Historically, men have always dominated areas that focused on the military. It was normal for a man to be expected to protect women and children and to take part in military activities as men were considered the head of the household and drafted into the army. A man’s physique helped to support the reasoning behind such sexist decisions. Men were large and muscular. They were unlike women as they were considered to be someone that was physically strong. Women, on the other hand, were expected to take on other roles that required them to take care of the home. This included raising the children and keeping the house clean and having meals prepared for the family. Women, unlike men, were able to get pregnant and bear children. However, they were also able to pursue other roles despite stereotypes. Some women even served as soldiers fighting alongside men. However, the ability of a woman to show that she was capable of participating in the military was short lived as women were barred from participating in the military.
Over the years, it was rare for the contributions of women to be read about in or even discussed, due to the belief that men should be the only ones serving in the military. During the American Revolution from 1775- 1783, men were allowed to join militias as women worked to support the troops by serving as their cook or nurse. During the Second Continental Congress, American Colonial leaders took it upon themselves to hire women as employees in 1775 within their hospital department that was designated for the army. These civilian nurses cared for the troops. As a result of this newly formed position, the role of women as a nurse in the military became acceptable. However, many women still had a desire to serve in other positions that would put them near combat areas.
Many women worked in the military as military scouts, drivers, and even spies. Some ever impersonated themselves as men to fight in the armies. They desired to be a part of the adventure and work closely with those that they loved. It wasn’t until World War I when woman began to take on other roles such as secretaries. They were needed to fill these roles in order for more men to be available for combat. But overtime, there was also a manpower shortage that led many women to be recruited.
Josephus Daniels, Secretary of the Navy, ordered that women be enlisted into the Navy Reserve. Over 13,000 women served in World War I. Even military nurses were ordered to serve near combat zones, although many died as a result of enemy fire. Equal Rights Organizations such as the American Suffragist Movement pushed for women to have significant roles in the military. Supporters of this movement believed women should have the same jobs as men. They even believed women should also be provided opportunities to fly armed aircraft as well. But regardless of their pursuit to allow women’s role to change in the military, many Americans disagreed as they believed women were unfit for certain positions.
In 1939, prior to World War II, women began to take a stance by joining civil defense units and other military organization to help expand their roles during war time. Although the United States had not officially entered into the war, many women that worked in health care and even civil defense began to prepare to serve although gender biases continued. Members of the army staff, however, only saw them working as either cooks, librarians, messengers, and even waitresses. It wasn’t until 1941when a representative of Massachusetts, Congresswoman Edith Nourse Rogers, introduced a bill that would create a women’s army corps that provided full military status. She worked diligently to help others understand that women would not be permitted to serve without obtaining the same protection of the men. But there remained opposition to the bill.
Women serving in any form of military combat was not at all normal. Some wondered if women were allowed to serve in the military who would be responsible for cooking food and washing clothes? The manhood of America would be reduced. However, in some instances, many women were seen as useful. Instead of the men being trained to perform clerical jobs, many women were qualified to fill these positions. According to General George Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, “There are innumerable duties now being performed by soldiers that can actually be done better by women”. It wasn’t until Japanese bombed the U.S. Naval Base at Pearl Harbor when Congresswoman Roger’s bill began to make head way. A modified bill was approved by Congress allowing for the Women’s Auxiliary Army Corps (WAAC) to be created. But the corps did not have full military status although the army would provide uniforms, housing, and food. They would also receive a salary, but it was much lower than men. The women within the Women’s Auxiliary Army Corps would not be put in positions where they could command men. Critics continued to oppose women soldiers and the efforts brought on by the WAAC.
The WAAC was accused of trying to remove women from their traditional roles at home. However, leaders within the WAAC made it clear to its critics that the women would only serve in roles that were noncombatant. “WAACs will do the same type of work which women do in civilian life.” Most women who worked during the war worked as typists, drivers, and even stenographers. Some were even telephone operators. But negativity continued to ambush female soldiers as critics accused the women of being pregnant at high rates and even having sexually transmitted diseases. But these were just rumors.
In July of 1943, the WAAC became a regular army known as the Women’s Army Corps (WAC). The women were able to receive benefits such as salaries. These encouraged women to become a part of other military organizations such as Navy WAVES and the Marine Corps Women’s Reserve. Women’s work in the military was now far better at times than men. For example, women were now able to move planes to their designated locations and test aircraft. They prove to be able to do these jobs with ease and with little to no mistakes. Jobs such as these although they were difficult help to allow more men to be able to participate in combat missions.
Rough conditions existed without a doubt. Some of the women who served as nurses during the wars faced enemy fire in mobile hospital units as they help to transport wounded men. They even took on other jobs that were traditionally performed by men where they had to wear protective gear as they operated tools to build ships and other military equipment. But after the war, women received titles that were commensurate to men. They also received medals for their courage and dedication. But after the crisis ended, many believed women should have been required to return back to their traditional roles. Women’s jobs in the military became limited. Some were even on a voluntary basis.
Congress, however, did consider providing the women with a permanent place in the armed services. As evidence, Congress passed an act that helped to create the Women’s Army Corps. The Women’s Armed Services Act of 1948 also helped women to become official members in the Army, Navy, and Air Force. But limits were also placed on the women as a limited number of women could be permitted into the armed forces. Also there was a cap placed on the number of women that could be allowed to be a female officer. They were forbidden to serve in ground combat or even on naval ships. Pregnant or married women were not allowed to serve. In 1950, several components of the armed forces accepted women. Such components consisted of the Army Nurse Corps, Women’s Air Force, and the Navy Nurse Corps. But overtime the number of women that was stationed in the military were reduced by the thousands. During the years between 1952 and 1955, there was no need to recruit. It wasn’t until the 1960’s when the U.S. military began to be heavily involved in Vietnam.
Women were needed to serve in combatant jobs. But in 1973, thousands of nurses treated soldiers and some even needed treatment themselves as they suffered physical and emotional trauma. Some nurses died as modern weapons and guerilla warfare caused deadly injuries. It wasn’t until 1969 when women were admitted to the Air Force ROTC. Women were also allowed to join the Coast Guard as well. Even in 1973, other jobs in the military became available to women when the nation began an all-voluntary military. The number of women in the military and navy began to increase tremendously. Women were joining the military because they needed job security, economic benefits, and an opportunity to meet new people. However, although women challenged many policies that denied them their rights, a 1948 law that banned women from flying combat planes and serving on combat ships was still in effect. Because of this many women were not put in positions that consisted of combat although many had already proved they could perform as well as men and some even served in higher class rankings.
The Department of Defense believes assignments that allow women to be assigned to ground combat missions causing them to have an encounter with enemy fire violate its rules. At times, women could even be captured. In 1978, the army used such reasoning to help them decide the positions women could be assigned to in the military. The army then began to use the term known as “direct combat” which they defined as “Engaging an enemy with individual or crew served weapons while being exposed to direct enemy fire, a high probability of direct physical contact with the enemy’s personnel, and a substantial risk of capture. It became evident that sending women into combat was not the best for the military. It was also not best for women or the society as a whole. This was partly due to women’s physic and any other problems that could come about as a result of mixing both genders in combat. It wasn’t a secret that women lacked physical abilities that were needed for combat.
The physical differences between men and women have been analyzed for years. Men are physically stronger and faster than women. They are able to carrier much heavier loads and run at greater speeds longer. Unlike women, they are more capable of throwing hand grenades a lot further. According to a study performed by Mackubin Thomas Owens, “Only 10 percent of women can meet all of the minimum physical requirements for 75 percent of the jobs in the Army.” Women are on average shorter than men as they have shorter legs. They tend to weigh less than men do and have a lower muscle mass.
A woman’s upper body strength is less than a man as well. When analyzing the weight of military-age women, they typically weigh 34 pounds less than the average man. Unfortunately, combat equipment such as survival gear, weapons, ammunition and even water can weigh up to 100 pounds or more. Speed and distance are very important in the military, however if a woman is forced to carry the extra weight, she is probably going to be unable to run the required distance. Many women are also unable to lift these heavy items as sometimes jobs in the field require one to not only be able to lift but handle such objects. Women are also slower than men. They are at times unable to run and climb ropes at high speed in combat situations. Female cadets have less the upper body strength of men and less the leg strength of a man. Men have more leg and dominate hand grip power. Even training does not provide women with greater strength or speed. Due to the lower amount of strength in women, women fighting in combat face a higher risk of death. These physical limitations not only endanger the women, but their fellow soldiers.
In 2003, Melissa Castillo, a first class private, died after the personnel carrier she was driving turned over. She was not seated properly nor was she wearing a seatbelt. She was also only five feet two inches and unable to see above the dashboard. She was not tall enough to drive the vehicle that required its drivers to be at least five feet five inches tall. Since she was not tall enough, she was unable to see any on-coming obstacles that could have been before her on the road. As a result, men believe men are just better suited for combat than women. They believe women also lack the temperament needed for combat. Since they are less aggressive, they do not make great warriors. Women are also known to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorders or PTSD unlike men. This was evident after the Persian Gulf War where more women needed to seek treatment for PTSD. Some of these same results have also been found in the civilian population as well. However, this is only one main reason why many believe restrictions that were put against women in combat should remain in place. Another reason that has been given involves American values.
It has been proven that women working in combat goes against the cultural and religious traditions of the nation. Morally, many believe men are responsible for going into combat and not women. Putting women into combat is a form of degradation as it takes away their femininity. Fighting in combat can be very difficult as the climate is brutal. American values should support not putting women in harm’s way. A woman lacks the requirements of strength, and so many believe this alone should disqualify her from even being allowed to engage in any conflicts of combat. Gulf War Veteran Lieutenant Colonel William Bryan just simply could not see America’s mothers and daughters forced to endure such abuse. Those in opposition believe women are capable of surviving such combat situation because they have done so in the past. They also believe that women should not be excluded because of rape threats. However, those in support of the restrictions against women believe throwing women into combat encourages violence against women. Another reason women have been restricted from the military is the result of the military and the media providing false impressions about how the women actually perform.
The media has provided the society with a distorted view of how women actually perform in the military partly because they depend on activities that are newsworthy. This has caused many stories to be falsified about women soldiers to show that they work just as hard as any man can in the military. For example, the story about Army Private Jessica Lynch was fabricated when photos were featured by newspapers showing that she was shooting at the enemy. However, Lynch was injured instead. Those who support women not performing in combat believe incidents such as these only dramatize their experiences. The media has also been accused of withholding information about women soldiers that could hurt their credibility. If American citizens are not provided a realistic picture of the military, then they will be unable to develop opinions that are based on true facts. Some even believe just the presence of women in combat units could instantly lower the cohesion and morale of a unit.
Working in combat units is far different than working in other organizations, this makes it difficult to mix genders. Unit members have to be able to build a strong and effective force in order to be able to survive in difficult situations. Mixing genders can cause competition and jealousy among combatants. It can also lead to romantic or sexual relationships. One who is in a leadership position can show favoritism of the one that they love, or they can form resentment against other group members. This can increase potential hazards as it leads to the clouding of judgment. Those in opposition of women in combat believe men are more likely to qualify for combat duty. If women are allowed to engage in such action, it could reduce the morale of a man as well. Men are encouraged to fight in wars to protect women and children. So a woman’s participation in combat, for instance, would distract the male who thinks he is a form of protection for the woman. Overall, supporters of women being barred in the military believe it is due to women being a distraction, and it could also hinder the effectiveness of the military.
Units that typically have a higher percentage of women, usually suffer higher rates of personnel loss. Women continue to be more prone to injuries than men. They easily receive stress fractures among other conditions. Women are more likely to become sick and are not able to fulfill their active duties due to medical reasons. One reason in particular is that of pregnancy. A large percentage of the military personnel is under the age of 30, which increase the chances of women becoming pregnant. In such cases, troops could be stationed in a given area, however because a woman is pregnant, she would have to be evacuated. Women are non-deployable in situations that involve pregnancy and other family responsibilities. This impairs the readiness of units as all members are dependent on one another. Departures, therefore, end up having an adverse impact on the unit. Health problems are also more common among women that are deployed.
Whether it is dehydration or even fatigue, many women are more common to experience such issues in the military. These issues lead to more problems such as the loss of not only personnel, but time and money. Women are more prone as well to losing their life. This typically happens because women are not as physically able to survive like men. They are also at times unable to help assist others. If a woman is shorter than a man and weighs less, it is more likely they would be unable to save their partner if injured. There is also a reason that if the exclusion policy is eliminated, many women would simply not enlist.
Some women actually fear being assigned to combat duty. Studies have found that there is only a small percentage of women who believe they should be treated just like men in combat. This would also hinder retention rates as well. Many women train for jobs that are unrelated to combat situations. They do not expect to be put in situations where they are under fire. These are risks many women refused to take. Having to wake up and take cover because your unit is under attack is not the dream of many military women personnel. Due to this lack of competency of women, even men will refuse to stay in the military or even enlist because of fear for their safety. A gender neutral military can also persuade experienced and highly qualified military men to resign. Other men just view the idea of women being put in combat as not appropriate. It simply comes down to women do not belong in combat. Leaders have made decisions that go against integrating the military. Many women have been removed from various positions and placed in platoons that are all-female. Training programs are based upon physical profile. In some cases, women are not even allowed to serve in the front-line infantry or drive tanks. The physical capabilities of a women have become the main reason women are barred from such duties in the military. Even military physicians have provided adequate reasons why women should not be allowed to serve in areas that involve artillery units, front-line infantry positions, or even within tank crews. Many cultures also simply forbid women to participate in combat zones.
It is up to the military to be able to not only defend, but prevail against some of the most dangerous enemies. U.S. combat troops have to be strong and highly motivated individuals to take on such a task. They also must be well-trained. Although a small number of women may be able to perform just as well as men in certain military situations, such as in combat, the military cannot and should not base any of its policies on such a small percentage. Maximum efficiency has to be a priority in armed forces and in order to accomplish this, administrators within the armed forces have to base their decisions on how the majority of the military can perform. Units within the military must be an effective fighting force and should not risk its supply of soldiers. There is an extensive amount of problems that could arise with women being included in such areas of the military such as ground combat units. It can easily complicate the mission of the military and put its overall effectiveness at risk. Everyone deserves equality, however, many people who fight for total gender equality on the battlefield fail to understand that sending all military personnel is not always in the best interest of everyone. Military readiness should always be considered and as a result policies set forth have to override gender equality conflicts.
References
Bellafaire, Judith. (2005). THE WOMEN'S ARMY CORPS: A COMMEMORATION OF WORLD WAR II SERVICE. CMH Publication 72-15. Retrieved from http://www.history.army.mil/brochures/WAC/WAC.HTM
Bragg, Rick. (2003). I am a Soldier, Too: The Jessica Lynch Story. New York: Knopf.
Francke, Linda Bird. (1997). Ground Zero: The Gender Wars in the Military. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Owens, Mackubin. (2013). “Coed Combat Units. The Weekly Standards. Retrieved from http://www.weeklystandard.com/coed-combat-units/article/697822
Simon, Rita. (2001). Women in the Military. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers.
Weatherford, Doris. (1990). American Women and World War II. New York: Facts On File
Zagaroli, Liza. (2004). “Leaders Are Focus of Reform Efforts”. Detroit News. Retrieved from http://detnews.com/2004/project/0407/13/a01-208481.htm
“
