Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Role of women in military combat roles
The role of British women in World War 2
Role of women in military combat roles
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Role of women in military combat roles
The Problem
The problem with the United States Armed Forces is that women are not allowed in combat. Not including women in the combat policy will not strengthen the Armed Forces but will weaken them. Women in the combat are a controversial topic. During the several wars, women were used in a many capacities, including nursing, spying, supplying and maintaining camps, as well as the occasional combat activity as necessary. The controversy of today has a lot to do with the role of women in combat, and how their presence will impact male soldiers. There have been very few women in history that is given credit for being a war hero. Why should a man always be the hero when a woman is capable of doing the job as well? For many years women have been have been doing the job for a lot longer than that, but never got the credit they deserved. This problem affects everyone because it decreases morale. This problem is not getting any better. Women train in the same manner as the men, but never get to use their training. This is a fraud, waste and abuse, and a definite waste of money. Throughout history, women had to fight for equal rights. For example, the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified and women won the right to vote. The civil rights movements of the 1960s inspired a second wave of keen activism confronting the inequities women faced in virtually all areas of American life. State and federal laws were passed outlawing discrimination in employment and education, and women responded to their new opportunities with enthusiasm. This is a form of discrimination. As a woman I am angry about the fact that women are not assigned to combat duty equally with men.
Throughout history women have already proven themselves...
... middle of paper ...
...ut the idea of marriage and having children before they go into combat. While combat is dangerous, it does not mean that everyone that goes will be killed, but options still need to be weighed. The U.S. should just be like Nike and do it. Everyone thought allowing African Americans in the armed forces would divide the military, but it has not. No one ever thought that the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” would work, but as long as no one asked and no one told there was not a problem. People thought the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” repeal would also be disastrous, but there having openly gay people in the military has not been a problem either. The U.S. should stop beating around the bush and allow women into combat. Perhaps our country could be a bench mark for other countries to allow women into combat. This will not only strengthen our country morally but militarily as well.
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 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
In the essay “Why gays shouldn’t serve” by David Horowitz he states that “Don’t ask, Don’t Tell policy is a way of containing the destructive force of sex on a combat capability called Unit Cohesion. (354)” This controversial topic has surfaced more and more recently because Barack Obama wanted to let all people serve in the military, regardless of their sexual orientation. “More than 1,000 retired flag and general officers have joined us in signing an open letter to President Obama and Congress, repeal of this law would prompt many dedicated people to leave the military (James J. Lindsay).” There are multiple points you could focus on when trying to explain your point on why gays or lesbians should not serve in the military. The first point we will be focusing on is: how would military life change if straight men or women knew that there were gays or lesbians sleeping next to them? The second point is: would straight men and women communicate with the gays or lesbians the same way as they would toward other straight men or women? The third and final point is: how would other countries view our military if they knew we had gays or lesbians in the military?
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.
Many women during WWII experienced things that they had never done before. Before the war began women were supposed to be “perfect”. The house always had to be clean, dinner ready on the table, laundry done, and have themselves as well as their children ready for every event of the day. Once the war began and men were drafted, women had to take on the men’s role as well as their own. Women now fixed cars, worked in factories, played baseball, handled the finances, and so forth. So, what challenges and opportunities did women face on the home front during WWII? Women had many opportunities like playing baseball and working, they also faced many hardships, such as not having enough food, money, and clothing.
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.
Historically, women have been excluded from combat roles. On the surface, it is because men, who have always thought of themselves better and stronger than women, believed that females could not handle the responsibility of holding a combat position and women are rupturing the socially constructed gender norms that were set in place. According to Nicole Dombrowski, “no other topic concerning women’s role in war creates as great a debate as the question of women’s active participation in combat units.” The benefits for the expansion of women’s roles in the military advantage not only the women but the military as well. In comparison, the drawbacks of expansion of women’s roles are usually disadvantages to the men within the military.
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.
Historically, women’s participation in combat roles was limited or hidden, with the exception of a few individuals. Although women had fought unofficially in the U.S army as far back as the Revolutionary War, which they usually disguised themselves as men in order to avoid the rules that excluded them. The gender war and integration in the military has always faced the question of social acceptance, were as society can accept how women will be treated and respected in the military. Throughout the history of the military, our leadership has always sought ways of how to integrate without upsetting the general public to believing that women are capable and created equal as any man.
Like with any modern point of contention, it is important to understand the history. Since as early as the revolutionary war, women have been active participants in the U.S. military. From nursing soldiers to cross-dressing and actually fighting, women have played a crucial
In 1999, more than 1,000 men and women were discharged from military service due to their sexuality. That number has actually decreased compared to recent years. (Suro NP) Homosexuals were purged from federal employment in 1950, with Bill Clinton updating that policy in 1993 by adding the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Pursue” policy. (Deicher 176) This policy doesn’t work and needs to either be updated again or the ban against homosexuals lifted. Gays should be allowed to fight for the military for employment reasons, the right to fight for one’s country, and because they are no different from anyone else. The fact of the matter is that not even experts can argue in favor of keeping the ban on gays in the military. With such strong evidence, lifting the ban should be the first priority for the newly elected president of the year 2000.
World War 1 had a massive effect on women in society. Their lives drastically changed in a short amount of time. In fact with this change came plenty of responsibility, and a great deal of both physically and psychologically demanding work. This responsibility is what made women more confident and self-satisfied, which later on led them to fight harder for their rights.
“After more than a half-decade operating in a favorable recruiting environment that allowed the U.S. military to be increasingly selective and to meet most recruitment goals, the new environment is “likely to become significantly less fertile in the near future,” according to a new summary report released by CNA” (Wagner). In the near future some have predicted that we are slowly needing more recruiment, and not reached the maximum of what we need for our military. If we took the right from LGBT individuals to not be able to serve in the military that would be harming us more than anything by limiting our recruitment
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.
Should women be allowed in the military? My answer was at first a resounding “no.” However, once I started my research, my opinion changed. In 1948, Congress passed the combat exclusion law that prohibited women in the Air Force, Marines, and Navy to hold combat positions; however, the Army can assign these duties as they see fit (Schroeder). Some people assume that Americans are not ready to see a woman wounded or killed in war; however, there are female police officers that are wounded or killed daily (Schroeder). How can we rationalize that a woman has the right to die protecting our local communities but not our country? If a person chooses to be in a combat field, and can pass the physical demands required, gender should not be an issue. The arguments of physical differences and cohesion among the troops are valid arguments but not substantial enough to prevent women from serving in frontline combat roles within the military.