Should Women Be Allowed During Combat Roles During The Armed Forces?

In terms of modern-day combat, women do not have an equal opportunity to survive."(Messay, 3) Some argue that it is a women 's right to be in combat, but anyone will agree that equal opportunity does not play part in combat. "Feminists and their supporters want to gender-neutralize the military be incrementally ditching common sense policies. This latest study, which claims that women can be trained to be like men, contributes to this misguided ideology, weakens the force structure at its core, and puts America 's military personnel in peril." continues Lt. Col. Maginnis. (Messay, 3) When we try to force and shove women into dangerous situations, we are ignoring their rights instead of protecting them. The dropout rate for women is higher than for men. Leading the dropout rates are white women with an average rate of 43%, followed by black women at 33% and Hispanic women with 31% (Park). This can be directly pointed to the physical demands that a women faced in basic training.

Feminists and women’s activist groups would have us believe that women are equal in strength, skill level, and in every form as men. Some women are attempting to get into the front lines of combat using lines such as: “it would increase the number of available soldiers”, “women can be as strong as men”, “there won 't be any

The majority of my pro sources are in agreement with me that women should not go into combat and the con sources are not in disagreement they are just expressing another viewpoint, like should the government mandate the decision on women entering the infantry. Most of the authorities on this issue and authors believe that America will take a second look at this issue of women going into combat when our mothers and daughters are sent home in body bags and in pieces. It is worst enough to see your sons come home like that but your daughters are a whole different ball game.

Now that women have been participating in direct combat it is possible to look at the challenges they encounter in direct combat and whether their presence benefits the United States military. On the battlefield women tend to face higher rates of injury and evacuation as compared to men. A study in 2010 by US army physicians found that women had more than three times the evacuation rate than that of men. The physicians studied 4,122 soldiers and of the female soldiers that had to be evacuated for non combat injury seventy four percent of them were issues related to pregnancy. Adding women to combat groups can also disrupt group cohesion which is especially dangerous when groups are in combat. Studies were taken regarding cohesion between men and women within the military and these proved cohesion will not be disrupted within a group unless dating is present. Although this might seem like a counter argument it is very difficult to find out whether two members of a group are in a relationship and probably even harder to prevent it. Women are also prone to more types of injuries such as pelvic stress fractures. One women out of every 367 had pelvic stress fractures compared to one in every 40,000 men. Women are discharged for muscle or skeletal conditions nearly twice as often as men. Since women have much higher rates of injury and evacuation it is necessary to ask what are the benefits of having women on the front lines of battlefield.

For soldiers, women being in the military has been a common thing. But females being in combat units is rare. Female soldiers deal with male soldiers hassling them around about the fact. Women should be able to have the same rights as men do. Just because we are more “sensitive” and “emotional”.

Women are vital to the stability and efficiency of all branches of the United States armed forces. Although women’s presence may be necessary to the operation of the military, their placement in combat positions would prove to be a devastating mistake. The body of a woman is not made to brave combat positions, and placing women into positions dominated by men could create a hostile working environment. The atmosphere of battle is already heated, and placing more problems into the equation could lead to the unraveling of military effectiveness as the country knows it. Consequently, women should continued to be excluded from combat oriented positions in order to preserve the superb work of the United States armed forces.

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.

It’s really good that women are trying to do a man’s job, but some jobs they just can’t do. Most jobs that men have women can do, but not this one. The job I’m talking about is military combat, for example, if you were stuck in a situation that need military services, would you rather have the squad be all males or be a mixed squad? If the military was sending a squad to come save me, I would rather have the all-male squad come save me, rather than a mixed squad. The all-male squad would know what they’re doing and would make you feel safer in combat.

The United States Military is the strongest of its kind of this planet. Several countries dream to have the firepower and loyalty that the United States has acquired since its infancy. Although the military is the most powerful, one issue which has been heavily debated as early as the 1920's is, “do women belong in the military?” Women have been fighting, bleeding, and dying for our country since the revolutionary war and have shown how capable they are in several military disputes . Women have turned the tides of history for the greater good. Women deserve to be treated as equals in the military, but should be excluded from groups which need the most effective and physically fit soldiers possible.

They argue that even though they can accomplish the same physical tasks like men, they are not naturally as strong as they lack the muscle strength that is required to serve in combat roles of the military. Muscle strength is necessary to carry the heavy weapons and in fighting the enemy. This therefore puts them at greater risk of injury and target by the enemy (Simons 451). In addition, they state that female are averagely shorter than their male counterparts and have less upper body strength that is essential for endurance in the military. Furthermore, they state that women have dense skeletal system that is prone to breakages.

Women have long been aggravated about the combat restrictions and have increasingly pressured the Pentagon to catch up with the reality on the battlefield. When Defense Secretary Leon Panetta lifted the ban on women serving in combat roles, it opened up hundreds of thousands of additional front-line jobs to them and cleared the path for military women to serve in direct combat. His groundbreaking decision overturned a 1994 Pentagon rule that restricted women from artillery, armor, infantry and other such combat roles. By removing the ban, it acknowledges the changing realities for women at war. They are often found in the line of fire, regardless of the fact that they are not officially designated as combat troops. Now women can be formally

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

After reading several articles, I noticed several issues are recurring in the argument against women in combat or direct combat roles. Females sustain higher rate of injuries then men, females’ physical capabilities to move “wounded” soldiers to safety is significantly lower, and their accuracy and effective use of weapons is lower versus their male counterparts. Multiple studies continually show lower performance of women in training based exercises, often women incapable of finishing the tasks and exercises presented. It can be noted that even though women are in the military now and accepted, the physical standards set for training and requirements are not the same and below that of men in the military. These things help enforce the argument that women

Obvious reasons why America would not encourage women to fight with the infantry are simply and generally because they are not naturally strong as men and do not have the same physical capabilities as men. Female soldiers are, on average, shorter and smaller than men, with 45-50% less support upper body strength and 25-30% less aerobic capacity, this is essential for endurance. Most females’ skeletal system is less dense and more prone

Many soldiers are known for getting in and out of situations fast, so they might, in exemplar I-do-not-want-to-leave situations, the soldiers might leave them there. Women are known for “complex” emotions so they may help in these special cooperative situations. Anyways, we might as well let women do these masculine tasks in the military. Women have been given jobs in factories, lumber mills, and box-lifting in grocery stores; so why not the military? Over the past century, women have been able to stand independently in robust careers like authorizing figures like firefighters and police officers. Firefighters and police officers risk our lives for us and some women undertake these professions. So why not on the line of