Ever since September 11th, war has become a more prominent issue amongst U.S. Citizens, especially women. Everyone wants to take part in helping our country, but some women simply can’t because of their gender. Many women would love to be involved and fight in the war, but are not able to due to the current law, and rules of the military. Some believe women don’t have the aggression, strength, determination, and the physical abilities needed to fight in war. But can any of this be proven? Are these fair assumptions?? Women have been fighting for equal rights forever, and have gained many of the rights they fought for in their efforts. Is it fair to deny military rights to them as well, or will this just be another obstacle that will soon be overcome? To better understand this topic, I read two articles about women in the military. “Should Women Be Soldiers or Pacifists?” by April Carter, and “Toward a Gender-Blind Military” by Cynthia Dunbar. I found that each author had their own unique writing style, and each had different viewpoints on the topic.

In the Article “Should Women Be Soldiers or Pacifists?” by April Carter, she seems to be against women in the milita

April Carter starts her essay by saying, “The dominant image of women in war shows women suffering: weeping for husbands or sons in battle, and if defeated, becoming the sexual booty of their conquerors.” She later states, “Women have been expected to support their men-cheering their warriors, offering sympathy and companionship, and nursing the wounded. Another group of women are assigned to meet soldiers’ immediate sexual needs, as camp followers and prostitutes.” This is a good argument but she has no source of credibility. She doesn’t state where she found this information, and doesn’t cover any possible counter argument for the opposing side. Without this, her statement is almost useless. Cynthia Dunbar has a similar argument in her essay, but she has credibility, and covers the counter argument. In her Essay she has a quote from Gen. Barrow in his testimony before congress stating, “I may be old fashioned, but I think the very nature of women disqualifies them from doing it. Women give life. Sustain life. Nurture life. They don’t take it.” She then goes on to defend this saying, “ Similar vague arguments were made not too long ago when African-Americans in the U.S. military were not allowed to go into fight training because it was simply assumed that they were not intelligent enough or that they had poorer night vision than whites. President Harry Truman put an end to this discrimination when he integrated combat units in 1948.” By doing this, she basically destroyed the first argument made towards women not being able to fight in the military. It makes her viewpoints very strong.

ry, and appears to be very one sided throughout her paper. Where as in Dunbar’s Essay, “Toward a Gender-Blind Military” she seems to be more for it than against it. I found that even

Some topics in this essay:
April Carter, G-forces Combat, Cynthia Dunbar, Bad September, Harry Truman, Gen Barrow, Minefields Miniskirts”, Gender-Blind Military”, women military, april carter, Vietnam War, counter argument, cynthia dunbar, Dunbar’s Essay, “toward gender-blind military”, “should women, “toward gender-blind, women soldiers, pacifists” april, gender-blind military”, women combat, women soldiers pacifists”, pacifists” april carter, soldiers pacifists” april, “should women soldiers,