Women In Combat
During WWII, the initial acceptance of woman in the military was controversial because they were deciding whether just needed more people, whether they should be an official part of the services, and whether they could perform the jobs. Most people were concerned that women would obstruct the view of American culture because they would be considered “masculine”. By 1944, women proved to be effective in helping during the war. Some were even trained to shoot guns next to the men. In 1994 the DOD (Department of Defense) created a policy that prevented women from combat with their male colleagues. They also could not be assigned to units below the brigade level, whose number one objective is combat on ground. Over the years women have showed that they are physically, mentally, and emotionally able to keep up with men in the military.
Statistics from a poll that was took from USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll in 2005, 27 percent of citizens think women should be able to serve anywhere in Iraq, 32 percent think that they should serve as support for ground combat units, and 44 percent think women should not be assigned to infantry units (“Attitudes Toward Women in Combat” #10). Many people are concerned that the women will be used as a prisoner of war, lack physical strength that will disable them in a mission, or wouldn't be equipped to handle stress situations. Women have proven themselves otherwise. Data from the 2011 class at West Point shows that 50 percent of female Cadets, a select group, passes the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) using the male standards. A percentage of women are just as efficient as men. New research suggests that women can enhance combat performances of the military without disrupting...
... middle of paper ...
...nuary, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Army General Martin E. Depsey announced to demolish all unnecessary gender based barriers to service. On May 15, 2013, all U.S. military forces had to submit plans to end the rule excluding women from critical ground-combat units. “Women have shown great courage and sacrifice on and off the battlefield, contributed in unprecedented ways to the military’s mission and proven their ability to serve in an expanding number of roles,” Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta said. “The Department’s goal in rescinding the rule is to ensure that the mission is met with the best-qualified and most capable people, regardless of gender.”(“United State Department of Defense”, #12). Women have the same reasons to fight for their country as their male counterparts. In the end women bring craft, effectiveness, and innovation to the force.
The military is trying to find new ways to recognize the fact that women now fight in the country’s wars. In 2011 the Military Leadership Diversity Commission recommended that the Department of Defense remove all combat restrictions on women. Although many jobs have been opened for women in the military, there is still 7.3 percent of jobs that are closed to them. On February 9, 2012, George Little announced that the Department of Defense would continue to reduce the restrictions that were put on women’s roles. The argument that “women are not physically fit for combat” is the most common and well-researched justification for their exclusion from fighting units. It has been proven if women go through proper training and necessary adaptations, they can complete the same physical tasks as any man. Though there seem to be many reasons from the exclusion of women in the military, the main ones have appeared to be that they do not have the strength to go through combat, would be a distraction to the men, and that they would interrupt male bonding and group
Women should be allowed in combat roles in the armed forces because they are just as capable as men. To begin, women such as Shaye Haver and Kristen Griest, graduates of the Fort Benning Ranger School, have shown that they can meet the same physical requirements as men. Nevertheless, these women still weren’t allowed to serve in combat positions despite the rigorous training they completed that involved grueling obstacles they had to complete all while carrying 100-pound gear. Does that make any sense to you? It didn’t to me and it certainly didn’t to women like Sgt. Patricia A. Bradford who said “If you have to be able to lift a certain amount of weight in order to do a certain job, then the weight is not going to know whether you’re male or female.” (Women at Arms: On the Ground.). In fact, in some instances women have proved to be even more
Thousands of men enlisted and were sent to fight during World War II. However, many people are unaware of the role that women played in the war, not only in taking over the jobs that would have previously belonged to men at home, but also in combat. D’Ann Campbell’s article “Women in Combat: The World War II Experience in the United States, Great Britain, Germany, and the Soviet Union” explores this topic. Campbell argues that the role of women in combat has been overlooked in the study of the Second World War. She states that, in fact, “the history everyone has learned about the greatest and best-known war of all times has airbrushed out the combat roles of women” (323). In the article, Campbell compares the methods of the four major powers involved in the war, the Unites States, Great Britain, Germany, and the Soviet Union, of involving women in combat, and what those methods used say about gender roles in that particular country.
With society’s past and present it is apparent that women are still not equal even if they have the title. Men are observably stronger and have a different mentality in situations than women. This is not to say that women should not be in the military but they should have the choice that way they can accept the responsibility and train themselves mentally and physically to achieve the responsibility and respect needed to fight for our country.
When it comes to combat assignments and the needs of the military, men take precedence over all other considerations, including career prospects of female service members. Female military members have been encouraged to pursue opportunities and career enhancement within the armed forces, which limit them only to the needs and good of the service due to women being not as “similarly situated” as their male counterparts when it comes to strength or aggressiveness, and are not able to handle combat situations.
Many women around the world have big responsibilities in the military, and although some people may disagree, I believe they can handle anything a man can handle when it comes to being on the battlefield. Some people think that women should not be able to fight in the military, where as other people think they should be able to fight in the military. Each supporter and non-supporter has their own reasons. Some of the reasons for the non-supporters are because of their gender. They think that because they are women, they cannot handle the challenges that being on the battlefield brings. Women are willing to fight, and they know what can happen, they know exactly what can happen. They are willing to fight for their country, and I believe they should be able to. The men that fight for our country are against women fighting in combat. They believe that women are not capable of doing what they do to defend and fight for our country. The men feel that they cannot trust women to help back them up at war simply because of the fact that they are women.
The problem of women fighting in combat along with their male counterparts is not a one-sided problem. Elizabeth Hoisington has earned the rank of Brigadier General in the U.S. Army, leads the Women’s Army Corps and believes that women should not serve in combat because they are not as physically, mentally, or emotionally qualified as a male is and that ...
...nto a situation of high testosterone, women are not considered to be a threat. Military research now however, has shown that women have the physical stamina to endure battle and do not disrupt the cohesion in the male units and can also be mentally tough without breaking when under fire. Women are not only discriminated against in the military, they are also discriminated against in Philosophy, religion, and Popular Culture.
Both men and women fought on the battlefield. Hundreds of women served as nurses, laundresses, cooks and companions to the male soldiers in the Continental Army.6 In addition, there were some that actually engaged in battle. Seeing "no reason to believe that any consideration foreign to the purest patriotism,"7 Deborah Sampson put on men's clothing and called herself Robert Shirtliffe in order to enlist in the Army. "Robert Shirtliffe" fought courageously; "his" company defeated marauding Indians north of Ticonderoga.8 There is also the valiancy of the water carrier Mary Hays, otherwise known as Molly Pitcher, who took up arms after her husband fell.9 As a six-foot tall woman, Nancy Hart was considered an Amazon Warrior. Living in the Georgia frontier, this "War Woman" aimed and, with deadly accuracy, shot British soldiers who invaded the area.10 Mentioned in the beginning of this essay was Margaret Corbin, another woman on the battlefield.
Women Have The Same Rights As Men To Be In The Military “Women have been serving — and in many cases dying — alongside men on the battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan for a decade” (“Equal”). Males and women were born with the God-given right to be equal. Women should be able to fight in wars because their motherhood instincts, vocal voices and their ability to rationalize situations. Everyone can perform the same tasks but some just have to work harder. Women can fight in wars just like men and they will work twice as hard.
One of the most controversial topics of the early 2000’s is whether or not to accept women into combat roles, on the front lines, in the U.S. military. Plenty of men and women around the country are attempting to instate equality of the genders in the 21st century. This would be a gargantuan step in equalizing the genders, as being a decorated member of the military is one of the most highly respected achievements among most cultures. Women should be allowed to serve on the front lines if they have the ability to meet all of the same standards of a male candidate including, but not limited to physical ability, because of yearning for equality of the sexes, better diversity amongst the military, and by having the ability to choose the best possible candidate for the job in question.
Some say that women are not qualified to serve in the military, but the statistics show that women are perfectly capable to go into combat. For example, there are already women who serve our country in the armed forces. According to Gabrielle Fromer, “Women account for 16.8% of the active duty officer corps and 15% of the enlisted corps. Approximately 280,000 women were deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan.” Women are capable of going into combat; the 280,000 women that were deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan provide proof that women can succeed while serving in combat.
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta announced that the Department of Defense lift its ban on women serving in combat. Panetta’s order made women eligible as infantrymen on combat patrol, and work on elite special operations units. However, women still had to meet high strength standards that could keep them out of units where physical demands were grueling. Panetta’s new policy opened 200,000 jobs to military women, and was implemented b 2015. Still, certain units could be kept off limits to women if reasoning could be justified to the Secretary of Defense (Martin,
Once a person decides to join the military, ideally, they should no longer be considered male or female, but instead a solider, airman, seaman, and/or US military member. They should be able to hold any position that they meet all mental and physical requirements. There are many views and opinions regarding women in combat positions, and it is the purpose of this paper to review the pros and cons and present them in a factual way that will create an unbiased conclusion to be reached. I believe the reality and theory will coincide in this instance, but only the facts will tell. I hope to show that having women
Many agree, that in certain military occupations, women can function at the same level as men. The controversy about having women fighting with men in wars is the fact that they have a different physical structure, deal with stress and emotions differently , are more susceptible to injury and just don't have the killer instinct necessary to get the job done. Although the last statement might appear to be a stereotype, most women would not be capable of supporting the demanding rigors of war-like situations. It would be a great mistake to allow women in these stressful and dangerous situations.