Pros And Cons Of Continued Sexual Segregation Of The Marines

Karen O. Donovan 's article about military culture explores military tradition, and the impact social changes in society has on the military. These changes included the policy change regarding gays six years ago. At that time gays were acknowledged in the military when the military ended years old

Lately, there has been an outbreak of people of the LGBT community coming out in the military. Historically the United States has had a policy of discharging gays in the military. There has been an act called the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”, it is basically saying that as long as somebody does not ask about your gender preferences, you do not have to tell. Even though the ban has been lifted, many militaries still say they cannot accept anyone from the LGBT inside. They do not care about how well you can perform or your strengths and that mindset is going to come back and hit them in the long run. Militaries that are judging these kids are taking them away from somewhere they feel safe and a place where they can finally belong. Members of the LGBT community find refuge in the military. It was one of the only places where they can prove their worth, where people aren’t focusing on their sexuality. They shouldn’t be judged based on their sexual preferences. Instead, they should be judged on their personality, performance, and their ability to get the job done precisely and correctly.

The campaign advertisement ran by the United States Marine Corps uses versatile imagery and a connotative language approach to strategically attract minority women. The print ad shows a female Marine in a defensive martial arts pose on looked by a crowd of men in what seems to be a combat training session implying she is the leader. The tag line: “There are no female Marines. Only Marines” suggests that women who join the Marines will have equal standing with men in their organization.

The inequality of the military has men doing the double of what women do because they are seen as being mentally and physically stronger. This relates to the requirements of the military that they have in place which indeed need to be changed for it to be deemed as an equal service. This identifies

This paper will discuss the U.S. Army’s decision to allow women into combat Military Occupational Specialty (MOS), specifically into MOS 12B known as a Combat Engineer which for years has been closed to women. I will speak briefly on the history of and mindset of the Army and how it has pretty much forced the women that currently serve to prove themselves. We will also discuss the certification process from Basic Combat Training (BCT), AIT (Advanced Individual Training), and Combat Engineer Advanced Leaders Course (ALC). This paper will also examine the specialized programs soldiers must receive such as Sexual

Donnelly had told the WND [WorldNetDaily] that the statistics show a more than 20 percent increase in reports of secual assaults on males. She had researchers specifically announced plans to track numbers to monitor the increase, since “this category of homosecual conduct no longer is illegal.” New issues of open homosecuality is failing, she said “What they need to do is get rid of gender-integrated basic training...That conclusion was drawn that it did increase and still is increasing disciplinary issues.” Donnelly tried to solve by terms of professional sexual assaulting responding to counselors, untold hours of mandatory training, preemptive punishments, bureaucracy, conferences, meetings and feel-good gimmicks have produces. Hikes of 22 percent since 2007 in secual assaults in all branches, douvling since 2006 of the number of violent attacks and rapes in the Army. She had explained the problems that had been developing for some time. Donnelly cited the 1997 recommendation from the Kassebaum-Baker Commission for the Army to end the gender integrated basic training. But all she did was

gays and lesbians from the military. The strange history of DADT begins when the discharging of homosexuals became “official U.S. military policy during World War II”.

J.D Student, Stella Cernak, in her excerpt in the Michigan Journal of Gender & Law, discusses recent media attention of intra-military sexual assault and rape in the United States Armed Forces. Cernak’s purpose is to bring awareness of the nature of gender crimes in the military. Not only in the U.S but all armed forces worldwide. She adopts an informative tone to bring clarity and awareness to the audience reading. She uses real life examples and cases that will trigger the readers to see that she understands what they are going through in hopes of victims to continue their fight for a change.

Joining the military is a commitment sold as a beneficial lifestyle. However, there is an unspoken truth about women joining the military. Hiding behind fluff, are women’s stories about the sexual violence during their time in the force and the mistreatment they received for reporting the assaults. What needs to happen: give some consideration to the type (and history) of men being recruited; take away the investigative powers from the immediate commander; send reports to an independent, impartial system for adjudication; prosecute perpetrators to the fullest extent of the law, and treat these crimes with the same seriousness afforded to

Imagine being in the heat of war, a place where trust is needed most. Imagine, however, that in the heat of war you cannot trust your fellow soldier because of personal tensions within the unit. It was this problem that the policy known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was designed to avoid, the tension caused between soldiers when homosexuals are serving openly. Without this policy, homosexuals serving openly could create tension that interferes with the military’s effectiveness. While it may not be obvious at first, the policy of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” actually supports the both values of the military and the rights of homosexuals. As a result, “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” is needed to protect homosexual service members and is crucial in securing

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

Some studies suggest that the obstacles to female integration in combat arms fields are manifest by masculine self-conceptions that remains central to the motivation of male Soldiers (King, 2013). The debate against the female integration manifests several obstacles. There is considerable evidence about opposition to the presence of females on combat military specialties. Conservatives point of view suggests that Armed Forces are traditionally male organizations. In addition, the problem of sexual attraction or sexuality will degrade mission accomplish. Some suggest that gender diversity is about demographics or groups classification; and the Army is about defending the nation and fight enemy. Other obstacle is about the disparity in

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.

Discrimination has become painfully familiar in today’s society. There are some who would argue homosexuality threatens us as a society, and unfortunately these feelings do not end with just civilians with some arguing that homosexuals serving openly in the military threaten unit cohesion and military effectiveness. Although it has been proven that the repeal of the ban on gays in the armed forces would have a minimal negative impact on the military 's effectiveness or unit compatibility, it has not always been this way. This essay, and Frank Pierson’s Soldier’s Girl, shows just how big of an impact the media and film depictions have of society and offers the viewer the opportunity to see the challenges homosexuals have faced when serving in the armed forces.

Most think that the reason they disapprove so heavily to women in combat is because of the Marine Corps legacy and history. Marines are known for being the best of the best and male Marines think that females will jeopardize that. Germano explains in great structure the Marine Corps process of thought on the situation by stating “I think it’s a misguided connection to our history, our legacy, and our heroes of the past that sort of makes it more difficult for the Marine Corps to come along.” (Tilghman 2). This is an understandable and recognized feeling throughout the Marines. But all Marines need to realize that females are a big part of an ever-growing world and are becoming more capable, stronger, and independent (5). How is it fair if the United States Marine Corps gets a waiver passed to keep women from fighting on the front lines when no other military force can? Even the most elite forces like the Navy SEALS allows females in combat rolls (1). It is not fair, and therefore as all men are created equal the wavier should not be passed.