Section I: Introduction
Women have been in the military, or associated with combat for decades. “The most famous example of the ability of a woman to not only be involved in combat but to lead forces is that of Joan of Arc's legendary battles leading the French army when she was just a teenager.”(Gerber 1) Women have been involved in espionage and even posed as male soldiers during the Civil War. Conflicts such as, WWI, WWII, Panama, and as recent as our current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan women have served with distinction in many ways. In our most recent conflict, over 100 military women have given the ultimate sacrifice. Today with changes in our society and the global environment in which we live two controversial arguments arise concerning women in combat. Basically the debate whether or not women should be allowed to participate in direct combat or not. As our society and cultural beliefs change so does what we except as social norms. Both sides of this argument bring many reasons for and against allowing women to participate in direct combat. Taking into account both views of this controversy it will show, that not only a social change has occurred, but the dynamics of the battlefield has in fact already placed female service members into direct combat.
Section II: Opposition to Direct Combat Roles for Women
Social Norms
Those that are strongly against it base their criticism on a number of reasons that are based on social norms that have existed for centuries. Our social and cultural norms have in the past and will far into the future dictate how we address these issues. Societies have from the beginning of time set certain norms of what men and women should be. These expectations are referred to as gender norms and a...
... middle of paper ...
... arms job, but those that are interested should be given the chance to do so. They should be given the opportunity because they are already there.
References
Casey, L. "Women in Combat", Academic Essays and Debates on Women in the Military: Military Woman Magazine. December 19, 1997.http://www.militarywoman.org/academic.htm
Elshtain, Jean Bethke. "Feminism and War." Progressive Sept. 1991: 14-16.
"Fire When Ready, Ma’am." Editorial. Time 13 Jan. 1990: 29.
Gerber, Bradely. “Women in the Military and Combat.” © April 24, 1998.
Hoffman, Julie. "Men and Children First." American Spectator Sept. 1992: 43-44.
Norden, Edward. "Right Behind You Scarlett." American Spectator Aug. 1991: 14-16.
United States. General Accounting Office. Physically Demanding Jobs: Services Have Little Data on Ability of Personnel to Perform." By Mark E. Gebicke. (GAO/NSIAD-96-169) 1996.
Within Megan H. Mackenzie’s essay, “Let Women Fight” she points out many facts about women serving in the U.S. military. She emphasizes the three central arguments that people have brought up about women fighting in the military. The arguments she states are that women cannot meet the physical requirements necessary to fight, they simply don’t belong in combat, and that their inclusion in fighting units would disrupt those units’ cohesion and battle readiness. The 1948 Women’s Armed Services Integration Act built a permanent corps of women in all the military departments, which was a big step forward at that time. Although there were many restrictions that were put on women, an increase of women in the U.S. armed forces happened during
Women in the US Military - Civil War Era. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Apr. 2017.
There are growing feelings in the United States that, as women are having more rights given to them that were previously restricted, women should be given everything that is offered to men. This is becoming very true in the military, where much sentiment is that women should be given the opportunity to serve in combat arms positions. Women are currently allowed to serve in combat support positions, such as military intelligence and air support positions, but they are not allowed to serve in positions such as infantry, armor, or field artillery. Many believe that it is time to open these positions to women soldiers and allow them to serve in the front lines of combat. Although women are currently allowed to serve in combat support positions in the military, women should not be able to serve in combat positions, because women do not have physical capacity to serve in these positions, would have trouble dealing with the emotional restraint involved in war, and could cause a decline in the morale of their unit.
Excluding women from frontline combat is essentially sexist. Regardless of the many substantial contributions women have made to the United States military from the American Revolutionary war to the contemporary Iraq and Afghanistan wars, it has long been a sanctuary of masculinity, which consequently, has resulted in the organization’s steadfast resistance against women’s direct martial participation. The opponents of women frontline combat argue that females are unable to execute the required responsibilities of battle based on gender and gender role stereotypes. Such opinions are comprised of the assumption that women are physically and psychologically weaker than men are, require supplementary accommodations, and are more vulnerable to sexual abuse. Thus, much of the resistance to women joining the military in combat roles is derived from the traditional, discriminatory belief that men should protect women from harm.
Ruby, J. (2005, November 1). Women in Combat Roles: Is That the Question?. Off Our Backs,35, 36.
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.
In an older society, women did not serve in the military. Women primarily raised the children and supported the troops from the home country. Times have changed. Women have an equal right to fight for their country. Adversaries of women in combat claim women should not fight in the infantry because of their value to the recreation of human life (Wojack). The previous statement is based purely off emotions, and provides no physical evidence as to why a woman should not take part in combat. In further regard to the allegation, the amount of women in combat will remain extremely low in comparison to men due to the social norm of war participation. All women and men are required to perform the same physical requirements to be eligible for participation in ground units. Many opponents to women's integration claim males are the stronger gender; therefore, why incorporate women in combat if the units will be weaker? The point of strength proves irrelevant in today’s modern warfare as studies have validated that intelligence, mental strength, and technical skills surpass the capability of mere physical strength (Skaine). Along with society, physical qualities have evolved as
In conclusion there is a lot of discussion on women in combat. I, personally believe that women should be in combat because every women is as capable as every men. Women has been discriminated by their gender for a while now, there has to be an end to this. If a woman is willing to help serve her country and want to be in combat, who are we to stop them. Not everyone is willing to risk their life for their nation. The more people willing to help the better. Men have a small vision, they only focus on what they are meant to do. Whereas to women, we are able to think/look outside the box. One of my favorite quotes about women is,“A women is like a teabag. It’s only when she is in hot water that you know how strong she is.”
In 2012 the Pentagon makes job assignments for women in the military official. As the Pentagon loosened restrictions on women combat it created a more equal right to freedom and burden. Although in 2012 women still couldn’t fight in combat; this signified a great change in women roles in the U.S.. I think as society advances and women begin to take on the same roles as men, women will soon be able to fight in combat. As 2016 comes around and the ideas of women in combat have loosened, the military is speaking of women being enlisted in the draft. These opening roles of women in the military and combat show a defining moment in the American Government and society as we come to integration between the
Boom did you see her she caught a grenade but she is not supposed to be in the combat field. Women in the army that extends over 400 years into the past throughout a large amount of cultures and nations. Although women are not allowed in the combat field but they play an important role in the army. About 33,000 jobs of the positions in the army are closed to woman because they were units that were designated as direct ground combat. That will change this year in units that are not under army special operations. This paper will tell you how woman played an important in the army in the past and in the present.
Military studies are relevant to women's history, because they serve to illuminate the extremely demanding conditions under which women have successfully served in, or in support of the US Armed Forces. An improved understanding of this facet of history serves to inform the contemporary debate over women in the military and provides a useful field of study for women seeking to enter the profession of arms. Throughout history woman have fought for many rights, because they felt as though they should be held as the same equal as their male counterparts. They have fought for a few rights like: voting, being able to have jobs, and the right to fight in the military. Woman in the military has been a hot topic for a very long time and still reigns true today. 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. This controversy reigns true because our society has assimilated to gendered ideologies of what the role of women should be as well as the role of men all throughout the media.
The subject of women in combat has long been a taboo discussion. Generally females are viewed on as the weaker sex, and handled as if they are fragile. The thought of women on the battlefield brings up a staunch opposition. It is argued that women do not have what it takes emotionally and physically to withstand the demanding aspects of war. However, I firmly believe women should have the right to be able to serve equally alongside their military counterparts if they so chose. In addition to extensive research, I have my own personal experience in the military on the frontlines. I have lived with infantry soldiers and been attached to the elite group of Special Forces. While it was an ever-enduring hardship, I still came out alive, and was
The participation of women in the military has been an issue of great controversy for both the public and the military fraternity. Throughout the decades, men and women have worked in the military under “equal but different” physical fitness standards. Different grading scales for the men and women were introduced, following the realization by the military that these two genders have different physical qualities (Union Resource Center 2015). Women have been provided with the opportunity to pursue military combat roles such as infantry, but special operations and other ground combat roles that require too much physical involvement and a higher level of performance are still off limits. Despite being allowed to occupy some of the same combat
For years, many women were antiwar and antimilitarist; however, that is not the case today. Since the United States military established an all- volunteer force in 1973, the number of women serving on active duty increased dramatically. In 1973, there were 42,000 military women on active duty; today there are around 200,000 military women in active duty. This topic is sociologically relevant because in January of 1993 the Secretary of Defense modified the “rule risk” which previously prohibited women from certain noncombat units to expand opportunities for women in combat. However, Under the Department of Defense, many career fields whose primary missions are direct ground combat, still remain closed to women. This policy excludes women from
Over the years, several soldiers have given their lives up to protect the citizens of America. Not many realize that many of these soldiers are women and have played a major role in fighting for our country. Whether they were stationed to provide medical assistance or fought on the front lines is not important. Their participation alone, with a simple motivation to preserve the peace and security of the United States, should be applauded more than it has been today. Despite biological differences, women have significantly contributed to the military over the years through their medical services and their participation in 95% of all military occupations, and, therefore, all constituents of U.S. armed forces should reinforce the idea of women in combat in order to eliminate the sexist stereotypes prevalent today.