Should women be allowed to serve in the infantry? (1 Viewer)

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

That article is pretty biased, Silver Persian. The Government is taking a scientific approach to the problem, not issuing a blanket mandate of women serving equally in every role alongside men.

If the government's studies find women physically cannot perform a role (or that they're less effective, or that it's overly detrimental to their health), they do not plan to open that role to women.

 

[Omie Jay]

Women cant compare to men when it comes to the physical aspects of the infantry, simply due to the build of men compared to women.

so..pretty much what s.h.o.d.a.n. said.

 

[russs]

Women cant compare to men when it comes to the physical aspects of the infantry, simply due to the build of men compared to women.

so..pretty much what s.h.o.d.a.n. said.

AND

"It's a simple physicality thing. On the battlefield, academic gender equity theory doesn't apply. The laws of physics and biomechanics apply,'' he said.

Why is this even a discussion?

Randomly pick 20 men and women on the street (age 18-25). Dress them up in boots, load up a 30kg backpack and give them a machine gun. Make them go for a (short) run fully strapped. The outcome here is obvious.

Also, I don't think too many women could pass the special forces test. lol.

 

[black_kat_meow]

Also, I don't think too many women could pass the special forces test. lol.

But why shouldn't they be given the opportunity if they ARE capable of passing?

 

[Omie Jay]

if they can pass the physical then sure, let them serve, but i doubt many women will pass it.

 

[black_kat_meow]

if they can pass the physical then sure, let them serve, but i doubt many women will pass it.

How likely they are to pass isn't the issue.

 

[russs]

How likely they are to pass isn't the issue.

Actually, it is.

If there were a 50/50 ratio in the infantry, special forces etc whatever, I wouldn't be concerned.

The real situation is, there will be 1 women per 50 men, if that. That's not acceptable. It will just cause more problems that it solves. Or, we will need to lower entry requirements to create substantial quality.

 

[HumanDichotomy]

And, in the end, it's THEIR life. If they're willing to give away their lives in service, if they have that level of dedication, then they should be able to.

 

[black_kat_meow]

What problems?

 

[HumanDichotomy]

My mum works as a doctor doing medicals for the ADF. The physical requirements are exactly the same. So, when a female is let in, she is up to the same standard as any of the men. The only problems here are the perceptions of the males.

 

[black_kat_meow]

My mum works as a doctor doing medicals for the ADF. The physical requirements are exactly the same. So, when a female is let in, she is up to the same standard as any of the men. The only problems here are the perceptions of the males.

Exactly.

 

[russs]

My mum works as a doctor doing medicals for the ADF. The physical requirements are exactly the same. So, when a female is let in, she is up to the same standard as any of the men. The only problems here are the perceptions of the males.

I was actually referring to sexual discrimination in my previous post. It will be present in male dominated fields, and there is no way out of it.

Doing medicals is not hand-to-hand combat and carrying weapons and heavy machinery. War also requires stoic mental character which normal women do not have.

Also, when we have a war that necessitates conscription, black_kat_meow, will you be happy to receive the phone call that you will be picked up tomorrow and geared up for your duty?

 

[black_kat_meow]

Yes, yes I will. My father is in the defense force, and I likely will also be joining.

 

[russs]

Yes, yes I will. My father is in the defense force, and I likely will also be joining.

Good for you.

Somehow I really doubt that the majority of the women will be jumping with joy when they hear that they are up for mandatory service.

 

[black_kat_meow]

Neither would the majority of men.

 

[HumanDichotomy]

Doing medicals is not hand-to-hand combat and carrying weapons and heavy machinery. War also requires stoic mental character which normal women do not have.

Comparing the psychological strength of women and men - by Jared Garrett - Helium

Comparing the psychological strength of men and women is about as misguided and pull-your-head-out dumb as watching American Idol.

Comparing the psychological strength of women and men - by Paul Lines - Helium

Recent tests carried out by the University of Wisconsin, show that in most other areas, there is virtually no psychological strength differences between the sexes at all, with both genders displaying very similar psychological reactions. This is supported by cultural evidence, which has shown that since the advent of equality of the sexes there is almost no psychological differences between the ways that the two genders approach issues such as childcare, work, sport, politics and other important life issues. Making comparisons is often misleading. In reality nature has designed the two genders to have compatible, but differing psychological strengths, simply to ensure that a suitable balance is achieved in the male/female relationship.

 

[loquasagacious]

How likely they are to pass isn't the issue.

Exactly.

If there are women out there who are fit enough and want to join the infantry and risk their lives defending Australia then why would we stop them?

It's their choice. We just want that choice to be available to them.

 

[Silver Persian]

I'm pretty sure Tamara would do a better job defending the country and than I.

I was actually referring to sexual discrimination in my previous post. It will be present in male dominated fields, and there is no way out of it.

While I'm sure that the military could potentially be an environment that is hostile to the presence of women, this is a problem with the military as it currently exists. The logical policy response to such a situation is to change the gender culture in the armed forces, rather than banning women from participating.

Doing medicals is not hand-to-hand combat and carrying weapons and heavy machinery. War also requires stoic mental character which normal women do not have

Even if it is true that women are on average physically weaker than men, there is a massive amount of diversity that exists within both the categories of male and female. Many women are stronger than many men.

Also, when we have a war that necessitates conscription, black_kat_meow, will you be happy to receive the phone call that you will be picked up tomorrow and geared up for your duty?

I know I wouldn't be.

 

[HumanDichotomy]

If there are women out there who are fit enough and want to join the infantry and risk their lives defending Australia then why would we stop them?

It's their choice. We just want that choice to be available to them.

Exactly. If they want to give their lives for their countries, who can stop them? We should be grateful and proud that women have got to the point where they feel that being an Australian is worth their lives, and that they feel equal (given oppression in the past) to men in this sense. Society has obviously reached a point which means women aren't afraid to try anything that men do.

Imo, it's an indication of how far we've come. Let's not hold it back.

 

[HumanDichotomy]

Also, when we have a war that necessitates conscription, black_kat_meow, will you be happy to receive the phone call that you will be picked up tomorrow and geared up for your duty?

Would you? This argument ignores the whole point of this discussion, the issue is *choice*. Conscription takes away choice, thus rendering that point invalid.