if there are women that pass all the same tests that men have to pass, why not let them in?
My more idealistic side says "absolutely, let them in" but I do think there is merit to the arguments some have made about unit cohesion and it being disruptive to the environment. I used to dismiss such arguments, then I actually served in the military, on a submarine, and was there when they were bringing on some of the first groups of female cadets. They weren't actually crew members yet, but these were young women (I think they were all teenagers actually) who were future officers and they wanted to expose them to a submarine underway. They weren't there with us for the entire duration, mind you, but I got a chance to see the impact.
Now, interestingly enough, at that time I was still a self-identified liberal and I actually argued against some other crew members who said they shouldn't start having women on submarines. I viewed this as an archaic, caveman attitude and I made some pretty impassioned arguments about "if they can do just as good of a job, why not?" etc. But in retrospect, I realize that their presence was incredibly disruptive and distracting. On another boat, not mine, the
COB actually got fired for sleeping with one of them. There are also
"health risks unique to women of child-bearing age" which exist on a nuclear powered submarine. Keep in mind that incident that got the COB fired happened within just the first year that ANY females were on submarines, at all, and in a very sparse and limited capacity no less.
So now I guess I've switched camps, but it seems the tide of history is against me. I am now at a point where I don't think women should serve in any combat role or be on any naval vessel, or be fighter pilots. I think there are roles for women in the military, but I think our grandfathers' attitudes on this sort of thing better reflected biological reality than our era's do. Even if they did not reflect the ideals of equality as well.
This is well established. What's not clear is if it's a result of boys growing up with video games and building blocks vs. girls growing up with dolls and ovens.
I think it's the result of what our ancestors were doing thousands of years ago, the last time natural selection really had a crack at our species. I think the men were out hunting moving objects, and the women were gathering berries, hence
why women see colors more vibrantly than men, it is theorized that this may have been an evolutionary adaptation to distinguish types of berries (poisonous vs. not) and spot berries among the surrounding foliage better. Whereas tracking animals and leading your spear throw so it hits where the animal is going to be, rather than where it is, were traits selected for in male brains. The ability to keep track of where you are in a three dimensional space is also
superior in males, for these same reasons.
Ultimately, I think we just need to face the fact that one of our species' genders evolved to engage in warfare and physical violence, and is suited for such, and the other, by and large, is not. Or at least, not nearly AS suited to it. We need to stop pretending our species has a "get out of natural selection free" card. Biology trumps our feelings.
Facebook
Twitter