Women in combat becoming a reality


The United States Department of Defense has granted full participation rights to women in all combat roles in the U.S. military. While this was enacted throughout the entire military, there are several other branches of the Department of Defense that are unfairly in disagreement with the decision, including the Marine Corps.

The argument that women should not be allowed to serve their country in this way because they “distract men” from completing their task is a debasing insult to both women and men. It suggests that women are only useful when it comes to their allure and that men are brainless and unable to muster the ability to focus on the task at hand. No one wins with this kind of mentality. That is why this granted freedom was an important win to acknowledge and support.

This mentality is still prevalent today in most facets of American life: dress codes at school enforce it, job opportunities enforce it, wages in corporate life enforce it. But now we can proudly say that national defense, which is perhaps the most strenuous example of this stigma broken by any governmental group, is leveling the field between men and women.

This should be regarded as a win for feminism and for our troops. Besides the fact that this plan yields greater contribution to the U.S. military since it is opening its door to copious other people, this change is also incredibly significant because it provides another tier that promotes social equality. Women now have the opportunity to advance to higher military positions. There no longer can be a gap between women’s and men’s abilities because both genders are being trained to handle the same situations. From a positive standpoint, this course of action will empower women and create trust and camaraderie between men and women.

Men will not feel the need to be protective of women anymore because this time, women will be in the field with them, protecting them, fighting off our enemies and keeping our country safe together. We have finally arrived at the point of progression in our society. No longer do married heterosexual couples have to be separated if they do not want to be. No longer do households of married heterosexual couples have to emulate 1940s lifestyle during which wives remained at home while husbands were off at war or in combat. How free and liberating it actually is for those women who have felt stifled by legal exclusion for all these years of battle.

It also seems constitutionally unjust to deny someone the opportunity to express his—or her now –love of patriotism to the country by forbidding him or her from serving.

There have been arguments about letting women serve in national defense because, historically, only three women were able to pass the fitness exam. It led to the extension of the idea that women are physically incapable of completing the same arduous training that men complete before serving for our nation. But perhaps this is only because women are not typically raised to push themselves to those same abilities.

Maybe if we raise our women to value physical strength and fitness the same way we encourage our men to, we would have different outcomes. With this implementation in the military, however, more than 200,000 women will serve to inspire generations as well as to protect civilians. It should be emphasized that these women will be in training throughout the duration of their military service. They will be able to develop physical strength and skills during their time in training, just like every other person who wishes to do so.

There are too many benefits that accompany this decision that overpower any other justification to keep women out of combat. It can only be so long before all sectors of the national defense incorporate women, and this change can be regarded as an advancement more than any expansion.