Just recently, the military lifted its ban on women in combat positions in the U.S. military. Many people think this is a good thing because it gets rid of the barriers between genders and shows fairness, but these people may not know the facts. It is not about fairness. It’s about effectiveness. It’s about having the deadliest military the world will ever see.
There are things men are meant for, and things women are meant for. War is a man’s world. Men have fought wars for thousands of years, and it was always meant to be men. But today we live in a society about equality and fairness, and most people don’t think about the consequences of being truly equal. Women do not belong in combat. Look at the facts.
Men are stronger. The military has been comparing men and women for over 40 years. (Fredenburg) They have found that men outperform women in every scenario they threw at them. The Marines just recently did a test on 45 of their most fit women, to see how well they performed against the men.
…show more content…
The test the Marines did proved that women have a harder time shooting straight than men do. Being in the military and knowing how and being able to shoot straight is very important. You can’t have someone who is inaccurate in your squad. They are not going to do you any good. Every squad member needs to be a phenomenal marksman. Because if you can’t kill the enemy, they will kill you. The Marines also found that men can throw significantly farther than females. Men are able to throw grenades on average 30 to 35 meters (98 to 115 ft). A squad of Marines was in a firefight, and a security officer, who was female, came to help, and attempted to throw a grenade. She could only throw it 15 meters, which is the injury radius, and caused the Marines to have to get down and take cover, because she could injure or kill some of them. After that, they took her grenades away from her, and they did the
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
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.
The most recent debate questions a women’s engagement in combat. What distinguishes some positions as being acceptable while others are not? Who has the authority to approve exceptions, and what exceptions have been made? On May 13, 2011, a bill placed before the House of Representatives addressed the issues to “repeal the ground combat exclusion policy for female members” (HR 1928).
The U.S. military is a strong force and body that protects and serves the American people. Many people support the military and some even disagree with it. What people forget is that without a military the U.S. would be totally over run by foreign countries claiming ground. The military also helps with the nation’s economy boosting the balance of money in the works. Families have trouble with members who serve since there is always chance that they never return but it is because of their service that we are still a free country. Even though the military causes pain to families when a loved one is lost, the U.S. needs a military because with a military the economy increases and that without a military we would be invaded by a dictator or foreign
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 ...
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
One of the most important factors that shows how women are not as effective as men in combat situations is the obvious fact that they perform on different physical levels. Other important points are the fact that women are much more susceptible to injury than men. These factors could weigh heavily for th...
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.
Throughout the recent years there has been a gargantuan debate about if women should be drafted or not. Some believe that women should not be put into the draft when they turn 18. Others believe that if we were to treat everyone equally than women should also be put in the draft. In this essay I will present my thoughts about this pressing debate. Then, I will bring in some other peoples opinions to see some mores sides of this debate.
In fact, one study found “women often possessed superior communication skills which enhanced cooperation, and team spirit at the organizational level (Alderman. Pg.34) Another primary concern is the idea that women are unable to handle the mental strain of combat due to their nurturing and caring nature. One sergeant in the Army’s special forces asked, “They nurture kids, Will a woman return fire and kill a child insurgent fighter?” (Michaels). In response, women have already proven they care mentally tough for the job.
A few women did extremely well in their fight to be part of the military. The following was a quote from a passage about women in the military and how well they were doing. “The General said, ‘I was informed that the women were trained just like the men were trained. They were not given any preferential treatment. Two of these female cadets beat their male counterparts to win placement at the United States Military Academy in West Point and they are doing well.’”
Some people will argue that the physical differences between men and women are substantial enough to dismiss women from infantry. In the Army, women do not have to score as high as the men on the physical fitness test, further backing the argument about physical strength. Women, on average, have less upper-body strength, less muscle mass, and a lighter skeleton, which could lead to an increased risk of structural injury (Owens). If women were assigned to the front lines, they may not be capable of doing the physically demanding jobs such as handling Howitzer munitions (Owens). There is a feeling of a double standard because men are held to higher physical fitness requirements than women.
Females who wish to have a combat occupation must work hard to be able to fulfill the requirements. There are not many females who qualify for the combat jobs, but the ones who do, deserve the opportunity. One study reveals that “Six out of seven female recruits - and 40 out of about 1,500 male recruits - failed to pass the new regimen of pull-ups, ammunition-can lifts, a 3-mile run and combat maneuvers required to move on in training for combat jobs, according to the data” (Baldor). Based on the research, many females did not pass the requirements for the combat jobs, which was predictable. For the females who did pass the run, pull-ups, ammunition-can lifts, and the 3-mile run, they one-hundred percent deserve to be allowed in combat.