At Ease, Soldierettes: Females and Shemales in the Armed Forces

Feature Article by: Don Ravetta on April 17th, 2005 at 2:56 PM

"The nation is proud of our women in uniform, but that is no excuse for forcing unprepared female soldiers... to face the physical demands of violent close combat and higher risk of capture that exists today." - Elaine Donnelly, President of the Center for Military Readiness

---

The military's gender role call

For nearly two months the Cornell Daily Sun, in endless letters to the editor and opinion articles, has blathered on about the discriminatory “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in the US military and the Solomon Amendment. Some anti-American radicals have even suggested that we disband the noble ROTC programs on this campus. What is truly shameful is that amid all this foolish bickering and breast-beating, every single person involved has missed the real and more important issue—getting women out of the military.

It should be obvious to anyone with any knowledge of military history that homosexuals have no place serving their country in combat. Not only does their disorder incite inappropriate military conduct, but the presence of sodomites, if they are indeed active in their homosexuality, is severely detrimental to military honor.

However, many politicians, even professed conservatives, believe that women should be allowed to serve in the US military. These so-called supporters of women have the audacity, the contempt for womanhood, and the complete callousness to send their wives, daughters, and sisters off to fight and die for their country.

In the first place, there is almost no reasonable basis for women serving in the military in any capacity. The purpose of the US military is to defend the United States of America, and to win any wars into which we might enter. Women, in general, are NOT physically or emotionally suited to this task. No studies are needed to confirm this fact – it is as obvious as the sky is blue. Since women are not suited to the job, they should not be enlisted.

Some might say that this is not fair in an “enlightened” modern society. To their dismay, the military is in the business of winning, not being fair. Do we allow the tall to serve on submarines? Do we adjust cockpits so that the obese can have the privilege of flying an aircraft? Surely then, we should not make similar compromises for women.

Further, the presence of women is a hindrance to troop morale, and like the presence of homosexuals, incites inappropriate conduct. As the Army slogan goes, a soldier is called to “Be all that you can be.” It does not say to “Be all that you can be, and lend a hand to Rachel.” (I do not want to even suggest a comparable translation for the gay military. Then again, perhaps this might suffice.) Men who are called by their country to the solemn duty of defending it should not be distracted by mixed company. To put it bluntly, there are no co-ed convents.

As women are incorporated into the military, the military must adapt training, discipline, and conduct to allow for weaker and more sensitive soldiers. The inevitable lowering of standards is not offset by any added benefit that these new recruits provide. Moreover, male soldiers who once feared only for their lives, are now faced with the threat of frivolous sexual harassment lawsuits.

Alternatively, many women fall victim to sexual assault at the hands of their fellow soldiers. Particularly in the Navy, significant percentages of female soldiers become pregnant while on duty. In an abhorrent practice, these women are often flown off-ship to have abortions. Not only are we murdering their womanhood, but now we are also murdering their innocent children.

If these were the only arguments against women in the military, perhaps there might still be room for women in some rare female-only unit where their particular talents could prove useful. However, to allow women to serve as soldiers in any capacity is distinctly contrary to natural law. Women exist to nurture, love and protect. As it is their privilege to bring new life into this world, it is not just for them personally to end the lives of others, which happens to be foremost among their duties as soldiers.

In order to assume the masculine role of a soldier, women must abandon their feminine instincts. Among the most troubling signs and fruits of this “masculinization” is the forced wearing of men’s clothing, the desensitization of future mothers to extreme violence, and the subjection of women to the indecency of the battlefield. This is not just a case of women exploring a career or opportunities outside of their natural sphere, or even denying that such a feminine sphere exists. Instead, the radical feminists—as always, ignorant and angry—want to destroy the concept of womanhood.

When women must abandon their femininity in the company of men, men are also deeply at risk. The modern “co-ed” military trains men not to respond to the cries of female soldiers and to remain cold to their suffering. A man who has been successfully programmed in this way has ceased to be a man at all. He becomes a pig – heartless, ignoble, and truly despicable. The fact that the vast majority of soldiers endure such vile and immoral conditioning against their will only further heaps blame upon the cowardly politicians who have brought about this tragedy.

The war that is currently being fought in Iraq presents a stockpile of evidence on the outrageousness of women at war. Women, despite not serving in actual combat, are maimed and killed in unprecedented numbers. They are exposed to the dangers and ferocity of the Mohammedan lands. They are entrusted to guard prisoners of war, where some young American women have even been seduced into the evils of torture and perverse sexual interrogation. With the inclusion of women, a frustratingly pointless war has been turned into a national disgrace.

Needless to say, it has not always been this way. The first women to actually serve in the military did so at the turn of the century with the formation of the Army Nurse Corp. World War I brought about even more involvement, as women were permitted to serve as Yeomen in state-side administrative positions so that more men could serve overseas. As so often occurs, these policies born out of great need and duress and meant to be temporary, were made permanent. In 1920, the Army Reorganization Act made these Army nurses officers, albeit with far less rights than male officers. In 1948, the first step was completed, as nurses were granted permanent status as members of the Army, Navy and Air Force. In 2005, we see the terrible avalanche that these beginnings have wrought.

The use of women as contract nurses in the War of Northern Aggression and the Spanish-American War were, in their day, mostly harmless and practical. During the World Wars, as American strength was stretched to its limit, a somewhat logical case could be made for establishing a more formal military organization of nurses suitable to wartime. Although problematic, such policies were not overtly offensive. However, the 1960s introduced men to the Nurse Corp and a moral line was crossed. The radical feminists who clamored for these changes are now pressuring for women in front-line combat. Given the United States’ proven history of caving in to feminists, action must be taken to ensure that this ultimate offense does not occur.

Sadly, our culture has almost unanimously rejected the formal concept of womanhood. Anything that women are allowed to do, it is believed, they ought to be able to do in the same manner and capacity as men. Besides being completely false, this sentiment makes the inclusion of women in military organizations to any extent quite dangerous.

One clear solution would be for the President of the United States, Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces to honorably discharge every woman who serves in the United States military. This is certainly not the only solution; however it is a highly effective and morally sound one. Regardless of the particular proposal, any politician who continues to ignore the crisis of women in the military exhibits a moral failure to God, law, and the women and men who make up the United States of America.

“Conservatives” on this campus who bicker over gays in the military are not only wasting their breath on an obvious point, but also illustrating their ignorance of the real issue. If you want to combat the menace of homosexual perversion, do not just condemn homosexuality in the military—condemn it everywhere. By not doing so, you eclipse the far more pressing issue regarding the Armed Force—the abolition of natural womanhood.

 

Comments

 

Post a Comment

Subject:
Name:	* Required
E-mail:	* Required
Enter code:
Comment: