Should the military allow women to serve in combat roles?
In December 2015, the Pentagon announced that all combat roles would be opened to women. The roles include driving tanks, firing mortars, and leading infantry soldiers into combat. Women would also be able to serve as Army Rangers and Green Berets, Navy SEALs, Marine Corps Infantry and Air Force parajumpers. Proponents of women in combat argue that women have been serving in Afghanistan and Iraq for 15 years and preventing them from combat operations is discriminatory. Opponents argue that allowing women to serve in these roles would limit the military's ability to fight in combat situations.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes
@9G6CZ736mos6MO
I think that if the women wants to be in combat and goes through all of the training that they should be allowed to because they already went through the training. But they should not make people do it if they don't want to.
@IamSirius32Green5mos5MO
Women are not any less capable than men. It feels unconstitutional to deny a woman from serving in the military.
@9GYMQ2M5mos5MO
Women are competent and should have equal rights with men. Women who go through the training shouldn't be denied just because of their gender, they like all people should only be denied if they are not suitable and haven't undergone training.
@9HN7DX83mos3MO
I don't know much solid data on this issue but I think that if the military has a job to do then they need to put their best people on it to be successful. To me is all about the numbers. If a person can pass the physical requirements to excel in a combat role then send them to the battlefield where they can best serve their country.
@9G8ZNH9Constitution5mos5MO
I think that you should not be putting other soldiers in danger because they have a genetically weaker person in there squad.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes, as long as they can pass the same physical tests as men
@9H2G9DK4mos4MO
If women can pass the same physical and mental screenings then they should be allowed to join the military and fight in the same combat situations as men.
@9K65DV6Libertarian1mo1MO
even if they pass the physical req which is unlikely, there is still the mental, and emotional stuff, it is a waste of time, i
t is like hosting trying to midgets for a dunk contest, go where the recruits are most rich to meet the req. would you go looking for a fishing spot in the desert, or a place rich in water sources, same thing.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes, preventing women from serving in combat roles is discriminatory
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No
@9G2XTMH6mos6MO
If a women is strong enough to pass all the training test some men cant do I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed in combat.
@9G35K3R6mos6MO
Women have proven themselves to train as hard, and even be better than some men in all main groups, they should have the right to be allowed in combat.
@9GYMQ2M5mos5MO
I think if women would like to serve in combat and they have gotten the training needed they should be allowed to fight in combat.
women are allowed to go to combat IF THEY pass all the trainings and requirements like their male counter parts no cuts.
@9H2G9DK4mos4MO
Women should be able to participate in anything a man can, including but not limited to Combat situations. I also believe the military creating new standards for women to meet is wrong. If women want to be included in things like that, they should be required to meet the same standards as the men in the military.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No, women are not as physically capable as men for combat
@9GJHMYQ5mos5MO
i think woman are just as capable as men because woman can be muscular enough to be able to support us in a war.
@9FLKM4DIndependent6mos6MO
Women are physically capable of doing all the same things men are. women can lift weights, get muscles, even abs. So yes women are physically capable as men.
@9G2XTMH 6mos6MO
I think thats the stupidest **** i have ever heard as I plus many other women I know are much stronger than men these days.
@97LJVRW1yr1Y
Granted there are exceptions, most women cannot pass the physical standards for combat units. Lowering those standards weakens military units specializing in combat.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No, combat roles place women in a high risk situation for sexual assault
@9FNRGXL6mos6MO
there are lots of positions and jobs that place women in a high risk situation and if the military is taking necessary persuasions then it should lower that risk
@9HV2CM3Libertarian3mos3MO
That sounds like an issue for men. Women shouldn't have to avoid certain jobs or places in order to not be sexually assaulted.
@9HTWPCPPeace and Freedom3mos3MO
If that woman know how to combat and defend her self she should be able to defend herself from suxal assault position PLUS sexual assult should not even be allow in first place
@9H2G9DK4mos4MO
In high-risk combat situations the men do not think about the women with them as women, they see them as their fellow soldiers. Also by the time a platoon gets to the point in their train that they are going into combat together, everyone has spent so much time together that the men see the women as either one of the boys or their sister.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No, men are more likely to risk the success of a mission in order to protect a women from danger
@9FRW9BD6mos6MO
women can do anything a man can and men should treat women the same that they treat men in combat. Women don't need extra looking out for just because they are women.
@9FV964R6mos6MO
That's not fair to the women who want to fight. We should accept those who choose to fight for our country.
@9F94PV57mos7MO
If men cannot see woman as peers, and have to view them as damsels in distress even after having trianed with them in bootcamp and/or specialty school. Then the problem is not the woman it is the man with outdated morals who is endangering himself and others on the battlefield.
@9F7VN487mos7MO
Everyone is equal on the battlefield, If the women wasn't skilled enough to be there she wont be. The man will keep the mission going.
@3PQFY5K3yrs3Y
Yes, as long as they can pass the same physical tests as men and as long as they are drafted when there is a draft, just like men. Equality should cover all aspects of serving in the Armed Forces and as serving on the front lines.
@47SYR7M3yrs3Y
Men in combat are inclined to protect the women and become less effective in engaging the enemy.
@47RRQHV3yrs3Y
Women are more susceptible to sexual and physical assault in combat roles. This may make them emotional less stable in life or death situations.
@97LJVRW1yr1Y
One commentator on YT noted an instance where a woman was put in charge of a combat unit comprised of men. She ended up sleeping with one of her subordinates and got pregnant. Combat units don't need a leader whose hormones are running out of control because she has a bun in the oven.
@3PPXZCZ3yrs3Y
Women should be allowed MOS's that are traditionally combat but not in positions that place them in units where survival depends on defense of each other. Not because women are not capable but because our society raises males to defend and protect females, this may interfere with efficient operation in a combat situation.
@47RB7ZL3yrs3Y
Yes, anyone stupid enough to volunteer for military service should be allowed to do so.
@47RX93M3yrs3Y
No, there are circumstances in which a captured woman can creat a larger incident. More so than a man being captured and could affect especially covert operations.
There is also a special social construct that is created in solely combat oriented groups that when adding a woman to that mix may compromise that social aspect in many different ways. While mixing things up is not bad doing this can lead to a decline is the affectivness of those special units.
I do not believe for one second that woman cannot do the same job as men. But pretending that men and women are the same and the enemy and our own government would react to every situation regardless of the gender of the soldier is unrealistic.
@5DR6G5J3yrs3Y
no, because if all the women get killed, it is harder to reproduce. But if they can't have a baby then they can join.
@47RHFWR3yrs3Y
If 99 out of 100 soldiers are killed in combat the remaining solder can help revive the births of the human race. Each woman who is killed represents a child that will never be born.
@9BLHGP411mos11MO
No, because combat roles place women in a high risk situation for sexual assault and men are more likely to risk the success of a mission in order to protect women from danger.
@3PR29SC3yrs3Y
I believe that the hard wiring of males will result in many poor decisions in combat should women be on the front lines.
@190100143yrs3Y
Women on their period plus a gun equals unstoppable.
@3PP6D9H3yrs3Y
Yes, if women serve in all women units. Armies throughout history have had women in the ranks, but had to segregate them due to rape, fraternization, and other psychological factors that come with co-ed groups.
@3PP63XG3yrs3Y
Obviously not, we want to kill people in battle, not make more. They are not as strong as men and will bring down the effectiveness of a combat unit. The Marines did a study on this and it supports this.
@52CDFV83yrs3Y
No. Women have periods, and if they are on a combat tour in a desert in Afghanistan they can't exactly bleed on tissues and throw it away in a trash can. Also, they can't have toilet paper, and women can't pee in such a way that it wouldn't touch them. If they pee without the chance to wipe themselves with something clean, they would be at serious risk of infection.
@9F22Q6R7mos7MO
retardant
@3PPQ3623yrs3Y
I believe that we are supporting a culture that glorifies violence by putting too much stress on this issue. There are many ways to support a culture that praises and encourages peaceful means as the primary and most effective way to solve problems, but pulling hard for womens' right to fight in the military as a high priority in the movement for gender equality seems misguided to me.
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...