Woman in Combat Essay

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

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 question originally posed in the Combat Exclusion Law, regarding placement of females in combat, continues to be debated as women are placed in combat roles without adequate training (Sanchez, 2011). What distinguishes some positions as being acceptable while others are not? Who has the authority to approve exceptions, and what exceptions have been made? On May 13, 2011, a bill placed before the House of Representatives addressed the issue to “repeal the ground combat exclusion policy for female members” (Sanchez, 2011, p. 1).

“As of 2012, women make up 14% of the U.S. military. More than 165,000 women are enlisted and active in the armed services with over 35,000 additional women serving as officers. “ (Wood) It’s been 13 years since the United States went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan and there have been more than 200,000 women who had actively served in the wars. Although there are no laws barring women from combat, keeping female service members away from the front lines have always been a military policy. Since the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, many women have served courageously and skillfully under fire, a reality that female service members have long been pressing the military to acknowledge.

As a woman, a leader, a student, a United States citizen, a feminist, and a Democrat, I am a firm believer that women should be allowed in combat. Hillary Clinton and Gary Johnson also agree with my point of view.

One study (Binkin & Bach) found that many NATO and several WARSAW PACT countries employed women in combat roles during World War II. Russia was reported as using military women on the front lines. In Israel, where they are actually conscripted, women have also experienced armed combat. (Binkin & Bach) found that in the first phase of Israel’s war of Liberation, one out of every five soldiers was female and they shared equality in both offensive and defensive battle situations. Holm found that some 7,500 military women served in S.E. Asia during the Vietnam War. She maintains that these women proved the modern American military woman is fully capable of functioning effectively in a military role in a combat environment, even under direct hostile fire.

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

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.

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

“We are all equal; it is not birth but virtue alone that makes the difference.” This insightful quote from the famous French philosopher and historian “Voltaire” seems to accurately represent the beliefs of the factions of American citizens pushing to allow women to fight in combat positions within the US Armed Forces. Though the topic has just recently been boosted into the media and congressional politics, it has been long debated. A rather current editorial from USA Today titled: “Open Combat Positions to Women” outlines the recent developments in the status of a much disputed and controversial issue facing the nation today. Though somewhat less in-depth than some opposing opinions, the

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.

I am in favor of equality for women, just not when it comes to women in combat. There have been women in society doing heroic things since the Revolutionary war. There have been brave women in war posing as men so they could fight. There are a select few women who could handle war and combat. The negative aspects of women in combat outweigh the positive. Women should not participate in military combat. However they may join the military and served in traditional roles such as nurses and office staff. The difference between men and women is women are physically weaker, they have vital personal needs, and they attract male troops.