[CMAC51]

It is a man’s job because they are built for it, mentally and biologically. No matter how strong a woman is she will not have the same strength as a man. Putting women on the front lines with the men can only spell trouble. Then there’s the issue of menstruation and hygiene. There is a reason for the exclusion.

Standards for physical strength, agility and stamina are part of the qualifications for the position. If the woman can meet those standards, your strength argument is no more substantial than cotton candy.

There are currently multiple forms of pharmaceuticals that will reduce menstruation to a 3 month cycle or totally offset it if desired. Most women in high stress physical environments have their menstrual cycle reduced or eliminated naturally by by controls within their own bodies. This is well documented by studies on female athletes

There are countries which have successfully integrated females into their combat forces, Israel being the most visible. Please describe for me the problems that Israel is having as a result of integrating females into their combat forces.

If there are reasons for the exclusion, please give me some that can't be refuted instantly with little or no effort.

I understand that you don't like the idea. That does not qualify as a reason to restrict another persons opportunity in a democratic society.

[POWERSBOOTHEFAN]

IMHO it only spells trouble because of what often happens between men and women. S-E-X. Female troops have gotten pregnant in order to get out of their duties. It is not a good idea to put the women in with the men.

They had the right idea in WWII. Women took over at home in order to free the men to fight. Theirs was obviously a very important job and they would be able to serve our country in another capacity. The idea of putting women on the front lines would have been considered foolish and absurd.

Why are the women so hell-bent on going into combat?