Lieb 1

Ava Lieb
Tamara Webb
English 1010
December 1, 2015
Position Synthesis
Outline
I. Introduction
A. Thesis: Women who are fully physically capable of participating in combat should be
able to. Women are aggressive, work hard and have been effective in the past, and are strong, yet
they are still deprived of many war occupations which needs to be changed.
II. Aggressive:
A. They say: Not Aggressive enough
1. Maternal Instincts
2. No past aggression
B. I say: Less daily basis aggression
1. Woman equally aggressive as any man I know
2. Just because women have nurturing aspects, doesnt mean can't use aggression
in fighting
3. Women are less prone to acting out on aggression
III. Effectiveness in the Past:
A. They say: Women hold squad units back/make them weaker
1. Sexual Tension
2. Distractions
B. I say: Women have been a vital contribution to the forces
1. Afghanistan & Iraq
2. Extra fighters
IV. Physical Ability:
A. They say: Women are not physically capable of infantry
1. Less muscle mass
2. Pregnancy etc.
B. I say: Some women can equal men in many aspects including physically
1. Equal standards = equal capability
2. Women graduating from Ranger school
V. Concluding Paragraph; Summary of naysayers and contradictions with personal position.

Lieb 2

Ava Lieb
Tamara Webb
English 1010
December 1, 1015

Position Synthesis
Women in Combat

In 2003 during the daring salvation of prisoner of war, Jessica Lynch, from an Iraqi
hospital, the first commando to reach Lynch identified himself as a United States Soldier. At that
moment, the 19 year old, woman Army private replied, Im an American soldier too. Jessica
Lynch is more than a soldier, she a symbol as well. One who reportedly fought her abusive
captors with heroism and courage and without any form of firearm. Her experience shows that
now is the time to break through the armored walls that keep women as second class citizens in
the military. Many that watch specific viewings of war operations on TV or read it in the
newspaper think that the military has already been fully integrated with regard to gender. Those
people would most definitely be wrong.
War has been part of humanity almost as long as humanity itself. However, women in
war have not. Women have undeniably served a vital role in combat roles throughout history and
to this day we hear about heroic and honorable women serving on the battlefield. Yet today, one
of the biggest arguments in human warfare is whether or not women should be allowed to fight

Lieb 3

alongside our men troops in front line combat roles. The issue of women participating in combat
roles is one of the most contested topics throughout the public today yet some people are not
even aware that it is a topic at all. Its time to be aware. Should woman be able to come face to
face with the enemy? Can women physically endure the hardships of infantry or special forces?
If a woman chooses this kind of challenge in her life, she is more than fully capable of upholding
it. A number of arguments have been traditionally given against women in combat that range
from womens lack of aggression, their effectiveness in combat compared to their distraction
tendencies, and their physical capability. Each of these arguments will later be discussed and
revealed of their flaws. It is to my strong belief that women who are fully physically capable of
participating in combat should be able to. Women are aggressive, work hard to fight alongside
their men counterparts, and are physically adapt for combat. Furthermore, their inability to
experience ground combat detrimentally limits their ability to potentially further a military career
in the future.
One of the biggest problems throughout the debate of women in combat is the general
opinion of many people that women, as a whole, tend to be less aggressive than men. This could
be because of womens portrayal of nurturing or maternal instincts which is true to a certain
extent. Most women are naturally more caring but that does not mean women cant have
aggressive behaviors and certainly does not mean all women are prone to that stereotype.
Truthfully we dont see many women getting into bar fights, mothers punching each other at a
little league baseball game, or watching as many violent sports such as Ultimate fighting and
such. This being said, stating that women are less aggressive than men is a fundamentally
different topic than stating womens lack of aggression makes them unsuitable or unqualified for
front line combat. I, myself, know plenty of women that could easily be just as aggressive or

Lieb 4

even more aggressive than an average man. We cannot doubt womens potential aggression when
it is needed based on what they show on a day to day basis. Simply said, it is wrong to assume
women have no place for aggression when it comes to being on the battlefield. Plus, womens
portraying aggression on a regular basis does not mean they do not capacitate it. It just shows
that women are better at holding it when needed and not making blatant decisions based on it
which could be detrimental throughout combat. A man that acts on aggression without thinking is
not any better than a women that lacks it.
Gregory Newbold uses his article What Tempers the Steel of an Infantry Unit to tell his
audience why women should not be on the frontline of combat units by showing other
perspectives than just the physical proportion. He states that if the decision was solely based on
physical aspects, there would not be a problem with women going into combat but that is just not
the case according to Newbold. He states how there are bigger factors to consider such as
cohesion of the unit. Another important and common argument for women joining the combat
forces is the matter of them being a distraction to men or not having a solid unit because of
gender differences. It is proven that there is a large number of women who have suffered from
rape or other unwanted sexual tension from their fellow soldiers. Experts in the field have noted
that female soldiers, unlike their male counterparts, are frequently violated in many different
ways while deployed. But why should women be getting punished for this? It is not their fault
that the population of men soldiers cant keep their hands to themselves. It is also said that
women can be a distraction in actual combat being that men will do everything they can do to
save a women in danger. Both these problems have an easy fix: discipline men more harshly,
keep a better eye out for assault to women and make sure the women are being treated as any
other soldier on the battlefield. There is no reason women should be getting punished by not

Lieb 5

being able to join certain leagues because of the insecurity of men. Not to mention, women have
undoubtedly taken a huge role in the success of battle all throughout the world including Iraq,
Afghanistan, etc. Not only do they inquire more soldiers to the forces but they have just as many
good aspects as any man, even though they may be different.
Probably the number one aspect of this argument is physical ability. Do women have the
physical qualifications that it takes to pursue these careers in combat forces? What about other
physical aspects such as pregnancy? Pregnancy is a huge concern when it comes to women in
combat positions. The main reason being that women who are pregnant during their deployment
tend to get off easier: not have to do as many drills, get excused from some training techniques,
etc. Obviously that could be a big problem considering that would make the force weaker by that
single women. So how about instead of excluding women in general, we fix the problem? Make
a rule that rules out women after a certain point in their pregnancy and make sure they can
handle the task they are signing up for. Besides pregnancy, the other big problem is literal
physical ability. It is stated that women naturally have a lower muscle capacity than men. On
average a man has about 25-35 percent more muscle mass than a woman in relation to body
weight. This being said, what about those above average women? It is understandable that there
are certain standards to being physically qualified to be in the military, but why disclude any
woman that can reach those standards? The main question being whether or not woman should
be compared equally to men or if they are obtaining a double standard or reducing the standards
for submission into the opps, therefore making them an asset or detrimental to war missions. Are
women physically incapable of being compared to men when it comes to war standards? Should
they be able to participate in all factions that men are allowed? Germano uses her article Make
the Standards for Male and Female Marines equal to not just press the issue that combat roles

Lieb 6

should be equal for men and women, but to explain why it is portrayed as a bad idea. She
explains how women are held to a much lower standard in basic training than men so when it
comes to actually being able to handle the battle field, they are not physically ready and then are
thrown under the bus for not being able to meet the standards. This is a problem that needs to
stop being ignored. We need to make the standards equal for both men and women so that there
is no argument on whether women are capable of the same things men are through both training
and battle. This last year there were 2 women who graduated from the U.S. Ranger Training
Program, the most advanced/difficult military training program there is. Both these women were
widely recognized for their achievement but still to this day, these amazing women are not
allowed to participate in about 7 percent of the overall military occupations, mostly of which are
infantry or special forces occupations. Does anyone see how that is fair? They have worked just
as hard if not harder to achieve what many thought was not possible so shouldnt they be
accepted just as much as the men who have done the same? Physical aspect should not be a
problem when deciding for or against gender neutrality in combat forces. If a being can meet the
standards that are requested from everyone equally, there is absolutely no reason there should be
a restriction on whether it is a male or female.
In in the end, for almost every reason there is for women to not be allowed into combat
forces in the military, there is an equally logical solution to the problem. Aggression, although
not portrayed on a regular basis like our male counterpart, is still in most women especially when
we need it for a specific task. Women have no doubt been a large aspect of success in many
battles up to this point in our history and should not be denied that potential for achievement
because of mans incapability to focus on the task at hand. Lastly, women as a whole should not
be physically compared to men. We are all aware that men have a higher muscle capacity but that

Lieb 7

should not deny women who work hard and meet the standards the option of applying for certain
military occupations. There is no reason women should be revoked of their right to be equal to
men on the battlefield.

Lieb 8

Citations
Germano, Kate. "Make the Standards for Male and Female Marines Equal."Should Women Serve in
Combat Roles?. 20 Aug. 2015. Web. 12 Nov. 2015.

Miller AE1, MacDougall JD, Tarnopolsky MA, Sale DG. "Gender differences in strength and
muscle fiber characteristics.."European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational
Physiology. Web. 11. Dec. 2015.

Newbold, Gregory. What Tempers the Steel of an Infantry Unit War On The Rocks. 5 Sept. 2015.
Web. 13 Nov. 2015.

Owens, Mackubin Thomas. "There Are Many Reasons to Oppose Gender Neutrality in the
Military."Gender Roles. 4 Feb. 2013. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.