17th March 2007, 9:44 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/18/magazi...gewanted=1
Read that article. Long, but worth it!
In short, the real threat to female soldiers isn't their average weaker physical strength (which, I absolutely believe, is not significantly enough different to make any combat role impossible. Men aren't all the same strength either... why should women all be judged equally when they are just as different in ability? If any person is able to do the job in question, they should be allowed to do it. Gender shouldn't matter.). It's sexual assualt from their male colleagues. This article says in detail exactly how big a problem that is, and it's something that needs to be dealt with... but the answer is absolutely not to cut back women's roles and pretend that they can't do things that they can, that's for sure.
While I'm not sure if it has ever been "completely normal", women have fought in combat at many times throughout history, and I've never heard a serious argument that a well-trained and committed female soldier is inherently unable to fight simply because of strength. The argument generally centers on expectations of gender roles, not physical qualities, and I don't think it's any different here... (and I don't just mean Ryan here, or just men; that conservative woman in the article I cited in my last post with a quote up there is another example of that thinking...)
Read that article. Long, but worth it!
In short, the real threat to female soldiers isn't their average weaker physical strength (which, I absolutely believe, is not significantly enough different to make any combat role impossible. Men aren't all the same strength either... why should women all be judged equally when they are just as different in ability? If any person is able to do the job in question, they should be allowed to do it. Gender shouldn't matter.). It's sexual assualt from their male colleagues. This article says in detail exactly how big a problem that is, and it's something that needs to be dealt with... but the answer is absolutely not to cut back women's roles and pretend that they can't do things that they can, that's for sure.
While I'm not sure if it has ever been "completely normal", women have fought in combat at many times throughout history, and I've never heard a serious argument that a well-trained and committed female soldier is inherently unable to fight simply because of strength. The argument generally centers on expectations of gender roles, not physical qualities, and I don't think it's any different here... (and I don't just mean Ryan here, or just men; that conservative woman in the article I cited in my last post with a quote up there is another example of that thinking...)
![[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]](https://www.tendocity.net/logo_bos_79x76.jpg){kind=logo}