Women in Combat and United States Marine Corps
In her article, Germano argues that the United States military lowers its expectations for women serving in combat roles and does not focus enough dedication into their proper training.
Upon Germano’s arrival to Parris Island “in June 2014 to command Fourth Battalion,” she realized that women were being given more leniency during their Marine training than the men were (Germano 1). The female recruits were allowed chairs for breaks during drills whenever they felt the need; men were not. Germano quickly removed the chairs and began searching for other areas and aspects to improve.
Because of Defense Secretary Ash Carter’s decision to open all combat positions, even infantry level ones, up to women, there is still a great deal of work that needs to be taken towards equality in each section of the military, especially the Marine Corps. The Marines requested that women not be allowed to serve in all combat positions (the appeal was denied) and still separate men and women during training. Germano claims that despite the Marine’s claims that it is taking serious steps forward, big and small problems are still extremely present, whether it be sexist remarks during drills, incorrectly measured hikes, or improper training methods. She implemented new improvements to the system, raising “the women’s weapons qualification rate to 92 percent,” increasing the female groups’ speeds during drills, and lowering their rate of injury (Germano 2).
Germano later submitted an article describing her proven accomplishments and what aspects seemed to lead to more success; however, the Marine Corps Gazette scrapped the story. Because of her own experience with sexism in regards to the Marines, Germano begs the questions of how sexual assault is handled and how women are supposed move past these oppressions. She urges Congress to take action in order to assist female Marines in realizing their own worth and to help the Marine Corps itself in creating new methods and expectations for all recruits to accept and follow.
Germano’s provides her audience with a rather reliable and convincing argument. Initially, it seems as if her article is geared towards informing the general public, but the reader soon realizes that Germano is aiming her recommendations towards Congress itself in order to elicit change and females serving in the Marine Corps so that they will know their worth. Proving her credentials, the article commentary above her article states how Germano has served as a battalion commander for the Fourth Recruit Training Battalion in the Marines and has previously written a book delineating how women are trained in the Marines. Germano uses her own experience and gathered data to support her claim. The source is a little over a page, found from a University of Alabama database, Opposing Views, and published on the reputable website The New York Times. Additionally, the article was published in April 2018, verifying how current it is in regards to my topic.
Relation To Argument
Germano’s article will be helpful to my essay, because it provides me with an individual who has firsthand experience serving as a female in the military. I can use Germano’s statistics on the different success rates between male and female troops as supporting evidence for certain topics I might cover and her own experience and opinions as a member of the Marines for the support and opposition sides of the argument. Germano did alter how I think about my topic a little bit, because I did not initially consider how much even entry or basic training techniques could affect women’s advancements in the military.
In his article, Philipps expresses his approval for the entrance of women into combat positions and his admiration for the equal standards set for both genders.
Phillips claims that the Army’s main goal after the decision permitting women into any and all combat positions was to take a completely gender neutral stance in all fields of training, and he insists that they have achieved that goal. “Afghanistan and Iraq were turning points for the Army’s thinking on women in combat,” prompting many women to take on the role of combat troops because of the large necessity and urgency (Phillips 2). Phillips then contends that each recruit, whether male or female, is required to perform the same demanding tasks to the same high standards. All women are being treated equally with their male counterparts, even if that means that the Army is not praising the history that the women are making (Phillips 2). Phillips explains how this equality is a result of the equivalent work and dedication that men and women obtain during their training together, despite many stereotypes and disbelief.
Published by The New York Times and posted on Opposing Views, Philipps’ article appears very credible. The article itself is about two pages in length and was produced May 2017. The article commentary conveys how Philipps’ has won a Pulitzer prize for his journalism and often “writes about veterans and the military for the New York Times.” Philipps seems to be addressing future women who might be interested in serving combat roles and informing individuals who still believe that the military holds different standards for men and women. Through his surveillance of the first women to graduate infantry training, Philipps narrates certain aspects of training that he notices and offers statistics between male and female combat troops.
Relation To Argument
Phillips’ argument does relatively contradict my viewpoint, because I honestly do not believe that after only a few years since the entrance of women into combat roles, there is complete equality and no sexism or double standards at all. However, Phillips does provide sufficient data, such as the percentages of troops and the amount of work that they have to perform. It has benefitted me though by providing me with another opinion and stance on the issue, that is not formulated specifically from the Marines.”
Germano, Kate. “”Separate Is Not Equal in the Marine Corps.”” New York Times, 1Apr. 2018, p.
2(L). Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A532864527/OVIC?u=tusc49521&sid=OVIC&xid=214bf60e. Accessed 26 Feb. 2019.
Philipps, Dave. “”Infantry’s First Women Shoulder Heavy Gear And Weight of History.”” New
York Times, 27 May 2017, p. A12(L). Global Issues in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A492966822/OVIC?u=tusc49521&sid=OVIC&xid=5227592c. Accessed 26 Feb. 2019.