Women have been serving their country in many ways through out history even before being allowed in the military. From spying, to smuggling information, to even posing as men and fighting, many women have wanted to answer their country’s call to bravery the same way as their male counterparts. I don’t dismiss in the least the bravery and sacrifice those valiant women made.
Women in the army as official soldiers is still a relatively new thing, only a few decades old. However, they weren’t in direct front line combat roles. Now though, the US government decided to let women join the ranks in elite male units, such as the marines, and in direct front line combat. I think this goes too far. Unlike the denials of the feminists, and politically correct crowd, it is plan and simple that women are physically weaker than men. Women do not have the physical strength and endurance demanded of male soldiers, in which all men are not invited either! Many men do not make the cut into the armed forces, especially elite units, so why must we delude ourselves that women can? Look, no one likes admitting women cannot do things men can, or that they are inferior. However, the cruel reality is: women are not fit to be in direct combat and only endanger their male comrades. Not to mention, many men will be distracted by seeing their female comrades injured in battle, as many men were taught to protect women. Men are traditionally the defenders of women. Wartime propaganda is rife with the call to arms to defend women! The military has lowered standards of physical fitness so women could join in too. This PC invasion of our military’s standards only makes us laughable to our enemies, and us look like a slave to societal whims than objective truths. We need our military to be based on tactical advantages, not social desires for egalitarianism. Not to mention, the sexual tensions brought up by many as a concern in coed units. Officers, and military wives alike dread such an occasion. Some criticize the military for being too macho or a “boy’s club”, but that’s what has made it so efficient in the past. The comradeship between soldiers is likened to being brothers in arms. Should they be walking on eggshells not to make some insensitive joke about women because of PC liberal feminist soldiers among them? The military has enough issues with sexual harassment/assault of female soldiers within the army, taking away focus from our enemies. Can I just say this bluntly? The military is NOT a female space! It traditionally was for guys to be guys without PC feminists freaking out at their every word. If it makes more morale, and unit cohesion leading to a better military if men do “locker room talk”, so be it. What’s more important, a well-defended country, or feminine sensibilities? If women truly had the strength and endurance needed of a solider in combat, I’d have no problem with them having a place in the army, if in all-female units. However, the reality is, women in direct combat is a danger to our military’s fighting force, and our image as a society who lets women fight while men stay home comfortably.
However, I’d be naive to think that combat troops are all our military is made of. Indeed, modern warfare has created more roles than the usual battlefield soldier. Now, we must have military engineers, scientists, espionage, people who can win the “hearts and minds” of a people as some examples. It is naive to think, in modern warfare, which often is not on a battle field, but in a community, women don’t have any place. When our enemy hides in the community, anyone including civilians like women and children could be the enemy too. A man may not be able to access the part of society women and children inhabit like a woman can. A female spy might pick up intelligence from enemy women that the men aren’t talking about. Also, a woman might be less likely to be seen as a threat, thus more discreet. There are units of soldiers whose jobs are to try to relate to the community to gain an ally against the enemy. Perhaps women can have a part to play in there. Or, perhaps in non-combat roles, such as the military engineer, who designs technology, or the scientist or medic. In modern warfare, brains has begun to be just as important as brawn. Women could help in the “brains of the operation” albeit not suited for the”brawn”. While I disagree with women being allowed to be in say, fire teams storming a building, or on the front lines killing and being killed, women may have a place in less dangerous areas of the military. The military used to realize that not everyone has the same strengths, and used to put people in the role that best suited their strengths. Women in the military should be no different. Women can add their own advantages to our military without having to be identical to their male comrades in arms. We are deluding ourselves as a country to have physically weaker women in combat alongside the strongest of the strong! We delude ourselves to think that men and women in the same unit won’t lead to scandals, pregnancies and disgrace. Why do we have women in elite marine units, for instance, when most men cannot make the cut? When will the military realize not to be “defeated” by some PC snowflakes? Look, I don’t decry women occupying more intellectual and peaceful roles in the military, but women pretending they are as strong as men is insane! Women can serve their country too, but not when it endangers everyone else! Ladies, let’s not let our pride and ego get in the way of admitting when our weaknesses make a job better suited for someone else.