Women Should NOT Be Allowed In Combat

Women have been fighting alongside men on battlefields for centuries upon centuries, giving their greatest fight to lead their team to victory. Although women are given this opportunity, direct ground combat amongst women remains against the law till this very day, allowing a gender to define what a female can, or cannot do. The human race continues to evolve every day, yet a simple discriminatory law that decides what a woman’s capabilities are without being aware of just how empowering that specific woman is is the same as it first was. Despite the idea that women do not meet certain requirements in order to take place in combat units, women continue to provide an endless amount of support to men on battlefields, bringing a completely

Women should not be in military combat because most women have babies to take care of at home. No crisis requires our government to send women in military combat, the author is dani martinez she is an author of many books and went to william woods university. Females are only 60 percent as strong as males. No female officer was able to complete the marine corps training course, the author was phyllis schlafly and she is a lawyer an activist and graduated from washington university . Females aren't as strong as some people think. Marine generals predict that women in combat jobs won't last, the author is rowa scarborough who is a news reporter and went to the university of maryland .Men are just stronger than most women and are made for combat.

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

Through the deaths and the injuries, through the explosions and gunfire, through the heartache and brokenness, women have been serving in the military one way or another. Since the beginning of time, women have been fighting for their rights. They fought for their right to work, they fought for their right to vote, and they fought for their right to be in the military. Beginning in the Revolutionary War, women were allowed to join the military as nurses and support staff. Since then, they have gradually been able to do more tasks and jobs that the men do. Today, the conflict is whether or not women should be allowed to fight in military combat. The argument is controversial, and will more than likely be a never-ending debate.

Over the years the United States has grown to love each other as the way people are, especially women. Women have proven to be even stronger than what people expected them to be. You can see the strength, the courage, and the confidence they have gained. It has been discussed many years that women shouldn’t be allowed in combat for not being “strong enough”. Men have shown that they can be “manly” enough to do women or girl things, so why can’t women do “manly” things? If women feel like they can handle being on the frontline then we should respect their decision and allow them to go.

Women and war have always been considered to have little in common. As the gentle sex, women are traditionally associated with the care and creation of life rather than with its destruction. However, over the past twenty years, women have increasingly served, and continue to serve, with valor and integrity in the Unites States Armed Forces (Kamarack, 2015). Although women have successfully proved themselves in the military, they should be restricted from entering into direct combat because they are less physically fit than their male counterparts, create animosity on front lines, and undermine cohesion within a military unit.

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.

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.

Some argue that women should not serve in combat because; they have never served in any type of combat operations in the history of the American military. Positions in the military have been designed specifically for women and how they perform their duties. No evidence can be produced that women have the abilities, physical strength, or motivation to engage in combat operations, the physical differences from their male counterparts are so extreme; women cannot maintain the agility or psychological confidence that men are capable of displaying during extreme combat stress.

Women are very skilled at these jobs, and help the country in many ways that we can’t imagine. But the one thing that is stirring up arguments across the country, is should women in the U.S. military engage in combat? Women across the country argue that women should be given the equal rights and opportunities in the military and in combat situations. Although many

A woman in combat was a trending topic for the armed forces for years. The year 2016 is when officially women have been granted the right to join the armed forces in a combat field of the job. Others, particularly in the military, are against this act because of various reasons concerning the safety of military troops in an anarchy form of living. A battlefield is known to be the most stressful and dangerous environment, and it is vital for the armed forces to conduct safety and simpleness to remove any complicated areas that might make the job more difficult. Efficiency, communication, and most importantly trust and loyalty are essential to perform in such a violent atmosphere.

Is America ready to see their women in combat units? For years this idea has been pondered and discussed. It was not until recent combat troops such as the Army Special Forces units: Rangers and Green Berets were open to the idea. However, after many injuries and fail outs parents of Derby High School girls are now asking if women are up to the task. America needs to make a stand; women due to physical ability, military readiness, and abuse should not be allowed in combat

Opponents of putting women in combat question whether they have the necessary strength and stamina. They also have said the inclusion of women in infantry and other combat units may harm unit cohesion, this is similar to the argument regarding

     Women have played a tremendous role in many countries' armed forces from the past to the present. Women have thoroughly integrated into the armed forces; all positions in the armed forces should be fully accessible to women who can compete with men intellectually and physically.

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.