Womans In Combat Essay, Research Paper

Some people believe that for work forces and adult females to be equal they have to be the same. Regardless of tradition, strengths, failings, and award we to be someway pushed into themold of sameness. Part of that attempt is for some to claim that adult females have to be allowedinto active combat functions. In this paper I m traveling to discourse some of the properties of thisidea. Populating in the here and now. What does it intend to make so? Life in general has provento be a game of which Domino falls foremost. Because everybody knows that one time one falls therest spell with it. A immense concern of mine is adult females traveling into combat and how it will effectmy life and that of others. If adult females were to acquire to be in combat functions what would simplyhappen is that when a war comes and bill of exchange is on it s manner adult females are merely as susceptible to bedrafted, yet another ground why I find this whole thought revolting. But, I don t merely find it revolting ; I besides find it nescient. I will non, nevertheless, slant my sentiment to the point of totalconfusion for you the reader, but will merely province the facts I have found. I will give yousimple logical thinking, scenarios, and thoughts, but the pick is finally ever up to theindividual. Choose sagely. Twenty old ages ago the construct of adult females in the armed forces would hold been mocked and threatened. Even merely the thought of interrupting a 5000 twelvemonth tradition of work forces contending in wars, ( Infotrac, p3 ) protecting their households and maintaining the peace, is like a boot in the face offreedom. What is failed to recognize is the equal work load, when work forces went off to war womenheld down the garrison. Now adult females besides want to contend for the freedom of the garrison. Women arenot merely in the military, but they are besides deriving regard and position. One job remainshowever ; harmonizing to feminine militants the prohibition on adult female in the infantry/combat functions is aninjustice and should be removed. Typicality in idea and logical thinking of the pro-feminist isthat the lone makings needed for combat include award, bravery, and humor. ( Infotrac, p5 ) Leaving one thing out, physical strength. Why is physical strength so critical in an foot state of affairs? Or is it? Too say that s ithold no importance would merely be a pure jeer of the military s developing techniques andvalues. To do a statement even remotely connoting that physical strength is a little factorshows obvious misconceptions of the world of war. War means transporting heavy equipment, populating in close and unhealthy conditions, being insanitary and so forth. War means hardtraining and small remainder. Adhering with others and maintaining high moral. War means equalityamong the group. Within some of the undertakings there may be non such a high value on physical strength. ( CMR ) However, everyone still has minimal demands as to how fast you can run andhow many press-ups you can make. Yet the ground forces doesn t need physical strength? Infantry unitsespecially stress full physical fittingness. Minimal criterions of work forces are merely met by 5 % of themost in fit adult females, and they aren t your best combatants, they are merely merely run intoing the loweststandards. ( Digest, p141 ) A series of trials with ROTC plebes at the University of Michigan proved that merely asmall per centum of high-achieving adult females are capable of physical accomplishment comparableto low-achieving work forces. ( Infotrac p2 ) Besides it was proved that male underperformers normally hadthe musculus mass and aerophilic capacity to better their tonss, but adult females at the same levelalready mayhem reached a maximal degree beyond which can non physically improved. Males

on average have 40 to 50 percent more upper-body muscular strength and 25 to 30 percentmore of the aerobic ability needed for endurance. (Digest, p142) Unit strength andreadiness still depend on the ability to carry heavy survival gear, weapons and provisionsover rough terrain in all weather conditions. These qualities remain extremely important in ornear front-line units where women do not have an equal opportunity to survive or to helpfellow soldiers survive. Offering women roles throughout the military has made a double standard among thegrading and passing of soldiers through training. The tests have been so gender sensitive thata D for man is equivalent to an A for a woman. (Digest p 139) Equal performance has beendropped to equal effort. Why train 100 women to only be able to actually have 5 of them stay? But more than5 stay and that is because of the lowering of standards in the military. If a man were to passthe woman s physical test and yet not get the minimum requirements of men, then he wouldnot make it, so why does the US military have double standards? We know that it isdangerous to put that man who doe not pass the women s minimum requirements, yet it s OKto send a woman out that can t meet the men s requirements? For example, men need to do pull-ups, in which women only need to hold their bodies up to a bar for a couple minutes. Men run a 14 minute 2 mile run while women run an18-mile run. (CMR) All of this is logic, yet for some reason the military has become theplayground of female activists. Besides all of these physical differences, we also forget abouthormones. A presidential-commission survey of Desert Storm military personnel found that 64percent reported sexual activity between men and women in their units, meaning thatregardless of the rules, men and women are still men and women with the same hormonaldrive that they had when they left for the army. Yet another problem was brought to my attention from Adam Johnson, a friend ofmine, and also a Lance Corporal who is now stationed in Japan, this is how he put it: Honestly, I don’t see anything wrong with women in the military. There are a lot ofguys here, like the majority that would disagree with me. But if this is what she really wantsto do, then I don’t think anything should stop her. As far as jobs, I don’t think women belongin some of them. Like infantry. I’m infantry, so I can give some examples as to why. Wespend the majority of our time in the field with no bathrooms, showers, any of the good stuff.We are out there from anywhere from a week to a month straight in those conditions. If we ever went to combat, the time could turn into months on end. And Iknow a lot of guys said their hormones would be hard to control if a female was out therewith them. And there are some stories I heard that I don’t think you want to hear. This alone could scare somebody into seeing that combat isn t made for women. It snot as though the rules are meant to deprive women of their rights, rather save her fromdifferent things. Unsanitary conditions being one of them. I don t know one woman whocould go 2 days without a shower, let alone weeks or even months. Women shouldn t bediscontent because they aren t allowed to be in combat, rather at peace that men haveenough respect to keep them out. I believe that the moral standard of our country would dropconsiderable amounts if we were to draft women. Womanhood should be cherished andchildren shouldn t have to ever fear that their 120 pound mother is being mutilated by a 200pound ogre.