Women in Combat vs. Reality
Jack E. Kemp
There is a great article in American Thinker called "Women in Combat: Battling Nature, Battering Reality."
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/02/women_in_combat_battling_nat...
Here's a quote from the piece:
When I worked with children years ago, one of my students, an 11-year-old boy, guessed that the women's world record for the mile would be faster than the men's when a question about the matter was put to him. In the same vein, a respondent to one of my articles mentioned a young man she knew who opined that women and men should compete together in sports. When she informed him that this would eliminate athletic opportunities for women - boys' American high school records surpass women's world records - he was surprised that the gap between the sexes was so great. You may be surprised at a knowledge gap so great.
Don't be.
For a few decades now, children have been raised seeing women in combat. Movies and television shows have long featured masculinized female characters who talk, act, and fight like men - except when they're shown fighting even better and vanquishing men. If a show features a male hero, he almost invariably has to be balanced with a tough(er?) heroine.
Professional wrestling will now occasionally even show women grappling with men (yes, it's fake, but not to a seven-year-old). Kids also have equality dogma drummed into them; equality this and equality that, and the only departure from it is when they're exposed to entertainment that makes men appear weak or to specious science indicating female superiority. It is another example of how the left presents the young with a distorted picture of reality.
It's thus no surprise that people make poor decisions on policy affecting the sexes. We better understand the different roles of horses and dogs because we perceive their characteristic strengths and weaknesses; likewise, how can we understand what roles are suggested by the sexes' characteristic qualities if we blind ourselves to them?
END OF QUOTE
I wrote this comment of anecdotal evidence under the article:
A while ago I took an evening writing course with several NY liberals. One was a woman who had an advanced degree from a well known Ivy League college (not Columbia). In a private conversation, I asked her about the then-new story of the boy who thought he was a girl in the wrong body and his mother who wanted to place him in a Girl Scout troop, complete with overnight camping trips. The national Girl Scouts were in favor of this, but the local Den Mothers dissolved their Girl Scout troop when ordered to admit the XY chromosome "girl." This Ivy League "sophisticate" showed no upset about the idea of allowing this sexually confused boy into a Girl Scout troop. I then asked her if she herself had a daughter. Hitting a raw nerve, she bristled back at me, "No, do you?!" I replied that I didn't but would want to protect the young girls of the troop (as a general social virtue). The Ivy League "intellectual" looked at me as if I were some type of caveman or hillbilly who wandered into NY on his way to the NASCAR Cafe on 55th Street. This was the "triumph" of feminism - or its self-defeat: a woman who wouldn't even stand up to protect the modesty of young girls on overnight trips to the woods.
END OF COMMENT
There is a second fine article written by a lady called Marion DS Dreyfus, called "Girls Just Wanna Have Guns."
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/02/girls_just_wanna_have_guns.html
In it, Marion points out many skills, including target shooting, that women excell at often better than men, but she also doesn't advocate women in combat for many obvious reasons, written from her female perspective.
Here is what I wrote to Marion (via the editor) in a (not now) private email:
Marion, after reading your Amer. Thinker article, "Girls Just Wanna Have Guns," I want to give you some background information on Leon Panetta who you correctly claim is a willing pawn or tool of those above him as Panetta made the decision to allow women in combat.
Last May I attended the New York premiere of "The Invisible War," a documentary film about rape in the U.S. military that won the NY Human Rights Film Festival's 2012 Human Rights Watch Film Festival’s Nestor Almendros Award for Courage in Filmmaking and the Audience Award at the 2012 Sundance Film Festival. I attended both premiere screenings and personally talked face to face with one of the main interviewees in the film, rape victim and Naval Academy grad and ex-Marine officer Ariana Klay and her husband, also an ex-Marine officer who also appeared in the film.
That movie was perhaps not as timely a topic as it is today. Ironically, after a private showing last spring, Sec. of Defense Leon Panetta immediately changed the Dept. of Defense rules so that complaints of rape now get reported to a level above that of the alleged victim's immediate commanding officer - and that is included in the film itself, towards the end. The Invisible War can now be bought or rented for instant viewing on Amazon.com. Most of the sexual violence is against lower income, less sophisticated women who don't know how to fight back via lawfare, powerful friends, etc. Although the filmmakers stated at the premiere that there are many women who served with no problems in the military, the film specifically states that a military investigator (who was, I believe, raped herself) says on camera that in order to make quotas, military recruiters have accepted new male recruits who have stated in writing that they have raped women in civilian life. My original review of The Invisible War was posted at Tim Birdnow's website and can be read here:
http://tbirdnow.mee.nu/the_invisible_war_a_groundbreaking_documenta...
Comment
-
Comment by Jeff Waller on February 5, 2013 at 8:59am -
Ya wanna be equal? Go do some of the crappy jobs I've had to do in my life!
Steam clean the maggots from a grocery warehouse.
Stand in a restaurant grease hood with decades old rancid grease raining down on you while you clean it.
Work for a sweatshop copper tubing manufacturer chopping scrap metal all day in 115 degree heat.
Clean up a business after a fire, walking around in knee-deep water and burnt crap all day.
Fill barrels with olive oil for twelve hours a day with it dripping and spraying all over you ruining the only clothes you have.
Go clean up a crude oil tank with a mop and a bucket. Go scrub pots for twelve hours a day.
Do all of these things for minimum wage!
Go steal some food so you can eat!
Go sleep on a park bench for a year or two!
Go live in a junk car and try not to freeze to death with nothing but a candle to keep you warm!
Get paid equally, and have opportunity to achieve, but to hell with true equality!
You don't know what you're asking for.
Just be glad you don't have to do certain things in this life because your men are willing to do them!
-
Comment by Victoria Thiel on February 4, 2013 at 11:52pm
-
Aside of the many problems that makes this idea flawed, let's see how enthusiastic the eligible group of feminists, in favor of this will be, once they are reminded that once this becomes law - all women will (including those who do not agree) be eligible for draft should that ever become necessary again.
-
Comment by John Smith on February 4, 2013 at 11:12pm -
Thanks Jack- good read.
A couple years ago I met two Chosin Marines at a Memorial Day event.
They were still spry, and full of fight too.
John
-
Comment by SHARRON AMSTER on February 4, 2013 at 1:34pm -
I hit the nerve that needed to be hit. now tell the the White House and all other parts of the that government that we are not as sick as they are That Our women are not raised to kill but they are raised with a strong love for their country and they will fight if need be. Don't mess with us God Love Ya
-
Comment by Jack Kemp on February 4, 2013 at 11:11am
-
John (and others),
I'd like you to read my Veterans Day story. Since most of it is a quote from a book written by a young Marine, he got the terms right. It involves a young Marine veteran of the Fallujah battle working at the Marine Corps Museum and an Iwo Jima veteran Marine who comes to visit. The story is at
http://www.projectshiningcity.org/fp1811.php
And thank you for your Service, John. Welcome home.
-
Comment by John Smith on February 4, 2013 at 11:11am
-
Good to go Jack. Carry on.
Semper Fi
-
Comment by Jack Kemp on February 4, 2013 at 11:00am
-
John, you made me do a little research on this via the internet. Here's the source of my new term for Marines not currently in the Service.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,287053,00.html#ixzz2JwzS6yIN“The title of Marine is an earned title and never goes away,” said Col. James Hoke. “Once you go through the trails and tribulations, it stays with you forever and cannot be taken away.”
Contrary to calling a retired Marine or a Marine who got out of service an ex-Marine, they should be referred to as “former enlisted” or “former commissioned officers,” Hoke said.
-
Comment by John Smith on February 4, 2013 at 10:51am
-
Hey Jack, stop calling us "ex-Marines"- but, thanx for capitalizing the word "Marine"
S/F
John
-
Comment by SHARRON AMSTER on February 4, 2013 at 9:21am
-
Let the women become the snipers in the units and let the men think about turning their backs to them. It is time that men start being men and stop being animals. Lets clean house with the brass on down. They think they can't do no wrong. Guess what? You can!! Stop sitting on your L and start doing your jobs. Or we will do it for you.
-
Comment by James N Haynes on February 4, 2013 at 2:43am
-
I will not go into the many examples in history why women in combat next to men is a very bad idea; you can do your own research. I will say that this decision like so many from the left will get people killed. Time after time in history this concept has been rejected by those armies that want to win wars. It creates discipline problems and reduces morale. By the way did you know that almost every modern socialist country presses women into military roles including combat; now there's a model for us to follow.
How are we to make this fair for all soldiers?
- Are women and men soldiers to be treated exactly the same regarding field assignments including the heavy lifting?
- Are women going to pull point duty equally with their male counter parts (one of the most dangerous rotation assignments in the field).
- If women are given the choicer lighter field duties, that will require the men to do only the "grunt work" or what we used to call the "s*** duty"; that will do a lot for morale.
- It is the job of the NCOs to make assignments fair to keep morale high. Preferential treatment for women will undermine morale especially when things get rough.
- Are women going to have a choice to go into combat while men do not?
- Are women going to be required to register for the draft at 18 years of age the same as men; if so how are fathers, brothers, uncles and other red blooded American men going feel about a country that drafts a women to a man’s job. I have two daughters and I cannot imagine watching them trotting down to the post office to register and I would have never allow them be drafted.
- If a combat soldier purposely gets hurt or sick i.e. sun burned or does not use his bug repel and gets stung by insects, in order to shirk his duty, he is charged with malingering; will the same be true of a female combat soldier that gets pregnant?
- How will pregnancy be handled? Can women soldiers be forced to take contraceptives and the morning after pills. What will be the rules for removing a woman from the field if she is pregnant? Can she be forced to have an abortion and returned to the field?
- Will women be required to carry the same equipment as men or a lighter pack? If lighter then someone must make up the difference.
No doubt the enemy will have plethora of physiological methods to use against any of the male fighting forces by targeting women for snipers, capture, beheading and torture not to mention the folks back home. How will we deal with female prisoners of war being released only to find that they are purposely pregnant having been raped over and over by their guard's. What about released female prisoners that have given birth.
Will male soldiers take greater risks than he ordinarily would or even disobey orders to protect females in his unit; it is not unthinkable that soldiers would have boy friend girl friend relationships, after all it does happen in most work place environments. Is it possible that there would be jealous feuds stemming from close quarters relationships?
I will leave you with one catastrophic incident caused by the integration of women in a traditional male military role that changed the war on terrorism. It was Abdu grave. That incident was a combination of prisoner degradation along with titillating sex. The American male and female soldiers guards were engaged in sexual affairs and routinely used the prisoners to a point of arousal. This is what is meant by breakdown of discipline. By the way the female general that was in charge of this unit was forced to resign for dereliction of duty. The resulting damage of this incident is incalculable. We do know that many thousands of new young fighters were recruited by use of the images of Abdu grave. Most behind the scenes experts will tell you that in a traditional all male guard unit, this incident would not have happened.
Jim Haynes (Vietnam NCO combat veteran 1968-69)
© 2013 Created by Judson Phillips.
You need to be a member of Tea Party Nation to add comments!
Join Tea Party Nation