Why Women Should Not Be Assigned to Combat Positions

Throughout history, women have behaveed a fibre in the defense of their nations. In 1429, Joan of Arc successfully led the French Army into battle against the incline at age 17. In 1588, Queen Elizabeth I traveled to Tilbury, Essex to fight beside her Army during the Spanish raid. And in 1788 at the Battle of Monmouth, Mary Ludwig Hayes, also known as Molly Pitcher, took over her preserves ceasenon position and continued to engage the enemy after he had f altogetheren in battle.While these be extraordinary accomplishments made by these most admirable women, should this level of close charge be expected, or possibly even required of women in the military? Many will lay out that the ban on women in fight is a discrimination issue, and that it creates a structural barrier that advise hurt their chances of promotion or advancement. The Defense Department Advisory Committee on Women in the run actually found that women serving in flake in Iraq and Afghanistan have had a positiv e impaction on mission accomplishment.But these women were not charge to an actual combat position in a unit that has a primary mission of direct ground combat engagement of the enemy. They were either assigned to a combat support unit that was engaged by the enemy, or they were attached to the combat gird unit. at that place is a vast difference, and this essay will explore why placing women in direct combat roles in the military would have a negative impact on combat readiness. All potent units in the field experience bonding that enhances readiness and cohesion.When women be introduced, men stop relating to each otherwise and begin trying to attract the women. This identifys them in direct arguing with each other and becomes a abominable distraction from the mission at hand. Morale hatfulnot be maintained if accusations of harassment are a threat, and Com homosexualders are unable to keep the males focuse on the mission when they are at war with each other over a fema le unit member. Helen of Sparta was perhaps the most inspired character in all literature, ancient or modern. A whole war, one which lasted for ten years, was fought over her (Bell, 1991, p. ).King David of Israel ordered Uriah the Hittite into battle to fight in order to commit adultery with Uriahs wife in his absence. He would even wage war against other nation in order to eliminate any competition for his women. But a relationship with a supervisor or a co-worker is detrimental to teamwork and blondness in the workplace. A lack of trust or possible resentment toward another soldier can possibly result in poor judgment in the heat of battle when someone decides they are mad at the man that got the girl.Disrespect among the ranks, mistreatment of fellow unit members, and destruction of professional reputations will certainly affect the career progression of everyone involved. And what happens to the effectiveness of the unit when a female combat soldier gets great(predicate)? Na val ships at war must return to shore because of the pregnancy of female sailors, thus prevent the combat mission. Infantry units must evacuate the female soldier out of the war zone and designate her to a support position back in the States. The disruption to combat readiness is extreme and can be costly. Chivalry is not dead.The basic, instinctual constitution of males is to protect females. This is full-strength of any species of animal. Parents raise their sons to protect women, and to discipline their safety because they are less equal of protecting themselves. While this whitethorn not be true of all women, it is certainly true of all men. In the New York Times article, Female POW is Abused, rubor Debate, by Ellaine Sciolino, Army Major Rhonda Cornum was interviewed regarding her captivity during the Persian Gulf War. She said Everyones made such a big deal about this indecent assault, she said, in her first interview since the war. But the only thing that makes it ind ecent is that it was nonconsensual. I asked myself, Is it going to prevent me from getting out of here? Is there a risk of death attached to it? Is it permanently disabling? Is it permanently disfiguring? Lastly, is it excruciating? If it doesnt fit one of those five categories, because it isnt important. But the male soldier that was with her had a different opinion.The 22-year-old specialist from Fort Rucker whom Iraqis slapped and beat during interrogations said he had not changed his opinion that omen should not be in combat, despite what he described as Major Cornums stoicism. I worried about her all the time, he said, and being a P. O. W. and going by dint of the torture, the pain, you shouldnt also have to worry about whats happening to the female soldier all the time. While the women may be able to endure such atrocities that come with war, the men are not psychologically disposed(p) to deal with listening to the screams of their women being raped, sodomized, and tortu red by the enemy. Then there is the moral question pot women in combat units.The question isnt necessarily whether a woman can do it, just whether she should do it. Assigning them into these positions would require training men and women to regard the brutalization of women, and a womans brutalization of others, as normal and acceptable (Kirkwood, 2003, p. 1). According to Vietnam War hero Ron Ray, Women should only be used in combat if national security depends on it. This means that all of our men have been killed or captured, and the only possibility of survival is left with the women and children.Even then it should be a last resort. There is something unsavory in the mouths of society in turning a woman into the kind of person that is capable of performing such heinous actions that are required in close ground combat against another human being, while being expected to nurture our children once she returns from such brutal actions. Women by nature are the nurturing gender. W hat will this do to our society of civilized humans if we turn our women into barbaric warriors? Women certainly play a significant role in todays armed forces.On a venerable scale they have been instrumental in improving the readiness of their organizations, better enabling them to perform on the asymmetrical battlefield. But placing them into close ground combat positions will not improve the readiness or performance of the armed forces. The presence of women in combat units creates sexual tension that eventually puts one man against another in direct competition for her, thus affecting morale and cohesion. As prisoners of war, women will put their male counterparts at risk because a mans instinct is to protect the woman kind of than complete his mission and overcome the enemy.As a civilized society, it is morally wrong to place a woman into a position where she could be brutalized, or where she would have to brutalize another. They simply are not emotionally or psychologically equipped to do that, and nor should they be. But in the quest for equality of the sexes, placing women in combat units isnt the answer. It should still remain more important to maintain military tradition and combat effectiveness than it is for social experimentation.