You're all missing the obvious reasons

Logistics

@4SidedTriangle Considering women are generally physically weaker than men, especially in upper body strength. It then does not make sense for them to be carrying the same as that of a man. The ability to shoot a gun effectively to kill the enemy is important, so why should women carry the same as men when they aren't as physicallly able?

>Weaker @Joshu

So more of them are required for the same task

Nathan, wait a second I wasnt done

Means more supplies are required to support them

Aight

Lets say you have a above average woman who was as physically capable as her section.

She is a lesbian

and is butch

not attractive in thr slightest

lets say she is literally unfuckable

So we eliminate that variable

@Mavalance If women are not as physical capable in the whole then why should they be in the military. Soldiers don't carry that which is not needed and if a woman cannot carry this weight then they are not suitable. It's purely a case of combat effectiveness.

What do women do

once per month men do not

Biological warfare is illegal @Joshu

@4SidedTriangle which is why there are other avenues that they can take. Not every role is solely combat orientated

Logistics

Do you want that container full of morphine/ammo

or tampons

It's a serious consideration

What happens of they run out in a combat situation?

Lack of hygiene during menstruation can cause serious infections

There is a good reason you can;t be front line if you REQUIRE meds

It;s the same reason why trans should not be in the military

They REQUIRE pills

Didn't think of that.

Ban em as well.

@Mavalance We aren't arguing that women should be in non-front line rolls we are arguing that they shouldn't be in front line rolls. That is what the article that sparked this conversation off was about.

and also are more suceptible to mental health issues

Now non front line?

Absolutely fine

But as soon as you put women in front line roles en-mass

you take away container space for critical supplies

It will indirectly kill people

Even if that women is a fucking olympic decathlon weightlifter

and is unfuckable

@4SidedTriangle I wouldn't want women to be in the army, simply because of what it entails. But i cannot refuse the freedom of the individual. If the individual women is just as capable as their male counterparts, then i see no reason for why they shouldn't be allowed. This would also go for everything about them. Including physicality and mentality

It's quite funny, those that are calling for more women in front-line combat will be the FIRST to say they need to be removed once a few are captured, raped, tortured, killed and then displayed to the world.