majority of military women even if misconduct never occurred. Stated in gender-neutral terms, the new law would require military persons to accept exposure to persons who may be sexually attracted to them (Elaine Donnelly).
This could state that a woman would have to share a barrack with a male that may or may not be attracted to her in which case they would be exposed to each other some of the time.

I await a response.
tianyijoanna

Pro

First, please allow me to refute the 2 new points that my rival opponent brought up.

1) "Although the job for being a combatant is known, there is no way to train women for pyscological harms…if a woman is captured she can be subjected to a series of sexual assaults such as rape and molestation."
there is no way to train women for pyscological harms. This is true, but can not be a reason to not allowing females to join the army, because first of all, a man can get physiological harms after becoming an POW too, if a man is raped by other men, he may feel even worse than women in this situation.

2)" The male brain is "wired" to where if a female was shot, the men would abort the mission to go help that one soldier thus putting many lives in danger."

My rival opponent is assuming that all male are emotional and will be unrational and put many lives in danger while fighting alongside the women, or suffer from greater pain after the the death of woman than after the death of man, but my opponent didn't bring up any evidence to that. My opponent said: " If worse were to happen to the females, such as death, the men would be filled with rage/sorrow and act upon their own actions. " By saying this, my opponent assumed that the men will be sader when their opposite sex get hurt, but this really depends on the relationship between this two individuals, if the man is just friend with that woman who get hurt, he won't be sadder than when his male friends get hurt. I don't see any connection between gender and sadness in this case.

3) Forced Intimacy. "This would be tantamount to forcing female soldiers to share private quarters with men—a situation that would be unacceptable to the majority of military women even if misconduct never occurred."
My side is not saying that women must be soldiers. We are saying that they can be allowed to enter the army according to their own will, so if they believe that forced intimacy is okay, than this shouldn't be a reason to block women from joining the army.

I will briefly summarize my points here:
1) Women should have the same rights as men, so they should be allowed to enter the army.
2) Women should be able to join the army according to their own will, although there may be bad consequences. But if those consequences are acceptable for them, it will be okay.
3) Men can also suffer from forced sexual behavior after they become POW, or feel awkward while having "Forced Intimacy" with another man. So it's the consequences of being an POW or "forced intimacy" can be suffered by both sexes, women are not the only gender that can be suffered from it.
Debate Round No. 2
Marineboy21

Con

As my oppenent has mispercieved, I was not stating that a woman should not be in the army. I was stating that they should not be combatants. I understand that it is impossible for people to be trained for tortures such as those, but the tortures thatcan be done to a woman is significantly greater than that of a man.
1) "assuming that all male are emotional and will be unrational and put many lives in danger while fighting alongside the women, or suffer from greater pain after the the death of woman than after the death of man"
Men have been known to go out of their way to help a woman that is hurt, it is taught in the US that a man must not hit a woman but instead protect one. This can be found outside of the military as well. If a woman were to die and the male had seen this, he would act irrational and show behavior that he wouldnt show otherwise. In Boot Camp and while overseas, you are required to know your team, squad, platoon, and everyone else inside the unit. You must know whose gaurding your back and whose back your guarding. While getting to know your people, you will most likely become great friends with them.
2)" So it's the consequences of being an POW or "forced intimacy" can be suffered by both sexes, women are not the only gender that can be suffered from it."
This is true that a man can also suffer from this, but a woman is usually more protective of her sexual parts. Something that can not happen to a man is that a woman can get pregnant and while a POW can get pregnant and then be tortured and suffer a miscarriage. As for forced intimacy, a male is not going to be attracted to another male (unless gay) but a male can easily be attracted to a woman. Adding on to this, when a soldier is deployed they can get lonely really fast. This could cause some sexual tensions between the males and the females resulting in possibly intercourse.
The last point I would like to bring up is a womans period. When a woman experiences her period, her behavior is diffrent than their regular behavior which may result in irrational behavior and cause a woman to go outside of orders which will put not only her life in danger, but everyone elses lives as well.
tianyijoanna

Pro

tianyijoanna forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Marineboy21

Con

Since my opponent offers no arguement to combat my own there is no choice but to accept my points and vote for my side as the winner of this arguement. Thank You.
tianyijoanna

Pro

Good evening ladies and gentlemen, this is my last argument.
I need to clear up some misunderstanding of my opponent first.
"As my opponent has misperceived, I was not stating that a woman should not be in the army. I was stating that they should not be combatants."
My rebuttal: When I am in the army, it meant join the army and become combatants.

The debate can be summarized in 2 sentences:
Opposition: "I understand that it is impossible for people to be trained for tortures such as those, but the tortures that can be done to a woman is significantly greater than that of a man."
Proposition: "Again, this is a personal choice if woman decide to be a combatant and suffer from the consequences or not."

Please, vote proposition, because of the following reasons:
1) Women should have the same rights as men, so they should be allowed to enter the army.
2) Women should be able to join the army according to their own will, although there may be bad consequences. But if those consequences are acceptable for them, it will be okay.
3) Men can also suffer from forced sexual behavior after they become POW, or feel awkward while having "Forced Intimacy" with another man. So it's the consequences of being a POW or "forced intimacy" can be suffered by both sexes, women are not the only gender that can be suffered from it. Women may suffer more, that's what my opponent is explaining through the whole debate, but if woman herself found it okay to take those consequences and sacrifice for the nation, it's definitely fine. It doesn't make any sense to decide not to let women be a combatant just because you think they may not want to suffer from the consequences.

Voters, please remember: opposition is trying to take away women's rights by deciding for woman about what they want. Which means, even if a woman is okay with suffering from being a POW, and okay with forced intimacy, will still not be able to become a combatant just because my opponent believe that it's too much for women to suffer, I believe that women can make up their own mind and decide how much they can suffer. Let women behold their own rights, and decided for them, if they want to sacrifice and contribute for their own nation, their mother land!

And let woman decide, if they want to have the same rights as men, and contribute same amount of love for the nation consisted of both women and men!

Thank you very much for reading this debate!
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by seraine 6 years ago
seraine
Marineboy seems kind of sexist... Women shouldn't be allowed in combatant roles because they're irrational and can't choose for themselves? Because they will be tortured if they become POW's? Because they'll distract the men? I'm a male, and I don't think that women are fainting violets that will do more harm than good in combatant roles. If they know what's in store for them, which they will, then they can make their own choices. This is not the Dark Ages where the males make all the decisions and the females follow.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by quarterexchange 6 years ago
quarterexchange
Marineboy21tianyijoannaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited and argued that women should be treated equally regardless of the disasters it can cause