Women could get combat roles in British Army by 2016

[ClassyTulip]

Why? I just believe that there are certain things men and women alike can never be equal on. I think women are far more better overall at parenting than men. Just makes sense. Men are better at combat than women. Maybe women can help with strategizing, but not actually being in the conflict directly. Just my two cents.

Jakarri, I do believe that women are better parents than men. One reason is because a mother has a bonding time that far exceeds any man with their child. The bonding time, the nine month gestational period, creates more security in trusting the mother from the infant. As far as combat affairs, women would be great at this also. Yes, woman do posses the gift of strategic warfare but full combat is also fitting. Some women have proved to fight better, shoot better, and wrestle batter than some men.

 

[Aree Wongwanlee]

I seriously think that in certain circumstances, women can actually do better than men on the battlefield. Women are quicker to recover from pain. This is part of a woman's physiological make-up. Women who go through the trauma of childbirth can be up on their feet in just days. Men who go through a similar experience will take longer to recover.

 

[musicmonster]

Well this should be interesting. I'm glad that they opened this for women who would like to be of service as well. Although, it is going to be really dangerous for them. I wouldn't say it's ideal though, but I suppose it's kinda cool.

 

[missbishi]

I seriously think that in certain circumstances, women can actually do better than men on the battlefield. Women are quicker to recover from pain. This is part of a woman's physiological make-up. Women who go through the trauma of childbirth can be up on their feet in just days. Men who go through a similar experience will take longer to recover.

Women definitely seem to have a higher pain threshold. In the UK, we joke about this quite a lot. I think it is definitely a physiological thing - I expect to help us cope better and recover quicker from the trauma of childbirth.

 

[Aree Wongwanlee]

Women definitely seem to have a higher pain threshold. In the UK, we joke about this quite a lot. I think it is definitely a physiological thing - I expect to help us cope better and recover quicker from the trauma of childbirth.

So I suppose that's the real reason why the generals, who are men, are reluctant to let women serve on the frontline. They are using all kinds of excuses to hide the truth which is that, if they allow women to serve on the frontline, the women will prove to be better soldiers than the men. That is something the men would not allow to happen.

 

[Mika]

I do not believe women (for the most part) are aggressive or violent in nature. They are nurturers and caregivers.

You have obviously never met a mama defending her children then! Human females were bred to be more submissive, however, in nature it is very common for women to be aggressive. Lionesses do the majority of the hunting. A mama bear will stop at nothing to defend her cubs. And don't you dare touch a hamster's babies and expect not to be bit. There are quite a few species that have larger and more aggressive females than males, especially in insects. The males do the occasional fight for females. Can you imagine what a woman on the front lines would do if they thought they were defending their family? Isn't that the reason a lot of men go to war and become aggressive as well, to defend their family (country)?

We as humans have just drifted towards smaller and weaker women, and therefore society will view them as such even when they're not. Perhaps women are biologically weaker as well, it is possible. However, it is because that is what society has desired. In just the same way, society could start desiring stronger and more masculine females and in result, we would end up with more buff women.

Something to think about: Biologically, every person starts out as a female. It's just a few chemicals that choose how the body is shaped. Testosterone does seem to cause some aggression though, but then again any woman knows those female chemicals can do the same!

 

[Aree Wongwanlee]

You have obviously never met a mama defending her children then!

Yes, I have seen that. Mothers are very much more aggressive when they feel that their children are threatened. So sending women to the warfront would be sort of like sending raging lionesses to fight. Maybe this is the reason why the Daesh fear the Peshmerga women soldiers.

 

[DeltaForce103]

Just establish a set of objective standards for army recruitment. Compare the percentage of male and female recruits who fulfill these standards. Now, you have actual scientific data. If there is large margin between men and women in favor of men, then offer women more technical/support roles. Otherwise, let them join as they see fit. Either way, develop a scientific hypothesis for the differences in physical and mental performance in the sexes. Publish your findings for militaries around the world to replicate and base their decisions on.

All this talk of women being caregivers, fierce mothers and so on seems to be based on cultural stereotypes and whether in support or not should be given little credence.

 

[diprod]

Women can be front liners. It is their chance now to show that they too could also protect their country and create a legacy. I'm still not sold out sending them to war zones but I believe that with the right training, they could handle the job.

 

[missbishi]

Something to think about: Biologically, every person starts out as a female. It's just a few chemicals that choose how the body is shaped. Testosterone does seem to cause some aggression though, but then again any woman knows those female chemicals can do the same!

That is so true, there are certain times when I feel so mad I could take down ten men! It's whether you have that "fire in your belly", as we say in England, or the character and correct frame of mind. After all, anyone can be trained to shoot a target. Ten women with the right attitude could do a whole lot more damage than thirty scaredy-cats.

 

[MarkM34]

I'd rather women weren't given the opportunity. It has a bad enough effect on men without women going crazy too. There are other roles that are just as important.

 

[missbishi]

I'd rather women weren't given the opportunity. It has a bad enough effect on men without women going crazy too. There are other roles that are just as important.

Although I don't agree, I understand that you say that from a purely chivalrous sense. You are right to say that other roles are just as important though. What surprises me is the amount of female frontliners you see from countries where women are treated as "lesser". Perhaps they feel they have something to prove?

 

[Stims]

Wow! Never did i expect such a big discussion on this! I'm glad to see everybody is putting their opinion across and really putting some thought into this

Another argument that has been thrown about is the potential for passionate relationships to be formed between the men and women causing distractions.

 

[xTinx]

That's fine by me. I am a libertarian-socialist feminist and I've been wanting to see an opportunity as groundbreaking as this for women in general. I'm well aware that by accepting this future circumstance as an inevitable fact, I may well be sacrificing the culture of "chivalry" in the process. Still, if this is just the beginning of a string of equalizing opportunities for women, then so be it. Next up: women priests.

 

[missbishi]

Wow! Never did i expect such a big discussion on this! I'm glad to see everybody is putting their opinion across and really putting some thought into this

Another argument that has been thrown about is the potential for passionate relationships to be formed between the men and women causing distractions.

Yes, that's something I have heard too. In fact, isn't this the reason why homosexuals are not allowed to join the army?