Pros
- Some women are more physically able to complete the rigorous tasks the military demands than some men
- Women are more capable and effective in certain situations than men
- Allowing women to serve would eventually double the talent pool to choose from
Cons
- Having women serve in direct combat will hamper mission effectiveness by hurting unit morale and cohesion
- In some situations, men may act foolishly to protect women in their combat units
- Harassment and resentment of women in a male-dominated military culture would certainly become a problem
- Female prisoners will be at risk of torture and rape. Other societies would be more willing to abuse women soldiers
- Military readiness would be affected by pregnancy and periods
- Women just aren’t physically suited for certain military jobs
Chances are that the women would be outnumbered by the men, which would provide a great opportunity for the men to take advantage of them. All that testosterone will lead the men to view women as something other than fellow soldiers. Also, as a guy, I can attest that at times we can be a little territorial.
Women coming into a traditionally male dominated environment, I believe, would cause contention, as the women would take some of the men’s jobs and “step on their turf” so to speak. This would only undermine any positive impact women could have.
With these problems arising, units will be unable to work together and ill-prepared for combat. According to the most recent study by the Pentagon’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response office in 2011, 1 in 3 military women have reported being sexually assaulted while serving, the majority by comrades.
Are women good to have in the military? Yes, I believe so. Just not in combat. They can be effective as leaders, doctors, and many other jobs. But when it comes to combat, leave that to the men.
This is a very interesting topic--I've weighed the pros and cons of women in combat myself and have come up with some of these same conclusions. I agree that one of the greatest disadvantages of having women in combat units with men is that they compromise, to a certain extent, the unity, trust, and morale of a group. Although the women may be great in combat, men won't be able to trust them the way they can their buddies. Naturally, women need more protection than men and it would become a hardship for men to watch their own backs and the backs of the women in their group.
ReplyDeleteNonetheless, I do agree that women have their strengths; I've heard that women have a knack for strategy. In addition, I am curious what you meant by "women are more physically able to complete the rigorous tasks the military demands than some men". Do you mean that they are, in come circumstances, stronger or more fit than men? Which kinds of circumstances do you have in mind?
Women do have their strengths, there is no denying that. My stance is against having women being ground soldiers (sorry I don't know the correct terminology). By this I mean having them in the midst of combat. I think that women in leadership roles or strategic roles, or anything like that, could provide advantages. I just didn't focus on that in my article. By saying that women may be more physically able than some men, I mean that there are exceptions. Some women are very athletic and in great shape, and some men just aren't. I'm not trying to rule out the possibility that some women could meet the physical requirements. But as a general rule, my opinion is that even if that is the case, they shouldn't be allowed in combat. But I have nothing against them contributing in other ways. As you mentioned, they can be effective. Thanks for your comment.
DeleteThis is a very interesting point. I feel like the pros are lacking..not because the points you made aren't valid, but because I feel like there are pros for having women in combat that you missed. Women think differently then men, therefore they can be an advantage in combat because they think "outside of the box." I also think women would be great for spys and secret missions.
ReplyDeleteOn the other side, your cons are fabulous! Good and solid. Women can be a huge distraction to the men in combat. Not only would the men be fighting for their lives and country, but also fighting for the attention of the women in combat.
Lets say that there are enough women to make the male to female ratio the same. Would we still have the same problem? In your opinion, if there was anything that the Military could change that would make it more likely for women to be in combat, what would it be?
There probably are a few pros that I missed. Women definitely bring things to the table that men just can't. My feeling is just that perhaps those advantages may get overlooked or undermined by the men in the military. I think that if the women to men ratio was the same, there would still be problems, but a lot less of them. I feel like the women wouldn't be taken advantage of as much, but the men will still probably won't be very accepting to them. If there did happen to be more women, that would just make more people for the men to watch out for and take care of in the middle of combat. That is a very interesting point you bring up though, I hadn't thought of that. I think that the military could do something to make the women feel more safe around their comrades, but even still I don't feel like that would help make women more effective in combat. That is just my opinion. I touched on this a little in my reply to the first comment, but I feel like there are plenty of jobs for women, and they bring many advantages, just not in direct combat. Thanks for your comment!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe idea that allowing women in combat may be more detrimental than anything else is intriguing. I like your arguments and the cons help me to understand your topic better. However, I do agree that the pros seemed a little underdeveloped. There are many good points there, but I feel that there are more you could have mentioned. By expanding your pros I feel that you would have been able to argue your point better. That being said, you have good evidence supporting your topic, but are there any insights from the sight of a male soldier working side by side with a woman in combat?
ReplyDeleteI understand your reasoning and it is made very clear what you are trying to say. Is there a solution you would have for this argument? Is it a matter of women avoiding the battlefield at all costs? Would there be any situations where women would be allowed in combat? Is this a general statement or are there exceptions to this rule?
Good job overall
Now that I look back at it, I can see that my pros are underdeveloped. I have actually read a few articles about that, and there are mixed feelings. Some men see it as a step forward, while others doubt the decision to allow women in combat and feel they will impair missions. There is no overall consensus. I have tried to think of solutions, and the only ones I could come up with is just to have women avoid the battlefield. That is strictly my opinion. Some women certainly will bring advantages, and may do very well with strategy. If there was a way for them to maybe control or guide a unit, but not be at the battlefront, I think that could work. There are exceptions to women meeting the physical standards and possibly even being in better shape and more qualified than men. However, as a general statement, my opinion is that women should not be allowed in direct combat. Thanks for your comment!
ReplyDelete