1.000 Migrants Since Christmas Day
News6 mins ago
I'm All For Equality But...
106 Answers
this is a step too far IMHO:
http://
Females can carry out just about every job there is in HM Forces but infantry soldier/Special Forces is not and should not be one of them.
Maybe a handful would be up to the physical and mental challenge but there are extremes of situation and circumstance that females are just not suited for.
Opinions?
http://
Females can carry out just about every job there is in HM Forces but infantry soldier/Special Forces is not and should not be one of them.
Maybe a handful would be up to the physical and mental challenge but there are extremes of situation and circumstance that females are just not suited for.
Opinions?
Answers
I don't think women are suited mentally or physically to combat. We are designed for having children and body shape and design are to bear and nurture babies. Without going in to too much detail there are plenty of reasons a woman would not be suited. Men and women are not interchangea
22:32 Thu 08th May 2014
From the link:
Major Judith Webb, who retired from the Army in 1986, is opposed to women being allowed to take close combat roles.
"We have to accept that we are different physiologically," she said.
"We don't have the same upper-body strength."
Maj Webb said it was "nonsense" to suggest there could be less-demanding tests for women entering combat roles, and reducing standards "across the board" would reduce the effectiveness of the Army.
She said the "occasional woman" might meet standards for male soldiers, but said that would lead to calls for more women to follow - which could result in standards being lowered to promote equality.
Women had proved themselves in a variety of roles and there should be more women in senior ranks, she added.
---------------------------
The lady knows exactly what she is talking about.
Major Judith Webb, who retired from the Army in 1986, is opposed to women being allowed to take close combat roles.
"We have to accept that we are different physiologically," she said.
"We don't have the same upper-body strength."
Maj Webb said it was "nonsense" to suggest there could be less-demanding tests for women entering combat roles, and reducing standards "across the board" would reduce the effectiveness of the Army.
She said the "occasional woman" might meet standards for male soldiers, but said that would lead to calls for more women to follow - which could result in standards being lowered to promote equality.
Women had proved themselves in a variety of roles and there should be more women in senior ranks, she added.
---------------------------
The lady knows exactly what she is talking about.
-- answer removed --
Now your suggesting that women who want to serve our country don't have the intelligence to have thought scenarios like this thru. Sexism and prejudice. Keep going.
--------------------------
Doubtless they have Zacs. But what will the general public make of it?
Also, if you are going to take part in a serious debate it's:
you're and not your and you not u. It's not a text message.
--------------------------
Doubtless they have Zacs. But what will the general public make of it?
Also, if you are going to take part in a serious debate it's:
you're and not your and you not u. It's not a text message.
-- answer removed --
I don't think women are suited mentally or physically to combat. We are designed for having children and body shape and design are to bear and nurture babies. Without going in to too much detail there are plenty of reasons a woman would not be suited. Men and women are not interchangeable and should not be expected to be. Women flying fast jets are ok. This is mental dexterity and coordination. Women fighting against men though ... Really good idea?
wonder what the stats are for female soldiers being sexually assaulted by their own comrades, ever think about that, so they might be more at risk from their own side, that may not be the issue, but to say that what happens if they are captured by the insurgents, going on tv footage they are supplied with powerful weaponry, just like the men, Mike Dannett said that in close combat they would have to use a bayonet, or kill at close quarters, perhaps, but its more likely to be shoot first ask questions later.
I am in two minds, but i don't think they should be stopped if that is what this wish to fulfil a full combat role.
also women pilots could be shot down, as has happened, so could still fall into the hands of the enemy, they are also issued with weapons,
do we stop them from being pilots, no
I am in two minds, but i don't think they should be stopped if that is what this wish to fulfil a full combat role.
also women pilots could be shot down, as has happened, so could still fall into the hands of the enemy, they are also issued with weapons,
do we stop them from being pilots, no
