Professor Ben-Ghiat’s article “Women should have to register for the draft” argues that when the women in the United States turn eighteen years old, they should be allowed to register for the Selective Service (SS). The primary argument is that society has fully embraced gender equality so women should also be obliged for the listing. The issue remains contentious in the political sphere because some leaders believe that women lack the physical and mental strength required for an effective military service. This paper aims to provide an analytical essay as to whether Professor Ben-Ghiat’s article is persuasive. Whereas this article has baseless assumptions and fallacious claims, it is convincing because it offers historical and constitutional evidences for inclusion of women in draft registry.
One of the strengths of the article is its firm statement of the author’s stance implying sufficient research has been made to warrant the claim. Specifically, the title “Women should have to register for the draft”, is a position that Professor Ben-Ghiat has taken. Her thesis is well articulated as it has a topic and comment which orients the audience on what they can expect. She identifies popular leaders who hold the same perspective on the topic indicating that she has done some research. A rhetorical question, “Should United States women be required to register for Selective Service when they turn 18…as men are obliged to do currently” is used at the opening. Professor Ben-Ghiat shows her dissatisfaction with the current draft registry and provides evidence that prominent leaders agree with her position.
In addition, professor Ben-Ghiat provides historical changes citing injustices in constitutional amends in a professional manner to strengthen her arguments. The female Army Air Forces pilots of World War 2 “were only recognized as veterans in 1977, and by the time they were…honored…some of them had passed on”. Worse still, the “law often lags behind changes in society and culture”. The article mentions key changes in the United States military legal enforcement supporting her position. For instance, women are constitutionally cleared for combat roles and rescinding of Assignment Rule in 2013. The necessary amends which have been formalized by law are yet to be implemented. The author uses unique capitalization which shows professionalism in writing Army related articles. These evidences are more convincing given that the author utilizes standard writing structure.
Refuting opposing arguments further strengthens the claims and makes her position more convincing. the primary contention by naysayers, which is that women are inferior. Specifically, 85% and 70% of the Special Operations officers believe that women should stay away from their job and serve in their individual units, respectively. However, the author dismisses such an assumption citing that they are driven by worries of female military. Women are able to reason in group and with enough training they can apply fighting strategies in the battle field. Evidently, whenever women have been given equal chance in any other profession they have proved to be just as competent as men. Offering a counterargument serves to strengthen the main claim. Thus, it is commendable that the author gave sufficient rebuttal and used logos and ethos to appeal to readers.
However, the article has several limitations due to assumptions and flawed arguments. To start with the author appeals to authority, but provides half-truth in order to sway the readers. Specifically, the text’s introduction provides evidence that prominent leaders also agree with the proposal that the author is making. Those who concur, are “Marine Corps Gen. Robert B. Neller and Army Chief of Staff Gen”. She gives each of them a substantial introduction because they hold a supportive stance. However, among the opposers of this debate, she mentions “Ted Cruz” only and does not elaborate on his position. The mentioning of female pilots who were not recognized on time after the Second World War is structure to appeal to emotions. The author tries to unfairly persuade people by evoking sympathy.
Conclusively, Professor Ben-Ghiat provides a persuasive argument on the need for women to be included in the draft registry. The author is firm about her stance because she is well-informed about the history of the military in the United States. One of the strengths of the article is that it provides historical evidence that women have successfully participated in the battlefield. The author also cites the constitutional amends which have cleared women to participate in combat roles. It is also impressive how Professor Ben-Ghiat criticizes the points of opposers regarding women being mentally and physically weak. However, there are a few flaws in the structure of the arguments in the article. Specifically, the author appeals to emotions in an attempt to win the argument and also fallaciously points to authority. Nonetheless, the paper has some strong evidence that must be considered to make changes in the federal draft registry.
Bibliography
Army Regulation. “Preparing and managing correspondence”. Information Management. 2020. Web.
Ben-Ghiat, Ruth. “Women Should Have to Register for the Draft (Opinion).” CNN. Cable News Network, 2016. Web.
Hogsette, David. Writing That Makes Sense: Critical Thinking in College Composition. Resource Publications, 2019.
Setyowati, Lestari, Sony Sukmawa, and Mohamad A. Latief. “Solving the Students’ Problems in Writing Argumentative Essay Through the Provision of Planning.” Celt: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching & Literature 17, no. 1 (2017): 86-98. Web.