How Gender Neutrality During Combat Occupations? Effects On Force Readiness

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

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.

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.

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 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 Defense Department recently announced new policies that will open more than 14,000 military job opportunities to women. Which seems like a great step—except that more than 200,000 positions will still remain exclusive to men, from front-line infantry positions to high-level special operations roles.” States Dani Moritz from The Muse. (Mortiz) Women have been thrown out of spotlight when it came to genuine positions. Does this shout disparity for women, as well as stereotyping and it for the most part tosses women’s rights ideal out of the window?

Upon the acceptance of the Combat Exclusion Law, each military service was to define their policies to determine where females could and could not serve. What this means to the Army in particular is that “all jobs except those having the highest probability of engaging in direct combat” (Ferber, 1987, p. 4) will be opened to women in the Army. The Navy, Marines and Air Force have all had to evaluate the exclusion laws as well and establish criteria as appropriate.

When women work in these areas they are said to be highly qualified for the job and are so good they out rank the men that have the same skills as they do. When these women worked many felt like they didn’t need to work and just refused it all together, some of the women were ashamed and didn’t feel they deserved to work, then there were some desperate ones that were in real need of the job and were proud they had one. And as for the typical 2000s children and adults that were female and still alive things began to get much easier than it was before for them. Although there weren’t big wars like WWI and WWII they still had small ones and women could have more parts in these war efforts. Although it's not as much as they wanted because there are still some officers in war that are doing everything they possibly can to remove women from the force. In an article by W.J Hennigans he states that many women are going to war in the 21st century. But they are still experiencing a whole bunch of problems. Which includes that many of the war branches aren’t too sure if allowing women to go to war is the best thing for them. And that women aren’t physically or mentally strong enough to be in war. Many women have tried to prove they were capable enough and should be taken seriously in the war but then men shoot them down by saying comments like this "There are some things

The Secretary of Defense and The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff announced in January of 2013 the rescission of the 1994 Direct Ground Combat Definition and Assignment Rule (DGCDAR). The DGCDAR restricted assignments of women to communities or jobs within the military in or collocated with direct ground combat units below the brigade level, in long-range reconnaissance and special operations forces, and in positions involving physically demanding tasks. This now correlates to the opening of previously closed occupations, to include the USMC infantry, to women who can meet occupation-specific, gender-neutral standards of performance. 230,000 positions that were previously unavailable in the U.S. armed forces to women are now available. From active-duty, to veterans, to civilians alike, one thing we’ve heard is the reluctance of many to publicly oppose the idea. This reluctance stems from a fear of being tarred-and-feathered “politically incorrect," a term apparently as morally reprehensible as crime nowadays.

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.

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.”

No matter your race, gender, or any other of your characteristics of yourself should not matter when someone is making a decision about you. So women should be treated just as men are when in the military. Decisions should be based off of facts and data about them, not their gender. Men and women have walked side by side ever since they have been on planet Earth, so why are men seen as superior or held at a higher standard? Some reasons why we have to enforce gender equality in the military are the following sentences. Women are a part of the military. Serving in the military is not about gender, it is if you meet all the standards. And they tension between men and women doesn’t rise.

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.