Why Would Anyone Have A Leasehold?
Society & Culture2 mins ago
Women May Possibly Join Infantry Units By 2016
75 Answers
No, no, no, no, no! It's a total recipe for disaster. We've been through this before and it would IMHO be detrimental.
http://
This(and similar incidents) has been discussed at length previously on AB, I'll post links as I'm unsure the 'Related Threads' thingy will work:
http://
http://
http://
This(and similar incidents) has been discussed at length previously on AB, I'll post links as I'm unsure the 'Related Threads' thingy will work:
http://
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ChillDoubt. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
There are women.....and there are women.
Some that i know, I would not like to meet on a dark night.
Woman are already in front line activities in the R.A.F and Navy and it is only natural that they should be in Infantry Units.
Other countries have already implemented the move....Auatralia, USA et al.
It has to come Chilli.
Some that i know, I would not like to meet on a dark night.
Woman are already in front line activities in the R.A.F and Navy and it is only natural that they should be in Infantry Units.
Other countries have already implemented the move....Auatralia, USA et al.
It has to come Chilli.
I take it you've read the links jim and have an understandning of the nature of infantry soldiering?
Urinating and defacating in full view of male colleagues? Would a female change a tampon in such circumstances? I can already see the Court case now for 'loss of dignity' or similar.
What about the sexual tension during 'down' time on a long range recce patrol of say 3 weeks? One soldier makes it his duty to look after the female in the patrol, to the point where he loses sight of his obligation to all in it?
Total and utter recipe for disaster, as anyone who has served in an infantry unit in the basest of circumsatnces and harsh conditions will tell you.
Urinating and defacating in full view of male colleagues? Would a female change a tampon in such circumstances? I can already see the Court case now for 'loss of dignity' or similar.
What about the sexual tension during 'down' time on a long range recce patrol of say 3 weeks? One soldier makes it his duty to look after the female in the patrol, to the point where he loses sight of his obligation to all in it?
Total and utter recipe for disaster, as anyone who has served in an infantry unit in the basest of circumsatnces and harsh conditions will tell you.
We'll see Sqad. Wherever the next battlefield may be, how wil the public react when equal numbers of coffins are being repatriated off a transporter?
What happens when one is beheaded/mutilated/raped and the details are presented in a video to the world?
There'll be a public outcry and the MOD will have to have a serious re-think.
Those making these sorts of decisions have no idea what goes on in a FEBA(Forward Edge of a Battle Area). As was borne out in the Falklands, it gets down to its basest i.e. fixed bayonets, punching, gouging and biting.
What happens when one is beheaded/mutilated/raped and the details are presented in a video to the world?
There'll be a public outcry and the MOD will have to have a serious re-think.
Those making these sorts of decisions have no idea what goes on in a FEBA(Forward Edge of a Battle Area). As was borne out in the Falklands, it gets down to its basest i.e. fixed bayonets, punching, gouging and biting.
Chill - You have advanced the same arguments every time this issue is raised.
You may well have 'experience' but the Army has substantially changed since you left and if women wish to apply for combat roles then that ought to be their right.
Any soldier having any sort of sexual thoughts towards his comrades in a time of war really has got enough of his mind on his job.
My son (currently serving) has no objection, at all.
You may well have 'experience' but the Army has substantially changed since you left and if women wish to apply for combat roles then that ought to be their right.
Any soldier having any sort of sexual thoughts towards his comrades in a time of war really has got enough of his mind on his job.
My son (currently serving) has no objection, at all.
I have no personal experience, if that's what you mean, but taking each of your points in turn:
"Urinating and defecating in full view of male colleagues?"
Why is this any less dignified when it's a man doing so in front of men? People will get used to it.
"Would a female change a tampon in such circumstances?"
Possibly, or they might find a discreet way to do it, or frankly no-one will care because getting shot at is probably a greater problem. Besides which I'm sure people in the army are used to the sight of blood.
"What about the sexual tension during 'down' time on a long range recce patrol of say 3 weeks?"
Might be there, might not be, but again people will get used to it. And it's possible for men and women to spend time together without the "we're so gonna bang" thought hanging around.
"One soldier makes it his duty to look after the female in the patrol, to the point where he loses sight of his obligation to all in it?"
Any women capable of serving in the front line won't need looking after as some sort of dainty Damsel in Distress.
In my opinion (which is perhaps in this case not worth much) many of these things are problems now because the culture of the front line is not used to women. But like so many other things once it opens up the culture will change and most or all of these problems will disappear.
"Urinating and defecating in full view of male colleagues?"
Why is this any less dignified when it's a man doing so in front of men? People will get used to it.
"Would a female change a tampon in such circumstances?"
Possibly, or they might find a discreet way to do it, or frankly no-one will care because getting shot at is probably a greater problem. Besides which I'm sure people in the army are used to the sight of blood.
"What about the sexual tension during 'down' time on a long range recce patrol of say 3 weeks?"
Might be there, might not be, but again people will get used to it. And it's possible for men and women to spend time together without the "we're so gonna bang" thought hanging around.
"One soldier makes it his duty to look after the female in the patrol, to the point where he loses sight of his obligation to all in it?"
Any women capable of serving in the front line won't need looking after as some sort of dainty Damsel in Distress.
In my opinion (which is perhaps in this case not worth much) many of these things are problems now because the culture of the front line is not used to women. But like so many other things once it opens up the culture will change and most or all of these problems will disappear.
Any soldier having any sort of sexual thoughts towards his comrades in a time of war really has got enough of his mind on his job.
----------------------
Define 'comrades'? Are we just talking about the rest of the lads in the platoon, or both male AND female colleagues?
Are you telling me that there would not be some form of sexual tension if one female was out in the field with 11 other blokes in a long range patrol?
Seriously?
----------------------
Define 'comrades'? Are we just talking about the rest of the lads in the platoon, or both male AND female colleagues?
Are you telling me that there would not be some form of sexual tension if one female was out in the field with 11 other blokes in a long range patrol?
Seriously?
It seems that arguments against are based on some concept of women as frail(er) creatures but surely by definition women who serve on the frontline must be physically capable of doing so, and as psychologically capable as men are of dealing with the sorts of violence and horror that it must be. As to sexual tension... a bunch of 11 men one or more of whom is gay might well be a tense situation too. But they'll cope, I'm sure.
In the long run I'd have thought we'd want our front line to be filled with soldiers who want to be there and can do the job. Excluding people who meet both these criteria is in the long run even more of a recipe for disaster, particularly if it ever came to a point where we needed our army to defend these shores.
In the long run I'd have thought we'd want our front line to be filled with soldiers who want to be there and can do the job. Excluding people who meet both these criteria is in the long run even more of a recipe for disaster, particularly if it ever came to a point where we needed our army to defend these shores.
As to sexual tension... a bunch of 11 men one or more of whom is gay might well be a tense situation too. But they'll cope, I'm sure.
---------------------
The gay issue is a moot point. We're talking about a bunch of alpha males at their physical peak and one female, alone in the field for up to 6 weeks.
The sexual tension aside, if someone isn't up to scratch in an infantry unit or not perfroming to their maximum whilst on their colleagues tend to remind them with a right hook or a butt stroke. It'll be an absolute disaster.
---------------------
The gay issue is a moot point. We're talking about a bunch of alpha males at their physical peak and one female, alone in the field for up to 6 weeks.
The sexual tension aside, if someone isn't up to scratch in an infantry unit or not perfroming to their maximum whilst on their colleagues tend to remind them with a right hook or a butt stroke. It'll be an absolute disaster.
"Six males and one female".
Hmm. You seem to have proscribed the ratio already. Why always 6:1? Why not 5:2, 4:3 or even heaven forbid the occasional 1:6? The idea that there will only ever be one token woman per squad is ludicrous.
Women on the front line can and will be able to give as good as they get, if push comes to shove. Who knows, on occasion it may even be the men who are found to be not up to scratch. I know I never would be.
You're going to have to come up with something more convincing than what you've said so far. I just don't see it ever being a problem beyond the first couple of days. Once the novelty factor wears off no-one will care. And those who do should be discharged.
Hmm. You seem to have proscribed the ratio already. Why always 6:1? Why not 5:2, 4:3 or even heaven forbid the occasional 1:6? The idea that there will only ever be one token woman per squad is ludicrous.
Women on the front line can and will be able to give as good as they get, if push comes to shove. Who knows, on occasion it may even be the men who are found to be not up to scratch. I know I never would be.
You're going to have to come up with something more convincing than what you've said so far. I just don't see it ever being a problem beyond the first couple of days. Once the novelty factor wears off no-one will care. And those who do should be discharged.
-- answer removed --
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.