Women in Combat

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s): 127
  • Published: February 22, 2007
Read full document
Text Preview
Formal Outline
It is man's role to risk his life on a battlefield not a woman's. I. War and humanity
A. Women in WW II
1. High cost experience
B. Combat is man's role
1. No women on the battlefield
II. Feminist ideal
III. Combat rules
A.Women support
1. Still can be POW's
B. Combat aviators
IV. Physical limitations
A.Weaker upper body
1. Men must help
B.Marine Corps study
1. One of one hundred
V. Training standards different
A.Co-Ed training
1. Men do not benefit
VI. Orphans
A.Soldiers married to soldiers
1. Both leave Children
2. Who'll replace the parents
VII. Psychological incapable
A.No Killer Instinct
1. Not violent Criminals
VIII. Women protect young
IX. Women improve quality
A.Well qualified
X. Motherhood
A. Risk
1. Not necessary
2. Flag draped coffin

Women in Combat
War has been a part of humanity almost as long as humanity itself. However, women at war have not been. History has many stories about exceptional women serving honorably on the battlefield. In many cases Women on the battlefield are liabilities. During World War II both the Soviets and Germans tried placing women on the front lines when they were desperate for fighting soldiers. Male troops forgot their combat responsibilities in order to protect the women fighting beside them. This made their units less effective and exposed them all to greater risk. Both the Soviets and the Germans later barred women from serving in combat. It is man's role to risk his life on a battlefield not a woman's. A woman's role is to support the man fighting in combat, whether it is serving as a soldier herself in a supporting role or staying home and caring for their family.

A woman participating in combat is a feminist ideal that should not be forced upon the military. The feminist culture has placed the rights of women above the importance of human life itself. This can be seen sadly in abortion. The ironic thing is the same feminists who wish to put women in combat would not tolerate even the thought of the same women being exposed to the type of violence experienced in combat elsewhere. Instead, supporters of women in combat should join other groups who abhor violence against women. The military has rules against women serving in roles with a high probability of direct combat. The problem is women are assigned to the support units which are deployed along with the combat units they're supporting. The lines separating women from combat does become blurry. Women POW's, like Jessica Lynch who was raped while captive, serving in a support role can be killed or captured as easily as a woman in direct combat. It is likely that any woman POW will be raped. The military is allowing women to fly combat fighters in the Middle East. In his article, "Case Against Women in Combat" William P. Hoar states that, "allowing women to fly combat missions dramatically increases the probability the United States would have women become prisoners of war. In Vietnam and Operation Desert Storm, the great majority of POWs were combat aviators" (5).

One of the most obvious reasons women should not be serving in combat is their physical limitations. A typical woman's upper body strength is not capable of withstanding the demands of sustained ground combat. Their male counterparts will be forced to help them more than they would another male soldier. In his article "Women Should Not Serve in Combat" K.L. Billingsley provides the following: "In 1993 the Marine Corps conducted a three month study with 50 women to determine whether they could be conditioned to meet male fitness standards. Official's found that they could not be. While some women can reach the lower ranges of male ability, they are operating at the peak of their performance and are therefore under maximum stress. They found that only one out of 100 women can meet the standards as opposed to 60% of the man who can" (4).

Physical training standards for women are not the...
tracking img