WOMEN IN COMBAT

Abstract
As the band is lifted on women serving in combat, some would say it will affect our military readiness as a whole. Through research this paper will show that all these misconceptions of women not being cut out to serve in combat zones are just that a misconceptions. This paper will also discuss physical standards, the fact that women have already seen combat, and whether women are able to make the same decisions as men in stressful combat situations.

WOMEN IN COMBAT
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta will lift a longstanding ban on women serving in combat, according to senior defense officials. The services have until this May to come up with a plan to implement the change, according to a Defense Department official. "To implement these initiatives successfully and without sacrificing our war- fighting capability or the trust of the American people, we will need time to get it right," he said in the memo, referring to the 2016 horizon (Martinez, 2013).
The new order, signed Thursday by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, will open as many as 237,000 new jobs to women. Women comprise about 14% of the 1.4 million active military personnel (Michaels, Vanden Brook, 2013). (See Appendix A, photo 1.)
During the Iraq War, 4,475 U.S. service members were killed and 32,220 were wounded; in Afghanistan, 2,165 have been killed and 18,230 wounded through Feb. 5, 2013.
Among service members deployed in these conflicts, 103,792 were diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) over the period from 2002 to December 2012. During that same period, 253,330 service members were diagnosed with a Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) of some kind.
As a result of battle injuries in the Iraq War; 991 service members received wounds that required amputations; and 797 lost major limbs, such as a leg. In Afghanistan, 724 have had to undergo amputations, with 696 losing a major limb (Wihbey, 2013).
"The reality of the battlefield has changed since the Vietnam era. About everyone is serving in a combat situation," freshman Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., a double amputee war veteran, said (Lane, 2013). (See Appendix A, photo 2.)
One argument claims that there will be quotas set for women in combat roles, thus displacing men. There is, of course, usually the assumption that the women will be unqualified and will be displacing qualified men—therefore wronging the men and also making the military weaker. Arguments of this sort were given in the context of race rather than sex (Labossiere, 2013). A second argument maintains that women soldiers will be subject to sexual assault either by enemy forces or by fellow Americans. Given the amount of sexual assault that occurs within the American military, this is a matter of concern. However, allowing women in combat roles would not seem to increase the chances of their being assaulted by American soldiers. There is still, however, the concern that sexual assault will be inflicted by enemy forces—after all, rape has often been employed as a tool of war against civilian women, so it makes sense that it could also be employed against female soldiers (Labossiere, 2013). Critics of the idea that women should be allowed in combat roles often point to the fact that the military has two sets of physical standards: one for men and one for women. Not surprisingly, the standards for women are considerably lower than those for men. While it could be argued that the lower standards are needed to allow women a chance to qualify, the obvious concern is that if women are held to lower standards then they will be less physically qualified than men.
While this would not matter if one were filling out requisition forms, it certainly would matter in combat. There is also the obvious moral concern—a man who would meet the qualifications set for women but not those for men would be denied a job simply because he is a man. That seems to be clearly wrong (Labossiere, 2013).
It is well worth noting that the general differences between men and women as groups obviously need not hold true between individual men and women. I know many women who are considerably stronger and tougher than the average man. They would easily exceed the requirements set for men. I also know plenty of men who could not meet the physical qualifications that women have to meet to be in the military. (See Appendix A, photo 3,4.)
Because of this, I contend that the military should either differentiate physical standards solely by role (rather than by sex) or that there should be just one general set of physical standards. This would allow women who are qualified to qualify legitimately without there being unjust double standards. It would also respond to the charge that the women in combat roles would not be qualified because they “qualified” by meeting watered- down standards.
Women have been able to fly combat sorties since 1993. In 2010, the Navy allowed them on submarines. But lifting restrictions on service in frontline ground combat units will break a key barrier in the military. (See Appendix A, photo 5.)
Because I believe in fairness, I believe that women who qualify for combat roles should have every right to serve in the roles that they earn. I also believe that the sex-based standards should be eliminated and replaced with either role-based standards or a bar that everyone must meet. That is, no more sexism.
We need to honor the women who are serving in this conflict.” Willing to step outside traditional roles and answer their country's call, they are vital to this mission. Women soldiers deserve to be treated just as all soldiers should be treated – properly trained, properly equipped and given the proper respect.
This is just my conclusion base on my research of this particular important current event in our nation’s military history. I do believe that this has the most merit, namely the concern about the physical capabilities of women. Obviously enough, men are generally larger, stronger and faster than women. Men also seem more inclined towards traits that serve well in combat—although perhaps some of these are the result of socialization rather than nature. Because of this, with the changing times on the horizon woman could be in the mix for our first line of defense filling combat roles alongside of men. Knocking down the doors of these male held combat jobs.

References
Brook, T. V., & Michaels, J. (2013, january 25). Women, men must meet the same combat standards in millitary. Retrieved from USA TODAY: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/01/24/women-in-combat-briefing/1861887/
LaBossiere, M. (2013, Febuary 1). Women in Combat.
Lane, G. (2013, January 25). Is Lifting Ban on Women in Combat a Good Idea.
Martinez, L. (2013, January 23). Pentagon to Allow Women in Combat.
Wihbey, J. (2013, Febuary 19). U.S. Military Casualty Statistics and the Cost of War: Iraq, Afghanistan and post-9/11 Conflicts.

Appendix A

Patrick Baz, AFP/Getty Images Posted By Tantor (September 12, 2011)

(Photo: H. Darr Beiser, USA TODAY) (Kevin Kelly)

(Tedrick E. Fryman III, U.S. Navy, via AP)