Cooper 1

William Cooper

Professor Malcolm Campbell

University Writing 1104

4 November 2018

Women in combat roles: Do bullets change gender equality?

Since the time of hunter gatherers (a time when women carried out many tasks alongside

men), women have been viewed as weaker and not up to most physically and mentally

challenging tasks men carry out. In regards to the United States military, women have played the

role of nurses for wounded soldiers since the American Revolution. In the civil war, a small

handful of women dressed up as men in order to be able to fight for what they believed in. In

World War One, more than 12,000 women enlisted in the United States Navy and Marine Corps

filling up non-combatant roles, about 400 of them were killed. The standard had changed, and

the path to combat roles being open to women had begun being paved. In the Second World War

women's involvement skyrocketed, with large numbers of US women filling nursing and clerical

roles. However, between other countries nearly one million women filled combat roles, with

almost half of those being front line troops. “Women became officially recognized as a

permanent part of the armed forces with the passing of the Women’s Armed Services Integration

Act of 1948” (Freeman, 2009). During the Vietnam War, nearly 11,000 women were deployed to

Vietnam, and the majority served as nurses. Commander Elizabeth Barrett was the first

American woman to hold a command in a combat zone. Over the years women were still not

allowed into ground combat units, even though they had been allowed into Navy Warships and
 Cooper 2
allowed to fly fighter jets. Women had even been shot at or killed in the Middle East serving

roles like Military police. This all changed in 2013 when the secretary of defense made an

announcement: “The militaries combat exclusion act will be rescinded” and on the 24th of

January 2016, this was followed through. “There will be no exclusions” said Secretary of defense

Ashton Carter. Our military has made many mistakes that cost the lives of many brave men,

could this be one of them?

What are combat roles in the military?

Combat roles are defined by the US Army field manual as: Infantry- Boots on the ground,

the people that go in platoon sized elements, find the enemy, and kill them with small arms fire.

Field Artillery- Those that help infantry by shooting the big cannons at them. Air Defense

Artillery- They shoot enemy aircraft down. Armor- They drive tanks and other combat vehicles.

Combat Aviation- Attack helicopters and air cavalry units. For obvious reasons women have

been excluded from these roles due to their danger and the perception that women simply aren't

strong enough to withstand the grueling realities of these roles. Currently women are allowed to

hold virtually any other role other than these, including nursing, clerical, logistics, etc.

Why would we even need women in combat?

The argument used for women in combat is women add greater numbers to our fighting

force. The world is growing, and other militaries are adding more heads to their fighting forces.

They are doing this through mandatory military service as well as by integrating women into

combat roles. With these facts, statistically speaking to remain the dominant military force in the

world the integration of women into the combat roles is necessary. This is why other militaries in

the past have had to use women to strengthen their fighting forces, such as Russia in the second

World War when they used nearly 400,000 women to strengthen their fighting force. Their is
 Cooper 3
also a smaller argument that women are better shots than men. Some argue their calmness

provides the ability to take better and more accurate shots. For example, a Russian female sniper

has been credited for 56 confirmed kills in WWII.

What does women in combat really mean?

Women in combat is a full integration in to the military with no exceptions. That means

even the most elite units such as Army Ranger Regiments or Navy Seal teams. What most people

think of when it comes to women in combat roles however is women holding back men by being

too physically weak. The secretary of defense has said that while the integration will have no

exceptions, the standards will not change at all. Women will have to adhere to the exact same

standards as men. Secretary Carter made it very clear that the standards will not be lowered for

any reason.

The facts: are women really fit for these tough positions?

There are several sub questions to be answered in order to address this question. The first

being: Are women truly physically fit enough to compete? Statistically women are 40-60%

weaker than men when it comes to upper body strength. This can be a big problem when it

comes to military tasks such as loading hundreds of heavy artillery rounds used to fire at the

enemy to save infantry soldiers lives, it could mean a female struggling to scale a wall and

putting male counterparts at risk to help her over. It could also be a major problem when it

comes to hand to hand combat with the enemy. Women are also 25-30% weaker than men in

lower body strength such as marching under load when time is of the essence, this can mean

failing a mission. In tough military training environments women will be more prone to stress

fractures, pulled muscles and other overuse injuries of that sort. Finally, males also have 40%

greater aerobic capacity, which could mean not being able to move or run as fast or as long to or
 Cooper 4
from dangerous situations. Again one can argue that the standards will be the same and if women

are going to be in combat roles they will train to the same standards, so the weak women, just

like the weak men will be weeded out for the good of themselves and those in combat. The

second question is: Are women mentally and emotionally stable enough to handle the ugly

side of war? Current research suggest that female combatants may need more social support

than males. “Female combatants may function better when they perceive sufficient support from

peers, friends, and families, while males may require less reliance on social support to buffer the

stresses of war” (Mcgraw, 2016). This leads to criticism from male peers being perceived as

rejection and can lead to many emotional problems within combat. Civilian women are also

reported to have twice the amount of PTSD as civilian men. Women can also differ in their

judgement, and it is a simple fact that women think differently and make decisions differently

than men. Women can sometimes freeze up under pressure and not be able to make sound

decisions when everything doesn't go to plan, which is in fact what happens every time the

bullets start to fly. Women also are much more likely to hold grudges than men, and let personal

conflicts get in the way of making sound decisions when lives are on the line. A final point

toward the psychological effects of war is that women are hormonal for one week of every

month. Deployments are 8-12 months long in combat zones which makes for 2-3 collective

months of a deployment spent in even more stressful conditions, with women battling roller

coaster hormones as well as the physical effects of menstruation. Some women use hormone

regulating forms of birth control in order to stop their periods, however these methods can lead

to weight gain, weakening of bones and other less than desirable side effects. Finally on the

subject of hormones, women can get pregnant, which makes them a liability in combat. In

stressful conditions it would be possible for a woman to go several months without even
 Cooper 5
knowing that she is pregnant, which would lead to a waste of resources if she were deployed.

Resources would be used to get her there and more would be used to get her back early in order

to avoid risks to the pregnancy and risk to her fellow combatants. The third question is: Does

putting men and women in such an environment ask for issues in sexual relationships and

harassment? The answer to this question is yes, when you deploy men and women together for

a year it can lead to inappropriate sexual relationships. It can also increases the risk of sexual

assault and harassment due to the close quarters men and women will be in, which exist in the

military much more than any other profession due to the nature of staying weeks in the field

together. The fact is At least 32% of U.S. military women report having been sexually assaulted,

and up to 80% have been sexually harassed(Meade,2013). Keep in mind these statistics were

taken from before 2016 when Carter lifted the exclusion.

Conclusion

The viewpoint that women are needed in combat to match the growing global forces that have

already integrated women is a valid one. However statistically and biologically speaking women

are inferior to men in combat situations. There is research to prove this. These findings just

simply beg the questions: Is having women in combat better than not having them at all? And: Is

the integration of women truly to better our fighting force, or is it from a push for movements to

diversify and feminize the military just like the rest of society?
 Cooper 6

Works cited

"Army Field Manual, A-4." Aviation (n.d.): 2016.

"Army Field Manual FM 3-90: Tactics (dated 4 July 2001), Appendix A: Army

Branches and Tactical Echelons, Appendix A: Army Branches and Tactical

Echelons, A-2 Combat Arms, Figure A-1." (n.d.): 2016.

 Cooper 7
McGraw, Kate. “Women in Combat: Framing the Issues of Health and Health

Research for America’s Service Women.” Watermark.silverchair.com,

Military Medicine, 2016, watermark.silverchair.com/milmed-d-15-

00223.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Er

cy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAAkwwggJIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggI5

MIICNQIBADCCAi4GCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQMY

CWt143rZO0CBb8TAgEQgIIB_yr5Sw25Yk53CBOo-

spXzOB_WRI_dy_XV6gsc3V9gvPpNXYS7ALLFAx9L6EbXgkDstbJAzMAOc

p1mf4I_VeVeLfV3o2A1xiOnvJ5OJ3lYbBDvSx87ZSpuXhHbpOMYxTSO6Nur2

IU5oIQyDeDob7QR5QpxSt9U_FvHf6XmB9awMUIIhBoFsDTeU0f0whR0vAfs

6lC2UIIE4LKvAC9zBsGVhXdRReIzBq0zFOiejZt3l2emu98J1DQ6grzrA_f6xm

Xu2FOQ4VKp41U2txAUGghZQ9w6S0J4IOdQmuHycReICGoMn9VhQJlF3Hq

S4tx_a0ARW2ROlhL-fxtqbn-

Xmpf1FEpCSCR9t_bIE1iD0pHWm2TYQ7xHOgx06cOh8Gev3D_Dt9sCVyS1l2

Wxg52dX_d_aOa4of-M2D9JCz9TJotJVhyz

CKoj771TyIucCNpS_6ps5tSLVXS4W9JnExUACo3wKMydD1Y2GEKvaXwdh

5Yu43bgnt6cSciWExj9TPNjsvxhQG7XXOCujxHUUKOeHBseK3d9pNC_mZ4n

OvYMULLiv8Tl0JGYFRXMTYefLOCdZsJF7B3j2ae1aoYbon3qVfarY2aXAQ

NxozcplCgGJE1knLEGXSnQ9-cp5_P8m03FsCvA1_xQxaZrSVRQ-

dq_DyKp5GxkIq-pHSIXkWZDFiQ0E.
 Cooper 8
Studio, Pixel Theme. “Women in Combat Pros and Cons.” Sisters In Arms RSS, 2009,

sistersinarms.ca/history/women-in-combat-pros-and-cons/.

Task & Purpose. “TIMELINE: A History Of Women In The US Military.” Task & Purpose,

Task & Purpose, 8 Mar. 2017, taskandpurpose.com/timeline-history-women-us-

military/.

“Women and War.” Monitor on Psychology, American Psychological

Association, www.apa.org/monitor/2009/09/women-war.aspx.