More handpicked essays just for you.
Literature review of gender discrimination
Role of women in military combat roles
Role of women in military combat roles
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Literature review of gender discrimination
In 1994 Secretary of Defense Les Aspen set in place a policy barring women from direct ground combat positions. That policy, which is still in effect today was based on a study done by an all male committee that looked more at social biases in determining it than at the facts needed to make such a policy. If that committee however would have looked at 3 areas of study and placed themselves in an unbiased state, they would have been able to make a policy that was supported by facts and figures and not by views and beliefs.
To begin an analysis of this policy, one needs to know the actual policy as the government words it. In a memo on 13 January 1994, Secretary Aspen laid out the policy for the heads of each branch of service. His policy stated:
“The following direct ground combat assignment rule, and accompanying definition of ‘direct ground combat’ are adopted effective October 1, 1994, and will remain in effect until further notice.
A. Rule. Service Members are eligible to be assigned positions for which they are qualified except that women shall be excluded from assignment to units below the brigade level whose primary mission is to engage in direct combat on the ground, as defined below.
B. Definition. Direct ground combat is engaging an enemy on the ground with individual or crew served weapons, while being exposed to hostile fire or to a high probability of direct physical contact with the hostile force’s personnel. Direct ground combat takes place well forward on the battlefield while locating and closing with the enemy to defeat them by fire, maneuver, or shock effect.” (Memo, pg. 2)
As previously stated, this policy was the result of a study done by an all male committee that was biased based on societies own beliefs of women’s role in the military. During the late 1980s and early 1990s when the study was done, the percentage of women in the military was still extremely low due to women still not being accepted as a soldier. This, along with the social bias, was the basis for the policy.
While doing the study, if the committee would have placed themselves behind John Rawls’ veil of ignorance, the would have been able to develop a policy that was supported entirely by fact and not by bias.