Ground Combat Elements Integrated Task Force Job Analysis

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

Although women should be fighting in front line in the military many believe they should not. More than 200,000 position will still be remain exclusive to men. women won 't be able to qualify for jobs. “They are not going to be able to meet those standards” (Women in the Military: Why Can 't We Serve on the Front Lines). The weapon use in the front line are too dangerous. “women will not be able to handle the big

Men have always been looked upon as the leading sex. Looking back through history women have been the ones who take care of the home and children, while men are the ones who work and go to war. However in recent years there’s no doubt that women have become much more equal in the work force. Nevertheless men are still the ones who are forced to fight our wars when the time calls for it. Many think that women should be entirely equal to men having their choice to be drafted taken away but the fact is that they are physically at a disadvantage, too emotionally oriented, and the increase of female presence would have a more negative impact in the military in the way of social interactions.

Over the past few years, there has been huge discussions when the topic of equality for women who have joined the military is being brought up. Being that gender equality is a big thing in the military now, I decided to chose this topic and discuss how I feel about it. According to the United States constitution, all men are created equal and this does not exclude women. One of the main things I learned is that equality for women in the military is a major issue. There should be no gender inequality in the United States military period. Most jobs are now open to women that were once allowed for only a man to do but when it comes to something such as the military, it should have always been that way No one should be told they can’t do something when it requires fighting for your country. Even back when men were drafted in the military, women should have been able to get drafted as well. You would think the military would take any and everybody that is willing to fight for his or her country simply because it would make our job easier as a whole. Frequently, women are stereotyped as feeble and incapable of doing certain things. Nevertheless, this should not be applied in any kind of career, particularly in the military.

In Molly M. Ginty’s article “Military Women: All Guts, No Glory” she explores the issue of women who serve in the army and them being included in combat with males, and the inequality they have been through serving in the U.S Armed Forces over numerous years. With new legislating, and there being new roles for females there is always going to be the debate if women should be in combat with men or not. For years’ women who would join the army were just nurses and secretaries, because of people thinking that they are not fit to be in battle. Even though they all go through the same training, the women were put in position to practically serve those who were in battle which were the men. So personally I do agree with women being able to serve

Women now make up 14 percent of the active-duty military in the United States, which is up from 1.6 percent, 25 years prior. (Christian Science Monitor, 1). In 1948, President Truman signed the Women 's Armed Services Integration Act which created the role of women in the military. This law meant that each branch of the service was allowed to have one female Colonel (Byfield, 12). As of 2015, there are many women who serve as Generals and Admirals. All of these roles are non-combative. Even though some women can do anything a man can do, the vast majority can not, therefore making it an unsafe idea to place these women into combat positions.

The big worry stems from an idea about the degeneration of the combat community structure. So, with that in mind, let 's suppose that women are granted full entry and that the requirements for men and women are exactly the same. Let’s also suppose nobody tampers with the vetting process, meaning no overseeing, “Yes Men generals,” pushing women through, as well as no misogynistic gate-keeper putting an extra sandbag in a girls’ rucksack prior to some training

Is it misogynistic to believe that, in this day and age, women should not be allowed to do the same job as a man? No, unequivocally and resoundingly no. The simplest way to state this view is by making sure that everyone knows that men and women are in fact different. They are different in muscle mass, in mindset, and chemically. Men are built for war and fighting, women are built for child birth and nurturing. The sexes view most things in life differently, so why would anybody think that there should be equality in something that is by nature masculine? Make no mistake, the military has but one single purpose and that is to fight the battles that writings and speeches can’t win.

As the time changed, the world reached greater importance to the women’s rights. However, in the military, females are still treated different from males in many fields. On physical standards, females’ standards are a lot of lower than males’ standard. From a national and personal point of view, is it really a good thing to be double standards for military female and male? I think women need to meet the same standards as men on military physical standards.

The distinction between direct ground combat and combat is not subtle; rather, direct ground combat, offensive in nature seeks to locate, close with and destroy the enemy. The very nature of the mission necessitates the physical capacity to endure unforgiving environments for long durations and the unremitting exposure to the grueling, cruel, and violent nature of war. The aspects of direct ground combat combined with the physiological differences between men and women suggest that integrating women into direct ground combat arms specialties will inevitably degrade readiness, deplete a talented pool of women from the total force, and impact the overall combat effectiveness of Marine Corps' direct ground combat arms

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.

Politics should not be playing a role in deciding the gender fairness of the standards set by the military. Michael Fumento believes politics is the only reason women are getting this opportunity. He states:

Considering the fact that many people would die due to the skills needed, it’s understandable that many people would be joyful to pursue these ladies a new option for their career. People who are against women in combat point out that women aren’t capable of doing such a “manly” job. Their argument is that women don’t have the upper-body strength to be able to carry a wounded soldier to safety (Neven, 2015, p.) Women in combat would then won’t be able to do such a job, so they would be denied the position. Women not being able to have a position in combat would give less support to the men who suffer an accident. This topic can then close as women being denied the position saving them from death, but the finale for this argument will leave women, and others unsatisfied, and it wouldn’t be quite fair for them.

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.

Throughout our nation’s history, women have played an important role in the military. It has not been until recently however, that women have been able to fully