Letters to the Editor
-
The number one cause of rape is men
rape in the military ultimately falls to the Pentagon for -- wait for it -- surrendering "to feminist pressures to insert women into combat."
No, rape in the military falls to men who rape.
-
Rationalizing inequity and harrassment
Yes, it's fascinating how people rationalize their prejudice. My father served in WWII, Korea, and VietNam; he saw the pre- and post-Executive Order 9981 U.S. Army learn to deal with integrating African Americans into the armed forces. (EO 9981 was Truman's desegregation of the U.S. military, eliminating all black units and boot camps and requiring equality of opportunity, etc., without regard to "race, color, religion or national origin.") LtC. O'Neal brought me up to believe what he said he saw time and time again—that bigotry was not only wrong but stupid, that much more was gained through mutual respect and giving everyone the opportunity to contribute.
Nonetheless, people argued back then that it was wrong to expect whites to put up with blacks, and wrong to ask blacks to try to do what supposedly only whites were capable of doing.
Parker's column is the same kind of self-blind rationalization as that. Women and men both share and differ in our strengths; there are different kinds of adaptation going on than that between white and black. But to say we should deny half the population the chance to contribute, and deny ourselves the benefit of that contribution, is not only wrong, but stupid.
African Americans & Women in the U.S. Army:
http://www.army.mil/cmh/topics/afam/afam-usa.htm
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/topics/women/Women-USA.htm
Article about female reservists in Desert Storm:
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2001/n03202001_200103203.html
P.S. Funny quote from the third URL. Maj. Gena Bonini talking about supply raids:
"We were able to get every soldier in the battalion brand new hunting-type knives. I personally didn't understand the popularity of the item, but all the guys thought they were the end-all and be-all of being a tough guy. They just had to have these big -- we're talking 12-inch-long -- knives that strapped to their legs."
Methinks Freud might have had a comment or two on that ;-)
-
Sharia, anyone?
Wonder if Parker realizes that her logic is precisely the same as the Wahabbist crazies in Saudi Arabia and their demented children the Taliban who beat women to death for daring to show their faces in public.
Their justification, of course, is that the sight of even the tiniest sliver of female flesh is an open invitation to lust from those uncontrollable sexual monsters we call men.
The mark of adult maturity is the ability to control one's inappropriate urges.
Like to urge to spew utter claptrap about "feminist pressures."
-
Two issues
Darlings, I fully understand that Rape is a Terrible Thing, and ought not to be permitted.
What strikes me as strange is that no-one on this thread has challenged the notion that 'women are men's equals in a combat situation.'
Simply, we are not. We lack the upper body strength, and the hormonal capacity to achieve it. And if I were a soldier under fire who was forced to trust my life to the notion that this was not the case, I might be just a wee bit resentful about it.
I do not believe that this is about feminism; it is merely a biological fact. If these facts were openly acknowledged without accusations of prejudice and misogyny, perhaps a sane and rational debate could move forward.
-
Women may have invented weapons
Didn't I read not too long ago that female monkeys of some kind were observed making and using weapons to kill prey? The males were strong enough to use their hands, but the females needed some assitance and they invented spears which made them very efficient hunters. Anthropoligists are now re-thinking the origins of weapons and tools.
Women are not by nature less agressive or less capable of violence. What do they always say about a mother protecting her young?
I don't understand this idea that women are out of place in war.
-
"We lack the upper body strength, and the hormonal capacity to achieve it."
Well, when they say "combat" here, it's not exactly "combat":
Today, women can serve on American combat ships, to include command. However women are not permitted to serve on submarines or to participate in special forces programs such as Navy Seals. Women are barred from serving in Infantry, Special Operations, Artillery, Armour, and Forward Air Defence. Women can fly military aircraft, but make up 2% of all pilots in the US military. So far the position closest to combat open to women in the U.S. Army are in the Military Police, where women man machine-guns on armoured Humvees, guarding truck convoys. Although Army regulations bar women from infantry assignments, some female MPs are detailed to accompany male infantry units to handle search and interrogation of female Iraqi suspects.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_the_military#United_States
Maybe for some positions, it should be gender-blind tests of strength and endurance. Then, only those men and women who can meet the requirements would be allowed to serve in those units. But that would exclude a lot of puny men, who are out there.
-
there is a difference between a teacher and your commanding officer
If my teacher says "if you want an A, you have to sleep with me"; I have the wherewithal to say No. And if he/she flunks me, I have a sexual harassment case. If my commanding officer says "sleep with me, or I'll put you on the most dangerous truck route in Iraq", I don't think you have the same leeway to say no. First off flunking is not the same as being put in to a life threatening situation, there isn't nearly the same level of urgency. Also not following the orders of your teacher is not a punishable offense, while disregarding the order of a superior officer is. A commanding officer has a huge amount of control over the lives of the soldiers he/she commands that really isn't comparable to that of a teacher.
You really can't say that have no recourse in the case of a teacher and that you had to consent. Your life was not being threatened. I cannot see that as being rape (excluding minors). Personally, I have to wonder about a person who has sex with their teacher and then makes an accusation of rape. What was lacking in that person that they didn't just tell the teacher to go f-themselves and walk away?