Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Women during war and conflict
Roles of women in combat civil war
Women during war and conflict
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Women during war and conflict
The United States (US) has been involved on the ongoing wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria for many years. After nearly a decade of war with an enemy that cannot be compared to any past adversary our military has been forced to evolve. In order to confront all of the issues that occur in a society that is repressive to women we have to evaluate rules that have governed our forces. One primary focus for the evaluation has been the role of women in a combat environment. In past wars and conflicts women were restricted from the “front lines”. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are very different. Our male soldiers are unable to speak to the women due to cultural and religious constraints. This has forced the evaluation of women in combat in this war. If the Islamic cultural standards are ignored the risk to the United States’ long term mission is significant. The enemy is media savvy, using every possible situation to exploit his stronger opponent. The risk and gains of allowing women to have a more forward role in the war has to be carefully weighted. Although the adversary will exploit the situation, the war itself has tested the economic and political strength of the nation. Both men and women have been involved on multiple deployments that have resulted in the loss of life and serious injury. This could be true of any of the wars the US has been engaged in. But this particular war has no definitive enemy or adversary, no laws or rules, no true front line. Since the adversary is motivated by ideology the US military has been engaged in a chess game of strategy, balanced with traditional war tactics. This is a very Asymmetric War. Because of Asymmetric Warfare; women have to play a more active role in combat.
As...
... middle of paper ...
...kes the possibility of guaranteeing that Female American Soldiers will not be in combat impossible. Therefore the role that female soldiers fulfill has been redefined out of necessity.
Works Cited
Army Public Affairs. Women in the US Army. n.d. 04 03 2011 .
Aspin, Les. "The New York Times." 13 Jan 1994. 04 03 2011 .
Garcia, J. Malcolm. "The Virginia Quarterly Review." July 2008. VQR. 26 Feb 2011 .
Goodwin, Liz. Female suicide bomber kills two U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan. 23 07 2010. 04 03 2011 .
McKenzie, Kenneth. The Revenge of the Melians: Asymmetric Threats and the next QDR. Washington DC: NDU Press, 2000.
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
World War Two was the period where women came out of their shells and was finally recognized of what they’re capable of doing. Unlike World War One, men weren’t the only ones who were shined upon. Women played many significant roles in the war which contributed to the allied victory in World War Two. They contributed to the war in many different ways; some found themselves in the heat of the battle, and or at the home front either in the industries or at homes to help with the war effort as a woman.
...and the responsibility to be just as patriotic and dedicated as any other. When the war ended and the men returned, women weren’t required for the occupations, and this stirred a yearning in women to be once again sovereign, and perhaps the time set a scene for a path to complete gender integration and a women’s rights movement.
Campbell begins by examining the Women’s Auxiliary Army Corps in the United States and the “experiments” that the Army General Staff held “to see how well American women could perform” (302). Ultimately, they discovered that “mixed gender units performed better than all male units” (302). Similar British experiences found much the same thing; in fact, it was the model of the British army that the United States “was watching closely” (306). In Britain in 1941, 125,000 women were drafted into the military, while 430,000 more volunteered over the next three years (306). The purpose of these units was to allow more men to fight offensively on the continent while the women protected the defensive lines. Neither country allowed the women to fight, however; in the United States the public was not “ready to ...
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.
Since the resolution of World War II, the United States has been involved in over fifteen extensive military wars. Recent wars between Iraq and Afghanistan are being fought over several issues which affect women in both the United States and the other nations. While the military is often thought of a male dominated institution, women are present and affected all throughout the system as soldiers, caretakers, partners, and victims. Transnational feminists often fight against war due to the vulnerability that is placed on women during times of war. Despite often being overlooked, there is no doubt that women are heavily included in the devastating consequences of war.
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).
Women during wartime situations were so determined to participate in the defense of their country and their homes, they went from performing the traditional duties of cooking, sewing, fixing the weapons for the soldiers to serving as soldiers themselves along side the men. They hid fugitives and even became spies. During World War II and the Vietnam War, women were only allowed to serve as nurses because military leaders did not want to expose women other than nurses to the horrors of combat. Women were not given any form of training and were not permitted to carry weapons which would able them to defend themselves against the enemy. Decisions permitting the deployment of women especially enlisted women, to the combat area was the military habit of over-protection, based on the notion that the women would not be able to cope with the slightest inconvenience without loss of morale and efficiency. It was just this kind of thinking that was continually interjected into the decision-making process when it came to enlisted women, which were often treated as though they were not much brighter than a young child. “The male soldiers, sailors, airmen and hostile wives back home labeled these
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.
Trying to hold the homefront together while there was a war waging abroad was not an
Since the creation of the Selective Service Act of 1917, the role of a woman has evolved from the common role of a housewife, teacher or nurse. Now women have access to and are equally able to join many different career fields that were once gender based. The case Rostker v Goldberg 1981 debated whether or not women should be excluded from the Selective Service Act. Congress came to determine that “since women are excluded from combat roles in the Armed Forces, then they are not similarly situated for the purpose of the draft (Rostker, 1981)”. According to the Army Times in 2012, “The Army will start placing women in as many as 14,000 combat related jobs (Tan, 2012)”. So now, women are able to pursue combative careers in the military.
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.
I am in favor of equality for women, just not when it comes to women in combat. There have been women in society doing heroic things since the Revolutionary war. There have been brave women in war posing as men so they could fight. There are a select few women who could handle war and combat. The negative aspects of women in combat outweigh the positive. Women should not participate in military combat. However they may join the military and served in traditional roles such as nurses and office staff. The difference between men and women is women are physically weaker, they have vital personal needs, and they attract male troops.
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.
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 .