How Will Allowing Gays to Openly Serve Effect Combat Readiness?

**Furunculus** · 06-03-2010, 14:37

Originally Posted by Vladimir

If this is true than British soldiers have lost part of their humanity.

I belive it has more to do with male service members coming to appreciate the value a woman can add to a team...and the sex, of course.

why?

it hasn't stopped any human insticnt from helping other people in general, or helping those who are vulnerable in particular, so what?

**Vladimir** · 06-03-2010, 14:51

Originally Posted by Furunculus

why?

it hasn't stopped any human insticnt from helping other people in general, or helping those who are vulnerable in particular, so what?

The same applies to children and small furry things. It's never good to have protective instincts "beaten out of" someone.

**Furunculus** · 06-03-2010, 15:21

Originally Posted by Vladimir

The same applies to children and small furry things. It's never good to have protective instincts "beaten out of" someone.

hold on their chuckles, didn't just say that there was no particular dimunition in the expectation of helping the vulnerable?

what i am talking about is the overbearing chivalry that rendered israeli male soldiers combat inneffective when israeli female soldiers where injured or exposed to mortal threat, a factor that wasn't present when men were in the same situation.

**Vladimir** · 06-03-2010, 17:24

Originally Posted by Furunculus

hold on their chuckles, didn't just say that there was no particular dimunition in the expectation of helping the vulnerable?

what i am talking about is the overbearing chivalry that rendered israeli male soldiers combat inneffective when israeli female soldiers where injured or exposed to mortal threat, a factor that wasn't present when men were in the same situation.

Err...

I thought so. I wasn't speaking of that example. If you, as a man, have no inclination or desire to protect a woman, than you are something less than a man. This could be due to real or perceived physical weakness but is more likely linked to a genetic desire to protect those who bear our young. There is nothing wrong with that desire, but possibly in how it is implemented (re: burkas, chastity belts, etc).

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

But the ones who CAN hack it should get the shot.

Err, no. Don't fall into the trap of thinking the problem women in combat is based solely on physical attributes with strength being the primary.

Edit: Maybe you weren't just talking about physical attributes. I don't think you understand just how the presence even a single woman can affect a bunch of young, dirty, and stressed out men.

Sorry, I don't mean to derail the thread...Lesbians on the other hand, are great in combat situations.

**gaelic cowboy** · 06-03-2010, 17:29

Bah yer all behind the times have ye ever seen a crowd of hens attacking the police in manchester them jihadi wouldnt stand a chance.

**Vladimir** · 06-03-2010, 17:30

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Bah yer all behind the times have ye ever seen a crowd of hens attacking the police in manchester them jihadi wouldnt stand a chance.

You're right. The problem occurs when women are in the minority.

**Rhyfelwyr** · 06-03-2010, 18:20

The main issue with female troops isn't their own ability to serve, it's just that when they are placed with the guys then trouble ensues. Below are a couple of BBC links:

Women at war face sexual violence

"According to several studies of the US military funded by the Department of Veteran Affairs, 30% of military women are raped while serving, 71% are sexually assaulted, and 90% are sexually harassed.

The Department of Defense acknowledges the problem, estimating in its 2009 annual report on sexual assault (issued last month) that some 90% of military sexual assaults are never reported."

Women at war: sexual violence in the US military

That has got to be devastating to the ability of these troops to fight together.