Could there possibly be such a thing as a female "infantryman"? There are not many oxymorons' being murmured about in the military that get such ferocious responses from many within the combat arms ranks. In the civilian world, women are able to choose and pursue their own paths of career, no matter the difficulties. In today's work environment women continue to play vital roles that have a direct effect on our homeland security and our precious way of life. Women in professional careers can usually compete as equals with their male counterparts, having unlimited opportunities for advancement. Although this being correct for most of today's civilian women, it is not the case for the females currently serving in the United States Armed Forces. The integration of women into the Combat Arms branch of the Army would not only affect the level of morale and esprit de corps for the existing male troops, but women would be put into harms way unnecessarily which they are not prepared for, be it physically or mentally.
             It has been Public policy and Federal law that prevents women from serving in combat units on the front lines. For example, in the United States Army, approximately fifteen percent of the Active Duty service members are women. Women in the Army are only permitted to serve in units where their primary function is combat support or combat service support. The Army, by not allowing women to serve in combat, runs contrary to the current workforce trend in American society. In today's world, women in dangerous professions such as firefighting and law enforcement perform equally well compared to their male counterparts. Even though women have in the past performed admirably in those professions and some are even considered heroes in our communities the fact remains that the dangers women face on the "mean streets" of America are in no way comparable to the hazards they would have to face on today's modern battlefields.
             ...