I do not want standards lowered but all should have the chance to serve in all positions if able. There were some who felt I should not be there but for the most part I was given the chance to prove myself, The men looked to me for leadership and not once did they attempt to "protect me" but followed orders.
I feel that there should be an equal opportunity for women to serve in combat roles, however, I do feel it's important that they meet certain physical requirements. Combat roles are very demanding physically and in extreme circumstances everyone in one unit has to depend on each other and not be a burden. Therefore it is critical that whoever is in that unit meets the needs to survive those extreme conditions.
Everyone is different and whether or not you possess the skills for combat is not based on your sex. Women at times can be better under pressure and higher skilled in marksmanship and strategy than men. The argument against women in the military is weak, and usually describes deficiencies in how women are viewed by men, and not based on the merit of the individual.
Women are trained to do what the men are trained for, and are physically and intellectually able to fulfill the same tasks. Combat need not be an exception. Women in the armed forces are highly competent and able to perform the duties called for in combat situations, so they should be allowed to serve in this capacity.
Women and men are supposed to be treated equal and given equal rights. If a woman wants to serve 100% for the country, then she should have that right. There should be no discrimination. A woman can do any job, like a man does, with the proper training. As long as she chooses to do it, nothing should hold her back.
The reason I support women fighting in the armed forces is because they have a right to. The women's rights movement has been going on since they didn't have the right to vote, and they won that right. If they can vote for a President, then why can't they fight for him? I say let them fight, if they want to fight.
Women enrolling in the armed forces are aware of the risks of their position, so they should be allowed to serve in all the same capacities as men, including combat roles. Since hand-to-hand combat is obsolete now, the idea of men having a combat advantage because of their naturally superior strength is also obsolete, making women equally suitable for these roles.
If a women wants to join let her. For too long, men have oppressed women. Women should rise up and fight back. Women have ran for president. Women have run companies. Women make it so we have a next generation, so they should be able to decide what to do with it.
Women should be allowed to serve in combat roles. If a woman is able to pass basic training and would serve some helpful purpose in a combat role in the armed forces, what reason is there to forbid her from serving in such a role? To disagree is to discriminate for no reason.
While I do not believe that women should be forced to serve in combat roles in our armed forces, if they are willing to do just that, then it's a different story. Women are fully capable, and have the knowledge, desire, strength, determination, and passion for serving, just as men do.
I firmly believe that, if a woman is accepted into any specific branch of the military, she should be afforded the same rights as men. There should be no gender separation, in regard to serving in combat roles. I think this should be a decision left up to each individual. If she is capable and able, then she should be allowed to. If her superiors feel that she would be an asset in that position and setting, then it should be her choice.
Women are slightly more vital to the species than men, a single man could father children with several women but not the other way around. This has been one of the main reasons of keeping women off the front lines for years, and it was semi valid excuse back when we still needed to worry about the countries population. There would of never been something like the baby boom after World War Two if women had died on the front lines along with the men. Now that there are more people and babies in the world than we can handle, there is no reason to not allow women into combat roles as long as they install some kind of clause to revoke the right if the country's population ever drops to a certain level.
1. I believe if a woman can pass the PT standards to serve in combat, then they should be allowed. By that I mean if they can pass the PT standards set for men, not the lowered standards.
2. If a man is too distracted by a female (ie. feels to protect her instead of doing his assigned job) then he should be removed from the unit.
3. Pregnancy. It takes two to tango. It was a common argument for women on submarines. The men's wives were worried about sex. If you are that worried, then maybe there are some marriage issues to be worked out.
4. Russia has women in combat roles. Not a lot of people are willing to mess with Russians. Germany has women in combat roles. Canada does too.
5. Rape. Women are raped in the military even without being in combat roles. It isn't our fault men feel the need to do something that horrible.
6. Draft. If I am denied a combat role then I shouldn't have to sign up for the draft. Once I get a combat role, I will register on my 18th birthday, if I get a combat role before then.
7. It's just sexist. To say I cannot serve in combat just because I am a female. Don't I have equal rights?
Our military used to be primarily composed of men but, in the past few years, many able and capable women have joined the ranks of our armed forces. Many of these women want to be more than just a desk jockey. Many capable women pilot our military aircraft and are responsible for developing military strategy. If a woman who is in the military feels that she can successfully engage in combat, she should be allowed to do so with the understanding that she has to be able to give her all and endure the roughness and the hardships along with the men. If a woman joins the military, she should have the same privileges and duties as a man in the military.
Personally, I am against war, in all of its incarnations. I do, however, believe very strongly in equal rights. I f a woman loves her country enough to potentially die for it, then she should be allowed to serve her country. Plenty of women are already doing this.
Women should be treated no differently than men when it comes to rights. If a woman chooses to serve in a combat role and is fit and able, than she should not be denied that right. If there are physical demands and requirements that come with that role and a woman is able to meet them, then it would not be fair to rule her out just because of gender.
Women are a big part of today's military, and preventing them from serving in combat is sexism, plain and simple. While there may have been good reasons in the past from preventing them from serving on the front lines, today's high-tech military makes those reasons obsolete. If they can shoot straight, we need them as soldiers.
I would say no, because if women are allowed in combat they will soon after be required to enroll in selective service. Ready to join the draft, ladies? You can't say "I want equality! ...but not that equality!" If you want to be treated like men, prepare for all the downsides of being treated like a man.
Physical Ability: While the majority of jobs in the armed forces are open equally to men and women, there are some to which women are just not physically suited.
Efficiency: While integration of women into combat is possible for those qualified, the small number versus the additional logistical, regulatory and disciplinary costs associated with integration do not make it a worthwhile move.
Morale and Cohesion: Having women serving in direct combat will hamper mission effectiveness by hurting unit morale and cohesion.
Military readiness: Pregnancy can affect the deployment of a unit and case a disproportionate number of women or understaffing.
Tradition: Men, especially those likely to enlist, maintain traditional gender roles. In some situations, men are may act foolishly to protect women in their combat units. Harassment and resentment of the presence of women in a hyper masculine military subculture would likely become a problem.
Abuse by Enemy: Both male and female prisoners are at risk of torture and rape, but misogynistic societies may be more willing to abuse woman prisoners.
If they join then what about their monthly pains? Also it would cost more for their equipment, room, and missions. They have to take care of the children at home if married or have kids. Also the military has lowered country standards so women could be in the military, i think that is unfair.
They're has actually be tests that has shown that in Israel, where men and women serve in combat roles, the men's natural instinct would be to protect the women, this could lead to both being killed. Also, when a medic sees a downed women, the women is helped, dead or alive, before the men who would be in a less worse condition, mainly because she is a women. It is just natural instinct. Not to mention the amount of muscle, and the way the two genders think. Also, I feel that even though technology is huge, it can fail, it can fail on itself, or it can fail from a weapon that ends it, therefore, I don't think that in that case, women will have what it takes to take on a huge, male enemy that we may be fighting. Just my opinion.
Women should still be able to fly planes but they should not be in ground combat. Ground combat is dangerous and the men on the battlefield will go die for the women because they are women, And they will not complete there missions. The military also lowered the standards for women in the military.