• Is this even a serious question?

    What the hell is this, Mulan? Or course women can fight in the war! All these lunatics think that a woman is going to have a breakdown on the field. What, do they think they're just going to suddenly throw a woman out on the field with a gun and no training and say "Have fun being sargeant,"? No, she's going to have YEARS OF PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL TRAINING! If a woman really was emotional, I'm sure she wouldn't sign up for the war in the first place! People who say women need to stay home to protect children are INCREDIBLY SEXIST and are still clinging on the the gender role ideology of 1945.

  • this is the twenty first century people

    of course women should be able to serve in equal combat roles as men. The whole thing sounds completely sexist to me. woman can do anything men can do, but we can do it in high heels. If a woman is willing to help serve her country are and wants to be in combat, who are you to deny her from serving her country.

  • Women In War

    I think women should go to war because they train for the same thing as men. Women can also carry their own weight. If you let women fight, you can always pair up a girl with another girl because if one were to get shot the other could carry her out.

  • Strength versus Fragility

    Quote, "A woman is like a teabag. It's only when she is in hot water that you know how strong she is."
    There are some women, who are just as strong as a man, physically and emotionally. Also, she may be just as patriotic and willing to serve, represent and protect her country. Why should you prevent her from such?

  • Women should have the right to fight alongside men.

    Why shouldn't women have equal rights? Why cant we fight for pride and justice? Why shouldn't women be able to serve their country with pride? Men may say that women are weak and feeble, but we really aren't. Men have tunnel vision, they only focus on what they are meant to do. Whereas we women, are able to look outside the box and come up with other plans in case one of our previous ones doesn't take place properly. We live in a world where, financial independence, equal pay and employment opportunities for women are all backed up by the law. With rights come responsibilities. Women that sign up to serve their country's don't expect it to be all flowers and rainbows out in the field. When we sign up we know that every back street, every market place, every playground is a war ground. We do not expect people to make exceptions just because we are women, we realize that there are dangers in war. Women can endure double the amount of pain a man can, we go through child birth, we put up with our periods every month. Like any job, employee's are picked because of their qualities and skills. It's the same in the forces, soldiers are picked because of their qualities and skills. Women can have many different skill's. Why shouldn't women be allowed to fight in combat along side men? The question isn't in what the women can do, it's what the men will think of it. Women deserve to be treated equally to men. We don't join the forces and expect everyone to bow down to us. We want the same respect a soldier would give another soldier. I hate the fact that women are stereo typed as weak, feeble, emotional humans. Its 2013, women haven't fought for all these freakin' years, it's time for a change. And a good change too.

  • Women can do the same as men can.

    Women are just as strong and smart as men, maybe even better. If a women wants to be in combat then let her. If not what's the point of her being in the military? A lot of women are good use to the military just because we are females and have breasts doesn't mean anything.

  • Women end with men.

    We are all the same. Women are strong, they pull their weight. Just like men, I have seen women do the same thing men do and better. They're smarter, it is a fact! Men are the ones saying no to them fighting, because women could do it better, much better.

  • A Debate Backed Up By Law and Fact

    “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any other State on account of sex.” These words, taken directly from the nineteenth constitutional amendment, apply almost directly to the women in combat policy debate, and describe how a lawsuit should completely vote in the favor of women’s ability to serve in combat. However, some have protested in fear of a decline in military effectiveness. Having women relations that are served or are currently served in our nation’s military, this topic is important to me, Women should, without a doubt, be allowed in combat, regardless of gender differences, especially if women meet the physical standards.
    Many people would disagree with my statement. They fear that if the policy is changed, military effectiveness will decline due to requirement changes made to suit both genders. What these people overlook is that women and men are completely different from each other. Men are generally larger and smaller; women are small (they can fit into tighter spaces) and lighter on their feet. Even if these points are overlooked, the average times for the military two-mile run test for both men and women are separated by only about two minutes. They also fear that women are more likely to be caught and raped by an opponent, but military courses are taught on self-defense and problem solving. If a woman makes it into a combat position, shouldn’t they already know how to protect themselves, fight back and avoid this problem?
    These people had the same fears when African-Americans and homosexuals were allowed into combat. However, nothing drastic happened and the military is still just as effective, so it’s safe to say that the same will happen if women are allowed into combat, nothing drastic. There are also women in prominent community roles such as police officers, firefighters, DNR officers, lawyers, medical scientists, etc. These women risk their lives often to save the lives of the citizens of our nation. With them saving lives and enforcing the law, putting them into combat shouldn’t be done with hesitation. Especially now that women can get into any career that they qualify for, the policy can be dropped.
    I remember when I was younger, my grandfather telling me about how my grandmother saved many lives in World War 2 and Vietnam as a military nurse. I am sure that many people can say the same about their families. It is very important that women become recognized in the military, to honor of our women relatives who’ve served under the hands of men. Another problem is that many women officers cannot move up in status due to restrictions in the combat policy.
    War and combat are still terrible things that should be avoided, but if a woman wants to voluntarily join in and fight for her country, she should be able to, because in America, we have equality. If these equality laws are ignored, it can be considered unconstitutional and, in my eyes, unlawful. Women should be allowed in combat, regardless of policies and gender differences.

  • Women are strong enough to defend against the enemies!

    In the armed forces, the main aim always should be defending our country with unity. So women should take place in the army to show our power. In this way, everyone on the earth will understand and accept that we are the strongest ones. Do not forget that women and men are always EQUAL!

  • I believe that there is unfairness and inequality showed when women are not able to serve in armed forces combat roles.

    I support the argument for women being able to serve in equal combat roles in armed forces. I don't believe there should even be an argument. It is said that everyone is equal, which means women are equal to men. The bottom line is that women are not being treated equally or fairly and should be allowed in combat. It is only right that they be allowed to fight for their country, and this should not be taken away from them if that is what they love and want to do. By not letting women in combat seems unfair and sexist to me.

  • I know it's a morally wrong view to have, but it's correct.

    I'm a freakin' liberal saying this. On average, men are just physically superior to women. It's not a theory, it's a fact. Look out the window, you see those men who are larger than women. Yeah, that's the point I'm making. It's just biology. Of course there are anomalies, like I bet there is a woman reading who might be able to kick my ass, but on average that's not the case.
    Sorry, ladies, but unless you are an anomaly, I don't think you should be on the battlefront.
    But, before I finish, I want you girls to know that it's not just you being held back. You know there are men who can't meet the physical requirements for joining the military, who desperately want to. But biology, like I said is the largest factor here. There are people who just don't fit the role and there are a larger percent in the female population than the male who don't.

  • NO!

    Can a female carry 130 lbs of gear running up and down 5 flights of stairs, kneeling and standing, and engaging an enemy less than 5 meters away? There are some female can do 40-50 pushups and outrun males, but think about it. They weigh like 125 lbs while males weigh around 180-200 lbs. Can they bench press 200lbs? No. They are weak. When I went to basic training, 95% of the females fell out of a 16k ruck march. Not kidding. Out of those who made it, none of them carried a crew-served weapon such as machine guns and AT4s. I don't want to risk a mission because females can't climb a steep mountain in Afghanistan for 25km. Also females can't carry extra weight such as rockets, and machine guns and heavy gear so those gear needs to be distributed among the remaining males, further burdening the males. Its a fact, females just are not stronger than males, stop trying to argue it. Maybe 1 out of 500 females is stronger than the worst physically capable INFANTRY male. Plus, they get pregnant and have to leave the unit for a year further burden the tasks on the remaining males. Males can roll around in the mud and not take showers for 3 weeks, females will get infections and has to deal with their hygiene. Please, be realistic, this is the military which involves WAR, the life or death of a COUNTRY! Not, some small business. Females, I know you think you are the most powerfully gender in the world, but please be realistic, almost all of the females just aren't physically capable, its nature. You have hips for giving birth, not running like males do. Please don't get me started on females in special ops.

  • REALITY CHECK! Just think about it...

    Men are stranger and women... Well sometimes women can be weak and have emotional break downs... So the fact that they can cry during battle and can get raped during combat or sex offended is ridiculous. So really I'm not saying men are better but that THEY should be the ones on the battle field... I am a girl and this is my OPINION so you can agree or disagree but either way it helps support the topic ^^

  • Women shouldn't be allowed in combat roles because that's not a woman's position to take.

    Women should not be allowed into combat for a variety of reasons. First off because women are too emotional, women lack a killer instinct, men are 10x stronger than women are, women can affect a mission by becoming pregnant or having sexual relations with a male comrade & women can also be a sexual distraction to male comrades.

  • No, I don't believe women should be allowed to serve in equal combat roles in the armed forces.

    After reading through the arguments from both sides its actually quite obvious that the gender orientated responses are in themselves proof of the differences between the sexes. The women saying yes are using emotional arguments such as "its not fair, we are just as good, its sexist, we have rights, we should have a say". The men saying that it's a bad idea are using factual and common sense arguments time and time again "Its a bad idea because of the biological strength differences required for the job, and mixing men and women together is a bad idea in these types of environments".
    The women NEVER directly dispute the scientific facts but rather try to muddy the waters with one off examples of a super female specimen as a way to side step the issues. This leads me to believe deep down that they know they are wrong but will do anything to try and prove they are right. Unfortunately this doesn't work on the battle field and this whole thing will end in tears.

  • Women should not be allowed.

    If women are ready to risk their life fine then. But you guys don't realize that women's training are modified, in battle field there are no modifications. Women are more vulnerable to torture. And they have less aerobic and upper arm strength than men. Women shouldn't have combat roles at all.

  • Pregnancy, periods, and physiological builds

    Sure, *some women* are as strong as the average male. How many women are as strong as the elite men? There are less than 10,000 in the world who are fit to be tested on the same standards as a man on Army Rangers or otherwise. You want to be fair? Submit yourselves to the same standards. Run around in the desert carrying 80 lbs of gear while having your period and blood streaming down your pants when you get into a firefight. Mentally, women are as capable as men. Physically? Only select few women have the same build to be on the same field as men.

    You will not be given quarter because of a period, pregnancy or your inherent physiological build. That is my equality.

  • As a general rule: NO. Some of you need a cold hard slap of REALITY to the face.

    To reiterate, the question is whether women should be allowed to serve in EQUAL combat roles. That means fighting directly alongside their male counterparts, in any combat role, to include highly trained special forces units. If you want to discuss unequal combat roles that's a different story.

    I can hear the other side shouting "Hey! Plenty of us women are just as strong if not stronger than some men! We can do everything they can do!" Sure there are some women who can pass the male physical fitness test standards. Even fewer who would perform "well" according to the male standards. First off there are very few women who possess the upper body strength to perform identically to their male counterparts in the pull-up exercise. A recent study of 318 female marines showed they performed on average 1.63 pull-ups. I have substantial military training and can tell you that the majority my male counterparts will consistently perform at least 10 pull-ups. Myself and many others that I know will perform 20+, 30+, even 40+ strict form dead-hang pull-ups. Some women are under the impression that they can do 20, even 30 pull-ups. For example this woman believes she can do 30 pull-ups. (http://www.Youtube.Com/watch?V=pxgs8g39_tA) Well I've got some news for your sweetheart, that's not 30 pull-ups, that's ZERO pull-ups! I've yet to see proof of a woman performing 20 strict form dead hang pull-ups (Please post evidence if I'm wrong here).

    The point is that women simply do not have the same ability as men to develop muscle mass and maintain as low a percentage of body fat. Even though a 5'5 female weighing 120 lbs is pulling up far less weight a shorter distance compared to a 5'10 male weighing 170 lbs (rough averages off the top of my head for a fit individual of both genders), for the reason stated above, women simply cannot compete with men in terms of number of pull-ups. So why does this matter?

    Your ability in combat is not determined by your performance on the PFT. Remember that in combat you are also carrying a rifle, ammo, grenades, equipment, BODY ARMOR, and specialized items such as radio communications devices or even anti-tank weapons. Your typical combat patrolman carries a load of 80 to as much as 130 pounds. Carrying that amount of weight in combat requires an incredible amount of both strength and endurance. Bring me the strongest, fittest, woman you can find and lets put 130 pounds on her. Lets see if she can even run. Much less assault a fortified enemy position while bullets are razing past your face in 120 degree heat.

    And I've only addressed the physical standpoint. Combat is a mental game. The physical aspect is just your admission ticket to the deathmatch. For numerous biological and evolutionary reasons, men are better suited at handling the mental stress of combat.

    War isn't about rules. It's not about fairness. And it certainly isn't about gender equality.

  • Not logical in any way

    I am a combat veteran who served two tours in Afghanistan. I'm a male Marine that is about 205lbs, and I've carried anywhere from 50-150lbs of gear during missions. There's no way in hell that a females could save me if I was shot on the battlefield. Also, we use to get resupplies about a kilometer out from our position and we would carry crazy amounts of water and food for distance sometimes under fire. I'm a big strong guy in great shape and it's been rough for me at times. Why we would we bring a female that can carry little to no weight, when we can bring a male who can carry double or triple? Plus women have certain hygiene needs and get their period once a month. Allowing women into the battlefield complicates things and no one wants to pick up a females slack.

  • No.

    I'm a woman and I strongly believe woman should not be allowed in combat. It's a man's job to protect women. If a woman gets shot or injured a man's first instinct is to go over and help her. If men were to leave their stance we could have a major disaster in a small amount of time.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Anonymous says2013-03-07T02:17:11.233
Yes they should. I don't think should be an issue, it's 2013! America is known for EQUALITY AND FREEDOM. The THOUGHT of women not being allowed to be in combat, definitely doesn't equal to me...
Anonymous says2013-03-29T18:00:51.113
Okay let's do it, but make the requirements for both male and female exactly the same, always.
Anonymous says2013-05-09T13:33:25.110
Women have just as equal rights as men, just because they have a defferent body parts doesn't mean they aren't just like us men.
Nolan Hale
Anonymous says2013-05-10T12:20:20.123
Women have equal rights. Thats all i have to say
Anonymous says2013-05-17T04:22:49.063
I don't think it's a good idea. I am all for equality but it doesn't seem logical to me to have women in combat. There are other important roles in the military they can fill. If a woman gets injured men will most likely go to help her and it puts the mission at risk. Also what about if they bring back the draft I don't want to see people's daughters or mothers getting killed. Finally how about the hazing that's a problem in the military. If they are going to have women on the frontlines then they should be on all women units or something. If I was a woman I would not want to be around a bunch of men who haven't had sex in a while. Believe me their are some sick people in the military. Sexual assaults will probably rise. Women have higher pain tolerance than men but they are not as physically strong mentally they are our equal.. I believe the should be in support roles.
Anonymous says2013-06-04T15:38:28.767
I believe that women should have the right to serve in the same roles, but only if they can demonstrate the same aptitude. No more of this lowering the bar nonsense. The fact of the matter is that there are biological differences, and the women are always going to have to work harder than the men to keep up. If they're willing to put in that extra effort, I have no problem with them serving. But if you're just another woman trying to pretend to be a man, then I suggest you find something else to do, and rethink your definition of equality.
Quan says2013-06-04T17:34:02.933
Only if they can demonstrate the same aptitude as the men. No more of this lowering the bar to encourage diversity nonsense. The simple fact is men and women are biologically different. The average women will have to work much harder then the average man to keep up. If they're willing to put in that extra effort, then I have no problem with women in combat roles. If they just want to pretend to be men, then they should find work elsewhere where they won't be endangering lives.
Anonymous says2013-06-10T20:29:55.323
The reason they shouldn't I think is the psychological effect it can have on men who they are fighting with. However remember women have lower fitness standards they need to pass to get in, which by default means they are, on average, less suitable. If they have the same fitness requirements as men then I think they should be able to join.
brant.merrell says2013-10-19T03:06:59.443
Am I the only one getting sick of all the anonymous posters on this question?
ESocialBookworm says2014-02-12T21:29:45.200
We all know why those people chose no...

Women bleed for a week and don't die. Can you imagine that war? Let me not get stated on our tempers...
Haroush says2014-02-18T16:04:22.450
What in the world does a period have to do with war? Get out of here...
eaham13 says2014-04-18T16:17:27.890
Some women could handle being in combat, but many won't. If there is a huge war, it wouldn't be right to draft women in. I know we all care about equal rights, but equal doesn't necessarily mean "same" Women are equal in value, but physiologically we are very different. Women may not be as strong as men, but we know who the smarter gender is. >:) in that case, let's put women in intelligence and the dogs on the field! Ahaha, jk jk.
justinpatrick1011 says2014-06-08T08:25:28.310
If females work for the police, they should also work for the military.
justinpatrick1011 says2014-10-17T07:16:12.707
If we have police women, what about female soldiers?

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.