Should women serve in combat units? Introduction It is my opinion that the ability and training of women in the military should be the base of the decision of where and how women serve in the military; rather than gender aspects. In the recent years, the subject of human rights has been the elimination of many media and public discussions. The key topic in the discussions is equality treatment and handling between the two genders. Several policies within the constitution define the expectations of law on each gender (Field & John 7). The societal setting and upbringing also has its impacts on the behavior of each gender and the perception that the genders have for each other. The American culture takes pride in the practices of democracy and justice for every person; however, this may not apply to all people. Initial thoughts on gender issues Currently, among the issues that affect the subject of democracy are the problems of the modern day gender roles. The issue epitomized in the years after the war of the 1950s. The women abandoned the initial works they used to do, such as being a homemaker. Today, they are extremely degrading themselves in their pursuit to achieve the so-called- gender equality (Pennington 26). They let themselves drink from the pot of hard headedness in believe that they can manage the activities that their male counterparts perform. I do not dispute that their fight to attain certain privileges are beneficial to them and the society. However,
ecretary Panetta 's decision to repeal the Department of Defense policy preventing women from serving in direct ground combat units opened Pandora 's box. We have since witnessed a fierce debate over whether women should be allowed to serve in specialties previously opened to males only. The media promptly rushed to side with those contending that all direct ground combat jobs should be open to women, suggesting that women proven had themselves on a "nonlinear" battlefield, where there were no distinguishable front and rear lines. Furthermore, many have rallied behind those women who have been able to demonstrate superior physical abilities, such as the two women soldiers that recently completed Ranger School. I would submit in line with the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces that neither accomplishment demonstrates that these women or women in general are the "best-qualified and most capable" to serve in direct ground combat arms specialties. This issue is not about what women should be allowed to do, it 's really about what are they capable of doing. The bias is not institutional, the bias is physiological.
I realized that although in theory women in the armed forces seemed like a good idea, there are many obstacles that make that reality very difficult to achieve. In writing this paper I am not proposing that either position is more valid or right than the other. I only hope to present each side in an equal light to help others to understand the issues involved.
I agree with women participating in combat. I feel women are sometimes minimized and overlooked to the things that they can and are capable of doing. If I was to serve in the military I would not be affected by someone of a different gender. I believe that can only happened if a female does not have the self-esteem and confidence that they need. When someone has these things, there is nothing that can bring someone down or have a person feeling less than what they are. Years ago, a lot of the jobs women did in the military were not at all dangerous. They were not allowed to do certain things in the military because they are women. Today women and men are put on for the same jobs. I think although we as a society have not reached the level
Women serving in the military is a topic that most people have very strong convictions on. Rather you are for or against women serving, you can find strong opinions that support both sides in this contentious dispute. Women have struggled to fit into the military life for years. Even though woman have fought alongside men in each key battle from the start of the American Revolution, they still find it hard to shake the stereo types about woman who serve. Woman have always had to cloak themselves in a masquerade of sorts to serve alongside men. When woman were finally accepted into the military, they were given secondary roles to the men. The Pentagon has just recently began to realize that gender really do not matter on the battlefield. Since the Pentagons enlightenment, one can now see progress in the integration of women in all expanding military careers. Women have always proven that they are not only an asset to the military but they are the strength of the America’s military.
To form an opinion on the subject it is imperative to understand women’s role in our military since its inception. During the revolutionary war many served in camps to do soldiers laundry, cook for them, and treat their wounds with permission from the commanding officers. In the Civil War women were in charge of hospitals and serving as nurses and cooks for both sides of the conflict, with the additional duty for some to act as spies. The Civil War is the first and only conflict that a woman earned the Medal of Honor; Dr. Mary Walker penetrated the enemy front lines to care for wounded Union Soldiers when no man would
Through the deaths and the injuries, through the explosions and gunfire, through the heartache and brokenness, women have been serving in the military one way or another. Since the beginning of time, women have been fighting for their rights. They fought for their right to work, they fought for their right to vote, and they fought for their right to be in the military. Beginning in the Revolutionary War, women were allowed to join the military as nurses and support staff. Since then, they have gradually been able to do more tasks and jobs that the men do. Today, the conflict is whether or not women should be allowed to fight in military combat. The argument is controversial, and will more than likely be a never-ending debate.
For years women have been trying to gain gender equality throughout the working world, along with in the military. Since the beginning of a uniformed military, women could not serve in military occupational specialty (MOS) positions that put them in direct combat roles. Although many women have contributed in significant ways, they have not been authorized to serve in MOS such as infantry, artillery, or armor. As the war on terrorism has developed since 9/11, women have slowly worked their way farther into the military and its many roles. This resulted in women being placed into direct combat roles. Though women have been allowed into many different roles, there is still one battle that they have yet to win and this time the majority is not backing them. Women are trying to gain access to United States Special Operations units in every branch of the military and the majority of these operators are not happy about it. While some people believe women deserve equality and the chance to do what men can do in the military, that is why women should not be
It is worthwhile to reflect on the social and political advancements of women during the past one hundred years. Women now have the right to vote and to own property. They let their voices be heard instead of sitting silently in the kitchen. Women hold jobs previously restricted to men - police officer, firefighter, construction worker, doctor, truck driver and scientist. Obviously, this list is not all inclusive. Unfortunately, there is still one area that remains restricted to women. Women have assisted the military forces as far back as the Revolutionary War and yet there remains positions that women are excluded from. Female military personnel, having proven their ability to handle combat situations and having
Women being prioritized over combat when injured is an issue that isn’t just because they’re women, but because it’s human nature to want to help those wounded whether they be men or women. James Gibson a master sergeant says, “if a girl gets shot in combat, all of the guys will be more focused on helping her than fighting.” The opposition argues that, guys will be way more subjective to this when a woman is wounded in combat, which is why there should be inequality. Men shouldn’t be distracted from their duties in combat. This is a valid argument, it’s also a partially faulty argument, owing to the fact that it’s human nature to want to help all people in need, regardless of their gender (Gibson). Nevertheless, men and women both need to
“We are all equal; it is not birth but virtue alone that makes the difference.” This insightful quote from the famous French philosopher and historian “Voltaire” seems to accurately represent the beliefs of the factions of American citizens pushing to allow women to fight in combat positions within the US Armed Forces. Though the topic has just recently been boosted into the media and congressional politics, it has been long debated. A rather current editorial from USA Today titled: “Open Combat Positions to Women” outlines the recent developments in the status of a much disputed and controversial issue facing the nation today. Though somewhat less in-depth than some opposing opinions, the
Women have fought alongside men in the United States Military in every major battle since the American Revolution. The roles of women in the military have evolved over time to allow the incorporation of women in expanding military career fields. Women have proven themselves to be an asset to the military despite some of society believing women would weaken America’s military effectiveness. Today more than 200,000 women are active-duty military, this is about 14.5% of all military. Currently, women are involved in all branches of the Armed Forces; there are around 74,000 women in the Army, 62,000 in the Air Force, 53,000 in the Navy, and 14,000 in the Marine Corps (By the numbers: Women in the U.S. Military). Military women continue to
Since 1901, women have served in some form of the military, however, dating back to the American Revolution women have had an unofficial role. Women have had and will continue to have an important role in the military, the question is whether women should be allowed to occupy specific combat positions. Traditionally women have not been allowed in combat occupations, but recently these restrictions have been somewhat lifted, making certain occupations available to women. Despite the lift complications arise from women being in combat vocations and it’s not just because of the physical differences, there is also the increased risk of sexual assault. Due to the detrimental impact on the military, soldiers, and society, women should not
When it comes to combat assignments and the needs of the military, men take precedence over all other considerations, including career prospects of female service members. Female military members have been encouraged to pursue opportunities and career enhancement within the armed forces, which limit them only to the needs and good of the service due to women being not as “similarly situated” as their male counterparts when it comes to strength or aggressiveness, and are not able to handle combat situations.
Women have played a tremendous role in many countries' armed forces from the past to the present. Women have thoroughly integrated into the armed forces; all positions in the armed forces should be fully accessible to women who can compete with men intellectually and physically.
Ninety percent of all military occupations in the military include all genders, but the top ten percent of roles are excluded to women. Women have already felt the misogyny with unequal pay and unfair treatment by men, now women have to face the discrimination for fighting for our country. Women should be able to serve in the front lines because it makes the military stronger as a whole with more diversity, women in other countries fight on the front lines and women have made significant contributions in the military so far.