The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 6 of 12)

The conservative approach to the issue of women in combat stands failed long ago. By agreeing with the left that it was a matter of rights and by refusing to say anything critical of the performance of military women, incremental concessions were continuously made so that, now, the remaining illogical contradictions in the policy are ready to be kicked over. Mr. Neumayr got that right.

Put simply, either women in the military are, collectively and individually fully capable of performing all combat, casualty evacuation or damage control tasks to the same standard as are men, and thus can be held to the same historic standards for fitness and training, or they are not. If the former, then the illogical policies currently in place (and the self-contradicting justifications for them) should be ended and all military personnel should be assigned, without restriction or prejudice. However, if women can't meet those standards (and there is ample, indeed overwhelming evidence that they can't), then their role in the military should be sharply reduced if not eliminated. It is either the one or the other. When anyone on the right is willing to actually take that position and look at the facts, the policies might change. If not, it makes no sense, either politically or operationally, to maintain the absurd rules now in effect.

All of this also applies to the less tangible but nevertheless real issues of morale, cohesion and fraternization. It is absurd to say that somehow, these issues are more critical for the members of an infantry squad than to the crew working on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier (which even in peacetime is one of the most dangerous places on earth). The latter, of course, is now coed. More generally, one cannot maintain that cohesion, morale, trust and fraternization have all been effectively dealt with in those areas of the military that are now fully coed, despite initial concerns, and then say that somehow they won't work out in the still segregated branches. Of course, if the seemingly never-ending parade of sexual misconduct incidents within the military and at the service academies demonstrates that these issues have not been dealt with, and if the sentiments of military men are not accurately captured by their official Party-line responses, then there's a case to be made for a change in policy. Again, it's either one or the other.

p>The sort of cowardly straddle that virtually all conservative politicians take on this issue is as self-defeating as it is stupid. That's because fighting ineffectively gives the appearance that the issue was openly debated and honestly settled. If one wants to fight this issue, late in the day though it is, one must challenge the actual performance of military women, the nature of the standards to which they are actually held, assert the scientific evidence that increasingly points to hard-wired differences between the sexes, and be willing to endure the reaction that will result from raising these points unapologetically. In other words, one must want to fight to win. If not, then let's concede the issue and stop writing these types of articles. br> -- Anthony Mirvish /p> p> DEAR JOHN br> Re: Larry Thornberry's Green Gasbag : /p>

topics:
John McCain, Television, Business, Environment, Global Warming, Law, Supreme Court, Military, Iraq, NATO, Immigration, Oil