Best
126 Comments
Post
  • #5
    !
    They've already washed out of IOC, Rangers, and a slew of other things. This endangers lives. I'm positive that there are SOME women that can hack it, but the overwhelming majority can't.
  • #15
    !
    Some men can't hack it either. I'd recommend that the females be held to the exact same standards as the males. I am confident that there will remain more males than females in combat roles. No one says it has to be 50/50. But if they can meet the requirements, then I am all for it.
  • #18
    !
    @Keyjo Agreed, I saw plenty of dudes wash out at SOI, but as it stands right now, females are already held to an easier standard than men. Shorter run times, less pushups/situps, flexed arm-hang instead of an actual pullup...do you see where I'm going with this? They held them to the exact same standards in Quantico and they washed out.
  • #21
    !
    @joshinAZ
    Yeah, I got ya! I was in the Marines and I know that women were held to lesser standards. But that was before they were allowed combat roles. Now, they should be held to the same exact standards. Likewise, I think there should be no exceptions for age either. I know that the older a Marine gets, the less the physical standards required. There should be no exceptions for battlefield requirements. There can be no "weak links."
  • R Load more replies

  • #32
    !
    I was in the Infantry for 9 years and this is the stupidest thing for them to do. We would train for weeks on end with no shower. How will that work with females? Also it would be a distraction for the male soldiers
  • #79
    !
    Will a woman disintegrate without a shower? What kind of argument is that? Equity; what a stupid idea, right? SO lame to be equal...*DRIPPING sarcasm*
  • #10
    !
    As a marine I do not advise this.. There would be alot of issue and sexual Harassment would rise good marines will lose career.. Women have hygiene problem then man.. I was in afghan and I didn't shower for 3 months.. It a brotherhood and it can be broken if women are put in it like saying put women in the NFL or MLB.. Keep the way it is now
  • #20
    !
    @monim4

    I have never felt the male need to sexually harrass a woman. one would think the military wpould be the safest place for women in this regard, yet the facts show it is one of the most dangerous place for them, vis-a-vis sexual harrasment and rape. why is that?(this holds true in peace time as well as war and in combat or noncombat areas...)
  • #23
    !
    I was in the Corps back in '69 - '75. I wouldn't wish what I went through on anyone but if women want combat let's hope someone who has been there will be there to provide the real facts to anyone interested. Don't think for one second there is any glory in combat or having your legs full of hot metal from a rocket attack or wearing someone's insides all over you or wondering if your buddy overdosed and decides you look like the bad guy or your next bullet should go through your own head.
  • #28
    !
    "There would be alot of issue and sexual Harassment would rise good marines will lose career.."

    If a "good" Marine is sexually harassing anyone, I have to ask how "good" he might actually be.
  • R Load more replies

  • #33
    !
    I wouldn't want my daughter in combat, but that's my personal opinion. I just feel
    men are better equipped to handle combat situations , but since it's getting to the
    place where women are becoming more 'manlier' than a lot of men, maybe the
    more manly women are up for it...Times they are a changin'.
  • #52
    !
    @mimi57
    Oh yeah, how old is your son? Is he beyond draft age?
    No matter, I hope you never have to send you boy off to war.
  • #53
    !
    @Keyjo My oldest son was in the air force, he did four years non-active duty, I'm
    sure it's much more difficult knowing they are in a combat situation, especially now. I can't wait til everyone is out of Afghanistan...but it seems like it will only be
    a short time until we're somewhere else battling.
  • #55
    !
    @mimi57
    Yeah, me too.
    Perhaps with women in combat, the powers that be will be a little more reluctant to start wars. One can only hope, anyway.
  • #26
    !
    And now men and women are similarly situated in the military, so we should make women register for the draft. Women not being allowed in combat was the reason the Supreme Court allowed the difference in the first place.
  • #14
    !
    Women should also be required to register for the Selective Service at the age of 18, just like their male counterparts.
    I would also advise that the women should be held to the same exact standards as the men in terms of physical requirements, conditioning. There may be some women who can't hack it, just as there are some men who can't.
  • #41
    !
    Whoa, don't put all of us women into that category. I have no desire to go to war or be put into a combat zone. I am an Army wife and my husband hates the idea of women in the military. Apparently an entire convoy has to stop because these women can't piss in a bottle. It's dangerous and it endangers our men. I am totally against it. And I highly doubt a little woman like me can carry a 250lb man off the field if he is injured. Let them try it. I'll serve my country over here and support my husband while he is over there. But women like me shouldn't have to sign up with the selective service because of those who wish to be "equal" to men. Women simply do not belong in combat zones. They will be targets of capture and rape by the enemy and who will have to rescue them? Our men!!!
  • #42
    !
    @AnnieO
    Okay, so do you NOT feel that women are equal to men?
    I'll tell you that not ALL males want to sign up for Selective Service or be put into a combat zone, either.
    As far as women taking a leak, I have seen women (intoxicated) squat down and pee right in the street. One, even in her own front yard.
    As far as carrying a 250 lb. man, well, I don't think that all males can do that on their own either.
    But females have successfully been cops, firefighters, have served in other nations' military.
    But if women want the equal rights and freedoms, then they should also be willing to fight for them as well.
  • #43
    !
    @Keyjo Physically, no, we are not equal to men. A vagina and a penis are very different things. Women have a place in the military but not in a combat zone. I stated that serve my country here, not at war. Equally important but not equal, by any means. I speak from the stories my husband has shared with me. During his first deployment, a woman took off on her own out into the field and the men were responsible for hunting her down and bringing her back safely. I can only imagine the repercussions if she had been captured. My husband also stated that indeed, they had to stop entire convoys in dangerous areas and go out into the woods and clear a spot for these women to take a piss. It's not right and it's not safe. Firefighters and cops are not in combat zones. They are dangerous jobs, yes, but hardly the same caliber as fighting in a combat zone. We need military members but we need civilians too. So no, I don't think I should be forced to go to combat because I know better than to think I would be of any use. I'd merely be a target. Something for a man to babysit.
  • #44
    !
    @AnnieO
    Well bear in mind, I said that the women should be held to the same exact standards as the men. Admittedly, as a psychological rule, the average male is stronger than the average female. Not every male is qualified, IMO, to go into combat either. Many males have been drafted and found unfit for combat duty and placed into non-combat roles. And men have wandered off and had to be "rescued" by their comrades, as well.
    I still believe that females should also have to register for S.S. If they are physically unfit for combat duty, they can be in other roles. But certainly, there are plenty of female M.P.'s, and if they are fit for M.P. duty, they are fit for combat duty.
    I am a naturally misogynistic person, and I have to keep myself in check, to not let my animal instincts rule my logic and sense of what is just. But fair is fair, and equal is equal.
    We can't put restrictions on equality, and sometimes there is a price to pay.
  • #47
    !
    @Keyjo If we were equal, I could agree with you. I simply don't think a female is physically equal to a man in combat. I'm more traditional, I suppose. I am an RN and I don't think men belong in Nursing. I think there are jobs for men and jobs for women, and I suppose I will always feel that way. My husband is strongly against women in the military and always has been because of his personal experiences with them. Of course, they aren't all the same but he is from a combat MOS and joined it in part so he wouldn't have to deal with women at every drill. I just don't think it will be possible to treat these women equally because women have certain needs that men don't have. Not all men are qualified to go to combat but those who are shouldn't have to deal with babysitting a woman while they are in combat. Noncombat roles are fine, I think. Just my opinion. You have some good points but I must respectfully disagree. I think if the military intended to hold women to the same physical standards as men, they would already have done so. If they were equal to men, wouldn't they ALREADY be doing the same physical tests as men?
  • R Load more replies

  • #12
    !
    This is a tough one...I can see women having limited combat duty as aircraft pilots, tankers, vehicle drivers, etc., but I cannot see women humping heavy weapons or heavy recon duty,etc. It is just a fact of life that, in general, women cannot do the physical work demanded by many combat roles.
  • #40
    !
    Equality. As long as they're held to the same standards as males I see no issues.
    What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
  • #71
    !
    By "held to the same standards", do you mean they should have to register for the draft, too? Because I think if we've decided they can be as capable as men, for equalities sake, they should have to do that too.
  • #31
    !
    I'm sure somebody already said this but whether or not the government "allows" women in combat or not is kind of useless. Our current enemy does not care if women are allowed or not in combat. They shoot all "infidels" whether they have a penis or a vagina. Secondly, I don't care what the Good Lord gave you for sexual organs, if you know how to shoot your weapon, USE IT!
  • #22
    !
    Theres no reason for them not.to be allpwed to do so if thays their indavidual wishes.... this is a free.country still right? I know some women that are tougher than some men. Women are not by anymeans below a man.. this is 2013 ...
  • #62
    !
    I've met some awfully dedicated, motivated, and mentally tuff females in my time, certainly capable of endurance. I don't think the mentality of this subject is interpretation that women are inferior. It seems to be along traditional lines.
  • #17
    !
    Ha. Keeps reiterating why I'm so glad I got out when my contract ended. If you think letting women be involved in combat, you probably also voted for Obama both times
  • #9
    !
    Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I can not for the life of me figure out why women would want to be in combat? Before y'all try to string me up, I did my time in the reserves as a nurse. I worked with the severe burn victims coming home. Very sad work.
  • #126
    !
    How many that are for this have served and served in a deployed combat MOS? I WOULD VENTURE TO SAY NONE. I have.......three times! In that time all I saw were the females falling out of forced marches making the men carry their weapon and pack, lying to get into positions, holding up formations, not maintaining focus and military bearing under high pressure environments. The fear of erroneous sexual harassment charges eroded unit cohesion and soldierly banter among the males, because it created a destructive separation, made men walk on eggshells and avoid the females altogether. As a leader of Marines you were unable to discipline them in the timely manner you could with a man, they would either work slower and less effective or would take offense and find the first sympathetic female above you to threaten action against you! This didn't just happen with me and didn't happen with just one female. So no it isn't supportive and no it isn't an advantage, and it reduces combat effectiveness. It's yet another, "daddy, I wanna play" measure from the academic politicians that never include a proper context in their research, have no experience with the area they are theorizing about, and indulging yet another set of people that want to seek something out of selfish entitlement. And yes Israel does use women in potentially combative roles because they are needed to fill the ranks, out of population constraints, but they are used to hold posts and places there are shortages, there are no shortages of men in this country.
  • #124
    !
    I thought we were downsizing the military and giving up imperialism finally? Should be an irrelevant issue, but if it makes girlies feel better then fine.
  • R Load more comments...
Post