Thread: Women in Combat

Originally Posted by GloriaInTX

I'm sure that would work if women soldiers just tell the Taliban they shouldn't rape them.

Or we could just agree with you that men will rape and then hold them to that very low standard.

Originally Posted by GloriaInTX

I'm sure that would work if women soldiers just tell the Taliban they shouldn't rape them.

Hey, if they can survive their fellow soldiers they may be equipped to handle the Taliban with ease. Who knows. That is their risk to accept, you really don't have to take it upon yourself to worry about, don't you think?

Originally Posted by bunnyfufu

Or we could just agree with you that men will rape and then hold them to that very low standard.

What difference does it make whether you or I think it will happen or not? So if we all agree that it won't happen then it won't?

I believe that culture is powerful and lifting this ban reflects a mental shift from long ago.

Ideas and standards of behavior act like viruses. They spread. Keeping the ban in place or removing it signifies that is how we as a group of people are going to deal with this issue.

I personally know two ladies that are as strong and fit as most men. If they had the desire to serve in combat, I do not see why they should not. A man can be raped and tortured just as easily. I do not think that is a reason to prevent someone if they want to and are able to meet the challenges of the job. That said, not every woman is cut out for that job. I certainly am not.

That being said Bonita, these aren't most men. I really think I've only met one female my entire life who could pass the standards these men go through. We train the Combat Controllers for the Air Force on Keesler. There are literally days where they do not stop their training. At all; not even for sleep. They carry logs or sacks filled with rocks on their backs and run up and down in any kind of weather we have (yay for short shorts! ), they swim for hours and hours at a time, they eat stuff that would make most people gag just thinking about and that's just the stuff I know about and I'm not part of that area. The percentage of females that could make it through a week let alone the full training has to be teensy weensy. We had a guy at my last job who really wanted to be a part of it and was allowed to use down time to train (we covered because he was so dedicated so he basically trained 20-30 hours during work time and a lot on his own time too). He spent soo much time in the gym pool I'm surprised he didn't grow gills and still couldn't pass the time they wanted.

Gloria, the women who can do things like that aren't the kind to let fear of being raped stop them from doing what they want to do.

Another thing that just occurred to me is that some women are already *in* combat areas in Iraq & Afghanistan, they just don't have the title that goes along with it, and maybe not the extra pay that goes along with the title IDK. They are flying support helicopters and driving caravans and ambulances, and they are just at risk as the soldiers who *do* have the combat title. It's like we're saying women can do part of the job, the dangerous part even, but not get the glory that comes along with the combat job title. That makes no sense. Either let the women in fully & completely, or get them all out of the danger zones. There should be no in-between.

Nah, the stats just don't bear out that the average soldier is that much of a specimen. Combat controllers are not the average soldier.

The new fitness test: Can you pass? - Army News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Army Times

The Army Physical Fitness Test: APFT Soldier Fitness Evaluation For women a 19 minute 2 mile run? Thats SLOW!

I've know plenty of women in the races and tri's I compete in that I have full confidence could pass the physical requirements for the average soldier. Now, one of my best friends brothers is an Army Ranger, and yeah, that is a whole different level of insanity, I've never seen someone as fit (physically or mentally) as he is. He is currently training high altitude jumpers in Israel or something insane. That is a specimen. But swimming a few miles or running 1.5 in like 13 minutes? Cakewalk.

I have full confidence that plenty of women could qualify for those physical requirements. I'm sure that a percentage of women could also qualify for combat controllers/seals/rangers too ~ a smaller percentage, just like a smaller percentage of men qualify.

Originally Posted by Spacers

The enemy can rape a male soldier just as easily but that's never used as an excuse to not put men on the front lines. ITA with Lillie that attitudes are (finally!) changing in the military and women in combat is no longer the risk to our own soldiers that it might have been years ago. If a woman wants that job -- and if she's physically capable of doing the job -- then I have no problem putting her there. When our building was on fire, half the firefighters were women. They came barrelling up the stairs in all their equipment and pulling heavy hoses and chopping the door open right along with the men. I didn't notice any difference in their performance. I've seen a female police officer chase & take down a suspect who got away from two male officers, she used no gun, no taser, and had no problem getting that guy to the ground. I wouldn't hesitate to put any one of those women into combat, if any of them wanted to be there.

They could... but do they?

Originally Posted by Potter75

If women want to serve in combat and meet the physical requirements I would support that. I would not support drafting women.

Are we equal or not?