Haver Stereotypes

While interviewing ten people, both civilian and members of our armed forces of varied sexes, all but one had a common concern with women in combat. They do not believe they should be integrated if they are unable to meet the exact same standards as the men who hold those positions currently. Staff Sergeant Pedro Campoverde (11B infantry), ex Drill Sergeant stated “women should have different standards. They are built differently from us males.” He has recalled many instances where male soldiers were not able to complete certain tasks and would have to get assistance from other soldiers.

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.

Women have served the military in one fashion or another since the Revolutionary War, in recent years the status of women serving in the military has changed dramatically. Traditionally women have always served in administrative or medical roles. With the advancement of views and the sheer determination of many women, we are seeing women serving in combat and fighting alongside their male counterparts. Training schools such as the Army Ranger school, Marine Infantry training, and pilot training within the Navy and Air Force have opened and began training women to fight. The history of some accomplishments women have made while serving in the military has paved the way for the future of women soldiers to follow.

For decades, men have been the ones that were drafted into the army while the women had to fulfill their roles as housewives at home. Countless wars have passed before women were able to fight and serve for their country, such as but not limited to: the American Civil War, Spanish-American War, WWI, and WWII. It wasn’t until 1948 that congress passed the Women’s Armed Services Integration act which permitted women to officially serve in the military and receive veteran’s benefits. Still today, there are stereotypes about women and the fact that they should not have as much involvement in military roles, even after an act has been passed for that specific reason. In a New York Times online and print article, “Arms and the Women,” Gail Collins argues that “the system is complicated”

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.

Combat roles are grueling and nerve breaking, with a lot of commitment and endurance required. Masculinity is the most suited trait for anyone to fit adequately and perform effectively. Mostly, men fit well in these roles due to their masculinity. However, women too, can perform as equally as effective as men. The effectiveness and suitability of inclusion of women in major combat roles in the American Armed forces has faced heated debates, between people who believe that the combat roles are most suited for men, and those that term these people as sexists and argue that women aren’t as qualified and capable of fighting in war. In essence, women can be as effective as their male colleagues in these combat roles.

Profoundly influenced by two post-9/11 protracted wars that highlighted the expanded role of women in combat, civilian leaders have opted to pursue a gender neutral military apparently on the grounds that integrating women in direct ground combat arms roles is both essential and prudent. Central to the rhetoric is that women are not only qualified, but that they bring a wealth of diverse talents that they should be able to apply across all disciplines within the Armed Forces and in turn, be afforded the opportunity to ascend to more senior ranks. However, policy makers are deliberately ignoring decades of medical research and evidence that strongly counter the logic of such a decision and brings into question their motives. The purpose of this paper is to synthesize and present the extensive body of evidence that exists counter to the rationality of pursuing a fully integrated, gender neutral military. This research paper uses a qualitative approach to argue that integrating women in the Marine Corps’ infantry will degrade readiness, deplete a talented pool of women from the total force, and impact the overall combat effectiveness of the Marine Corps. After presenting a brief background of how we arrived at the present date decision and debate, this paper will enumerate the impacts of physiological differences between genders. Next, the paper will then lay out the cumulative impacts that the difference in physical strength and endurance have on attrition and readiness

Introduction/Objective: The push for equality by allowing women to serve in combat positions is not just isolated to a few military branches of service. According to the Department of Defense Secretary Ashton Cater, the push for women to be eligible for all positions in the military is credible, (Commander Call Topics, 2015). Based on the secretary’s recommendation, women will be eligible for all positions to include roles in combat. Senior leaders noted that this will provide a better selection of candidates, therefore increasing the quality of the selection process, (Commander Call Topics, 2015). The Air Force currently has opened over 4000 positions for women, including several that are combat related, (Commander Call Topics, 2015). The leading idea behind gendered neutrality is to improve the military’s position regarding well-qualified personnel in key positions regardless of gender. This integration is supported through equal opportunity for everyone who inspires to serve their country. It has been noted that standards will remain the same, therefore women will need to pass the same requirements as their male counterparts. According to research, several studies were conducted prior to making the decision to open all military positions for women. It was noted that over 200,000 women worked alongside their male counterparts in Afghanistan and Iraq without incident, (Commander Call Topics, 2015). Their performance was noted as, nothing less than outstanding.

Many argue that women won’t be able to handle the requirements needed to be able to go into combat and lack the muscle as well. Standards can’t be lowered for women and most aren’t able to make the cuts. “Those who are capable are going to rise to the challenge,”states Chief Warrant Officer Raquael Patrick of the Army ( motherjones.com). Even though the standards are high, the women who do reach them respectively earned their place and have proven that they are capable of serving in combat as much as guys are.

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.

This editorial discusses the subject of women in combat. The army is primarily known for the men who fight for our country. There could however, be a turning point for women in the army coming in the near future. Two women graduated from the Army Ranger School this month, which is something a woman had never accomplished before. They had to complete this physically, mentally and emotionally challenging course, which is designed to be just like combat.

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.”

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

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

One of the most honorable things that a person can do in their lives, man or woman, is deciding to commit any period of time in their lives to serving their country. Commitment is also not the only thing that a person needs in order to get into any branch of the military. After deciding to commit, they need to get checked out by military physicians to make sure that they are fully capable to carry out any task that the military may require from them. Physicians will check a person’s medical history to see if they have anything that might hinder their chances of getting into the military. Military life may be difficult and rigorous on a person’s body no matter how in shape they may be. With that in mind, the military needs to assess if a person willing to join is physically capable of getting the job done. For example, in the Air Force, males looking to serve their country need to be able to run a mile and a half in 12:54, do 44 push-ups, 46 sit-ups and have an abdominal circumference of no more than 37.5 inches (Air Force News). Females looking to serve via the Air Force have a different set of standards. In order to be accepted into the Air Force, females need to be able to run a mile and a half in 15:21, do 27 push-ups, 42 sit-ups and have an abdominal circumference of no more than 34 inches around (Air Force News). I believe that any female capable of meeting or exceeding the male physical standards, should be able to do any job that a male is offered in the military