Should Women Serve in Combat? A Look at Both Sides

Should Women Serve in Combat? A Look at Both Sides
Capt. Kristen Greist and 1Lt. Shaye Haver graduate from Ranger School. Jessica McGowan/Getty Images. Source: Time Magazine.

“The question isn’t who’s going to let me; it’s who’s going to stop me.” — Ayn Rand

Women have been in combat roles for thousands of years.

In 1200 BC, Fu Hao of the Shang Dynasty was the most powerful general of her time; she directed an army of 13,000 soldiers in the earliest-recorded large-scale ambush in Chinese history.

Around 60 AD, Queen Boudica and her army killed 80,000 Romans in an uprising that nearly forced Rome out of Britain.

The legendary Joan of Arc commanded the French army in the Hundred Years’ War — recapturing Paris and setting a new paradigm for military strategy.

And, in more modern times, the Soviet Union demonstrated female fighting power in both the air and on the ground. They sent 2,000 female snipers to the front in World War II, including Lyudmila Pavlichenko, who had 309 confirmed kills. They were also responsible for some of the first female fighter pilots.

From the Amazon warriors, to numerous spies and guerilla fighters throughout Europe, our history was crafted by women who fought and died in war.


World War II & the changing role of women

Should Women Serve in Combat? A Look at Both Sides
Rosie the Riveter interpretation.

As millions of men were called away to fight in World War II, women’s roles on both the homefront and in the military changed dramatically.

Many housewives and daughters began working industrial labor jobs that were previously restricted to them. This helped the war effort, as women in America built the weapons and supplies needed by soldiers.

More than 310,000 women worked in the aircraft industry in 1943, totalling 65% of the workforce (it was 1% in previous years).

“Rosie the Riveter” was a campaign run by the U.S. government to encourage women to work in the munitions industry. Rosie was a symbol of strength, and a strong recruitment tool. It became one of the most iconic images of its time.

The military had been opened to women in World War I, though in a very limited capacity. Only 30,000 joined, and female service in the military was still very much a point of contention.  

Conversely, around 350,000 women served in the Armed Forces during World War II.

This included Women’s Airforce Service Pilots (WASP), the Women’s Army Corps (WAC), and the Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service (WAVES). First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt advocated for these groups after seeing British use of women in service.

“Their contributions in efficiency, skill, spirit, and determination are immeasurable.” — General Dwight D. Eisenhower, referring to five women who served in the Women’s Army Corps on his staff in 1945.

After the war ended, President Harry Truman passed the Women’s Armed Services Integration Act. For the first time, women were fully recognized as members of the U.S. military, and could make a career for themselves in the Army or Navy.

Women’s numbers in the military continued to grow over the decades. Soon, they were granted access to the Marine Corps, Air Force, and the service academies.

In the Gulf War, female pilots were finally authorized to fly combat missions. They also served on combat ships and flew warplanes from aircraft carriers.

The debate for opening more combat positions to female service members began in 1994. Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, amid a firestorm of controversy, refused to allow women into any form of ground combat.


Current policy

In January 2013, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta removed the ban on women serving in combat.

American women have been forced into combat roles as far back as the Revolutionary War — but never had the choice of intentionally filling them.

“They’re fighting and they’re dying together, and the time has come for our policies to recognize that reality,” Panetta said.

“We are making our military stronger, and we are making America stronger.”

Since 2013, women have successfully undergone and completed infantry training for both the Army and Marine Corps. There have even been graduates of Army Ranger School, and an anonymous woman who passed the RASP II selection course for the 75th Ranger Regiment.

Should Women Serve in Combat? A Look at Both Sides
Female soldier carries male in Ranger School. Photo by U.S. Army/Spc. Dacotah Lane. Source: NBC News.

In 2015, the Pentagon opened all combat jobs to women.

Though many women have graduated from combat-oriented courses, very few have been placed in units of their choosing. As with most major changes in the military, implementation will take time.

But, if their service is authorized, why are women still being denied for combat positions?


Arguments against women in combat

The road to gender integration in the military has been long and hard-fought. This includes the more recent effort to allow women into combat roles, which has received a lot of backlash.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Joseph Dunford — the highest-ranking and senior-most military officer in the Armed Forces, as well as the principal military advisor to the President — has staunchly opposed this policy change.

Dunford spoke on behalf of the Marine Corps in his opposition, citing 2014-2015 experiments done to test female capability in the field.


The study found that women:

  • Were twice as likely to sustain serious injuries
  • Had lower shooting accuracy than men in combat simulations
  • Performed lower in tasks like negotiating obstacles, carrying wounded troops
  • Were 11-38% slower than men on loaded marches


The Corps argued that women should still be able to serve in certain combat roles, but not on the frontlines in infantry or artillery positions.

Besides concerns over physical performance, the military has a history of separating units and tasks by gender; they would have to navigate new challenges within mixed-gender operations.


These challenges could include:

  • Romantic or sexual relationships between members of the same unit
  • Threat of pregnancy in a combat zone
  • Higher risk of sexual assault when captured
  • Lower male performance due to concern for female soldiers


However, the biggest weakness of mixed-gender units might just be due to the men.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have banned women from close combat operations since 1948. This ban was directly due to how male infantrymen behaved after a woman was wounded.

The IDF cited complete loss of control over male soldiers, who experienced “an instinctual protective aggression that was uncontrollable,” when they witnessed a female soldier being injured.

Despite this, women have served in IDF combat units since around 2000. There’s even a mixed-gender infantry battalion called the Caracal Battalion.


The need for equality

There is also strong evidence that supports female effectiveness in combat.

  • Harvard and MIT report a rise in group intelligence when women are on teams
  • Social sensitivity and emotional intelligence are needed skills in military operations
  • Female soldiers have much more success gaining valuable intelligence from children and women
  • Female Engagement Teams in Afghanistan built better community relationships

Proponents of women’s integration argue that as long as they meet the same qualifying standards that men do, women should be allowed to serve in combat positions.

Even though women weren’t formally allowed in combat roles until recent years, they’ve always been on the battlefield. Today, women in units such as engineering and medical support are often thrust into danger; it’s the nature of existing in a combat zone.

The U.S. military’s policy change was born from a need for equality. As more and more women want to serve their country with pride and distinction, there will be a higher demand for respect.

And that respect, very simply, means treating men and women the same.

Do you think women should serve in combat?


Trending Articles

Share This Page

Comments are closed.