Women in Frontline Combat: Arguments For and Against

Background of the Issue

The number of women in the military has continued to increase over the years to the point that women now account for a significant portion of the armed forces. This substantial increase over the past decades can be attributed to the emergence of the All-Volunteer Force in 1973. However, women have traditionally been excluded from exposure to combat or frontline combat, which is one of the military occupational specialties. This exclusion can be traced back to the establishment of the risk rule in 1988 by the Pentagon (Strategika, p. 6). While this rule was abolished in 1994 on the premise that all American forces on the battlefield are subject to the same risks, there are still concerns regarding whether women should be involved in frontline (forward operating) combat. This issue has generated a substantial debate characterized by numerous arguments and counterarguments. This paper examines the issue and supports the argument that women should be involved in frontline or forward operating combat.

The risk rule, established in 1988 by the Pentagon, contributed to the exclusion of women from serving in or engaging in frontline combat (Strategika, p. 6). This rule was created to protect women from exposure to forward operating combat, hostile capture, or hostile fire. Even though the rule was later rescinded in 1994, it has had a significant impact on the role of women in the military and in combat. Despite its abolishment, the rule has continually provided the framework for women's exclusion from frontline combat over the past few decades. Women are continually excluded from engagement in combat regardless of their substantial presence in the military. While nearly every occupational field has remained open to women in the military, their engagement in frontline combat has been significantly limited even as the overall number of women in the military has continued to grow.

In the past few years, however, there have been numerous debates and arguments over whether women should be permitted to engage in frontline combat. These debates have been intensified by the increasing number of women serving across the various occupational fields of the military. They have questioned whether frontline combat exclusion is still warranted, given that women are adequately trained and prepared — much like their male counterparts — to engage in combat. Moreover, the controversies surrounding this issue have been fueled by its characterization as a form of gender discrimination. Consequently, arguments and counterarguments have been raised both in support of and in opposition to the exclusion of women from frontline (forward operating) combat.

Arguments in Support of the Exclusion

One of the arguments raised to support the exclusion of women from frontline combat is the claim that women are biologically less capable than men. Specifically, women are considered to have lower levels of muscular strength and aerobic endurance compared to men (Castenfelt et al., par. 24). Proponents of the exclusion therefore contend that women are relatively unable to meet the physical requirements of a frontline combat position, and that excluding them is a means of protection given these disparities in endurance and strength.

Secondly, proponents postulate that exclusion is necessary because women are less able to manage the realities of frontline combat. Women are said to find it difficult to effectively cope with these realities, particularly when exposed to combat for a prolonged period of time. Some of these realities — such as lack of hygiene and gender-specific mistreatment if captured by an adversary — are cited as conditions that women would be especially ill-equipped to endure (Castenfelt et al., par. 25).

Third, proponents believe that the effectiveness of a combat unit would be psychologically damaged by the presence of women in forward operating combat. This damage could occur in the form of sexual relationships or a disrupted team dynamic. Therefore, according to this view, women should be prevented from involvement in frontline combat in order to preserve the effectiveness of the combat unit.

Counterarguments on the Exclusion

Opponents of the exclusion of women from frontline combat have raised several counterarguments to support their position. First, they contend that preventing women from participating in frontline combat is tantamount to gender discrimination. They view this practice as prejudice in disguise, particularly in an era where equality is vital. Opponents argue that the arguments raised to support exclusion are rooted in patriarchal notions of gender and serve to rationalize innate prejudice against women. They refute the proponents' claims on the basis that the primary concern when deciding whether women should engage in frontline combat ought to be whether they can accomplish the job — not their gender. Excluding women simply because of their gender advances patriarchal notions and prejudice. In essence, the military should function like any other profession, where all opportunities are open to everyone regardless of gender (Moritz, par. 5).

Secondly, opponents contend that modern warfare has evolved in ways that enhance the capabilities of women to engage in frontline combat. The evolution of modern warfare implies a need for updated thinking, including on the question of allowing women to participate in frontline combat (Evans, par. 3). Concerns regarding women's strength and endurance are increasingly addressed through technological developments and tools that enable women to engage in forward operating combat. For instance, the physical disparity between men and women — which has traditionally been used as the primary justification for exclusion — can be addressed through the integration of technology. Castenfelt et al. contend that technology enables women to participate in forward operating combat and mitigates their physical disparity with men (par. 12). Advancements in weapons technology thus provide an opportunity for women to enhance their capacities to participate in frontline combat.

Third, the exclusion of women from frontline combat is opposed on the grounds that including women in such roles would enhance the overall effectiveness of the combat unit. Unlike proponents, opponents contend that the inclusion of women in frontline combat does not undermine unit cohesion and effectiveness, but rather strengthens it. This enhanced effectiveness is attributed to the diverse viewpoints that women introduce when serving in forward operating combat roles. Diversity of perspective acts as a catalyst for improved problem-solving, offering different approaches to the challenges faced by the combat unit. Since the battlefield is rapidly changing and adversaries are employing sophisticated means and weapons, diverse viewpoints are beneficial to the accomplishment of the unit's mission and objectives. In this view, the exclusion of women from frontline combat significantly compromises unit effectiveness by limiting the integration of diverse perspectives in combat operations.