arch13, i do not think that was an effective way to begin the discussion.
anyway...
the line for what women have been thought to be capable of has been moved back, again and again. it's unescapably true that some women are combat-ready... no doubt about it.
the real issues are separate...
first, what does it mean to be in a society where women in combat is acceptable? what have we lost from our cultural roots that may have been beneficial to society? what have we shed that may have hindered us? this represents a dramatic sea-change in gender expectations and priorities... does this change represent an overall positive or negative thing for American culture?
lastly... accomodating previously excluded groups based on gender has almost always been accompanyed by a drop in standards. what if fewer than 5% of women are combat-ready relative to their male counterparts? do you drop the standards to make it more "fair"? inevitably, some elements of our society will demand standards be lowered in order not to "exclude" others based on gender. this will endanger the lives of all infrantry-type units... but i think that's a call such people will be willing to make while watching the war from their couch.
so, my suggestion would be to allow females in the combat-units IF THEY CAN MAKE THE CUT. I would even be in favor of raising physical/mental fitness standards to weed out the weaker males for the women who can truly succeed in that environment.
__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.
~ Winston Churchill
|