None. Women did not serve aboard warships or with combat troops.
Historically, only men were allowed to fight in wars due to societal norms and beliefs about gender roles, which positioned men as warriors and providers while women were often relegated to domestic responsibilities. This perception was reinforced by the idea that men were physically stronger and more suited for combat. Additionally, cultural values and legal frameworks often excluded women from military service, viewing their primary role as supporters rather than combatants. However, these views have evolved, and many countries now allow women to serve in combat roles.
Women in the military can currently serve in almost every field, except for anything having to do with combat. Women can be in helicopters and such, but they cannot serve as a ground combat soldier, or "grunt", as it is called in the marine corps. P.S. Please recommend me!
Some woman were in the French Resistance. And many women served in the Soviet Red Army (russian army) And no women served in the U.S. army. In Britain, the U.S. and many Allied countries women did serve in the armed forces in World War 2 but not in a combat role. The Soviet Union was unusual in having women in combat. Obviously, in the case of resistance movements, the distinction between combat roles and others may be blurred.
During World War II, several women's auxiliary forces played crucial roles in supporting military operations. Notable groups included the Women's Army Corps (WAC) in the United States, which allowed women to serve in non-combat roles such as clerical work and logistics. The British Auxiliary Territorial Service (ATS) enabled women to contribute as drivers, cooks, and anti-aircraft gunners. Additionally, the Soviet Union's Night Witches, an all-female bombing squadron, showcased women's bravery in combat roles, flying dangerous missions under the cover of darkness.
Because women should have equal rights, and should be able to serve there country.
Absolutely not.
beacuse women have the potential
no yes they should be able to participate in combat duty
yes,they should.Women Have a equel position as men
yes, they should be allowed to. women should be treated equaly to men.
yes
Women were not allowed to serve as members of the Roman Legions.
Men and women should definitely be allowed to fight side by side in combat. There is nothing that a man can do in battle that a woman cannot also do, from firing weapons to providing medical care.
Women were not allowed to serve in the military.ANSWER 2same as most wars, pretend to be a man - i imagine it does, or did, happen more than we know - women have a long history of serving in combat and can be every bit as capable as man and just dont like to be told they cant - my mom was one who served as a radio operater on B-17's to ferry the planes about and would have jumped at any chance to serve in combat if allowed
no,cause if they do,if the woman got shot near the heart,the man will focus on the boob
Women are allowed to serve in many more positions than they used to. Now in the US women can serve in pretty much every position with the exceptions of combat arms (i.e. infantry, artillery, etc) and spec ops positions.