[Debate] Women shouldn't be allowed in combat

[Pavoneo]

Picture it this way. Would you give the same test of physical capability to a house cat, as you would with a leopard ?

Would you put a house cat and a leopard in the same situation? Your analogy is rather incoherent. The house cat in your situation wants to be put in the same position the leopard's in.

 

[King Of Crows]

Nope, but I would certainly trust the house cat with my life over the leopard.

I wasn't being literal :sy: It was an example used for the sake of the debate going on here XD

Would you put a house cat and a leopard in the same situation? Your analogy is rather incoherent. The house cat in your situation wants to be put in the same position the leopard's in.

It was an extreme example. If the situation was entirely to do with their physical capability and nothing more, then I would choose the leopard.
In something like war, physical capability means little in modern warfare. Granted you have to be physically capable, as a person, but there will always be a difference between a man and woman in that area.

 

[-Punk-]

The inferiority complex is strong in you I see.
True,physical strenght is a trait of men and women tend to be weaker in situations that push the limits of the human body.But lets be real.It's the army.Main combact is conducted with weapons and not hand to hand.Not to mention about strategy,planning etc.Also,there are other things that you need to pass in the army, like psychological tests that measure your ability to stay focused and act in times of crisis,make good judgements, being able to lead,assist etc,etc.Things,that women seem to be equal with men if not better.So apart from the physical strength,soldiers are supposed to have other traits too.
By your logic, you men have the strength but we women, as nurtures and mothers, know how to take care of others,make good judgements for the survival of the people we take care of,fight for their wellbeing,organize a large amount of people and give responsibilities that seems to be fitting for them,advice and comfort others when they are in need and even more simple things, like prepare food and make a descent living place (things that most men seem to be incapable of doing even under circumstances of need).All the above mentioned are traits a soldier who goes in battle should have to survive and help his team survive too.Things that are supposed to be traits of women and not men by the racial discrimination you choose to make.So I say they are pretty useful.

OH! SISTER! TESTIFY! ..................................Now we are talking *Joker voice

I'll Drink to that Chiharu !

You must be registered for see images

/Thread

 

[Vilvake]

Picture it this way. Would you give the same test of physical capability to a house cat, as you would with a leopard ?

Nope, but I would certainly trust the house cat with my life over the leopard.

You must be registered for see images

 

[King Of Crows]

You must be registered for see images

How was that a burn ? In my example, the housecat was the woman, and the leopard was the man. You are arguing against women. . . . :sy:

 

[Vilvake]

How was that a burn ? In my example, the housecat was the woman, and the leopard was the man. You are arguing against women ?

Did you think I was arguing for women?

 

[eyesofthekyuubi44]

I wasn't being literal :sy: It was an example used for the sake of the debate going on here XD




It was an extreme example. If the situation was entirely to do with their physical capability and nothing more, then I would choose the leopard.
In something like war, physical capability means little in modern warfare. Granted you have to be physically capable, as a person, but there will always be a difference between a man and woman in that area.

Obviously you weren't being literal.

Nor was I. I am saying that the fact that the housecat has more empathy for my life than the leopard who needs to "be a leopard", or in this case, an analogy for a man (we ARE known as hunters after all) would be of great benefit.

I am NOT saying that men don't care for their fellow men-in-arms. I am ALSO saying that not all women are weak.

Also, quantity and quality go hand in hand in times of war and we can only draft so many men.

 

[Pavoneo]

It was an extreme example. If the situation was entirely to do with their physical capability and nothing more, then I would choose the leopard.
In something like war, physical capability means little in modern warfare. Granted you have to be physically capable, as a person, but there will always be a difference between a man and woman in that area.

If a woman were to join in combat. In my opinion, according to this analogy. She'd have to have all the requirements needed to be a leopard like the others. A woman could gain physical capability via things like exercising/dieting/etc so there won't always be a permanent difference between the two in that area. And that's the thing that would drive a woman to want to join the military. To overcome some gender boundaries by pushing herself to have the capabilities of a man. It sounds like I'm trying to say women are less than that of men. Not what I'm trying to get at. Men just have a better leverage over women when it comes to physical capabilities, that's all.

Hope this sortakinda makes some sense.

 

[~Yubel~]

Women are entirely too weak. I mean just look at them, they have no endurance, they anger too easily, and they've got women troubles. Just more proof that women don't belong in a man's war.

 

[King Of Crows]

Did you think I was arguing for women?

I edited my post, the fact remains that it was not a burn at all. :sy:

Obviously you weren't being literal.

Nor was I. I am saying that the fact that the housecat has more empathy for my life than the leopard who needs to "be a leopard", or in this case, an analogy for a man (we ARE known as hunters after all) would be of great benefit.

I am NOT saying that men don't care for their fellow men-in-arms. I am ALSO saying that not all women are weak.

Also, quantity and quality go hand in hand in times of war and we can only draft so many men.

Okey dokey. Though our primal instincts are considerably lower.

If a woman were to join in combat. In my opinion, according to this analogy. She'd have to have all the requirements needed to be a leopard like the others. A woman could gain physical capability via things like exercising/dieting/etc so there won't always be a permanent difference between the two in that area. And that's the thing that would drive a woman to want to join the military. To overcome some gender boundaries by pushing herself to have the capabilities of a man. It sounds like I'm trying to say women are less than that of men. Not what I'm trying to get at. Men just have a better leverage over women when it comes to physical capabilities, that's all.

Hope this sortakinda makes some sense.

You aren't saying that they are less than men. It is the biological truth that men and women are different. It doesn't mean both genders cannot strive to attain the same thing.

Women are entirely too weak. I mean just look at them, they have no endurance, they anger too easily, and they've got women troubles. Just more proof that women don't belong in a man's war.

Endurance and anger are subjective to the individual, it has nothing to do with gender. You seem to forget that "Man's war" is started by men themselves.

 

[SniperFella]

in my opinion not really, because it might backfire later and cause political issues and debates, when ever women would require to register for draft when they turn 18, and ofcourse we all know that women and children arent a military material, those women who do become soldiers, are one of a few, and extremely tough. but in a heads up, it not really natural for women to techicaly to be fighting in war, unless it was defending their country.

 

[Pavoneo]

Women are entirely too weak. I mean just look at them, they have no endurance, they anger too easily, and they've got women troubles. Just more proof that women don't belong in a man's war.

..I'm not even going to start.

You aren't saying that they are less than men. It is the biological truth that men and women are different. It doesn't mean both genders cannot strive to attain the same thing.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm trying to say, thank you for understanding.

 

[24 12 11 to troll]

LET US CONCLUDE!
WOMEN SHOULD BE ABLE TO FIGHT FOR THEIR COUNTRY IF THEY PLEASE (However they need the same tests and boundaries otherwise the less physically fit will only fall behind risking the lives of themselves and others).
/THREAD
END.

 

[King Of Crows]

LET US CONCLUDE!
WOMEN SHOULD BE ABLE TO FIGHT FOR THEIR COUNTRY IF THEY PLEASE (However they need the same tests and boundaries otherwise the less physically fit will only fall behind risking the lives of themselves and others).
/THREAD
END.

No. A male in his prime form will be greater than a female in her prime form, if they undergo the same training. So the tests should be different.

 

[Aertes]

I'm specifically talking about combat roles. Those traits are much more inclined towards a job outside of it. I feel like you're agreeing with me but you think you're disagreeing...

I think you are mistaken.There are plenty exercices and training missions in which soldiers are expected to camp,survive with only little food and water,find their own recourses,missions in which soldiers have to secretly sneak into the enemy lines,missions that need careful planning and leading abilities. All those part of the military training and part of a war if ever happen.The same soldiers that goes to combat,goes to camping in insecure areas,rescuing survivors from the enemy lines etc.
So I believe you are mistaken if you think that battles are based in raw power only.The 70% of a battle is good planning,strategy and calm mind to be able to make good calls in time of crisis.

 

[SoulKiller]

They should just cook for men

LOOOOOOOOOL ^^^^^^ I totally agree with this.

 

[DocThao]

i don't care about women being in combat so long as they meet both the physical and mental requirements

plus no dumb chick drama

combat sucks enough as it is, don't want to add someone who can't do the job

 

[24 12 11 to troll]

No. A male in his prime form will be greater than a female in her prime form, if they undergo the same training. So the tests should be different.

You clearly know nothing of the military in any MEDC. If someone is physically incapable or less capable than others their life is at risk. They put others life at risk. And endanger a whole unit (potentially) , which is why they need the same tests.

 

[King Of Crows]

You clearly know nothing of the military in any MEDC. If someone is physically incapable or less capable than others their life is at risk. They put others life at risk. And endanger a whole unit (potentially) , which is why they need the same tests.

The physical tests should be different for males and females. A physically capable female is still good <(-.-<)

 

[24 12 11 to troll]

The physical tests should be different for males and females. A physically capable female is still good <(-.-<)

You fail to understand my point ; i am saying a woman has the right to join a military ; however in my opinion she must take the same test as males otherwise when they are on the field they will only be in danger...