Rebecca Zissou Women Warriors Analysis

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.

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

capable than men. For instance, in a training exercise at Fort Benning Ranger School, a woman, Shaye Haver, helped a man, Michael Janowski, carry his gear up a cliff. Despite this, people are still saying things like women shouldn’t serve in the armed forces because they’ll weaken the unit. After learning about these instances it is clear that we should allow women in combat positions in the armed forces because they have demonstrated that they can meet the same physical requirements as a man.
Women have already been serving in combat positions even though they are not officially permitted to, so allowing them to serve in combat positions will not mean that much of a change. Although women are not officially allowed in combat positions, they have been fighting alongside men in places like Iran and Afghanistan. Some people argue that having women serve with men will weaken our troops and change the dynamic. However, there doesn’t seem to have been a noticeable change in force or dynamic in the time that women have fought with male soldiers. In addition, according to the Upfront Magazine video Women at Arms: On the Ground, “Women have demonstrated courage and confidence in combat situations, winning medals of valor in the process.” This statement illustrates that not only have women been in combat with men, but they have done so passionately. If women can fight and do so well, then there is no question that they should be able to serve alongside their fellow male soldiers. In summary, allowing women to serve in combat positions will not result in a noticeable change because women have already been fighting with men, although military policy technically does not allow it.
In conclusion, women in the United States armed forces should be allowed to serve in combat positions.

This is because women have proved themselves to be of equal capability as men, and they have already been serving in combat positions alongside men, though not legally. Fortunately, the Pentagon was able to see this and on December 3, 2015 Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter announced that they would be officially allowing women to serve in all combat positions in the U.S. armed forces. This change in military policy will allow more representation for women in the armed forces but it also represents a major leap towards gender equality, further closing the gap between men and

women.