Should women be allowed on the front lines to fight side-by-side with their male counterparts?

by L.A. Times Posted 2012/11/28 17:00:00

1,623 votes
Read all 834 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes	1,046 votes	64%
	No	577 votes	36%

Since 1994, the Defense Department has formally excluded women from most direct ground combat positions, creating a growing disconnect with the realities of warfare. Marine Capt. Zoe Bedell said she left active duty last year because the policy limited her potential for promotion by failing to officially recognize her combat leadership experience. On Tuesday, she joined a federal lawsuit challenging the blanket exclusion.

+26

Add a comment above

nightcrawler2005 2012/11/28 21:28:19

No

+21
This is a tough one because of my experiences with women in the field I have no use for them in combat positions. A lot of the ones I've seen expected preferential treatment and if things didn't go their way they complained to the platoon commander that the section commander was picking on them. Also a lot of them just couldn't handle the physical requirements.
That said I do realize there are quite a few women that are totally capable of the challenges and expect to be treated completely as an equal. These women I have no problem with and would be an asset in the field.
>> See Replies

More polls by L.A. Times

Pul 2013/01/24 02:16:31

No

The people who voted yes are complete fools. They have never been in a street fight themselves. A man or a woman who says that a woman could handle a man in a hand to hand fight to the death has never been in a street fight with a man. An average man could destroy a woman in a matter of minutes. And anyone suggesting that a woman be put in a position with combat units of men are fools. The women would be destroyed first by the enemy and consequently the remaining men would be put at an extreme numerical disadvantage against their enemy. But fools are never wrong and you can't argue with perfect ignorance.

reply
Tim 2012/12/16 03:11:57

No

Our women should never have to do that. It's quite unlady-like. When I think "violence", I think "men". When I think "kitchen" I think "women".

reply
elle 2012/12/15 21:12:20

Yes

Only if they request to be on the front lines, it should not be mandatory.

reply
Ahzz 2012/12/12 18:08:54

Yes

Why are we even asking this kind of question in today's world? Of course women should be able to do anything that they are capable of.

reply
TommyB 2012/12/08 17:58:57

No

One of my assignments in the military was with a mobile radar unit. When deployed we were required to be turning and burning within 24 hours of arrival at our field location. The work was intense and back breaking for 20+ hours. The males on our crew collectively groaned whenever we received notice that a new crew member was female. The rule of thumb was that it took three women to do the work of one man. A woman assigned to our unit meant the men had to work harder. I know there are some strong women in uniform but if a soldier is down a muscular 200lb man will pull him out of harm's way quicker than a smaller framed woman. I love women, but not in combat.

reply
Wizard_in_Time 2012/12/05 17:42:36

Yes

In many societies in the past, women fought alongside men. I see no reason that the United States can't be as enlightened, especially if a woman wants to.

reply
brady.shackelford 2012/12/05 13:41:47

No

+1
I believe that women are highly capable and can do most things that men can do; however, war is not one of those things. I spent 4 years in the Marine Corps, and warring requires lots strength and testosterone, both of which women lack.

reply
Playerazzi 2012/12/05 10:58:21

No

+1
If you want to keep your country safe, this is a no-brainer. Military effectiveness is much more important than political correctness.

reply
Kenneth... to Playerazzi 2012/12/11 18:37:40

Is our military being effective if it's excluding otherwise capable soldiers just because they're women?

reply
ZenerSix 2012/12/05 00:09:11 (edited)

Yes

It's about equal rights. But service in the armed forces is entirely unnecessary because the armed forces are unnecessary. The 2nd Amendment means that every American citizen is a soldier for America. We, the people, are obligated to uphold the principles it was founded on and to defend it from all threats, foreign and domestic. As long as there is no draft, service in the US armed forces has nothing to do with patriotism and a US soldier is only as admirable and honorable as the politicians he or she works for.

reply
DreamSpeaker 2012/12/04 20:38:12

No

Not until women get equal pay for equal work, get equal recognition in government and have protections against being raped by their own comrades and 'superiors'. They should also be required to be on birth control to insure that the innocent ones aren't endangered. Frankly, I believe the entire idea is abhorrent. War should be abolished in favor of intelligent discourse. Fat chance on that ever happening.

reply
AndyWolf to DreamSp... 2012/12/06 05:16:20

Women and men are paid equally in the armed services, and plenty of protections are in place.

reply
SuperTrooper 2012/12/03 23:19:35

No

If the women have the same standards as men, physical, and when talking about promotion time, then I'll gladly let them fight.

reply
silentart 2012/12/03 22:54:59

Yes

As long, we have volunteer policy... Women can join if they want to protect our freedom... That is good way to show wimpy men that women can do better than them!

reply
PM to silentart 2012/12/03 23:30:56

Ha, wimpy men... funny.

Yeah, women are faster and stronger than men too, so they should be allowed to fight on the front lines. In fact, all men should quit the military and let women defend our freedom!!!

reply
meg 2012/12/03 22:11:53

Yes

Yes.

reply
thomastdewey 2012/12/03 21:35:43
PM to thomast... 2012/12/03 23:33:40

+1
I don't understand your post??? White people live in Africa and Asia too.

reply
kateisgod 2012/12/03 20:31:58

Yes

Didn't we settle this? With suffrage over the past 100 years?
The women that are there to be in the front line, to serve to their fullest extent should of course.

reply
Cliff 2012/12/03 18:16:41

Yes

How about if we turn the tables? Men have been doing almost all the combat for ages. How about if we let the women handle most of it from here on out? And if we are going to draft them, lets be sure we draft the ugly ones first.

reply
fitz 2012/12/03 17:14:00

No

A severely injured woman would distract soldiers from being efficient in their mission. It's simply the human nature aspect of our species. I think the majority of women understand this reality.

reply
Eris All Hail! 2012/12/03 09:35:32

Yes

Everyone should be allowed on the front lines. The front lines should be everywhere and soon will be.

Golden Apple, anyone?

reply
Nicholas DeShane 2012/12/03 07:01:40

Yes

Equality is a two way street, they need to sign up for selective service as well.

reply
PM to Nichola... 2012/12/03 23:35:50

Hey, now there's a good idea. I forgot about that. When I applied for certain jobs, I had to prove that I had registered for the Selective Service. Women should too if we are to be truly equal.

reply
John 2012/12/03 04:41:37

Yes

Not only should they be in the front lines, they should be required to register for the draft and shoulder the same responsibility for the protection of their freedom and rights as their male counterpart.

reply
Nightmusic 2012/12/03 00:18:49

No

+2
no because it disadvantages the men. they don't have adequate support with a woman backing them up and their natural instincts make them be more protective and thus compromise themselves.

reply
Joe to Nightmusic 2012/12/03 03:41:35

You are one very astute young lady...I'm impressed!! jms

reply
Eh Poli... to Nightmusic 2012/12/04 09:03:03

See, any good marine would disagree with you. If you're inadequate, you're not given the opportunity to fail your squad because you wouldn't be out there. In regards to natural protective instincts, the mission is what's most important. Rescuing the wounded comes second.

reply
laydeelapis 2012/12/03 00:18:38

Yes

If that's what they want. You couldn't pay me to do it.

reply
Jesferkicks 2012/12/03 00:13:55 (edited)

No

+2
Hell No!
This Marine Capt wants hers no matter how much it screws up our military. I curse the recruiter who hired her.

reply
adeenmckenziekennedy 2012/12/02 21:49:51

Yes

Sure, they should be able to. I am a young woman after all.

reply
Tasine 2012/12/02 21:33:39

Yes

Yes, BUT only under the exact same conditions, rules, equipment, clothing, supplies as the men. Any extra anything is out of bounds and costly to the taxpayer.

reply
Manwë 2012/12/02 20:00:54

Yes

+1
The military is now all volunteer. Service should be based on merit - if a man or woman can handle a job and there is an opening, they should be able to fill it.

Currently there are women in the military who are in combat zones and need the training for combat just like the men in those areas do.

reply
Emo Rocker 2012/12/02 20:00:09

No

But neither should men...

reply
Ishmael 2012/12/02 19:41:47

Yes

As Bill Mauldin wrote:

"The Quickest way to BECOME a Pacifist is to join the Infantry."

reply
ticlo7 2012/12/02 13:48:41

Yes

But only if they past the tests and meet the requirements. What use would it be if they aren't able to cope on the field?

reply
Vee 2012/12/02 08:18:44

No

+1
No! A woman place shoud be at home with her children taking care of them.
I don't under stand how they can go to afghanistan and leave their little ones like they do

reply
gary ® 2012/12/02 06:57:20

No

+2
Just my opinion. I'm sure there are qualified women who would perform very well and be willing to die fighting. I personally just don't want to see it.

reply
Terrain 2012/12/02 05:25:21 (edited)
Matt to Terrain 2012/12/02 15:53:15

+1
why don't we all just hold hands instead?

so when hitler started taking over countries in europe... the UK should have not fought back???

reply