• Not all women can survive on the front lines of war, neither can all men

    I personally would not be able to survive on the front line of war and I am a man.

    Simplifying things based on gender leads to vast generalisations, as is inevitable when you try to clump the whole world in to one of two groups. Most certainly there are women out there who would not be able to survive on the front line of war, by the same token there are men out there (myself included) who could not survive on the front line of war. But I am certain that there are also women out there who could survive on the front line of war.

    Several other arguments here say that "Men are stronger then women". What they mean by this is that ON AVERAGE men are stronger than women, not that the weakest man is stronger than the strongest woman. So while there /may/ be less women suitable for front-line warfare (and I'm not sure if I accept that premise) there are some women who ARE suitable. So what is the point of excluding these potentially great soldiers from enlisting based on their gender.

    Radical idea here but let's test people INDIVIDUALLY on their abilities and not based on some predefined groups that they belong to and our predefined notions as to the fitness of these groups.

  • they are strong

    As a female in the military I agree that women can survive on the front lines of war. They are just as strong as a man and they are more than willing to put their life on the line and to give up half the things most women dream about to protect our freedom! If they can push just as much weight as a man than why keep them away from that?

  • Women in War

    Women can be just as strong as men if they are dedicated enough. If they want to fight or us then we should let them. It's their decision, not ours. Women are smart and with proper training and devotion they could probably battle really well in a war. It's their decision.

  • Yes they can

    Women have served on the front line throughout history, way back to thousands of years ago. It seems like a wasted opportunity to prevent women from serving in the infantry. People seem to think that allowing women into more combat positions will weaken the military, but if the training standards remain the same, then only women who are capable will gain access to these positions and women who aren't, won't. Same as men who are and aren't capable. I think people need to stop being so old fashioned about gender roles. I'm male and I have no problem with women joining infantry positions.

  • It is a no-brainer!

    Just keep the standards as they are for men, which will keep most women out. This will be sure the capable will surface. Now add the skills women already have above and beyond her grueling training and capabilities on the front lines, like negotiations, decision-making, dealing with flaring tempers, handling children or the elderly stuck in the middle. This all adds up to lives being saved. Think about it!

  • of corse they can!

    A bullet does just as much harm to a male than a female. The U.S. army has so much technology that now a days that only one military member dies every other day. A women goes threw the same training as a man does so they have the same probability of surviving. Even though women don't have the same muscle mass as a male, doesn't mean they can't survive, a women can use there smartness to survive!

  • If women want to fight for the USA, let them!!

    Women have rights just like men, but women still can't be on the front lines. Canada allows women to be in the special forces, and that's more than we can say for women in the USA. I urge you to change your vote on whether or not women can fight for the USA!!!

  • You cant say yes or no on this.

    Women have just as much of a chance of surviving the front lines as a man. A bullet is a bullet, it can take out a man just as easily as it can take out a woman. Also anyone going on to the frontline is going to have just as much training as the next person. You shouldnt judge a person by their gender.

  • Yes

    Yes SOME women are able and will survive, just like SOME men are able and will survive. Although I do believe there is a higher percentage of men that fit the bill for front line combat, to assume all women are unable to survive is ignorant. Russia proved this point and we will soon add supporting evidence.

  • I think so

    If a woman wants to, its her choice. I can say I won't be able to handle the front lines and I'm a man. Its their choice they want to protect us, why not let them? Some women can, just like some men cant. Its just how it happens. If a woman wants to risk that, she should be allowed to.

  • No, they should not be on the front lines.

    It all comes down to the simple fact that women are not physically equal to men. Put a grown man and a grown woman side by side (same age and same conditions growing up) and it is inevitable that the man will be superior physically. Women are made to take care of the family and basically take care of the men. Men, on the other hand, are made with more aggressive instincts. Men are the killing machines of the family. It's just a simple fact that none can deny.

    You may say, "but there are many women who could beat a man down," but it is true that that woman would have most likely had some sort of training. So, if you set a trained woman against and equally trained man, then would not the man triumph?

    I am not saying that women are weak or anything of that nature. But I am saying that the dirty side of war should be left to the men.

  • Sexual Tension and "equality"

    If the few women who can reach the physical standards of men are deployed they will be outnumbered and their very presence and need for separate facilities will create discord among the soldiers. Men and women can never have and never should have equality because they are fundamentally different, yes women are amazing, but mostly in different ways. Anyone who has ever served on the frontline in a warzone doing the dirty, gritty work will know what I am talking about, women would break the cohesion of the ranks.

  • Think of them

    I think they should not. I women is to emotional and physically weaker. Also many of women are mothers, should they leave their children motherless,? I think they are well fitted for other jobs like doctors or technology. They are also a very BIG detraction. A man could not work efficiently with a injured or killed woman in front of him.

  • Physically weaker and a distraction

    Properly raised men will go out of their way to ensure the safety of a woman. It would be a distraction for the men in the military and a terrible mistake to allow women on the front lines. Furthermore, women are the weaker sex. They are not biologically very strong. Leave the fighting up to the men. I believe that if women fought along side men on the front lines the consquences would fall on the men. Even though I, being a female, support equality for all...It is to a certain extent. Males and females were not created equal, both sexes should not have perfect equality. It would be an awful mistake to allow women on the front lines and would not benefit our country in any way. It would only cause more problems- something we, as a whole, do not need

  • Females are not eligible to serve as a frontline due to following reasons:

    They are more emotional and can affect the operations in which they don't work separetely.

    They cannot afford to carry heavy loads during the long patrol.

    They are playing vital role in the society but not in the frontline.

    This will also be one of the wastage in budget of the MOD.

  • Odds

    Due to biology and the tactics of modern day every little bit helps, men do have the generally advantage in combat otherwise woman would be in the place men are in now. while women can no doubt be just as skilled as men and as knowledgeable which in modern times makes them capable soldiers. But due to male superior physical state, we are more likely to survive wounds and prevail in physical combat. male mental state also makes us more effective soldiers {not in a good way} as we are more able to kill innocents and diminish the enemy war effort {horrible, despicable actions} while women may be more prone to letting such innocents live {maybe 3rd world country's need more females in their military, and letting the prideful overly aggressive males kill each other out}.

  • Seriously? No.

    This is simple biology, women are physically weaker than men. It would be absurd for women to fight the front lines during war. This is not an argument about modern views or equal rights for women, scientifically putting them on the front lines is preparing them for death especially if there are men battling against them. Are all women weaker than men? No, but the situation needs to be looked at as a whole. Plus men have an instinct to protect women, this would affect how men fight along the sides of women. Ultimately this is easy. NO.

  • Differences between men and female shows the answer.

    Firstly, men are taller, stronger, more sturdily built and higher stamina than women on average. Males have stronger, longer and larger bones. Males are much more aggressive than women, and this normally affects the outcome of a battle. Women have more delicate bodies, making them more prone to injuries. Women also have the menstrual cycle they have the worry about, and the mood swings in their PMS is dangerous to the well-being of a platoon/squad. Furthermore, this has nothing to do with training. The male testosterone causes males to have much stronger and massive bones, increased muscle mass, This hormones are also the cause of male's aggressiveness, thus it is natural in males. Females are also generally more caring and they should be medic instead of being on the frontline. Thus, I believe that women are less suitable to be on the frontline.

  • As infantry - absolutely not

    I served 2 tours in Kunar in Afghanistan near the Pakistan border, the front of front lines. We had to do 15 hour patrols in the mountains carrying over 100lbs of equipment. I can't see a girl doing that, let alone be effective when actual fighting occurs during those long patrols and effectively combating the enemy. Being politically correct, a woman "can" do this, but it would put more lives in danger because they can't do it fast and quite frankly, would put the woman and her fellow soldiers in more danger.
    There's a line between common sense and political correctness, this is crossing it. Women in infantry would put more lives in danger, that is a fact. I don't care what you believe, while you sit out this war behind a computer. Women are not physically capable of serving on the front lines as infantry.

  • No, they do not belong in front line infantry units.

    I have no problem with women serving in combat roles such as fighter pilots, tank crew or other such roles. An average woman does not possess the physical strength of the average man. I am not interested in hearing arguments based on the rare exception power lifting woman. The role of a woman in a front line infantry platoon is fraught with problems.

    1. If a squad is deployed to the front for an extended period of time, does the woman not have to go on patrol during her menstrual cycle?

    2. If she becomes pregnant during her forward deployment, does she get pulled out of her unit and rotated to a rear base?

    3. Are women now eligible for the draft? If the mother AND father are eligible, who keeps the children?

    4. If a woman wants to serve in an infantry unit, do we lower the PT standards for them? If not...then why do we do that now? Based on the current special treatment that women get in the military I do not anticipate this practice will change.
    If a man must do 20 pull must the woman, no more women's push ups with their knees resting on the ground..etc.

    These are just a few random thoughts. I have no problem with women serving in the military, I have no problem with women serving in combat roles. But I draw the line at Infantry and SpecOps.
    Another example...the USMC opened it's Field Infantry Officers School to women a few years ago...the female pass rate has been 0%.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.