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.
Those that oppose my idea of continuing to bar women from combat positions feel that it is sexist and politically incorrect. Some feel that limiting women to support positions is insulting to women, and that it is damaging to the relationships between men and women in the military. Furthermore, many believe that women should be given an equal chance to prove themselves alongside men. These people point out that some women may be able to stand up to the rigors that are required in combat arms positions; therefore, these women should be given the opportunity to serve in the military in these positions. The opposition also points out that the military has become more driven toward teamwork, and that a woman who is cap...
... middle of paper ...
... to allow women the opportunity to prove they worthy to serve in a combat arms position. However, when one sees how much physical strength, mental strength, and unit cohesiveness is required to fight in a war then they may conclude that allowing women to serve in these positions would severely hurt our country's ability to fight effectively in a war. I myself once thought it would be no big deal to allow women to serve in these positions, but after doing research I changed my mind. Women should be given the opportunities to fulfill their dreams if they are able. However, women should be held at the same level as men, and no concessions should be made to enable them to make the standard. Women should not be allowed to serve in combat positions, because the overwhelming majority of women will not be able to improve the system as it is now- and may even damage it.
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
In the Upfront Magazine Article “Women Warriors”, author Rebecca Zissou told the story of two women who recently graduated the Army’s Ranger School, but whether they would be able to serve alongside their fellow male graduates was unknown. Zissou also delved into the issue of whether or not women should be allowed to serve in combat positions. However, I believe that women should be allowed to serve in combat positions in the U.S. armed forces.
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.
Before World War I, women assisted the military during wartime mainly as nurses and helpers. Some women, however, did become involved in battles. Molly Pitcher, a Revolutionary War water carrier, singlehandedly kept a cannon in action after a artillery crew had been disabled. During the
Should women serve in combat positions? The Combat Exclusion Law has dealt with this question since the 1940’s. As time continues, the question remains. The military has increased the percentage of females allowed to be enlisted and commissioned in the services as well as increasing the positions allotted to them (Matthews, Ender, Laurence, & Rohall, 2009). Keenan posits “women have served with distinction in … the Revolutionary War…as volunteer nurses and were only occasionally in the direct line of fire…four nurses evacuating 42 patients while the Germans bombed their field hospital…” (the DoD Combat Exclusion Policy) pg. 21.
Women and the Draft Imagine a big war that has suddenly broken out between America and another country. The military suddenly realizes that in order to better their army and be stronger, they need more people to join and fight alongside them. The military decides their needs are drafted. However, men are the only ones eligible to be apart of the draft. Should this be something that should be changed with the military?
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 ...
Women are not as strong fighters as men are. Drafting women will create a weaker military because they are not built to fight against men. Some women are physically capable of being in the military but the majority are not.
Since the creation of the Selective Service Act of 1917, the role of a woman has evolved from the common role of a housewife, teacher or nurse. Now women have access to and are equally able to join many different career fields that were once gender based. The case Rostker v Goldberg 1981 debated whether or not women should be excluded from the Selective Service Act. Congress came to determine that “since women are excluded from combat roles in the Armed Forces, then they are not similarly situated for the purpose of the draft (Rostker, 1981)”. According to the Army Times in 2012, “The Army will start placing women in as many as 14,000 combat related jobs (Tan, 2012)”. So now, women are able to pursue combative careers in the military.
Gender integration in the military has always faced the question of social acceptance, whether 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 in how to integrate without upsetting the general public if our females were captured as prisoners of war, raped, discriminated or even blown up in combat. My paper will discuss three situations pertaining to the first female submariner, fighter pilot and infantry graduate. I will also discuss some of the arguments that male military leaders and lawmakers opposed the integration of women: lack of strength, endurance, and the disruption of unit cohesion. I will end this paper with my personnel experience as a female NCO responsible for other female subordinates within my command and share some of their experiences while deployed in combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
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.
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.