Can some please tell me why women shouldn't be allowed in frontline combat?

Question

I'm on a roll today. Let's see how many people I can p**s off with this question.

I'm a whole-hearted believer that there aren't any valid reasons a woman shouldn't be allowed to fight in frontline combat. If that woman can meet the same standards as a man she should have the right to fight on the front lines. It is well earned and she is an equal to her male counterparts in that respect. Don't take this as I believe women should be held to different standards than men because I don't believe that at all.

I don't think threat of rape or torture is a valid argument either because women who are captured during war, no matter what position they are in are subject to rape or torture. Although I agree it's a terrible thing for a woman to go through, if she is informed of the dangers and still consents then she should be allowed.

Answer 1

I've seen a few people say that if a female soldier gets injured on the front lines, her male counterparts will forget about the mission and rush to protect her, as they have been evolved to do. I say, if someone is so easily distracted from a WAR, they're the last people to place in the army in any capacity.

Answer 2

I'd like to see this one myself . Not to long ago I had a very loud debate with about 6 people at one time everyone of them telling me why women shouldnt be on the front lines and they were all full of  sh.t . Anyone with ability and knowledge should be able to be anywhere they they please regardless of gender.

Answer 3

Hahahaha! Oh thats a good one!

Well they might break a nail

Dirty their pretty dress

Get a run in their pantyhose

Get their silky panties torn

Even an office guy like me would stand a better chance than a woman!

Go get a skirt & heels!

Answer 4

honestly i see no point in this queston even if i responded with a valid counter argument to your claim it would make little difference to you, it's like arguing with a kkk member about civil rights, it's a lost cause.

Answer 5

well put it this way, if im on the front lines what would i prefer standing next to me, a man or women. it will be a man every time. no soldier will want a women guarding his back in combat unless she is exceptional. the reason is that men are physically superior to women, particualy at the higher levels of fitness.

but apart from that women should be allowed, they definatly should be allowed to fly combat aircraft (i think they can already)

Answer 6

Tell you what; you want it that bad; go  to your nearest recruiter; take the test; you pass; go through basic training; remembering that when your drill sergeant says for you to jump you had better ask him how high two weeks ago; after that is all done; you get sent on a fighting mission; simply demand to be put on the front line.

Answer 7

I'm not answering this question to bolster any male or female contest on this site. I'm an settled person that answer questions based on the facts. Woman are kept out of combat for the most part because women can bare children. PERIOD. Men cannot bear children. PERIOD. So, the more women killed, the lower humanity's or a nation's reproductivity becomes.  One woman can only bear one child every nine months... One man can impregnate thousands of women. So men are more expendable in situations of combat or risks of survival. There is no amount of arguing that will change that fact.

Answer 8

When I was in the Army, I had several infantry guys confess that they were the problem, that their conditioning to protect women was entirely too strong to put to rest under any circumstances, that watching a woman receive a bullet to the head would affect them 100 times worse than if it was a guy.

One even went so far as to tell me that guys get raped in POW camps and he couldn't bear seeing a woman after such a trauma.

Judge it as you will. I still believe them and appreciate their honesty. Maybe someday we'll achieve equal opportunity murder and chaos, but for now...

Veteran for Peace.

Answer 9

That's a complex question that can't truly be answered here. I will tell you that I am against it on moral grounds. A more pertinent question would be why would a woman want to be on the front lines. We are never prepared for life events especially war, as much as we think we are. Are women ready to shoot a man in the head and walk right over him. Or see their best friend get decapitated by a high velocity round. Are you prepared to shoot a 12 year old boy if he approaches you with a weapon. What if you are captured. Are you prepared to be continuously raped for the next two years. The possibilities that you may find yourselves in during war are limitless. And while all this is going on, other people are depending on you. Not to mention the fact that if women are allowed to fight, what happens if the draft returns. Lets send a bunch of 18 year-old girls half way around the world to die. I don't understand.

Edit: Don't you understand, Real Men value women, and we are genetically programed to protect you. A woman's death in combat would effect me immensely.

Former Army

Answer 10

Women have and do serve in combat situations in many nations and throughout history.  Women have risen to be great military generals over vast armies.  But, in one way or another, women have been restricted from combat because women are primordially what men fight over.  Actually, it's for s*x.

Early human groupings had alpha male rule and alpha male - only harems. Non-alpha males were not allowed to have s*x within their grouping.  They were subservient to their alpha males and raided other groupings to plunder at his bidding AND they willingly did so because they got to rape the females in the the other grouping.  Basically, that's the foundation of civilization.

A soldier class of men rose and they formed paternal fellowships and brotherhoods which evolved in military history into our modern Boys Club military establisment.  Women are still not allowed into that establishment. Without actual combat experience, one cannot rise into that establishment.  It's that simple.  I served as a U.S. Army combat medic and behavioral sciences counselor.

Answer 11

if they perform to standards in basic training as equal to men, than they should be allowed. The argument  that it would be a distraction to the men is something that MEN need to work on changing.

Answer 12

I agree there really isnt a valid one...

male POW...have horrible things happen to them....some far far worst then rape.

Answer 13

I can't think of any valid reasons either...

Answer 14

you're so correct, my friend. there is no valid reason!

and i even have an answer for the period issue:they can get an I.U.D.

asts 5 years and you don't have periods. i have one and it is awesome.

so, there goes one more reason why women shouldn't be on the front lines....

Answer 15

Wait until you get this argument from some of the posters on here.

1) It's unfair that women don't have to register for the draft!

2) But women shouldn't be in front-line combat!

Sometimes from the same poster. So, which is it?

Answer 16

My step-dad is in the Army and he's had plenty of female soldiers out in the frontlines with him in Iraq. He doesn't think any less of them. When you're in combat it's important to have each others backs regardless of gender.

Answer 17

I agree, too.  When I was about 16 I remember hearing that male soldiers were the reason women couldn't serve in direct combat roles, because men would be very badly affected by women being killed.  That was when they brought back registering for the draft and there was debate over whether women should register.

Well, I don't believe anyone should have to go, but if they did bring back the draft, then everyone should be subject to it.  When I turned 18 I went down and tried to register.  The postmaster thought I was crazy!

Answer 18

because if they're fighting then whos gonna cook me dinner? you're really selfish shamu.

edit: hehe, i can see 10 pts lost for me! fu*k you haters! kiss gazz b's s**y as* biatc*s!!