Women in 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.

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.

January 24, 2013 Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta lifted the ban on women serving in combat. For years women have served with honor and distinction. When faced with combat and in an insurgency type of modern warfare, any soldier can potentially see combat. Realistically, there is a difference between experiencing combat on a convoy and going out day after day on combat patrols to perform search and destroy missions. Having served as a Marine Infantryman in Afghanistan twice, I am against the decision to open all combat military occupation specialties (MOSs) to women. My purpose is not to degrade the valuable contributions of women in the military, but to specifically address their role and effect on direct combat Infantry and Special Forces units. I celebrate the decision to lift the previous ban on a social basis for women’s equality, but my personal experiences and knowledge of the way war is experienced makes me ultimately opposed to allowing women to serve in direct ground combat positions.

Sergeant Hester’s involvement in this active combat situation is an exception. She, like other women in the military, are not permitted to be assigned to combat positions. While on a patrol, she encountered surprise gunfire, but the Department of Defense actually prohibits women from assignments on the front lines for combat. Although Hester acted bravely, worked successfully with her squad, and was even awarded a Silver Star for her bravery, women are still banned from combat positions out of concerns for female safety, questions of ability, and concerns about women impairing the bonds of brotherhood on the front lines. Although there may be a higher risk of violence toward female soldiers, women in the U.S. military should have the same opportunities to fight in combat as men.

There was also opposing viewpoints that women were at high risk of sexual harassment (Carlson 4). Although that should not get in the way when women can report the individual who did her wrong and also there was a risks of violations back at home. While their daily experiences were different, all women who served were met with the clear realities of danger and death on a daily basis (Women in Vietnam). Once the initial experience of arrival was over, women began to camouflage to their situations and to settle their job that the war offered (“Iris”). They, like the men in uniform who were doing the fighting, came under much of the same enemy fire and risked their lives. They were a rare breed of women who were knew what not so much was coming to them but was able to handle such a traumatic devastation. But along with men, they were able to handle seeing such horrible situations, opposing that women and men should have been allowed to fight the battles regardless of the sex.

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.

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.

Placing a woman into a field comprised mostly of men would upset a balance of unit cohesion and morale among their male counterparts. Unit cohesion “result[s] from proximity of group members over time; social similarities or commonalities; success at joint tasks; and concerned, competent, honest leaders” (Simons). This means that the individuals that comprise a combat unit must be able to relate to each other, and work together in positive and constructive ways in order to carry out dangerous, high-risk missions. During combat operations, soldiers and their units are confined to small spaces for extended periods of time. The addition of women into this close quartered group would add “romantic and sexual elements that can cause competition, jealousy, and

However, this thinking misses the point. History has shown as far back as the Revolutionary War, women such as Molly Pitcher, who took up her husband’s position as an artillery gunner, after he was injured in combat. More recently during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have had many women put into stressful combat situations, with very little training, and were able to engage the enemy effectively, and in some cases displayed courageous actions that saved lives. They were able to physically and mentally handle the combat stress equally with their male counterparts.

Men fighting with the women would not be the only ones affected by women in the US military engaging in combat. According to Clinton W.: “ The women would be affected; they would be emotionally affected because they would be exposed to combat situations such as shooting, killing, etc.” This means that if women were to be put in combat situations, they would be exposed to emotionally scarring things that they are not used to seeing because they have not been in combat as much.

In the article All Guts, No Glory it explains how women were not allowed to be classified as in combat soldiers regardless of what job was assigned. Generalizing women as delicate and almost as liabilities in the armed forces kept them in inferior ranks as well as having insufficient combat training. That not only endangered them but fallen male soldiers making it so women were unable to help bring them to safety. Sargent Rebekah brings up the point stating “From push-ups and drills of basic training

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.

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.