Woman in Combat
Should women be allowed to serve in combat roles and what are the ethical implications?
Based on the book:
WOMEN IN COMBAT Civic Duty or Military Liability? by Lorry M. Fenner and Marie de Young
Since World War II, women have been serving in dangerous positions within the military. Although technically women cannot serve in combat roles, “more than 800 women have been wounded in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan alone, and more than 150 have been killed” (Domi). The policy banning women from serving in combat roles is antiquated and only prevents women from getting the promotional consideration and recognition they deserve. The fact is that women are already dying in war zones, so to continue a policy which denies them the right to serve in any position they are qualified for, is unfair and goes against the very nature of the democratic philosophy we are trying to protect.
The policy of restricting the role of the female in the military is based on societal ideals about the role of women in our culture. War is ugly no matter how you look at it, and being able to say that it is necessary to protect the women and children brings comfort to the establishment. We live in a society that has long thought of women as unequal to the majority male. From Rosa Parks to Hillary Clinton, women have proven themselves as equal to their male counterparts in nearly all aspects. There are several popular arguments used to try and justify the prevention of women in combat roles. It is my intention to address each of these one at a time. The first argument is that women are not physically strong enough for the rigorous tasks involved in jobs such as infantry. Along with that statement, follows the idea that women are not emotionally strong enough to face the horrors of war. This argument is void right on its face. Not all women, just as not all men, are physically qualified for all jobs. I see no problem with certain standards
Based on the book:
WOMEN IN COMBAT Civic Duty or Military Liability? by Lorry M. Fenner and Marie de Young
Since World War II, women have been serving in dangerous positions within the military. Although technically women cannot serve in combat roles, “more than 800 women have been wounded in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan alone, and more than 150 have been killed” (Domi). The policy banning women from serving in combat roles is antiquated and only prevents women from getting the promotional consideration and recognition they deserve. The fact is that women are already dying in war zones, so to continue a policy which denies them the right to serve in any position they are qualified for, is unfair and goes against the very nature of the democratic philosophy we are trying to protect.
The policy of restricting the role of the female in the military is based on societal ideals about the role of women in our culture. War is ugly no matter how you look at it, and being able to say that it is necessary to protect the women and children brings comfort to the establishment. We live in a society that has long thought of women as unequal to the majority male. From Rosa Parks to Hillary Clinton, women have proven themselves as equal to their male counterparts in nearly all aspects. There are several popular arguments used to try and justify the prevention of women in combat roles. It is my intention to address each of these one at a time. The first argument is that women are not physically strong enough for the rigorous tasks involved in jobs such as infantry. Along with that statement, follows the idea that women are not emotionally strong enough to face the horrors of war. This argument is void right on its face. Not all women, just as not all men, are physically qualified for all jobs. I see no problem with certain standards
Bibliography: Chappell, Bill. www.npr.org. 14 January 2013. NPR. Article. 21 April 2013. Domi, Tanya L. www.nytimes.com. 8 February 2013. Online. 25 February 2013. Frankl, Viktor E. Man 's Search For Meaning. Boston: Beacon Press, 1959. Book. Fenner, Lorry M. and de Young, Marie E. Women In Combat: Civic Duty or Military Liability? Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2001. Book. Women in Combat: Hearing before the Military Forces and Personnel Subcommittee of the Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, First Session, Hearing Held May 12, 1993. Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 1994. Print.