Women in Combat
by
Walter E. Williams
Recently
by Walter E. Williams: Official
Lies
A senior Defense
Department official said the ban on women in combat should be lifted
because the military's goal is "to provide a level, gender-neutral
playing field." I'd like to think the goal of the military should
be to have the toughest, meanest fighting force possible. But let's
look at "gender-neutral playing field."
The Army's
physical fitness test in basic training is a three-event physical
performance test used to assess endurance. The minimum requirement
for 17- to 21-year-old males is 35 pushups, 47 situps and a two-mile
run in 16 minutes, 36 seconds or less. For females of the same age,
the minimum requirement is 13 pushups, 47 situps and a 19:42 two-mile
run. Why the difference in fitness requirements? "USMC Women in
the Service Restrictions Review" found that women, on average, have
20 percent lower aerobic power, 40 percent lower muscle strength,
47 percent less lifting strength and 26 percent slower marching
speed than men.
William Gregor,
professor of social sciences at the Army's Command and General Staff
College, reports that in tests of aerobic capacity, the records
show, only 74 of 8,385 Reserve Officers' Training Corps women attained
the level of the lowest 16 percent of men. The "fight load" – the
gear an infantryman carries on patrol – is 35 percent of the average
man's body weight but 50 percent of the average Army woman's weight.
In his examination of physical fitness test results from the ROTC,
dating back to 1992, and 74,000 records of male and female commissioned
officers, only 2.9 percent of women were able to attain the men's
average pushup ability and time in the two-mile run.
In a January
report titled "Defense Department 'Diversity' Push for Women in
Land Combat" (http://tinyurl.com/axn9l93) Elaine Donnelly, director
of the Center for Military Readiness, points to U.S. Army studies
showing that women are twice as likely to suffer injuries and are
three times more undeployable than men. Women are less likely to
be able to march under load – 12.4 miles in five hours with an 83-pound
assault load – and to be able to crawl, sprint, negotiate obstacles
with that load or move a casualty weighing 165 pounds or more while
carrying that load. Plus, there are muscle-challenging feats, even
for men, such as field repairs on an M1A1 Abrams tank.
Then there's
the pregnancy issue, which makes women three to four times as likely
as men to be undeployable. And once deployed, they often have to
be medically evacuated, leaving units understrength. Finally, there's
another difference between men and women rarely considered in deliberation
about whether women should be in combat. All measures of physical
aggressiveness show that men, maybe because of testosterone levels
10 times higher, are more aggressive, competitive and hostile than
women. Those attributes are desirable for combat.
Here
are a couple of what-if questions. Suppose a combat unit is retreating
in mountainous terrain in Afghanistan, where a person's aerobic
capacity really makes a difference, and the women in the unit can't
keep up with the men. What would you propose, leaving the women
behind to possibly be captured by the Taliban or having the unit
slow down so the women can keep up, thereby risking causalities
or capture? What if a male soldier is washed out of the Army's Advanced
Infantry Training program because he cannot pass its physical fitness
test whereas a female soldier who can't perform at his level is
retained? Should male soldiers be able to bring suit and be awarded
damages for sex discrimination? How much respect can a male soldier
have for his female counterpart, who is held to lower performance
standards?
There's another
issue. The Selective Service System's website has the following
message about draft registration: "Even though the Secretary of
Defense has decided to allow women in combat jobs, the law has not
been changed to include this. Consequently, only men are currently
required to register by law with Selective Service during ages 18
thru 25. Women still do not register." How can that, coupled with
differences in performance standards, possibly be consistent with
the Defense Department's stated agenda "to provide a level, gender-neutral
playing field"?
February
5, 2013
Walter
E. Williams is the John M. Olin distinguished professor of economics
at George Mason University, and a nationally syndicated columnist.
To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other
Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators
Syndicate web page.
Copyright
© 2013 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
The
Best of Walter E. Williams
|