Women sue US goverment to allow women in combat

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
First, women press the government to pass laws to protect them from violent men, because they cannot defend themselves, and then they sue the government because they want to defend the country from violent men.

I guess that makes sense in a woman's mind!
Well, they are not the same women in each case. :)
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Of course, she must meet the same standards of fitness and physical ability as the men, there shouldn't be separate standards just to let women in.
But separate standards in the US Army are the rule, in reality. I have seen it.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
^^
In either of two "opportunities" are to exist, women must be able to hold an MOS in a Combat Arm (Infantry, Armor, Artillery or Engineers). Just a fact.
Correction:

Combat Support [CS]
In the mid-1980s the Combat Support (CS) branches were incorporated into the regimental system. Unlike the Combat Arms, which each had several regiments, CS branches retained their "Corps" title. The entire branch was integrated into a regiment under the "whole branch" concept.
There is a poorly defined distinction between the "combat arms" (who actively try to kill the enemy, as attack helicopters do), and the combat support and combat service support branches. Combat support, in theory, refers to those who actively facilitate the battle (such as the Signal Corps, Military Intelligence, Engineers, Military Police, and the Special Operations Forces' Psychological Operations and Civil Affairs units) while combat service support (CSS) refers to those who sustain the ability of the combat arms to fight by transporting the ammunition, fuel, food and water, servicing and repairing the equipment, providing health care, sorting the mail and providing other personnel and administrative services.
 

Damian

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
4,836
Likes
2,202
IMHO women can fight, and are usefull in some roles, but in some, they are just useless. I seen a women in Bundeswehre serving as tank crew members... the sight was just embarrasing for these women, the chick barely was capable to load a main gun, not to mention other stuff with vehicle maintnance services, that requires to do things with some other, heavier than ammunition, components of vehicle, for example road wheels or sprockets.
 

average american

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
1,540
Likes
440
IMHO women can fight, and are usefull in some roles, but in some, they are just useless. I seen a women in Bundeswehre serving as tank crew members... the sight was just embarrasing for these women, the chick barely was capable to load a main gun, not to mention other stuff with vehicle maintnance services, that requires to do things with some other, heavier than ammunition, components of vehicle, for example road wheels or sprockets.

I have seen some men have the same problems.
 

Damian

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
4,836
Likes
2,202
So imagine, if some man have problems, what you can say about women that are less strong, smaller, and not phisically fit to do such jobs?
 

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,570
Told you you'll paint me as a regressive sexist.

You see, a man is no one to tell a woman what she should be doing or not doing. That's her own business. But as it happens, the army is run by men not women. So if they want combat, they should just raise their own army. I know it sounds silly, because women in combat sounds similarly silly if you ask me.

Do you believe in God? If yes, good, if not even better, that means you believe in science. Both say clearly that men and women were not built for the same thing originally. There's a reason you've got a pole and she's got a hole. Neither God nor Evolution is stupid enough to create copies of same things in different sexes.

In any case, the majority of women, even if they pass the test, won't be able to handle the heat of the battle. Their brains and bodies aren't wired to do so. These are not my words. It's our job to protect our women and children first and foremost and not theirs. This is the way it has been intended. You can deny all you want to, but I welcome you to back it up with facts to the contrary.

In any case combat is a mark of masculinity. Why would feminists judge a woman through the prism of masculinity?
Yes, you are a regressive sexist.

It is true that the majority of women would not be able to handle warfare, but then there are also plenty of men who would be unable to handle the rigors of war. No one is suggesting that we conscript all women into the army. However, those women who are capable of handling combat and meet the necessary requirements for armed service should not be barred from doing so simply because of their sex. Denying them this opportunity would be discrimination based on sex, i.e. sexism.

In my own hometown we have a female icon who was famous for her exploits on the battlefield and who humbled her male rivals. You can read about her to clear any doubts: Rani Rudrama Devi - The Brave Queen Of Medieval Kaktiya Empire- Her Life and videos � www.dilipkumar.in
 

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,114
Likes
7,761
Yes, you are a regressive sexist.

It is true that the majority of women would not be able to handle warfare, but then no one is suggesting that we conscript all women into the army. There are also plenty of men who would be unable to handle war. However, those women who are capable of handling combat and meet the necessary requirements for armed service should not be barred from doing so simply because of their sex. That would indeed be sexism.

In my own hometown we have a female icon who was famous for her exploits on the battlefield and who humbled her male rivals. You can read about her to clear any doubts: Rani Rudrama Devi - The Brave Queen Of Medieval Kaktiya Empire- Her Life and videos � www.dilipkumar.in
I look at it from a cost point of view. It is much easier to recruit suitable men for combat, probably because higher percentage would qualify.

If recruiting a female division to ensure equality leads to too much cost, it would be loss of efficiency. For eg. 10% male pass the test, while only 5% females..cost efficiency would imply recruit men!!
 
Last edited:

ezsasa

Designated Cynic
Mod
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
31,732
Likes
147,040
Country flag

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top