Fighting Mothers.
 

In light of the Shatt al-Arab incident should mothers of small children be allowed into a combat zone?

Indeed should they be serving in the armed forces at all?

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

Lol, do you work for Jerermy Vine?:D

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

Gender, or the fact that someone is a mother/father, should make no difference as to whether someone is sent to the frontline in a war zone.

They chose to enlist.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

At the end of the day, it's their job. If the mothers weren't allowed to go into a combat zone, then what about the fathers? Then you end up in a situation where only single or childless military personnel can fight for their country.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

I thought Jambutty had been trawling YouTube, and had found a film clip of two local chavettes knocking hell out of each other.:D

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

From the point of view of a mother of two small children I dont know how she can leave them for any length of time let alone be on the front line. At the end of the day though its her job and her choice and I wouldn't condem her for doing it. I think its just as hard for the fathers too but its a job and someones got to do it.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

Lets look at this issue from the child’s perspective.

It has been reported that Faye Turney has a 3 years old daughter and during an interview on board HMS Cornwall before the capture, she moaned that she really missed her daughter but she loved her job. More than her daughter obviously.

No doubt someone will have a different viewpoint but for me the most important person during a child’s life, especially during the first few years, is its mother. The father is also important but not to the same degree. His level of importance grows with time. So to deprive that child of that very important contact because mum wants to pursue a career in the navy or any of the armed forces is simply wrong. Unless the mother is stationed close to home or has married quarters where she goes home every evening. That makes it no different to being a working mum in civvy street. Going to sea for a few months or being posted abroad is not good for the child. It’s not very good for the mum either.

I’m not condemning Faye Turney or any other woman in the armed services, I’m just looking at the issue from the child’s angle.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

The same criticism could also be levelled at our Royal Family, or anyone else who employs nannies to raise their children. Those offspring also have very little maternal, or paternal, contact, and seem to cope well enough... in the case of the Royals, perhaps not so well.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

Get all those women out of the work place, what ever next they will be driving buses or even, god forbid, serving us beer and crisps. While I'm on here anyone tried that new fangled e lec tricity?

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

She chose a career she wanted and because of equal rights she can go and take a pop at our enemies. Yes she will miss her child, but dont we all when away from them. Someday it wont be seen as a bad thing and here daughter can grow up proud of what mummy does for a living.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

When you enlist you accept that you may be sent to the front line and you accept all the dangers that come with that. People do not see their job as more important than their child jambutty they do it for their child so they can provide for them. Wasnt you in the navy? And personal with children get houses so they can be with thier child and child care during working times is sometimes provided depending on where you are based.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

Jambutty, Faye Turney gave up the nurturing role to her young child when she enlisted. There is no reason why the father cannot fulfil this role either; the 'female nurturing role' is completely down to socialisation and is not genetic in the slightest.

The situation is no different from a male soldier leaving his wife and child to go to fight.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

Personally I do not know why women would want a combative role in the services, but then having chosen this role, she should be no different to any other serving soldier. Presumably, she will be getting paid for what she is doing.......and she herself says she enjoys her work. She also chose to have a child and so must take responsibility for the risks she must necessarily take.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

Sorry Shaker , but your 'metrosexual' view about nurturing just doesn't cut any ice with me ,
Women have served in the armed forces for nearly 80 yrs with great distinction without the need to go into combat , leave that to the guys. It's not a matter of equality, Women have prooved many times in guerilla warfare situations that they are the equal of the guys, examples.... French partisans and the Viet Kong but that was a matter of neccesity, life or death, I don't think we are at that stage just yet , Women in regular combat units , sorry dont see the need and don't agree with it .


even though it gives me chest pains , I have to agree with Jambutty on this one ..... :eek: :eek:

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

You don't really give any valid reasons why women shouldn't enter into combat, if they so wish, except that you don't like it. I know loads of women with great courage, and men who are total wimps, who couldn't kill a slug. It's all about choices.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

So believing in equality as you do ....can I presume that you would see nothing wrong with a man and a woman fighting/struggling for a seat on the life-boat ?, or would you take the Lytton Strachey view when asked at his pacifist application hearing what he would do if he found a German soldier raping his sister and answered "Sir I would try to come between them "

No matter how fashionable and trendy it is in Tony's and Cherrie's new egalitarian UK to say a woman is equal to a man in all things is incorrect, just the fact that a woman is able to bear children puts her at a disadvantage in hostile situations in the event of capture ( I think the chances of a female POW being raped/sexually abused by her captures are a thousand times higher than her male counterpart ).

As deplorable as domestic violence is, I think there would be a lot more big black cars heading up Burnley Rd. if men really thought women were their equal and treated them as such .

;) :cool: :D

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

of course I could be a complete misogynist pig and do an ala Chav post and say .........
" why would anyone want to be in a foxhole/bunker with someone out of action seven days a month "

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

She's a member of our armed forces so why shouldnt she serve on a boat? Its part of her job which she knew when she enlisted and when she had her child that there was a chance she would be assigned to a boat and so have to leave her child and husband at home for 3/6 months or whatever it is. Women have been going to war for years so why not?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_Nightingale

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

It's just facing facts & not being ignorant mate; nothing metrosexual there.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

Perhaps Steeljack would prefer if the little woman stayed by hearth and home...and the kitchen sink.

Why should a person's gender stop them doing a job they are quite capable of doing, if that's what they chose to do?

Would you also insist that female police officers only be given desk jobs, to protect them from the slightest whiff of danger?

Just over a year ago WPC Sharon Beshenivsky died whilst carrying out her duties as a police officer. If she was my mum, I would of course have been devastated at her death, but I would also have been incredibly proud to have called her my Mother.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

I am in agreement with most on the site, she enlisted knowing full well she could be sent to a war zone, she is doing her job ,and yes missing her family as all the servicemen where-ever they are must do.

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

But isn't it about choice?

Some women chose to be full time mothers, others want to do other things as well, including joining the armed forces, and going to the frontline.

Would you take that choice away?

What's the point of equality if it isn't applicable to everyone?

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

There used to be a lot of tutting and muttering over "househusbands", men who stayed at home to raise the children while their wives worked. It's not quite so startling a concept these days and it's down to choice.

Children need mother at home? If dad's more child-orientated than mum what's wrong with him doing the caring? Being capable of giving birth doesn't always mean that a woman is more predisposed to the nurturing role. In the same way there are some men whose nature is more "maternal", for want of a better word, who relish the job of raising the children.

The lady in question made her choice and joined the armed forces to fight alongside men. That in itself is not such a big deal, in Israel women have to do National Service and they do exactly the same job in the army as the men, they are trained to fight. The lady in question has a child and I'm sure she loves it just as much as all her male colleagues love theirs. She's not "unnatural" or a bad mother, her child is lovingly cared for in her absence, she's just different from those who choose to stay at home. Better a mum who loves you but has to be away at times than one who stays at home and doesn't really give much thought to you and there are quite a few of those around, aren't there?

Re: Fighting Mothers.
 

Agree, 100%.