Exam Essay Historically, women have been excluded from combat roles. On the surface, it is because men, who have always thought of themselves better and stronger than women, believed that females could not handle the responsibility of holding a combat position and women are rupturing the socially constructed gender norms that were set in place. According to Nicole Dombrowski, “no other topic concerning women’s role in war creates as great a debate as the question of women’s active participation in combat units.” The benefits for the expansion of women’s roles in the military advantage not only the women but the military as well. In comparison, the drawbacks of expansion of women’s roles are usually disadvantages to the men within the military. Drawbacks of expanding women’s roles in the military Society has placed strict gender norms on both males and females and these norms are suppose to be rigid and fixed.
A soldier should be a soldier, if a woman cannot live up to the expectations that being a soldier has, then they should not be allowed to be a soldier. Just because people cannot make it through boot camp, does not mean that the ... ... middle of paper ... ...iers. Women dismissed from the military will have something to strive for in the future, or they can attempt to progress through another corporations career ladder. When a company fires an employee for not performing as well as his peers that is not discrimination, it is simply improving the company. So if the Military fires female soldiers who are not performing, or are not as physically fit, as male soldiers, then that is not discrimination; it is simply improving the company.
The Problem The problem with the United States Armed Forces is that women are not allowed in combat. Not including women in the combat policy will not strengthen the Armed Forces but will weaken them. Women in the combat are a controversial topic. During the several wars, women were used in a many capacities, including nursing, spying, supplying and maintaining camps, as well as the occasional combat activity as necessary. The controversy of today has a lot to do with the role of women in combat, and how their presence will impact male soldiers.
Women could now work outside the home and earn their own wages, albeit in still typically “feminine” jobs and for less money than men. But many saw the participation of women in the military as more than a threat to jobs. The army was now a threat to a woman’s sexuality. The public worried that by joining a workforce so undeniably masculine women would start to behave like men. Complaints that the army would turn... ... middle of paper ... ...the many accomplishments of women display the spectrum of their capabilities, society’s idealized view of them is too ingrained to change overnight.
Thus, much of the resistance to women joining the military in combat roles is derived from the traditional, discriminatory belief that men should protect women from harm. The concept that women are physically and emotionally weaker than men, and therefore should not serve in combat, ignores the often-grueling physical training involved in military training. For both male and female enlistees, training, fitness and psychological exams are part of is part of army life. Both sexes are required to pass physical fitness exams, and discipline is an expectation for all who consider serving in the military. Furthermore, frequently aligned with strength is the allegation of psychological weakness, bringing with it the masculine tagged word, bravery.
Women’s Responsibility in the Military-The Right to Fight 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.
In addition, women who do achieve the title of “executive” are highly concentrated into the types of jobs that offer little or no opportunity for advancement to the top. They are not likely to serve in roles or capacities that are crucial to the success of the company, and both the tasks and duties performed, however well done, will not designate them as capable leaders within their organizations. Gender-based job segregation at the upper-levels of corporate management r... ... middle of paper ... ...valuated and affirmed by those around us. For women, however, this process is often interrupted, due to the fact that “when women display leadership behaviors we consider normative in men, we see them as unfeminine, [and] when women act more feminine, we don’t see them as leaders” (Sarah Green, Harvard Business Review). This issue is felt and internalized, rather than seen, and drastically decreases women’s motivation to lead within an organization.
Instead they are positions now open to women. They included those jobs that are closed to women such as 12B, 13B, and 11B and 19K this job were closed to women because they thought that women weren’t battle tested. The army is still deciding on if they should let them be in the combat MOS jobs. The people that will choose are the army training and doctrine command they are trying to see if a women meets the requirements to handle the physical training. Ensuring that the army has clear standards for all females that want to be in the combat field.
While some individuals feel that the biological differences between men and women in combat would put our military at a disadvantage, evidence and logic prove that they are misinformed. Women in combat are able to fulfill many front line jobs already, are not at any higher risk of death than living a civilian life at home, and have the right to fight at the same level as their counterparts if they are capable of meeting the standards for battle. Nonetheless, there are still individuals who insist that women do not belong on the front lines. Former Army Ranger, Roger Chapman, argues that “it’s about winning a war, not providing an opportunity. At the end of the day it's about national security" (Musgrave).
This can be seen sadly in abortion. The ironic thing is the same feminists who wish to put women in combat would not tolerate even the thought of the same women being exposed to the type of violence experienced in combat elsewhere. Instead, supporters of women in combat should join other groups who abhor violence against women. The military has rules against women serving in roles with a high probability of direct combat. The problem is women are assigned to the support units which are deployed along with the combat units ... ... middle of paper ... ...ew Polesetsky, Eds.