The 21st century can be fairly called the age of proclaimed equality of genders. Today, one can count much less occupations that remain solely masculine—women are constantly conquering new positions and proving they are also capable of participating in physically challenging activities. This refers particularly to war. 50 years ago, the idea of a woman serving in the army in full combat would seem ridiculous—today it is a reality. However, is such an advancement reasonable? Though women have successfully proved they can doubtfully be called a weak gender, war is one of those occupations women should not take part in, since it results in a series of negative consequences in regard to their health and the state of the military in which they participate.
Nature has made women physically weaker and less durable than men. No matter how angry feminists can get about such statements, a woman, even a trained one in military boot camps, can hardly match a man in physical strength. Therefore, if women would be allowed to serve in the army, they would either need to match with the already existing training standards, or the standards themselves have to be lowered across the board. Officials from the West Point Academy inform that after women were allowed to serve in the military, men are no longer required to run carrying heavy weapons, which was considered a norm before (Fire & Knowledge). This is only one example of the changes that have occurred from the admission of women in the army. As a result, the army’s fighting capability lowers.
Normal physical exercises for men are often excruciating for women. A women’s health can be damaged by constant physical loads; this especially refers to the reproductive system. According to recent research from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, excessive exercise can seriously reduce a women’s fertility (ScienceDaily). In addition, it can result in amenorrhea, problems with menstruation cycles, hormonal balance, and other aspects of health. It is obvious: compared to the perspective of becoming infertile and having many specific health issues, the benefits from serving in the army are rather doubtful.
Perhaps future armies will count as many women as men, but today women represent a minority in the military. Thus, having one woman placed in a whole squad of men is not rare. Being surrounded by men is psychologically awkward for women and men as well; besides, chances of sexual harassment increase dramatically due to this psychological friction, despite all of the discipline of the military (Suite 101). Women negatively affect discipline in a male environment, thus reducing the army’s combatant value.
Serving in the army today is solely a masculine occupation, and it should remain such further. Women in the army will decrease its fighting efficiency, since training standards will inevitably be lowered. Excessive physical exercises can seriously damage women’s health. Also, women in the army are not numerous, therefore they will most likely suffer from sexual harassment and negatively affect discipline.
Sowin, Joshua. “Why Women Should Not Be Allowed in Combat.” Fire and Knowledge. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 Aug. 2013.
“Hard Training May Reduce Fertility in Women.” ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 23 Nov. 2009. Web. 06 Aug. 2013.
Grover, Sam. “The Disadvantages of Women in the Military.” Suite101. N.p., 25 Mar. 2013. Web. 08 Aug. 2013. <http://suite101.com/article/the-disadvantages-of-women-in-the-military-a344351>
Follow us on Reddit for more insights and updates.
Welcome to A*Help comments!
We’re all about debate and discussion at A*Help.
We value the diverse opinions of users, so you may find points of view that you don’t agree with. And that’s cool. However, there are certain things we’re not OK with: attempts to manipulate our data in any way, for example, or the posting of discriminative, offensive, hateful, or disparaging material.
Comments are closed.