Women are not fit for Defense Services

I do not think that women are not fit for army because women more stronger than men physically mentally but I agree that men are some time stronger than women because of their environment from childhood and the most important thing is their body design but if proper training is given to women they are better than men. Who think that women are not fit for solider post they are insulting women power.

At one side we are talking about women empowerment but women are not allow in infantry why so when all says better than men than why women are not allowed in infantry. In against some says family will not allow but they forget the logical thing that the women who want to join infantry they do not care for any body they are independent enough and are very brave so they want to join if our government is not allowing women in infantry then they have no right to say that women empowerment is going on.

I agree that women have some biological problems but every problem have its own solution. Hens I want to say that women should also get the chance to join infantry as soldiers.

As India, a secular country all men and women have given an equal position. In my opinion, women are totally fit on not only in the defence services but in all of the position of a country also.

We can go through to some examples of our brave women like Pt Usha, Saina Nehwal, Sania Mirza who has qualified in the field of sports and brought medals for our country.

The great freedom fighter like Rani Laxmi Bai a lot for our country and led our freedom fighter and brought independence.

Mother Teresa got a noble prize for the activity of social work women's reach in the pic point of the Mount Everest and arrived in the surface of the moon.

Women are nowadays struggling in the field of politics and many more aspects in the field of national growth and improvement.

As we experienced that women are now in all of the good and reputed posts like IAS doctor engineers and many more. So how can we think that they unfit in the defence? They have social value and always have the right to fight for our country as a soldier and punish the enemies and terrorist of their nation.

Well today we are not living in dark ages where women were confined to four walls of houses. Today whichever sphere of life it may be, whether its sports, academics, arts or technology women have shown their mettle and proved themselves. Then why not DEFENSE? And to those who are relating the word 'defense' merely with combat missions and physical strengths, I would humbly like to remind them that there are technological and administration departments in defense too.

Women can play their part there. We can cite a recent example of women empowerment in defense when Pooja Thakur, wing commander in Indian Air Force served inter service Guard of Honour to U.S President Barack Obama and made us proud, motivating thousands of girls across country to join defense.

So please stop whining about women are physically weak. Its not only d physical strength which is required in defense. Wars can be won by mental tactics too. And if we want our country to develop at a higher rate then whole of demographic dividend should get fair opportunities.

Men are the mighty ones. They invented guns, bombs, missiles, aircraft, warships and numerous important things. Women too invented many things but just not as same as men. As a citizen of India everyone has the right to do what they want. So women can apply for defense services and its their will if they want to take up the job. That is alright.

But as science and nature has proved men are much more physically stronger than women (early men used to hunt humongous woolly mammoths and ancient large animals) they should be the first choice for serving at the front zone of battlefield. Its in their DNA. There they will be useful for moving and operating heavy battle machines.

Besides their hunting instinct is far superior because they were great hunters during ancient days so they can be more tactful and merciless towards enemies than a woman who is generally caring and soft. Boys grow up playing guns and robots while girls grow up playing dolls. So if it is not at the front line of the battlefield women are fit for defense service.

I agree with the concept of girls enrolment in army but practical concept is something different, actually nowadays, most of the girls enrolled in the forces are creating problems in commands, sometimes they create an unnecessary burden to their commanders of low level, even, it also observed that sometimes most of them as and when it is possible they fraudulently blame / threatens the low-level commands that she will complain to high command and as per our psychology we always believe a girl especially when there is a flow of tears, another thing is that no single girl can be assigned a field duty there should be at least two girls for a single man task. If she is so strong, why and from whom we are protecting her by sending two instead of single. So in the above discussion, so many people quoted examples of maharani Laxmi bai and other brave / ladies, all are felloceous. However, we have to give an opportunity to the girls to serve the nation. Don't waste the time on this malloceous disscussion.

To those who say women do not belong in armies/navies/air force because they lack the upper body strengthen ability to withstand pain, may I remind you a few points that we see in nature:

1. Females such as tigers, are the hunters.

2. Females go through immense pain while giving birth, which is not just during the time of giving birth but throughout a major portion of the 9 months.

Females are not as weak as you see them to be. I can even bet that a female like Mary Kom can take on any man here in this forum. With proper training, every man and woman gets stronger.

As for them being vulnerable to sexual torture if captured, that's probably, about the only reason why a woman would prefer not to be in the front-line in the army (not saying that there are none). There are many posts in the army as tactical support or navigational officers, etc that can suit their strengths fine. Also in the navy and air force they can take on any role a man can efficiently.

As per my opinion, if a person wants to serve his/her country then he/she should be given fair chance to do so. What is bad in it?

I accept that women are not as physically fit as men, but some women are, and army is not only about physical work, it is also about mental toughness, and if a woman thinks that she has that capability, then what is wrong?

Isn't she a citizen of this country, isn't she has a right to join defence and serve their country.

In defence forces, there is a huge demand or lack of officers due to the lack of perfect officer like material in mostly men, but if women also encouraged to join defence then there would be more applicants or candidates for the job, and obviously, more officers will be given commission. And our forces would be much more capable and powerful.

And also there so other branches too in an army in which that much physical strength is not required, so women, if they want can serve in these branches.

Hi everybody!

I am going to put my thoughts on the given topic very briefly.

1) On the whole, all the genders in nature are equal but most probably are different.

2) Men are usually physically stronger than women.

3) If a woman carries out all the tasks that she should do to prove her efficiency to be in army, then what is the problem?

4) Why lower the level of the tasks? It is not the privilege we girls are talking about. We want the permission to be their with full respect only if we prove our efficiency totally.

5) If naturally the number of women in army is lesser because lesser girls can do it, then I have no objection. I would not like to advocate increase in the number of women in army by sending there inefficient women like me! because it is a very serious issue! we are talking about our nation's safety. But if a woman can do it all, then what is the problem?

So, efficient women should obviously be in army.

A lot of people have debated this from the emotional point of view and I'll try to avoid that, but biologically women and men have same or at least similar lower body strength so running, jumping walls, etc are usually not a problem but when upper body strength is concerned men are stronger than women (as can be observed by the fact than men have broader shoulders and denser muscles), so carrying heavy rucksacks or weapons like LMG (though it is called light machine gun the only thing light about it is the name) and mortars, they also have been known on an average to be able to do less push ups and pull ups than men and are not able to perform as good as men in rope climbing, etc. Now, I have not stated any of these facts arbitrarily, the US Marines conducted a study on women and male Marines and found these facts, anyone who wants to cross check the fact can go read the report it is available to the public.

For defense services a person should be very strong physically and mentally. Woman may not be as much strong as man but they are strong enough for defense services both physically and mentally. I admit the fact that something like pregnancy make them weak. So instead of saying "women are not fit for defense service" if we say "women are fit for defense services but not always" will be more appropriate.

For this some provisions can be added in the law like she can not give birth to child up to the age of 30 years. Till then she can serve in the active defense services after that there are many sections in the defense services which require less strength can be given to her. And I will be happy to share the fact that currently they are working in defense services and at border areas they are proving their importance in frisking the females who move across borders.