Why I don't ever want to see women in combat, on the front lines.

chavelah · 2012-05-19T14:16:49+00:00

What... the... huh?

I can't even figure out what brand of stupidity this guy subscribes to.

wavegeek · 2012-05-19T14:55:30+00:00

[permanently deleted]

fondueguy · 2012-05-19T15:17:25+00:00

So he didn't have a single logical reason. He just saw women we more valuable.

2012-05-19T21:42:00+00:00

But I can't deny that I value the special place of women in society as a protected gender.

Uh, no thanks.

mwilke · 2012-05-19T15:49:22+00:00

Maybe if women started coming home in flag-draped coffins or wheelchairs or with arms missing, people would give more of a shit about horrors of war. Maybe they'd start to think about the price men have been paying since time immemorial. We should be just as horrified about men fighting and dying as this dude is at the thought of women doing it.

enkidusfriend · 2012-05-19T16:40:39+00:00

The word "God" came up as his only real justification. He's flying the idiot-flag high.

2012-05-19T17:43:09+00:00

His entire article is " I love my daughter more than my son because she is more nurturing, and women's lives are more valuable then men's"

Pwag · 2012-05-19T19:45:18+00:00

Okay, I might regret this, but I feel I might be in a position to have an opinion that actually matters more than usual here...

I am an infantryman in the US Army, currently deployed. Full disclosure: I cannot tell you where I am deployed to, or what my mission is, however I will tell you I doubt that I'll get shot at anytime in the near future.

First off, I'm big on equality, but there are some times when the mission is more important than personal politics. Because of this, my experience has led me to be of the opinion that women, as a general rule, should not serve in combat arms.

I do, however, feel that if the United States were in an old-fashioned fightin' war, and the draft were re-instated, women should be drafted for support roles. I have many reasons for both of these opinions, however if presented with an interesting or new argument, I will gladly change my mind.

-Physical ability:

Women, on average, have lower physical capabilities when it comes to strength, endurance, and fitness in general. This is heavily reflected in the current Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT, and I'm talking about the current one, not the new "gender neutral" one that is in the works).

All females ages 17-21 in the Army have to do at least 19 pushups in 2 minutes, a male of the same age has to to 42 in 2 minutes to achieve the same score. Now, if we made the tests gender-neutral, this would "solve" the problem, and that is, in fact, being done. However, to make the tests gender-neutral, the standard has to drop. This has obvious and powerful impacts on mission readiness and combat effectiveness.

Another thing that is worth noting is that many times women will never actually be held to their own standard (I will admit that many times men are not held to the standard, either), and this would severely cripple any critical efforts made in tight situations. A man who fails the APFT, or passes the APFT but fails the height/weight test, is still much more combat effective than a woman who barely passes their APFT.

-Sexual Harassment:

I may get a lot of disagreement here.

If women were introduced to line infantry units, this will lead to increases in sexual harassment allegations. It is important to note that this is not the fault of the victims, whomever they may be. There is a lot of testosterone in an infantry company. The women who join will also (this is just a guess) be much less dainty than your typical female. This will lead to company-shattering, morale destroying, EO-complaint-filing sexual harassment issues. It is unavoidable. It will happen. It already happens in the rest of the Army. I know Infantrymen, all it takes is 1 person in a company to do the wrong thing, and I know that there is probably at least 3 of those people in each platoon. These people should have no place in the Army, their behavior would be completely unprofessional and absolutely disgraceful, however if we avoid the situation entirely, we can keep on truckin'. Mission effectiveness is more important than being fair.

-Taxes:

It will cost massive amounts of taxpayer dollars to modify existing structures to accomodate females. There are a lot of buildings in the Army designed to only be used by men, and women in the infantry should be allowed to have their own hygiene facilities. This is a massive burden on an already stressed economy.

-Conclusion:

I think if women are to be phased into combat arms, we should first take experienced and outstanding women who have proven themselves capable. Female Engagement Teams should be full of women who meet the necessary requirements, and if a woman has the ability to do what all the men do, then I would not deny any company from utilizing talents when available.

There's my wall of text. Feel free to argue with me now.

chavelah · 2012-05-19T16:22:46+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Octagonecologyst · 2012-05-19T14:34:30+00:00

There are plenty of logical reasons as to why women should never be on the front lines; his however were fairly silly.

Pwag · 2012-05-21T06:25:07+00:00

You guys see this as a Men's rights issue, and there's some people out there that see this a Women's rights issue.

No one should be able to not do what another person is allowed to do because of race or gender. Ability? Yes. Race or gender? No.

This is an equality issue.

Torquemada1970 · 2012-05-21T12:37:04+00:00

I don't give a fuck about the gender - but I don't understand why more isn't said about seeing parents on the front lines.

Once you've had a child, that's your first responsibility. First. Whatever words you said to a flag, sergeant etc. are irrelevant. Worthless, in fact. A promise from yesterday, when you were alone. Your primary task is looking at you, gurgling, and needs a nappy change. Any excuse you use to leave this task (or to leave your partner to this task) for more than 24 hours at a time is just that, an excuse. Justify or rationalise to yourself all you like, it changes nothing.

As a result, because this issue appears to be routinely ignored, I get annoyed by the 'dead soldier funeral'-type picture posts not because of why they died - sometimes I agree with the 'cause' in question, sometimes I don't - but when I see a child following the procession, my immediate reaction is 'what the fuck were you doing in Iraq/ Helmland/ etc.? What, there weren't enough volunteers to do your job or something? They had to send a father or a mother?'. To me, this aspect is more fucked up that any WMD-justification or anti-terror initiative.

2012-05-19T17:44:35+00:00

Dr. Keith Ablow is a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team. Dr. Ablow can be reached at [email protected].

catipillar · 2012-05-19T18:27:45+00:00

I have the same opinion on women in combat but my reasons are way different. Women should be kept out because they aren't physically able to do the job. Not because they are more important.

Title	Why I don't ever want to see women in combat, on the front lines.
Author	TerriChris
Upvotes	0
Comments	59
Date	May 19, 2012 2:00 PM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/tup4s/why_i_dont_ever_want_to_see_women_in_combat_on/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/why-i-dont-ever-want-to-see-women-in-combat-on-the.1021478 https://theredarchive.com/post/1021478

Comments