Peter Pan

After thinking about this a little bit more, I want to clear up just a couple of things, and give a few more thoughts before I let this go.

Army commanders can really use females in this specific role. They have found that a female is great to have on these missions for cultural reasons, but wait, there’s more!

One of the reasons that the army doesn’t think that “girls” should fight in combat units is that it is thought that they will mess up the “band of brothers” unit cohesion of a unit of all men (boys.). But according to almost all accounts that I have heard or read, this issue just isn’t true. Most unit cohesion is actually a little bit tighter because of the female, or in spite of her.

That leads to another huge army fear, that somehow, the female will destroy the unit in the case of her injury or death. Here is my take, and I think it’s a pretty good one.

The army should think that about every single death of every single person regardless of gender, but if they’re going to insist, then the perfect job for a front line female is that of medic (just like SPC Brown). A medic is the one person in the unit that is least expendable, but also required to be (mostly) the most courageous. If females are to gain agency as combat troops, what better way to prove themselves then in this noble profession. The men will (according to the army) do as they are programmed to do from birth, that is, protect the female (again, according to the army), which will only end up with the medic being more taken care of, and therefore giving her the ability to care for the injured troops more effectively. Also, we could take into account that perhaps the enemy would prefer not to kill a female, but probably not since they pretty much blow up women and children in the street….

That’s my take..

Comments?

Trackback URI | Comments RSS