Argumentative Essay: The Role Of Women In The Military

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

Thesis Statement: A few females are joining the military, and those taking leadership roles is even small, caused by existence of limited information about the Army and less combat roles, and this can be addressed by lifting ban on women on combat and creating more combat support jobs.

January 24, 2013 Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta lifted the ban on women serving in combat. For years women have served with honor and distinction. When faced with combat and in an insurgency type of modern warfare, any soldier can potentially see combat. Realistically, there is a difference between experiencing combat on a convoy and going out day after day on combat patrols to perform search and destroy missions. Having served as a Marine Infantryman in Afghanistan twice, I am against the decision to open all combat military occupation specialties (MOSs) to women. My purpose is not to degrade the valuable contributions of women in the military, but to specifically address their role and effect on direct combat Infantry and Special Forces units. I celebrate the decision to lift the previous ban on a social basis for women’s equality, but my personal experiences and knowledge of the way war is experienced makes me ultimately opposed to allowing women to serve in direct ground combat positions.

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.

Secretary Mr. Panetta’s decision to repeal the DOD policy preventing women from serving in direct ground combat units opened Pandora’s Box on the debate of whether or not women should be allowed to serve in specialties previously opened to males only. The narrative regarding the women serving in direct ground combat arms specialties was immediately high jacked by those sympathetic to women who have served in combat on a “nonlinear” battlefield, where there were no distinguishable front and rear lines. Additionally, 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 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.

The United States Army was founded on June 14, 1775, and since this day women have helped nurture this great branch into what is known today as the largest and oldest United States Military service. (“Women”) The US Army is consisted of about 452,064 enlisted soldiers and 87,610 officers. This total of 539,675 makes up 37.8% of all of the military branches. ("Demographics”) As time has carried on more and more women are looking to serve the country in the Army. While women have many skills and abilities to offer, there is still a major issue that needs to be addressed. Double standards for women in the Army has created a disservice to not only the females but the entire Army. In order to have a more efficient armed force, standards for men and women should be equivalent.

The article addresses the immediate concerns and resolutions concerning military women in combat. David Lerman provided overwhelming evidence that allows the reader to imagine a world with women in a combat role. He also states the pros and cons for women in combat roles. Although it is clear from Mr. Lerman’s tone that he supports women in combat, this article did not overwhelm the reader with positive regards. It fairly suggests important processes that will need to be in place before this implementation can be successful.

     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.

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.

The topic of women in combat is an ongoing debate that is currently being argued in many places, commonly in the United States. Women in combat next to men and a free women combat are two different perspectives in which women in combat are defined by their gender. Women in combat will provide help to those men who are to attend a combat. A free-women combat, on the other hand, prevents women from dying during combat due to not being allowed in combat. Since Women aren’t able to be included in any job in the military and have a right to be equally treated like men in combat, it’ll be unfair to more people. Women should be given the same right as men out in battlefields because “women serving in the armed forces has not wavered as warfare has changed, a clear sign that the necessity of women serving in combat is recognized.” In addition, “several other countries outside the U.S. already have women serving on the front lines.” Lastly, “Combat is nothing new to our women in the military. Several women have already given their lives serving in combat.” Women have, over the years, worked hard to get awarded the choice towards their career. Although it prevents more deaths, it’s also a sexist matter. Any job in the military should be a choice for women, it’s their career after all and they can make their own decisions.

Women have been participating in the United States military since the Revolutionary War, where they were nurses, maids, cooks and even spies. They played vital roles in order to keep those fighting on the front lines healthier, and even a more important role in keeping commanding officers informed with private information stolen from the other side. Although the Revolutionary War took play in 1776, the first law to be passed that permanently stated that women have an official place in the military was in 1948, almost one hundred and seventy-two years later. Since that time there has been a lack of true growth when it comes to integration of females in the military. In 1994, a law was passed that tried to prohibit women from being assigned to ground combat units below the brigade level. Women are excluded from more then 25% of active combat roles within the military and only in 2013 was the ban lifted which was the final barrier to allowing women into all active roles. This has been a huge step in the direction for women being considered as being equal but there are still challenges that women face within the military. Ranging from sexual assault, discrimination, bullying, and other tactics, it is clear that for many, the military is still a “boys club.”

After years of discussion and debate it appears that soon women will be sent into combat operations in the United States military. This is the way it should be because women are ready and competent to be put into combat roles in the U.S. military. Indeed, slowly but surely, the Defense Department and Congress have been inching towards a decision that will formalize the policy; in fact the National Defense Authorization Act, put before Congress in May, 2012 by U.S. Senators John McCain and Carl Levin will in effect order the military "…to come up with a plan to send women into battle" (McAuliff, 2012). Hopes are high that this will be approved by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama.

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.

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

Women being included in the military make for a stronger and better knit unit because of the vast diversity and opportunities that are now opened up. Widening the applicant pool calls for more talent and people with