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.
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.
If women are interested in combat positions, then they should be expected to perform at the same level physically ...
... middle of paper ...
...posing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomson Gale. University of South Alabama Library. 13 July 2006 .
Schroeder, Patricia. “The Combat Exclusion Law Should Be Repealed.” Women in the Military (1991). Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomson Gale. University of South Alabama Library. 13 July 2006 .
Skaine, Rosemarie. “Properly Trained Servicewomen Can Overcome Physical Shortcomings.” Women at War: Gender Issues of Americans in Combat (1999). Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomson Gale. University of South Alabama Library. 15 July 2006 .
Wojack, Adam N. “Women Can Be Integrated Into Ground Combat Units.” Integrating Women into the Infantry (2002). Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomson Gale. University of South Alabama Library. 13 July 2006 .
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
Women in the US Military - Civil War Era. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Apr. 2017.
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 General Accounting Office concluded in a hearing on May 8th 1999 that combat inclusion is the greatest impediment to women attaining higher military rank. Until qualified women are given access to assignments that are central to the militaries mission, they will be marginalized. Sexual harassment is a huge problem
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.
"Update: Women in the Military." Issues and Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 29 May 2007. Web.
Becraft, Carolyn J. “ A Case for Women in Combat.” U.S Army Command and General Staff
The signing of the Women’s Armed Service Integration Act increased women’s interest in the military. Women were now able to take o...
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 ...
Ruby, J. (2005, November 1). Women in Combat Roles: Is That the Question?. Off Our Backs,35, 36.
Both men and women fought on the battlefield. Hundreds of women served as nurses, laundresses, cooks and companions to the male soldiers in the Continental Army.6 In addition, there were some that actually engaged in battle. Seeing "no reason to believe that any consideration foreign to the purest patriotism,"7 Deborah Sampson put on men's clothing and called herself Robert Shirtliffe in order to enlist in the Army. "Robert Shirtliffe" fought courageously; "his" company defeated marauding Indians north of Ticonderoga.8 There is also the valiancy of the water carrier Mary Hays, otherwise known as Molly Pitcher, who took up arms after her husband fell.9 As a six-foot tall woman, Nancy Hart was considered an Amazon Warrior. Living in the Georgia frontier, this "War Woman" aimed and, with deadly accuracy, shot British soldiers who invaded the area.10 Mentioned in the beginning of this essay was Margaret Corbin, another woman on the battlefield.
The story of America’s military woman can be traced to the birth of our nation. During the American Revolutionary War, the 18th and 19th centuries, where women served informally as nurses, seamstresses, cooks, and even as spies and were subject to Army’s rules of Conduct. Though not in uniform, these women shared soldier’s hardships including inadequate housing and little compensation. Women have formally been part of the U.S Armed Forces since the Inception of the Army Nurse Corps in 1901. In 1973 the transition to the All-Volunteer Force marked a dramatic increase in the opportunities available for women to serve in the military. As of September 30, 2009, the total number of active duty women in the U.S was 203, 375, and women made up 14.3 percent of the U.s armed forces (Robinson). Women are a crucial role in c...
One main rebuttal to his want of equality of men, women, and children and their position on the battlefield is that women and children are not physically capable of performing the same tasks as men. Males are genetically built differently than women; they are bigger and stronger. Having women and children on the battlefield may not be the best option because of their lack of superior strength. Although, even though women and children are not as physically strong as men, they may be mentally tougher. Also, some women are stronger and more capable than certain men.
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.