Bruske 1

Chas Bruske
Professor Elliot
English 111
6 October 2014
The Battle of Who Should Be on the Battlefield
A topic that is highly debated today is exactly what type of role women should play on
the battlefield. Many people argue if it is right or wrong for women to serve in the military along
with men and the moral implications that go along with combat. This issue can be viewed from
many different angles and many are addressed in an article by Mackubin Thomas Owens.
Mackubin Thomas Owenss article A Bad Idea on All Counts is focused on coed
combat units. Owens argues against allowing women to partake in combat beside their male
comrades. He also states that the physical differences between men and women are far too vast.
This increases the danger faced by the unit because men are stronger than women. Owens states
that, when a stressful situation arises the women in the unit will not be able to keep up with the
men. He also argues the anatomical differences between men and women make it hard for
women to partake in combat. Owens makes the statement that placing men and women in a tight
knit group will cause problems in the unit from the relationships that form. This in turn could
lead to the unit playing favoritism when stressful situation arise and not putting what is best for
the entire group as their main focus. Owens then states that the double standard the military
creates to help women pass physical fitness testing makes the military weaker in general. He
claims the double standard is letting weaker people join the military who are not ready for
combat.

Bruske 2

In his article Owens uses many generalizations to help try and prove his points, but fails
to acknowledge people who may be exceptions to his belief; however, Owens does cite sources
throughout his paper to add credibility to his writing. Owens article is nimble minded and he
fails to acknowledge many things that disprove his point by creating situations ideal to his
beliefs.
One of the first generalizations Owenss makes is about the physical differences between
men and women. He claims that the average female military personnel is five inches shorter, has
half the upper body strength, lower aerobic capacity, and 37 percent less muscle mass. Many
people have the belief that all men are stronger than women; however, many people find that to
be very untrue. During the Olympics women weightlifting takes place, many would argue most
men are not stronger or have more muscle mass than these women. There are also numerous
women who are taller than men. Women marathon runners also run incredibly long distances
faster than most men. This proves that some women do have a higher aerobic capacity compared
to men. Owens tries to use these generalizations to prove a point that men are physically superior
to women. He is attempting to establish an emotional connection to make the reader feel scared
for men who have to serve alongside women. However, he fails to recognize the exemptions that
go against his idea that men are stronger than women.
Owens also generalizes about the fact that women are more likely to become injured or
leave the military than men. This depends on the type of person as certain people are more
susceptible to be injured than others. There are men that are incredibly small and unfit for
combat. In contrast, there are women who may be big and strong who could serve in the military
more adequately than certain men. Owens puts this generalization into his essay to appeal on the

Bruske 3

logic that when women become injured it would hurt the unit. However, he does not mention that
men can also become injured during combat.
Owens has an article present where a female marine officer notes the physical
deterioration she experienced during deployment. He then argues that all women experience
these same results and it is awful for their health to be deployed in combat. However, Owens
fails to give an example of what physical deterioration a man experiences during deployment.
This hurts the essay in the fact that an educated person will look at this statement logically. If
these effects occur in women, they will affect men in a similar fashion.
Owens also generalizes the fact that men and women cannot work together in a group
without fighting or having intimate relationships with each other. Many work environments
throughout the world operate with men and women working side by side and many of these
places are productive and safe. The generalization that placing them together will cause fights
and problems is irrelevant. Owens is trying to establish an emotional connection with the reader.
He is making the reader think about past relationships and if they have had any past negative
experiences with the opposite sex.
One of the positive things Owens does throughout his essay is cite sources to give his
essay credibility and provide the reader with outside information. To prove his point about
physical deterioration experienced while deployed Owens uses an article written by a Marine
Officer, Captain Katie Petronio, from the Marine Corps Gazette. In the article Petronio talks
about the physical deterioration she experienced while deployed. Owens adds the article to
provide outside knowledge and give the reader the perspective of a female Marine Officer.
Owens also uses an excerpt from the book The Warriors: Reflections of Men in Battle. In
the book the words of J. Glenn Gray are used; essentially saying that many soldiers have died

Bruske 4

from staying at their post during times where fleeing may have been in their best interest.
However, they did not because it would have exposed the unit to more danger and endangered all
their lives. Owens uses this excerpt to go along with his idea that unit cohesion is incredibly
valuable and if there is mistrust or rivalries within a unit it can cause danger for the entire unit.
Owens also uses the words of Air Force General Charlie Dunlop, a former JAG and
director of Duke Law Schools center on Law, Ethics, and Nation Security. Essentially what
Dunlop says is women cans serve in combat roles as long as they can pass the same physical
standards that are set for the men. Owens uses Dunlops word to prove his point that the double
standard weakens the military and allows people who may not be physically ready to deploy in
combat. Owens uses the words of a respected Air Force General to let the readers see his point of
view on the double standard, which happens to align with Owens own view on the subject.
The sources Owens uses throughout his paper add outside knowledge from respected
individuals. However, he fails to add sources from respected individuals who have opposing
views from him. Owens could have established a stronger essay if he acknowledged the
opposing points and explained why they were wrong.
In his writing Owens uses many generalizations to help him prove his points and
emphasize his beliefs. He fails to recognize all the things he states may not be true and there
could possibly be exemptions to some of the things he states. Owens makes his generalizations
appear like they are facts. One of the positive aspects of Owens article is how he cites and ties
outside sources into the writing to support his ideas. Many of the different sources he brings in
reiterate his points and offers the perspective of someone who is respected in the military
community. However, he could have placed sources into his article with opposing viewpoints to

Bruske 5

add more credibility. Owens creates an effective piece of writing that expresses his opinions and
lets other know how he feels in a respected and educated way.