Last week, the Pentagon announced that it will be enacting a partial lift on the ban on women in combat. For years, society has attempted, and in many cases succeeded, in blurring the line of distinction between men and women. In a day and an age when everyone does what is “right” in their own eyes and most people feel they have the “right” to do whatever they please, it almost seems archaic and chauvinistic to some to not allow women in combat. In fact, this announcement may have been the first time some have realized that women were not already serving in combat roles in the United States Military. However, despite the recent shift in winds, the fact is, there are many good reasons to continue the time-honored ban on women in combat.
Here are a few:
1. Unit Cohesion
There is no way to fully articulate the sanctity of unit cohesion. The unit trains together, sleeps together, showers together, fights, lives, and dies together. The glue that keeps a fighting force tightly knit, particularly during trying times of combat strain and stress, is the oneness and camaraderie of unit cohesion. Anything that would be an unnecessary distraction such as a woman or another man of alternative passions is detrimental and deadly to that cohesion. If I had the power to directly manipulate the enemy’s army, I would place women in combat units to intentionally disrupt the unit’s cohesion. We need only turn to the Navy to see how well women on floating birthing vessels, err, I mean ships and submarines, have worked out.
2. Rigors of Training
The average week’s training for combat soldiers involves 35 mile marches with a 75 pound pack on your back. The hard facts are that this is impossible for the average woman. Since one of the best ways to destroy morale and divide a group is to establish different sets of expectations within that group, allowing female combat troops to qualify under a different set of entry and training standards accomplishes just that. Should there be different standards and expectations of training among the soldiers in a unit? Not if you’re interested in the fittest possible fighting force!
3. Unable to carry the wounded off a battlefield
The average woman cannot carry a wounded man off a battlefield. Therefore, a combat unit containing women is automatically weaker and less capable than an all male unit. I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t want it to be my life on the line as I got left behind to die on some foreign shore because my fellow soldier, who’s supposed to be my equal, could not carry me to safety.
4. Preferential treatment for lesser wounds
We can sit back and pretend that the sociologists and feminists are correct and that there are no differences between men and women, but the bottom line is, a wounded female soldier is more likely to receive first treatment from a man for lesser wounds on a battlefield than a man who is more seriously wounded. An inexorably unspoken chivalric component kicks in which is ultimately against what is best for the unit and army as a whole, since life and death judgement calls are now no longer being based on the greatest need. Unfortunately, again, women in combat would prove to be detrimental, not advantageous.
5. Requires separate bathroom & shower facilities
Female troops require separate shower and bathroom facilities. That means carrying extra water, tarps and whatever else is needed because while the men are showering, a women needs separate facilities. I have heard from combat troops who had female photographers follow them into combat and the extra work that became necessary in order to load, carry, and construct extra facilities due to her company demonstrates the absurdity of creating twice as many showers and bathrooms during war. Setting up twice as many bath houses just to accommodate women in combat is 50% more than is absolutely necessary under battle conditions.
6. Rape and Impregnation
Do I need to elaborate here? Captured women can be ravaged and abused in ways men cannot.
7. Men were created to protect and defend women, not the other way around
The Biblical model is that women are to be valued, loved, protected and defended by men. Since we once understood and believed this, we as men, would never dream of asking our wives, daughters, sisters and aunts to fight our wars for us. However, since we have abandoned our Biblical heritage and have deliberately rejected the commands of Scripture, it is no surprise that we would reason that the opposite should be the standard.
At a time when all that has traditionally been held dear and sacred is being jettisoned against the rocks of social decay and national decadence, it is helpful to remind ourselves and efficacious to revisit the wisdom that has served us well for over 200 years.