Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Women in the military

Exactly. If women are physically capable, then why not? Women on average may not be as powerful as males, but they wont break like a twig :/

Im sure they have their reasons behind it that are not simply based on tradition

kasrkin seath wrote:Im sure they have their reasons behind it that are not simply based on tradition

Like being sexist assholes?

Nocbl2 wrote:

kasrkin seath wrote:Im sure they have their reasons behind it that are not simply based on tradition

Like being sexist assholes?

No, they are not used in combat roles for several reasons.
In general
- On average, not as physically capable as males
- Having one sex only would prevent MOST romantic relationships, which are not good
- A wounded or downed female will sometimes cause a break in discipline with the male soldiers. Definitely not good.

There would be less issues if they were kept seperate in their own units, true, but that brings up problems as well.

kasrkin seath wrote:

Nocbl2 wrote:

kasrkin seath wrote:Im sure they have their reasons behind it that are not simply based on tradition

Like being sexist assholes?

No, they are not used in combat roles for several reasons.
In general
- On average, not as physically capable as males
- Having one sex only would prevent MOST romantic relationships, which are not good
- A wounded or downed female will sometimes cause a break in discipline with the male soldiers. Definitely not good.

There would be less issues if they were kept seperate in their own units, true, but that brings up problems as well.

Break in discipline? If it was your best friend who got shot, wouldn't most people try and save him? Same goes for women. Plus, if you get shot by an automatic weapon, it's more than likely you'll have multiple bullet wounds all over the body, so the TV drama scene with the 'big choice' probably wouldn't happen considering they're already dead.

Nocbl2 wrote:

kasrkin seath wrote:

Nocbl2 wrote:

kasrkin seath wrote:Im sure they have their reasons behind it that are not simply based on tradition

Like being sexist assholes?

No, they are not used in combat roles for several reasons.
In general
- On average, not as physically capable as males
- Having one sex only would prevent MOST romantic relationships, which are not good
- A wounded or downed female will sometimes cause a break in discipline with the male soldiers. Definitely not good.

There would be less issues if they were kept seperate in their own units, true, but that brings up problems as well.

Break in discipline? If it was your best friend who got shot, wouldn't most people try and save him? Same goes for women. Plus, if you get shot by an automatic weapon, it's more than likely you'll have multiple bullet wounds all over the body, so the TV drama scene with the 'big choice' probably wouldn't happen considering they're already dead.

The break in discipline has been OBSERVED in males when a female has been wounded or killed. It is believed to be instinctual, rather than based just on a relationship.
This is not theory, it has been seen in the battlefield.

kasrkin seath wrote:

Nocbl2 wrote:

kasrkin seath wrote:

Nocbl2 wrote:

kasrkin seath wrote:Im sure they have their reasons behind it that are not simply based on tradition

Like being sexist assholes?

No, they are not used in combat roles for several reasons.
In general
- On average, not as physically capable as males
- Having one sex only would prevent MOST romantic relationships, which are not good
- A wounded or downed female will sometimes cause a break in discipline with the male soldiers. Definitely not good.

There would be less issues if they were kept seperate in their own units, true, but that brings up problems as well.

Break in discipline? If it was your best friend who got shot, wouldn't most people try and save him? Same goes for women. Plus, if you get shot by an automatic weapon, it's more than likely you'll have multiple bullet wounds all over the body, so the TV drama scene with the 'big choice' probably wouldn't happen considering they're already dead.

The break in discipline has been OBSERVED in males when a female has been wounded or killed. It is believed to be instinctual, rather than based just on a relationship.
This is not theory, it has been seen in the battlefield.

Source?

Nocbl2 wrote:

kasrkin seath wrote:

Nocbl2 wrote:

kasrkin seath wrote:

Nocbl2 wrote:

kasrkin seath wrote:Im sure they have their reasons behind it that are not simply based on tradition

Like being sexist assholes?

No, they are not used in combat roles for several reasons.
In general
- On average, not as physically capable as males
- Having one sex only would prevent MOST romantic relationships, which are not good
- A wounded or downed female will sometimes cause a break in discipline with the male soldiers. Definitely not good.

There would be less issues if they were kept seperate in their own units, true, but that brings up problems as well.

Break in discipline? If it was your best friend who got shot, wouldn't most people try and save him? Same goes for women. Plus, if you get shot by an automatic weapon, it's more than likely you'll have multiple bullet wounds all over the body, so the TV drama scene with the 'big choice' probably wouldn't happen considering they're already dead.

The break in discipline has been OBSERVED in males when a female has been wounded or killed. It is believed to be instinctual, rather than based just on a relationship.
This is not theory, it has been seen in the battlefield.

Source?

On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society
It's a book so I can't really link to it.

I just know that if I were a soldier, I'd have a lot of trouble shooting a female enemy combatant. It just wouldn't sit well with me. On the other hand, I'd be perfectly comfortable with killing another man.

here, this discussion relates to this
http://militarywoman.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-11964.html

http://www.fireandknowledge.org/archives/2005/03/21/why-women-should-not-be-allowed-in-combat/

1.The inevitable result is that training standards are lowered, and then the facts are then ferociously denied. This has already resulted in one pilot death (Navy Lieutenant Kara Hultgreen) [I am sure more have resulted, as this book written in 1995]. Also, David Horowitz offers specifics:

1.“Gender norming” is now the rule—women are measured against other women, rather than against men who outperform them.

2.Even though West Point officially says there have been no negative effects from the admission of women, the sworn courtroom testimony of a West Point official says that women cannot perform nearly as well as men and that the men’s training program has, for that reason, been downgraded. For example, men are no longer required to run carrying heavy weapons because women are unable to do that.

2.Even if a man is willing to lead women in combat, even the thought that it might not be suitable is sufficient to end your career. This happened with Lt. Commander Kenneth Carkhuff who was recommended for early promotion due to his “unlimited potential … destined for command and beyond,” but after a private conversation with his superior officer that his religious views made him doubtful about putting women in combat, though those views also required him to lead women into combat if ordered to by his superiors, he was discharged.

3.Due to such threats as the above, career officers do not speak about the performance of women in combat positions, because to do so puts them at great risk of discharge—especially if they mention anything regarding women not performing as well as the men. This is an extremely dangerous policy and will result in the loss of lives and possibly wars.

4.In physical fitness tests, very few women could do even one pull-up, so the Air Force Academy gave credit for the amount of time they could hang on the bar. Female cadets averaged almost four times as many visits to the medical clinic as male cadets. At West Point, the female cadets’ injury rate in field training was fourteen times that of men, and 61 percent of women failed the complete physical test, compared to 4.8 percent of men. During Army basic training, women broke down in tears, particularly on the rifle range.

5.The pregnancy problem. Navy ships have had to be recalled from missions because of the pregnancy of female sailors. A male and a female sailor on the aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, both married to others, videotaped themselves having sex in a remote part of the ship. There had been thirty-eight pregnancies since the crew went aboard the Eisenhower, fourteen of them after the ship was deployed. Only someone who has never been with troops could not anticipate this result or fail to realize that it will be a major problem forever. The troops in question are very young, at an age when their hormones are, to put it mildly, fiercely insistent.

6.Effects on morale can be particularly adverse. The presence of women among male troops weakens combat readiness. All-male units in the field experience bonding that enhances unit cohesion and effectiveness. When women are introduced, men stop relating to each other and begin trying to attract the women. Men can quickly become on less-than-friendly terms with a mini-war over a woman. Nor can morale be improved when accusations of harassment are always a threat. An accusation of sexual harassment by the woman, even if unproven, would severally damage the man’s service career, and both the man and the woman are acutely aware of the fact.

7.The Israelis, Soviets, and Germans, when in desperate need of front-line troops, placed women in combat, but later barred them. Male troops forgot their tactical objectives in order to protect the women from harm of capture, knowing what the enemy would do to the female prisoners of war. This made combat units less effective and exposed the men to even greater risks.

(Note, this is not my writing. Just posting this person's twist on it.)

I believe we should keep the don't ask don't tell policy. It shouldn't matter if you're gay, lesbian, straight, or bisexual. You want to help your country in the best way you can. And why separate them? They are still human like you and me. So why? It shouldn't matter.

Maeve wrote:I believe we should keep the don't ask don't tell policy. It shouldn't matter if you're gay, lesbian, straight, or bisexual. You want to help your country in the best way you can. And why separate them? They are still human like you and me. So why? It shouldn't matter.

I agree on this note. And Ruski, are you agreeing with that person's views? Not allowing women in the military? Hm, you changed my mind . Now I understand why women aren't allowed in ground combat units. Makes sense.

lol