Women Should Not Go Into Combat

“Should Women Head Into Combat?” National Journal, 2012. Opposing Viewpoints In Context, go.galegroup.com.catalog.stisd.net:2048/ps/i.do?p=GPS&sw=w&u=j031916004&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE|A295443049&asid=8445d2f3fc63af3ae9ac94cfdd3067fd. Accessed Dec. 2017.

Although women should be fighting in front line in the military many believe they should not. More than 200,000 position will still be remain exclusive to men. women won 't be able to qualify for jobs. “They are not going to be able to meet those standards” (Women in the Military: Why Can 't We Serve on the Front Lines). The weapon use in the front line are too dangerous. “women will not be able to handle the big

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

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.

There are many different arguments from various feminist groups, politicians and even average Americans. Many of these individuals have never experienced day to day life in a war zone and generate their opinions based on social concepts developed in the safety of a free country. The primary argument I have against the integration of women in direct combat roles, are the physical characteristics of women verses men.

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.

Women in combat in the military is described as qualified women who serve on the war front in battle like rangers, navy seal, air force, and marine corps infantry. The Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter ordered the military to open all combat positions for women on December 3, 2015 (Kamarck). The physical incapabilities, mental stress, and inadequate performance in unit cohesion supports my claim that women should not be allowed in combat.

Throughout the history of mankind there has always been a debate regarding the equality between men and women. A more specific detail in this argument is the conflict of women should be on the front line of battlefield. This topic is significant congress is currently passing legislation on whether women can serve on the front lines of combat. It is also significant because the army rangers has opened its camp to women for the first time in early 2015. This essay will argue the point that women should not be allowed on the front line of combat but allowed in the military. In order to argue this point this essay will demonstrate how the role of women changed in combat over the past 100 years. It will also show what the differences are between

The article addresses the immediate concerns and resolutions concerning military women in combat. David Lerman provided overwhelming evidence that allows the reader to imagine a world with women in a combat role. He also states the pros and cons for women in combat roles. Although it is clear from Mr. Lerman’s tone that he supports women in combat, this article did not overwhelm the reader with positive regards. It fairly suggests important processes that will need to be in place before this implementation can be successful.

Yet, many argue that the distinction between combat and non-combat becomes blurred in the context of women warfare (Ladin; Holm, Hoar). In actuality, many women are assigned to jobs that will expose them to enemy attack, and this has been openly acknowledged by the top Pentagon officials. The United States Army has also recognized that women would be deployed in combat zones as an inevitable consequence of their assignments. This was

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.

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.

I realized that although in theory women in the armed forces seemed like a good idea, there are many obstacles that make that reality very difficult to achieve. In writing this paper I am not proposing that either position is more valid or right than the other. I only hope to present each side in an equal light to help others to understand the issues involved.

“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