I just don’t think this is a great idea. Men are generally chivalrous and will want to protect the women, which may compromise their combat readiness, which could, in turn, put them in harm’s way.
I am not a soldier, and am a woman, but that is just my two cents. :)
Any thoughts? Please see my earlier post.
We can avoid the chivalry problem to some degree by having all female combat battalions.
I am of two minds on this.
Women serve well in the Israeli Army. They service in combat.
Many, many years ago, women served alongside my husband in the MP’s and did outstanding.
I believe if they are treated as soldiers rather than women soldiers, they can serve and succeed. The problem arises when the military expects one thing and then accepts another.
Currently, women expect special treatment and men expect to be able to take advantage of women soldiers without consequence.
Here’s some interesting commentary from my nephew-in-law to be (niece’s fiance) from a couple years ago about woman in combat, from his time in the Marines just a few years ago.
Beyond that, whenever the subject comes up, I invite people to read some detailed history of serious combat. I really don’t think most civilians advocating for women in combat roles have done so. One great source is Project Gutenberg, where they have free short folio histories prepared by the Marines about island battles in the Pacific during WWII. Read about Guadalcanal, or Tarawa, or some of the others, and ask yourself if women had any business there.
Pacific Campaigns and Battles here:
We have too many fools who think G.I. Jane and the like bears any resemblance to real life.
I agree, and I am also a woman.
Compromising readiness is actually the goal of initiatives such as this.