Arguments For or Against Women in Combat essays

Arguments For or Against Women in Combat essays Women should be allowed to fight in combat with infantry units and Special Forces units in a wartime environment. A number of arguments have been traditionally given against women in combat that range from women's lack of aggressiveness, the possibility that female soldiers will be raped, the familial damage caused by the absence of female soldiers, potential damage to military cohesion, and the physical weakness of women. Each of these arguments will be discussed, and revealed as inherently flawed. In addition, the historical value of women in combat suggests that women can play a valuable role in the US military in combat. Further, inability to experience ground combat seriously limits the potential career track for women in the military. Taken together, these arguments suggest a potentially valuable role for women in ground combat in the US military. The issue of women in a combat role in the US Military is one of the most hotly contested topics in the public arena today. Both supporters and detractors of women in the military seem to have deeply held, often inflexible opinions, and debate has often been emotional and heated. This paper will attempt to identify some of the key arguments of each side, and provide a reasoned, careful look at the issue of women in combat. Ultimately, the evidence and reasoning presented in this article suggests that women should be allowed to fight in combat with infantry units and special forces units during a wartime environment. Much of the opposition to women in combat seems to be based on the argument that women are not "geared" toward combat duties. This stems from a traditional, conservative view of women as nurturing and maternal, with few aggressive tendencies. Generally, I think that most people's experience would agree with the assertion that women, as a whole, tend to be less aggressive than men. After all, ...