Frontline Women?

[Redneck]

Re: well well well

i am just stating my thoughts of the topic.... i dont use language nor do i need to so i do not understnd the problem....... perhaps you could eleborate as to what i can and cannot do...... i think other people need to be watched more than me such as ben..... sorry though for anything i have done and if you could explain then i may tone it down a bit...... just a bit though because they are still my thoughts.... haha..... thanks

This should be a PM.

 

[TacticalEdge]

women in war

women should be allowed to fight but i feel that as an officer in charge of those women it would be morally difficult to order the women into a fighting postiotion with potentially deadly consequences compared to a man..... but this is of course just my point of view..... ohhh and some people have been thinking that i am a thick stupid kid who has no idea what he is talking about..... iwish to eliminate that picture which some of you have(and with just cause)........ due to my past behavior.... and for that i am sorry9i have never really been in a forum before

 

[SHERMAN]

well

Taking the opposit opinion to my own, T-edge, is it more moral to send men to their death?

 

[Jtf2]

Man,woman or....wtv else exists these days lol a bullet in the head will kill any of them...Yes woman have a physical handicap if you compare them to men...so why not let the woman who can follow the men fight and the others ...wtv they are allowed to do?

 

[panzer]

Hey who ever wants to fight let them, I mean yes some women will have physical handicaps when compared to men, but their is men out there that are in the same boat. But anyway if a woman or better yet a PERSON wants to go to the front grab a rifle and show them the way. And T-Edge like sherman said I would like to know if it is more MORAL to send men to the deaths?

 

[Redneck]

I believe that it is more moral. I'm a strong supporter of the "women and children first" mentality. It is hard to argue on that point, however, which is why I left it out of any of my previous arguments on this subject, because it is a personal moral judgement.

 

[Redleg]

Re: women in war

but this is of course just my point of view..... ohhh and some people have been thinking that i am a thick stupid kid who has no idea what he is talking about..... iwish to eliminate that picture which some of you have(and with just cause)........ due to my past behavior.... and for that i am sorry9i have never really been in a forum before

Sounds good.


I have answered this women in the military/combat arms question several times before in another thread.
I'm too lazy to write my answers here...
So here you go:
http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=404

 

[panzer]

Oh yeah redneck most definately you are correct there. It is a personal moral call on that.



HEHE redleg :twisted:

 

[RnderSafe]

*sigh* Too lazy to keep retyping. My reply in the other women in combat, thread.

It seems some are getting caught up in the PC argument. The military, where lives are at stake, is not the place for social experimentation.

Let's look at the most obvious issue. There are physiological differences that limit women in the critical area of physical ruggedness. Even if there are some women who can do it, the military still has no obligation to rework the whole logistics chain to accomodate them.
No matter how much you want to argue, men and women are different. Check relative cardiac capacity, erythrocyte counts, muscle-mass-to-body-mass.

1) The male on average has a larger heart than that of the average female. Therefore, is able to pump more blood into the muscles for longer rates of endurance.

2) The average male has a 25% larger lung capacity than that of the average female. Therefore, the male has the ablility to pump more O2 into the body giving males more endurance also. For example, go to any neonatology unit in any hospital and ask a Dr. what type of prematures babies have the best chance of living, and they will say that females do, because the females do not have as large as lungs as that of the males, therefore, thier lungs can develop quicker than the males.

3)3. Body weight, the average males has over 25 lbs on the averagae female. Therefore, providing the male with greater advantage in almost all situations.

4) Hips, on average women have wider hips than males making their center of gravtity lower to the ground and causing them to have more of a sway from side to side when they run. Therefore, making running that much harder on females than on males.

5) Upper body strength, if a women and a male were to stand side by side and both were to put there arms straight out, the males arms would be a straight line, whereas, the females arm would form an "X" like shape. Try this with your wife or girlfriend, females arms bend-in at the elbow whereas a mans does not. This gives the male more leverage and more upper body strength in areas such as pull-ups and push-ups.

There are several more areas that I could go into, such as body fat percentages, muscle mass ratio's, red blood cells, white blood cells, smaller bones, etc. but I think I have made my point.

Now, understand .. I am not against women in the military. While I've never been assigned to any units that allow females, I have worked with, and in some cases against, them in many enviroments under many circumstances. What I am against is women serving in combat arms MOSs. For those of you that support allowing women in combat arms, I pose these questions.

Could you address the dynamics of small units and the manner in which they would be affected by the introduction of females?

Can a unit benefit by their [females] addition?

Are these units handicapped by their absense?

 

[No MERCY]

no

America is not ready to see women come home in body bags or wooden crates. It is not time for a woman to fight. Men fight. Women need to be protected.

 

[RnderSafe]

America is not ready to see women come home in body bags or wooden crates. It is not time for a woman to fight. Men fight. Women need to be protected.

No Mercy, women are already coming home in body bags. Women are not serving in support MOSes to be protected. This topic has turned from "should women be on the frontlines?" (Which, they are) to "Should women serve in combat arms positions?" (which they do not, and should not). It has nothing to do with women not fighting or needing to be protected, because like it or not, they ARE out there and they are doing a a job in their allowed MOSes.

 

[airmen2b]

No unfortunately there is not a whole other breed of the female human race that is your barbaric, amazon woman who could trash any man who comes across her path. Nope there is not many women like that out there. hmmm....I have met several men of lesser brute strength and would not hurt a fly but are in the military and on the front lines. You see my brother fought eight months in Operation Iraqi freedom and while he speaks very dearly about his unit, he is not too thrilled with jackass men he had to work with that were selfish and irrisponsible and lazy and these are all very commonly occuring faults that weigh on the entire unit. I really get tired of people throwing around the easy answers..."women dont have enough upper body strength" uh, ok well now that you men are off your high horse and you have attempted to defend your "dominance" lets get real. Women have have proven to be more mentally stable in crisis situations then men in a lot of cases. Just as easily as we could have a "weak" women on the frontline we could have an unstable man making ultimitaley fatal decisions. We cant all be heros, but we are not all weaklings either.

 

[RnderSafe]

Airmen, facts are facts. If you don't like them, I'm sorry. Read my quoted post, those are FACTS about the differences between men and women.

This topic is about women. If you would like to start a topic about the assclown men that skate by and get into combat arms MOSes, please, do so. But "trashing" men in order to avoid the facts about women does not help your case young lady.

 

[airmen2b]

It is not my intent to trash men. It is my intent to say what I feel. That is what this is all about ultimately, right? I just get ruffled when everyone disputes the compitancy of women. Why do people make such a big deal out of this subject? The way I see it is that it is a social double-standard that someday will be part of the history books and will be locked away in the archives of prejudice. I cannot think of any other social fault that our country has not yet warmed up to. Equal opportunity. How is it equal opportunity if we don't even get the choice; that is what it is all about. The wars, politics, patriotism. We are free, sure but unfortunately not free from the bondage of "majority rules." What is mainly acceptd is what is done. Men are protectors, they are territorial. Who is to say that that is not what sways people one way or the other. You know in POW training they beat up on the women more then the men intentionally on account of the fact that it makes the men lose their minds. That is is my point, the women put up with and can handle more $h!t, while the men go crazy. So I feel like it is more about that rather than the give-me-a-break-upper-body-theory. If a women was determined to be on the frontlines than she would be determined enough to train harder too, and if that is what it takes to give women just the choice, then that is the challenge she is willing to accept. Your stats are not a good enough reason for me, however I do respect your opinion. but stats are an overrated measure in the art of persuasion. It just is not that simple to me. Besides who cares what size a females organ is in comparison to males ,they are not obtaining a male body. They only need the lung/ heart capacity to obtain their female bodies in the event of physical exertion. It is just not enough for me. However I do appreciate your funfacts.

 

[RnderSafe]

How is it equal opportunity if we don't even get the choice; that is what it is all about.

This is the MILITARY not CIVILIAN life .. you are not owed ANYTHING.

The way I see it is that it is a social double-standard that someday will be part of the history books and will be locked away in the archives of prejudice.

Obviously, you have not read through the threads loaded with facts. You're young, you have a hot head .. you know everything. I know, I was there at one point. Slow down, and actually read. Be logical. This is not about what YOU feel is fair. The United States Military couldn't care less if you think it is fair or not. We're in a dirty nasty business where people die. There is no time for social experimentation.
I suggest you learn the difference between your civilian world and the military world. You are in for a rude awakening.

You know in POW training they beat up on the women more then the men intentionally on account of the fact that it makes the men lose their minds.

Young lady, you speak on something you absolutely know nothing about. I don't care what someone has told you, I don't care what you saw in the movie GI Jane. You have no idea what goes on at SERE.

Your stats are not a good enough reason for me, however I do respect your opinion. but stats are an overrated measure in the art of persuasion. It just is not that simple to me. Besides who cares what size a females organ is in comparison to males ,they are not obtaining a male body. They only need the lung/ heart capacity to obtain their female bodies in the event of physical exertion. It is just not enough for me. However I do appreciate your funfacts.

You talk a lot of shite for someone that doesn't know what she is talking about. I've got more time in the military than you have on this planet little one. My opinions come from experience ON the battlefield. Where do yours come from? Those "Funfacts" you so casually dismiss are still facts, and you're obviously not mature enough to discuss them in a rational manner and it is clear you have no concept of what it is like to serve in combat arms. I suggest you change that attitude before you ship out, or you will become the young lass you've posted about in another thread.

 

[Redneck]

Unfortunately, determination has nothing to do with not getting injuries as the result of carrying loads that weigh more than most females do, for example. And as much as you would like to pretend that the "upper body theory" is bosh, it isn't. There are of course some females capable of performing the purely physical tasks that Combat Arms servicemen are required to, but it does not justify the expense that would come with the inclusion of this handful of females in Combat Arms (seperate housing and facilities at all the CA training sites/deployments/etc.). As RnderSafe and others have said in this thread many times, we are not claiming that women are inferior servicemen, nor are we claiming that their service is any less honorable, worthy, or neccesary than that of their brothers in arms.

On the other hand, your own (as yet unsubstantiated) claims that males have inferior mental capabilities when compared with females smacks of the "double standard" you yourself claim to be attacking.

 

[Ben]

On the other hand, your own (as yet unsubstabtiated) claims that males have inferior mental capabilities when compared with females smacks of the "double standard" you yourself claim to be attacking.

Well put. As women use both sides of the brain more than men do whilst thinking, it actually means that female thoughts are more concerned with emotion, whereas men's thoughts tend to reside in the "logical" thinking part of the brain. this basically helps guys alot more when thinking about practical problems and why you get the common stereotype of women "not being able to read maps" etc. put on by men. Thus it actually means for most problem solving in military life - men are better "equiped" for it.

Besides who cares what size a females organ is in comparison to males ,they are not obtaining a male body. They only need the lung/ heart capacity to obtain their female bodies in the event of physical exertion.

This is quite untrue. Whilst it might be the case for long-distance runners, it is not where physical strength is needed, which comes from muscle mass and density, which naturaly males have more of because of body structure and the amount and types of hormones. In fact, the only way for women to adequately build muscle is if they use a combination of steriods, and hormone supplements, which is essentialy what most women would have to do if they wanted to be able to join the combat arms if they were allowed.

 

[airmen2b]

I am not here to change the military or change your mind. I am here to vouch for myself. I can fully accept the fact you see things differently.
I really do not expect that my opinions will authorize anything and I am sure you feel the same way so why are you getting all worked up. this is a website, it is not the military and it is not how I would act in the military. I assure you that I do not walk around with the intentions of being bold or trying to be some sort of hero by speaking my mind. Actually I ussually don't. It's simple. Other people stand on their soap-box telling me yay or nay (you see I am young so I get that a lot) but it does not change the way I live or what I believe. Now I know I have a thick head that probably should not be so much, and I realize that I will need consider what that'll mean for me in the military. I have been in JROTC for several years and have become the group commander, drill team commander, saber team commander, chosen as last years Outstanding cadet, and have the most amount of awards in my unit, I was also the first cadet awarded a block letter which landed me a spot in the newspaper (now I really don't believe that my experience is close to being an ounce of yours and i am not trying to say that i am experienced, but what I have been able to do I have been able to do it well.) You are right. there is a time and a place for everything and the military does need hot headed people, that is why I am hot headed elswhere. I respect your service in the military and appreciate your opinion but if we always listened when people told us no we would never get anywhere.

 

[RnderSafe]

this is a website, it is not the military and it is not how I would act in the military.

Just as I have told someone else, just because it is the internet does not mean you are free from consequences. You would be suprised just how far the long arm of the military reaches, my dear. Conduct yourself with a certian level of discipline and respect no matter where you are. Say nothing, act no way that you are not willing to in front of the same company offline. If nothing else, it keeps you honest and helps build integrity.

I can fully accept the fact you see things differently.

You may see things differently, but ignoring facts .. or stomping your feet and calling them worthless and stupid does not help your argument.

but if we always listened when people told us no we would never get anywhere.

The military is not a democracy, I suggest you learn that.

 

[Redneck]

Well put. As women use both sides of the brain more than men do whilst thinking, it actually means that female thoughts are more concerned with emotion, whereas men's thoughts tend to reside in the "logical" thinking part of the brain. this basically helps guys alot more when thinking about practical problems and why you get the common stereotype of women "not being able to read maps" etc. put on by men. Thus it actually means for most problem solving in military life - men are better "equiped" for it.

:lol: Thank you for your support, but I entirely disagree with your reasons. Men and women DO think differently, but I believe that neither one is more or less mentally capable of handling stressful situations effectively. In respect to mental/intellectual abilities, I do believe that there is equality between the sexes.