Should Women Serve in Combat Roles?
Two female officers are set to graduate from Ranger School on Aug. 21, a significant step in the armed services’ decision to widen access to direct combat roles for women. All branches of the military have until Jan. 1, to decide which positions, if any, they want to keep off limits to women. What factors should President Obama’s secretary of defense, Ashton Carter, consider in making that final call?
* graduate from ~ = ~를 졸업하다/ the armed services = 군부(三軍)/ widen = 넓히다, 확대하다/ off-limits = [장소가] 출입금지의/ secretary of defense = (미국) 국방장관/ call = 결정, 판단
군대에서 여자에게 허락되는 지위를 결정하는데 고려해야 하는 요소는 무엇인가요?
1. Maintain the Combat Exclusion for Women
Even on lower fitness standards, women have far higher rates of injury, illness, non-availability, non-deployability and attrition than men.
2. Now, Open the Ranger Regiment to Women
Secretary Ashton Carter should open up all positions to every qualified individual, but also continue evaluating standards for each job and make infantry standards tougher for everyone.
3. Make the Standards for Men and Women Equal
The Marine Corps mission is to make Marines, win battles and develop quality citizens. There is nothing in this mission statement about making female Marines and male Marines.
4. The Military Shouldn’t Have to Reflect Society
The defense secretary shouldn't value the achievement of female Ranger graduates over the male Ranger graduates. And he should advise Obama not to attend the graduation.
5. Retire the Myths; Women Are Ready for Combat
Not allowing female Rangers to serve in Ranger regiments is like surviving the trial of medical school and being told you can't be a doctor.
6. Lifting Barriers Makes the Force Stronger
It no longer makes sense to divert a woman to a lesser job when she might be the combat officer who saves a platoon.
Sample Essay
Make the Standards for Male and Female Marines Equal
The elephant in the room in this debate is not whether women should be allowed into direct combat roles, it is the acknowledgment that for years and years, we have demanded less of women in the military. We owe them — and the American public — better.
The Marine Corps mission is to make Marines, win battles and develop quality citizens. There is nothing in this mission statement about making female Marines and male Marines, who have separate tasks, responsibilities and are up to different standards. Yet we clearly do have different expectations for the performance and conduct of men and women, starting from the day they are screened to enlist. Right from the start, women are held to a lower standard for achievement, which explains why their failure rate on the initial physical fitness test at boot camp is nine times greater and their discharge rate is double that of men. It also explains why we have such a problem with sexual assault in the Marine Corps. There is no level playing field established for men and women in terms of respect, conduct, performance and expectations.
The majority of data being collected to support opening combat roles to women is based on physiology, physical endurance and strength. However, over the the past five years or so, the women being tested were recruited under different sets of expectations and performance standards from the men. For instance, men perform pull-ups and women do the flexed arm hang. Those standards are simply too different to measure strength and they set women up to fail in the combat integration tests, which then allows the Marine Corps to say that women aren't up to the challenges of combat.
Until we acknowledge the elephant in the room and stop lowering expectations for female performance and conduct, the data will continue to demonstrate why women should not be allowed in these new combat roles. We simply can’t allow such an easy out for the military.
