General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: OK, I gotta say it. Women don't belong in combat. [View all]Liberty Belle
(9,533 posts)than non-veterans or even than the offspring of male veterans, more than double the latter. This is a special risk to their children that should be assessed and likely sending them into combat will make this go even higher. It's an inconvenient truth that women are the carriers of eggs -- and contaminating them is not a good idea. It's one thing to risk your own life, quite another the lives of your future children yet to be born. I suspect if most young women understood how high these risks are they might choose not to serve. Most men might think twice, too, if they knew that their sperm are also affected, though not at as high rates as the women.
There are other special issues for women too. I've heard that women who sat on crates of depleted uranium in vehicles came home with cancer and had to have their reproductive organs removed at very young ages - some still in their teens.
Also 1 in 3 military women are sexually assaulted (that means rape, not harassment). How much worse will this get in combat zones?
I have extremely mixed feelings about women in Congress, but DEFINITELY feel that if it's done, it must only be voluntary. No future mother should ever be made to serve in combat if a draft is ever reinstated in the U.S. It's bad for fathers too but statistically the odds are way higher of having a severely deformed baby if it's the mother who is exposed to toxins, even years before she gets pregnant.