Female Soldiers on The Front Line

antijoke

antijoke

antijoke

Caporegime
Joined
28 Jan 2003
Posts
40,055
Location
England
Whilst driving home last night they were talking on the radio about females serving on the front lines. There was a very split opinion on it, serving soldiers were saying women shouldn't be on the front lines, and even some female medics and others in roles with-in the army said women shouldn't be on the front lines.

Link

And on the topic of this the Tories state they will allow the forces to refuse entry to gays.

Link

What is the opinion of the OcUK faithful?

Now females flying planes/on ships/artillery units etc appears to work well, but would a woman be able to cut it on the front lines in an infantry unit? As I heard last night there are all sorts of issues to be taken into account, foremost must be hygiene reasons.
 
Last edited:
If they want to do it, why not? And if they pass the training the men do then i see no problem.
 
Women aren't built for the role, they don't have the body mass or strength to carry the same load as the men.

And men have millions of years of genetic programming to protect the women-folk (even when they don't need protecting), it would lead to mistakes & risk taking that wouldn't be there in an all male group.
 
I think they should be able to fight on the front line, they train for it and want to do it so why not.
 
'Wes said:
If they want to do it, why not? And if they pass the training the men do then i see no problem.
Click to expand...

You'd think this, but then having spoken to people in the army about it, it's quite different. Men have an instinctive nature to protect women, this would cause problems for soldiers in a combat situation.

And there is also the problems that arise from the soldiers home situation. Knowing your husband could be bunkering down in a foxhole with a woman is not the ideal situation for the soldiers family back home - and this does cause problems for the solider serving.
 
platypus said:
You'd think this, but then having spoken to people in the army about it, it's quite different. Men have an instinctive nature to protect women, this would cause problems for soldiers in a combat situation.

And there is also the problems that arise from the soldiers home situation. Knowing your husband could be bunkering down in a foxhole with a woman is not the ideal situation for the soldiers family back home - and this does cause problems for the solider serving.
Click to expand...

I see your point, you also have the dreaded 'the time of the month' scenario's as well when mood swings appear.
 
SB118 said:
Women aren't built for the role, they don't have the body mass or strength to carry the same load as the men.

And men have millions of years of genetic programming to protect the women-folk (even when they don't need protecting), it would lead to mistakes & risk taking that wouldn't be there in an all male group.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Just watch any 'professional sport.' The difference in standard between men and women is HUGE.
 
They may be capable and trained but I don’t believe they are physically/mentally able to withstand the rigors of a front line fighting unit. I also wonder whether unit moral would be compromised because the males would become overprotective in a fighting scenario.
 
anticonscience said:
There is also not just the issue of the physical capability of being able to do the role, there is also that special week that women have that could cause major issues on the front line.
Click to expand...

I agree if they are not physically capable then they shouldn't be allowed, but there are women around who are more than physically capable of doing this.

One women who stands out to me as someone who shows what physical feats women are capable of is Cristiane "Cyborg" Santos, a female MMA fighter watch some of her workout vids on youtube and tell me she wouldn't be able to physically handle what the men handle.

Granted it's a minority of women who would be capable, but they shouldn't be overlooked.
 
This is my argument with 'equal rights'. It really does seem to swing in womens favour lol even when women 'could' and are 'likely' to be not as good at something as the male equivalent.

Tis also like girls you see, screaming and shouting, hurling abuse, slapping boyfriends etc and they can get away with it as they have no fear of physical reprisal, which I agree with of course a man should never hit a woman but the equal opportunities is never applied in defence of a man hitting a women yet its used for a lot of other purposes in the womens favour.
 
I think that if an army had a lot of women on the front line and the other army didn't then there may be some significant issues with female prisoners being mistreated.
 
Why ever not? The only reasons that crop up are fairly sexist and chauvinistic in nature. Other countries (especially the US) do just fine with them.

And also the ultimate military commander-in-chief is the Queen! :P
 
Dkore-DeX said:
I agree if they are not physically capable then they shouldn't be allowed, but there are women around who are more than physically capable of doing this.

One women who stands out to me as someone who shows what physical feats women are capable of is Cristiane "Cyborg" Santos, a female MMA fighter watch some of her workout vids on youtube and tell me she wouldn't be able to physically handle what the men handle.

Granted it's a minority of women who would be capable, but they shouldn't be overlooked.
Click to expand...

No matter how hardcore she is, she still bleeds for a week which on the front line is going to be a major issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom