Carol Platt Liebau: Equal Doesn't Mean "The Same"

Friday, August 18, 2006

Equal Doesn't Mean "The Same"

Who woulda' thought it -- men and women are different! And as the linked piece shows, a majority of men still believe it's their obligation to protect women.

That's good -- it's one of the signs of a civilized society, in fact. It's one reason that it always seems so profoundly misguided for the feminists to insist that women be allowed into combat. Not only does it make no practical sense (after all, who wants to gamble that a particular woman will be strong enough to haul your wounded husband, brothers and friends off the battlefield instead of a man who could easily do it?), but the idea is also theoretically flawed.

The impulse to protect women is one of the nobles of a manly nature. Why would we attempt to "depgrogram" a sense of duty that is key in building civilized societies, and which encourages men to wield their superior physical strength on behalf of women, instead of against them?

6 Comments:

Blogger ELC said...

Why would we attempt to "depgrogram" a sense of duty that is key in building civilized societies, and which encourages men to wield their superior physical strength on behalf of women, instead of against them? Because much of what has passed for thinking over the past three decades has been the result of decades of (originally Communist) subversive anti-American infiltration and agitation designed to weaken our society to the point of collapse? Just a thought.

11:57 AM  
Blogger Editor said...

The tales of King Arthur and the knights of the round table.

There are many women who want to serve and there is no reason to prevent them. It certainly does not require brute force to be affective and a valuble asset in a modern and high-tech military.

12:26 PM  
Blogger amber said...

Brute force? I disagree, it does necessitate a "Kill" mentality if you are going to be any good (unless you are a clerk). Fortunately most of us females are able to tap that feeling if we really need to. There are a lot of women who physically can not handle it. The gear they wear now is over 100 pounds. They do not wear this all of the time, but whenever they travel it is on and today it was 137 degrees ferenheight at my husband's home. I could do it, but I am no lightwieght. Just because I was in the military, though, does not mean I do not appreciate a man who opens doors and who will fight my battles for me if I choose to let him.

5:52 PM  
Blogger Marshall Art said...

I don't believe that our form of government was founded on the principle that if you want it, you must be allowed to have it. I personally don't have a problem with women in the service, but not as a first string. But it wouldn't bother me if they reversed themselves and prohibited women in combat roles. On the most basic level, face to face and weaponless, women, far more often than not, would lose. This basic level must always be kept in mind, as a battle could be reduced to that level. If the enemy has women soldiers, that just means on the most basic level, they have the weaker army. We should never be the weaker army and should always strive to do what's necessary to be the strongest army. Always your best punch first.

11:48 PM  
Blogger Sean said...

I have a suggestion for those who want to integrate women into ground combat teams. Instead of using the military for such experiments (which could prove to be fatal for some), why not use our Olympic (or professional sports) teams? After all, no-ones life is on the line, and we'd soon see it if is a good idea - no?

6:04 PM  
Blogger Editor said...

AP Probe Looks at Recruiters' Misconduct
By Martha Mendoza
The Associated Press

Sunday 20 August 2006

More than 100 young women who expressed interest in joining the military in the past year were preyed upon sexually by their recruiters. Women were raped on recruiting office couches, assaulted in government cars and groped en route to entrance exams.

A six-month Associated Press investigation found that more than 80 military recruiters were disciplined last year for sexual misconduct with potential enlistees. The cases occurred across all branches of the military and in all regions of the country.

"This should never be allowed to happen," said one 18-year-old victim. "The recruiter had all the power. He had the uniform. He had my future. I trusted him."

At least 35 Army recruiters, 18 Marine Corps recruiters, 18 Navy recruiters and 12 Air Force recruiters were disciplined for sexual misconduct or other inappropriate behavior with potential enlistees in 2005, according to records obtained by the AP under dozens of Freedom of Information Act requests. That's significantly more than the handful of cases disclosed in the past decade.

8:49 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google