Should Woman Be Allowed To Fight In

Combat Essay, Research Paper

Should Woman Be

Allowed To Fight In Combat?

PROS:

In my opinion, there are lots of women who have the right attitude, drive, concentration, moral flexibility, physical stamina, and confidence to match which would, given the proper training, make them ready for combat or serve in combat roles in the military. There is already woman Military Police Officers who have the necessary skills. Sexist attitudes cause people to over look woman’s potential.

You will find 85-90% of people in the military are good, 10-15% are not so good. Unfortunately, the 10-15% that aren’t so good are the ones that are publicized 90% of the time. They are usually weeded out through the first few years, in most cases, so what is left? You have your hard workers, your motivated sailors, your dedicated Marines.

In any situation, you will first have the men and women rival, but after a few months they get over it. Most women realize that it could mean their career. Since the release of the restriction of female pilots in combat, there have been less than 5 women that have been criticized for lack of expertise, or lack of morals.

I’m sure that there are plenty of women that if trained and conditioned in a particular job from day one would be able to do it with the same amount of competence as a man. Women are mechanics, machine operators, electricians, heavy equipment operators, and construction workers and have to perform maintenance at the same level men do.

The Los Angeles Police Department is begging for woman to come work on their force. Woman have a very low percentage of physical confrontations and a low number of public suits brought against the city because of it. The Los Angeles Police Department is trying to become 50% female. The key in war is to avoid war through deterrence. Ideally, woman can play a strong role in avoiding unwanted confrontations during war.

CONS:

Forces heard testimony from Army Lieutenant Colonel William Gregor, Chairman of the Department of Military Science at the University of Michigan, who conducted a test of Army officer candidates and found that: The top 20 percent of women at West Point achieved scores on the Army Physical Fitness Test equivalent to the bottom 20 percent of male cadets. Only seven percent of women can meet a score of 60 on the push-up test, while 78 percent of men exceed it. Only one woman out of 100 could meet a physical standard achieved by 60 out of 100 men. Gregor concluded that going through this process would mean, “I have just traded off 60 soldiers for the prospect of getting one. The cost considerations are prohibitive.” (Lt. Col. William Gregor, USA,

Testimony before the Presidential Commission, September 12, 1992, cited in the Presidential Commission’s Report to the President, November 15, 1992)

Soldiers under fire must have confidence in the physical abilities of their comrades. Will men feel confident during combat that the woman will be a reliable resource during battle. Will this effect the performance of the men if they aren’t.

On one support ship during Operation Desert Storm, 36 of the 360 women on board — ten percent — became pregnant. (Alecia Swasy, “Shipboard Pregnancies Force the Manly Navy to Cope With Moms,” The Wall Street Journal, October 3, 1991, p. 1.) In a Roper survey conducted during the Gulf War, 64 percent of military personnel surveyed reported that sexual activity had taken place in

their unit. (The Roper Organization, “Attitudes Regarding the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces: The Military Perspective,” September 1992.)

Mixing men and women in military units invites sexual attraction and special relationships, and these relationships — or even the perception that they exist — destroy the morale and cohesion which any fighting force must have to win wars. If more women join combat units that become open to them as a result of the Administration’s new policies, this problem will only worsen.

History shows that the presence of women has had a devastating impact on the effectiveness of men in battle. For example, it is a common misperception that Israel allows women in combat units. In fact, women have been barred from combat in Israel since 1950, when a review of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War showed how harmful their presence could be.

The study revealed that men tried to protect and assist women rather than continue their attack. As a result, they not only put their own lives in greater danger, but also jeopardized the survival of the entire unit. The study further revealed that unit morale was damaged when men saw women killed and maimed on the battlefield. (Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces, International Trip Report, September 14-27, 1992.)

These findings will come as no surprise to most Americans; in a recent national survey, two-thirds of those who favored the current policy barring women from ground combat cited the potential loss of men’s’ effectiveness as a reason. (The Roper Organization, “Attitudes Regarding the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces: The Public Perspective,”September 1992, p. 41.)

Some of the facts the Clinton Pentagon does not want you to know about —

1) At any given time, nearly 10% of women in the military are pregnant.

2) Women are 3 to 4 times more non-deployable than men.

3) The Navy has rewritten its critical shipboard task list so that female sailors can complete them (Carrying a 150 lb. stretcher is now a four-person task, rather than the previous two).

4) Co-ed basic training is now common.

5) Our troops sleep in co-ed tents in Bosnia.

A survey done by Harvard researcher Laura Miller found that only 3 percent of women believed they “should be treated exactly like men and serve in the combat arms just like men.”

“Men and women-boys and girls for the most part-are now assigned to coed tents and barracks on deployments and in training. Even chaplains in the field are not exempt from this requirement. The result of this social experimentation has been an abundance of consensual sex-relations which would normally only hinder a male’s career; hundreds of pregnancies resulting in evacuations from warships and places such as Bosnia, leaving others to perform the duties of the vacated billet; unsubstantiated sexual harassment claims which destroy promising careers and foster sexual animosity. This creates a corrosive environment for males and females alike and entails untold financial and logistical burdens on a military already suffering deep cuts.”

In conclusion, If males treat their female colleagues as sisters, rather than potential mates, you’ve solved half your problems before they happen.

The problem with integration is not physical standards; it’s character standards. Men in the armed services need protection from harassment just as much as women do. Keep in mind that men will need to serve and work with women. The military is not some giant boys club where men can act like animals. The military is a serious job that requires highly skilled professionals. Only those men and women who accept both the physical and character challenges of the military should become soldiers.

References:

1) L. Miller, Feminism and the Exclusion of Army Women from Combat (Harvard University: John M. Olin Institute for Strategic Studies, 1995).

2) The Roper Organization, “Attitudes Regarding the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces: The Military Perspective,” September 1992

3) Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1992), 60.

4) The Roper Organization, “Attitudes Regarding the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces: The Public Perspective, “September 1992, p. 41.

35c