America has always claimed to be the place of equal opportunity, so why shouldn't women be able to make their own decision and fight alongside men on frontlines? Women deserve the right to fight for their freedom too. There are no resounding facts that show in any way women are less capable than men. As is evident in the legalizing of allowing women to participate in the front lines in January 2013 of last year( ). Also as the majority of the rest of the world’s military powers allowing it. With this it is also beneficial to our society, providing women with equal career opportunities as to men, and giving a broader selection to fill spots in our military. Without out this it denies the opportunity of earning the respect achieved by …show more content…
When the thought that women should be able to fight on the front lines arose, everybody started to make comments that seemed to degrade woman's physical and mental abilities. It is true that men are usually physically stronger than women, but as long as they are able to go through the same physical training without problems there is no reason they can’t fight alongside men. Another argument was that women will have a negative impact on the battlefield. In most cases that is not true because it will improve the units abilities as a whole and the will accomplish their missions with better performance. If women were not cut out for the job they would not be allowed to fight on the front lines. There have been many instances that prove that women are just as capable as men. For example, the Lioness Program, which was created by the U.S. Marine Corp to conduct outreach operations with Iraqi women. The program quickly expanded over the years to include Civil Affair-type operations and more cultural outreach efforts. The women also have to be put through a week of training. Although it was not considered a “combat” role, it was the first time that women were able to serve at the same capacity as the infantry. This program was started before the ban on females fighting on front lines was lifted and now the women can take almost any position a man can. The American community needs to be
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
Women were only allowed to fly the planes and be nurses, but they should have also been able to fight in the war, not just be transporting things. Women in the workforce war era really helped shape the roles of women in the future. Nowadays women are encouraged and accepted when joining the war, but in World War II women would act and dress like the men because they weren’t able to fight in the war. Back in WWII women were only able to have certain jobs,but they took the ones they were able to get. Now women can have any job men have and can do almost anything men can do.
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.
Women should not go into hand-to-hand combat because of all that heavy protective gear weighing their bodies down. The protective gear is extremely heavy and is not the kind of gear a woman should wear. The protective gear is made for men who have upper body strength and is able to carry it on their backs across the battlefield. If a woman tried to sprint across the battlefield with all of that extremely heavy gear latched onto her back, she wouldn’t make it. Women also have a lower aerobic capacity than men. Just imagine if women had to run with heavy gear on and was extremely exhausted from running. Only one or two women can do that, but most women cannot. Men on the other hand have a much higher aerobic capacity than women. Men can run without getting exhausted easily and they have enough strength to carry all of the heavy gear on their backs. The better the soldiers are, the higher chance the team has of winning.
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.
...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.
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.
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...
Today I will inform you why I think that women should fight on the front lines with men. In 2011 there were 203,000 women serving in the USA military. So women are already serving in the military so why not let them go on the front lines? I believe that women should be able to serve on the front lines along-side men If the women is already in-listed they already took that first step.
With a woman in combat, it would keep our service larger. (Sisters in Arms RSS, 2009). Men take up 67%, with woman serving 22% of all of the military in the United States of America today. (Sisters in Arms RSS, 2009) Imagine if that percentage of woman got larger. It would push the men to be better than them, equally making our nations military larger. Therefore, if we have more military, we have more defense for this
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
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 this essay I will evaluate the success and the lack of success of the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire using three different Chinese perceptions: Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism. Through Confucianism, I will
Across the history, women Suffer from luck of their right. Culture and civilization was not respect women and put them in the lower layer in their social pyramid. Kill them were they alive, while other give them a life with a lot of misery and obstacle, which is the same thing or killing them better than these life . At the few previous centuries, the world growth and become more opening. people understanding that they are needing women in a lot of job outside their home as men. Sadly, when we came to combat sector, we stop thinking logically. It is men major one hundred percent . If we look to the book (1001 things everyone should know about women's history) which written by Constance Jones (2000) we can find that only 88013 women among history had the ability to take part in military by give a variety of services. Some country actually these day try to make it happen. For instance the first country was allowed women in military was Norway around 1985. Then, it followed by thirteen other countries. It still small percentage compared with the world. It is the right of women to join army and take part in combat, because they are capable as men in adapting with situation. Also, they have equally amount in cerebration and they have the right to decide their own destiny.