Women allowed in combat

Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course Title
Date
Women Allowed in Combat
Introduction
Traditions are often discarded and thrown away during times of great need, and the times of war are not any different. History is full of moments where women took dramatic roles that would have never been conceived of during other periods. “During the pressing demands of the two world wars of the 20th century as well as the American civil and revolutionary war of the 19th century and 18th century respectively” (Nuciari 14), women were beckoned to boost the ranks of the armed forces in various jobs, which range from nursing the wounded to taking up arms on the front-line. In particular, “about 30000 American women served in the American military during the first world war, and after that hundreds of thousands served in the second world war, and they also flew military aircraft for the first time during the war” (De Pauw 281).
In 1948, the US Congress approved women status in the regular forces, although it restricted their numbers who could be enlisted as army soldiers to a mere two percent of the ranks. This rule only lasted until 1967. The ‘risk rule’ put in place in 1988 barred women from even noncombat roles because such roles expose them to unnecessary risks from direct conflicts, capture or enemy gunfire. The near universal support for equality calls for inclusion of women in all cadres of the military, including combat fronts.
Physical Ability
According to Sherrow (33), “women lack heavy items.

” Some women in the military have proven themselves to be physical, emotionally and ethically competent in leading and executing a combat-type operation. Hence some of them often feel qualified enough in being involved in combat roles. In the long-run, it is not of a concern whether women have the competence to be involved in a combat operation, as the experiences of women during combat situations of the world wars have revealed that they can hold their own in extremely demanding combat situations; rather the main concern might be women longevity. A question that deserves a comprehensive answer is on whether women can stomach the physical and emotional demands of a sustained combat operation, and whether they can accept the abrasion and medical concerns that go along with integration. While majorities of positions in the military and other armed forces in the country are open in equal measure to the two genders, there are positions that do not physically suit women (Fenne 134). The standards of physical vigor demanded in combat operations suit men, and for women to attempt in attaining the standards can only overstrain themselves. It is only fair that women learn to accommodate themselves to the limit that they can manage.
Efficiency
There are women who shall meet the required standards; however, a majority will not make it past the threshold. The integration of women into combat can only be made possible to the small numbers that are qualified. It has been argued that women serving in the direct combat can affect the effectiveness of a mission and hurt morale and cohesion of the entire force (Skaine 222). The prohibitions of women were repealed by the Congress in the 1990s, but they were restricted to noncombat roles. Women were barred from some quarters in Iraq and Afghanistan, and this was to keep them from direct combat, and were even proscribed from being stationed together with the combat units. Moreover, combat units only commit to physical activities that are designed to fit their capabilities, which are glaringly missing from women’s physical compositions, and there is nothing that can be done to correct the situation as it is the product of nature, and cannot be undone by the work of men (Nuciari 73). Women who serve in integrated units are more likely to suffer more injuries from their unique physical bodies. Women can be a liability in combat zones, as nature bequeathed them with the responsibility of carrying the next generations of citizens. Pregnancy might impact the ability of deploying units when such units have an uneven number of females.
Tradition
Men, particularly those who more likely to be drafted in the military maintain the long-established gender roles. In other situations, men can act in stupid ways to protect their female counterparts, assuming the role of a protector in the traditional male-female relationship. Resentments and harassments of women in a culture that have consistently been conceived as a masculine domain might occur, defeating the goals. In fact, popular media seem to be relaying the same message (Nuciari 33). Women are more at vulnerable to torture and rape, especially when caught by the enemy, and due to their female makeup they can easily divulge the secrets of their military compared to male combatants. Male and female enlistees should be given opportunities of joining the armed forces, but with an understanding that they should have different roles, from their different physical and emotional attributes. In turn, this should mean there are different roles that they should follow their paths to promotion so that the females have equivalent opportunities without the need for women to be involved in frontline maneuvers.
Supporting Enlisting of Women in the Military
The principles of leadership and teambuilding apply to women much as it applies to men. As long as the authorities safeguard criteria benchmarks, they should not make an impression that a section of the enlistees is bound to get obtain it easily, shall have popular support. As long as an enlistee merits a position, the gender becomes secondary concerns. It is very simpler to recruiting and sending into combat females that are in a better shape compared to their male counterparts. It is likely to be the benchmark conscription and instruction for enlistees regardless of their gender, and those who pass can thrive in combat (Simon 121). Moreover, the involvement of women in physical exercises and athletic competitions that have been the preserve of men has dispelled the traditionally held opinion that women cannot thrive in physically demanding competitions. Women play rugby, football, soccer, springs, long distance marathons, and amongst others. 300 (2006), the epic military film, which associate military prowess to masculinity is just the creation of the media and does not convey the truth of the manner regarding the fate of women in combat zones. Moreover, extra muscle bulking can be useful in reducing injury rates in female soldiers. Modern technologies in the battlefield are increasingly playing their roles on the battlefield, and have replaced the traditional dependence on brute strength.
Conclusion
The arguments on whether women are ready for combat roles in the present generation is an unending debate fronted by feminists, who are obviously unaware of the physical differences between men and women. While they continually front equality of the two genders to be a sufficient reason for the inclusion of women into combat, they unwittingly turn a blind eye to key factors that make unsuitable for combat roles. Apart from the physical build of women, women are less efficient, and men are likely to be careless with women on board, unnecessarily risking their lives for the women, to preserve their traditional status as protectors of women.
Works Cited
De Pauw, Linda Grant. Battle cries and lullabies: Women in war from prehistory to the present. University of Oklahoma Press, 2014.
Fenner, Lorry M. Women in combat: civic duty or military liability?. Georgetown University Press, 2001.
Nuciari, Marina. “Women in the Military.” Handbook of the Sociology of the Military. Springer US, 2006. 279-297.
Sherrow, Victoria. Encyclopedia of hair: a cultural history. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006.
Skaine, Rosemarie. Women in Combat: A Reference Handbook: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO, 2011.
Simon, Rita James, ed. Women in the Military. Transaction Publishers, 2001.