"First, force young men, who already face the challenge of bringing their unruly spirits under the control of rigorous military discipline to face the even greater challenge of reining in their urgent, natural drives-while living, dining and sleeping in close quarters with women. Then mix in the young women, who, while ostensibly pursuing military careers, are expected to suppress their visceral drive to capture lifemates. And what do you get? Confusion, and a lot of pregnancies."

This = completely ridiculous

And:

"What loss of common sense could ever bring a government to purposely introduce into its fighting forces the element of sexual interplay"

Israel makes every 18 year old, male and female, serve two years in the army, and they have one of the best forces (for their size) in the world.

Also, I know that pregnancy is not rampant in the army, but I did have a friend who purposely got pregnant (by her husband, who is not in the military) so that she could postpone being sent to Iraq, or perhaps get out of it all together.

my guy's best friend joined the military post high school and he says 99.9% of the guys there have "army girlfriend" (read: sex buddy) in addition to a real girlfriend or wife waiting for them back home. he is personally discusted by it, and counting down the days until he can come home and ask his girlfriend to marry him.

ill have to ask him about the rate of pregnancies there. he has never mentioned any, thus far.

Wait, I thought all the women who joined the military were supposed to be butch lesbians? It's interesting to see how stereotypes shift accordingly to the argument.

Besides, I'm a bit confused about the men folks' supposed "natural urges." Just what the hell is she getting at? Their natural urges are so sexist and violent that it's for the women's own good that they be barred from service?

As far as I know, most jobs in America aren't segregated by sex, so how are men working in corporate america managing to supress their "natural urges" while military mens just can't seem to hold it together? Don't a lot of men live and dine with other women? The author doesn't seem to give either sex much credit.

Uh..

This is unrelated, but worrying:

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_7452276

"
Post Poll - Abortion Ballot
Would you vote for a ballot measure defining "personhood" as a fertilized egg? (Read related story.)
Yes
No
Don't know

The Colorado Supreme Court today released a decision giving proponents the go-ahead for a ballot initiative that would amend the state Constitution in 2008 to define personhood as a fertilized egg."

it's good to know that women in the navy are only pretending to be "sailors."

am i hallucinating or does she actually allege that that admiral committed suicide and naval commanders left the service because there are women in the navy?

Okay, what gets me about this is that the article says,
"Perhaps most shocking of all is the degree to which so many of today's military women appear hell-bent on becoming "single moms." For many, this seems to be a more overriding ambition than the career they supposedly set out to build. Maginnis writes, "At any given time, up to 18% of Navy women are pregnant and a study of two ships showed a pregnancy rate as high as one in three. That's nearly 8,423 women, or enough to crew almost two aircraft carriers." And in a less than well-kept military secret, Maginnis reveals that "During Desert Storm, 1,145 women on ships needed to be reassigned because of pregnancies, at an average of 95 per month."

Maginnis cites data about the USS Eisenhower, which was the first combat vessel opened to female crew members, where pregnancies grew from five to 39 in just a couple of months. "In all, 13% of the female crew became pregnant." And, needless to say, in each case, the "sailor" had to leave her shipboard duties.

Uh... was there even ONE marriage statistic in there?

Okay, what gets me about this is that the article says,
"Perhaps most shocking of all is the degree to which so many of today's military women appear hell-bent on becoming "single moms." For many, this seems to be a more overriding ambition than the career they supposedly set out to build. Maginnis writes, "At any given time, up to 18% of Navy women are pregnant and a study of two ships showed a pregnancy rate as high as one in three. That's nearly 8,423 women, or enough to crew almost two aircraft carriers." And in a less than well-kept military secret, Maginnis reveals that "During Desert Storm, 1,145 women on ships needed to be reassigned because of pregnancies, at an average of 95 per month."

Maginnis cites data about the USS Eisenhower, which was the first combat vessel opened to female crew members, where pregnancies grew from five to 39 in just a couple of months. "In all, 13% of the female crew became pregnant." And, needless to say, in each case, the "sailor" had to leave her shipboard duties.

Uh... was there even ONE marriage statistic in there?

Wow. They really hit the nail on the head, didn't they? I mean, don't all women in lower income brackets (as most incoming military recruits tend to be) LOVE to be abandoned by the father of their child so they can have all of the sparkling benefits of single motherhood? I mean, I know my single mother was just a whorish baby-trap waiting to be knocked up so she could stop building her career as a 55 hour-a-week-at-$2/hour-plus-8%-tips waitress and reap all of the benefits our capitalist, patriarchal system of social welfare in America.
/snark

They really will find any reason to blame women for everything. How about instead of condemning the women willing to give their lives for a pointless military disaster, provide them with birth control, EC, abortion, and then child care, health and medical benefits when they do "get" pregnant. *scream, barf, rip out hair*

Elaine Donnelly is a whack job and her little Center for Military Readiness is a crock. Hardly anyone in the military takes her seriously anymore on anything. One wishes that the rest of the world (Washington Times, Wall Street Journal, and some actually objective sources) would stop treating her "studies" as proof or using her as the "other side" in a report.

There are sometimes women who get pregnant on purpose to avoid deployment. They can and should be punished. There are also women who are so damn stupid that they accidentally get pregnant right before a deployment. There are some women who have aborted unplanned pregnancies in order to deploy. The bottom line is that the number of men who are unable to deploy because of pending discharge/legal actions against them due to misconduct, drug use, etc., is percentage-wise much greater than women, and much much greater than pregnant women.

It is true that there's a lot of casual sex in the Army. However, to say that 99.9% of guys have an Army sex buddy is really overstating it (as male soldiers would). I'd put that number at around 70% in the junior enlisted ranks, and much lower elsewhere.

All of this is unit dependent and can be impacted by how a leader chooses to educate their soldiers about contraception, empower their female soldiers over stereotypes and marginalization, crack down on alcohol usage in the barracks, etc. As for sexual tension, etc., there are administrative actions for not doing your job because you're too into someone, or having sex on the job. It's the leader's job to make them work.

My only response to that was:

What? You don't think that the men were having sex in the armed forces before women joined?

Ignoring the double entendre of Brothers in Arms, lets consider the fact that many people who against women in the military are the same ones who are against men in the military.

Incidentally, I just learned the other day that women being barred from "combat duty" does not mean that women are not on the front lines being shot at. You can risk your life being a medical personnel, but that doesn't count as combat duty, so you can't become a three star general.

I read a book (They Fought Like Demons) recently which chronicled the hundreds female soldiers who fought in the Civil War -- disguised as men, obviously. The authors found evidence that some were, in fact, simply in the army because they were following a boyfriend or spouse instead of staying at home. (In most of those cases, the man was aware that she was coming along.) Some even got pregnant while fighting. But BY FAR the majority of them weren't there looking for men, they were fighting as soldiers and did a damn good job and were respected by their comrades in arms even after they were found to be female. Reading some of the positive things those 1860's male soldiers said about the females hiding in the ranks, I find it ridiculous that in this "enlightened" age such bullshit as Ms. Wright's article could be published.

I'm sure there are some less-than-pure motives for joining the armed forces. (Hell, my brother-in-law was only a solider because he needed [NEEDED!] the GI bill to pay for grad school.) But that happens in any part of the world and society. Our soldiers and sailors and pilots deserve more respect and credit than they were given in that piece of rubbish.

"which inevitably brings with it romantic ramifications with which we're all familiar-hurt feelings, periods of anxiety and brooding and, sometimes, even vengeful behavior?"
i love how she addresses these problems as if they were anywhere NEAR large enough to distract you from that fact that you have immersed yourself in a kill or be killed situation. I'm sure that the emotional trauma, the constant evidence of brutality, the frequent concern for your limbs are all just brushed under the rug in light of your new romantic fling!
also, you have to give her credit for subtly suggesting that it's not total immersion in a violent paradigm which produce vengeful behavior, but girl problems. We all should have realized that long ago! That's why the army was such a peaceful place until women came along...

I absolutely refuse to believe that 99.9% of the men in our military are philanderers. I'm sure lots of people in the military have sex buddies, but not all of them have a partner at home. Sure, many do, but surely that number is a major exagerration.

ok...when i stop beating my head on the desk and can make coherent though i will comment again...i can not believe this shit...

OT...but "Chief Petty Officer" is capitialized...as it is a title just like Ret. Lt. Col., and in the navy commands almost equal respect...

Did anyone else read her blog? This lady is fascinating - she contradicts herself all over the place in her views on men and women, blacks and whites...wow. just. wow.

Also, my favorite part of the Global Politician site is on the banner where it says "objective, in-depth analysis". Those are two things this piece by Wright are decidedly not.

Life must suck for me then, my four years was up and since I hadn't found a husband yet, I reenslisted! Yay!

Yeah I can't spell either appparently.

FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE...

I don't even know where to begin with this article.

I'm a woman, a Marine, and up until this moment had some faith that America backed up her troops selfless commitment by attempting to see us beyond our sexes. Pie in the sky ideals I know, but it kept a lot of us going.

Then this b.s. comes out for people to read and consider just how women in the military is ruining our military.

So lemme give those a**holes a little history lesson. Women have always found their way into the military, and not because they were hoping to get knocked up or find a mate.

The Civil War: Countless women cut their hair and posed as men to enlisted and fight for a cause they believed was worth dying for.

WWII: "Free a Man to Fight" became the slogan posed BY THE MILITARY in order to attract females to positions (armory, mechanical, as well as desk jobs and cooking) in order to allow men who were in those spots the ability to serve as infantry/airmen.

WOMEN WERE KILLED AT PEARL HARBOR IN SERVICE ALONGSIDE THE MALE COUNTERPARTS. Just because she didn't sink with the ships doesn't mean she didn't die when they bombed the hospitals where they were serving as Navy Corpsmen and Nurses.

And that's just a few examples. My platoon mate- Sgt. J. Winters (USMC) was THE FIRST WOMAN KILLED in Afghanistan in Jan 2002.

Glamour Magazine printed an article about several female Marines who not only suffered a roadside bombing on their way BACK FROM PATROL (where they were inspecting cars for bombs and potential threats). These brave women not only recovered their wounded and dead, but held off the enemy as they opened fire on them until help arrived. With burned hands, faces, and bodies- the instinct of these FEMALE Marines was to pick up the weapon and eliminate the threat.

But this article takes completely away from all the sacrifice, the courage, the loss, and the hardships that women in every branch faces. We had a slogan in the Marines for females that we used to keep ourselves motivated. "We work twice as hard for half the respect." I've never had an instance that it wasn't true. If you wanted to be taken seriously, you had to fight for it. Always, every where you went.

So yes, some parts of this article ring true: some women are on their own agendas, some women might be looking for a way out, or for a mate. But MOST women are proud to be there, and without a second thought will lay her life down for her 'brother/sister in arms'.

The person who wrote this clearly never served, and should be damned ashamed of themselves for perpetuating the negitive stereotype that every single hard working and motivated young female soldier, Marine, airmen, or seaman has fought so long and hard to break down.

Feminists aren't to blame for any supposed weakness. Idiots are.

I served on a Navy ship for 6 months out to sea after those towers came down, and I was met face to face with the ugly reality that no, we are not all created equal in accordance to the stripes we wear. I was a Sgt- and had 40 MEN beneath me, but I just happened to be unlucky enough to wind up on one of those ships where the Captian did not appreciate the 'female invasion' into his boys club. I felt the reprocussions first hand, as did all 20 female Marines aboard that ship.

Did you get that?

There was 20 of us. 20 female Marines on board a ship of 5000 male Marines and countless sailors. NOT ONE OF THE FEMALE MARINES ENDED UP PREGNANT nor did she leave the ship because of it. We all went to war with the men, and were glad to do so. When there was talk that my guys might be going into combat with out me, I said "no way." I was going, so help me God. If they were going to die for their country- then give me the chance to lay my life down with them. We are ALL Marines.

So all in all, all this does is promote the primitive way of thinking. It offers a scapegoat to blame when something happens like pregnancy. Did they take into account the number of MARRIED women in the service PLANNING on getting pregnant to have a family? Or did they get lumped into the same group as all the other women on an "agenda"?

If this person knew anything, they'd realize that you get promoted based on scores- various tests, fitness and academic and that someone OUTSIDE OF YOUR COMMAND sees only the number and a last name and the score. They don't know male from female. So how could laying on your back achieve you a higher rank? It seems unlikely to me. Maybe not impossible, but unlikely.

And the physical strength comment? Two women can lift a piece of gear that weighs 100+ pounds just like two men could. And they do, at least in my platoon. No one went easy on any one else- regardless of gender. Suck it up Marine, some one had to pick it up- might as well be you.

Women in the service have to live a double life- one of soft and approachable because that is what society wants to see, and one of hardened, without a second-thought killer because that is what they are trained to be. Men don't have to live by that double standard.

All in all, these women are proud, and this person better think twice about trying to take that away from them. At the end of the day, women are trained to kill with their bare hands- JUST LIKE THE MEN.

Thank you for listening.
Sgt. Bowker
USMC Veteran

FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE...

I don't even know where to begin with this article.

I'm a woman, a Marine, and up until this moment had some faith that America backed up her troops selfless commitment by attempting to see us beyond our sexes. Pie in the sky ideals I know, but it kept a lot of us going.

Then this b.s. comes out for people to read and consider just how women in the military is ruining our military.

So lemme give those a**holes a little history lesson. Women have always found their way into the military, and not because they were hoping to get knocked up or find a mate.

The Civil War: Countless women cut their hair and posed as men to enlisted and fight for a cause they believed was worth dying for.

WWII: "Free a Man to Fight" became the slogan posed BY THE MILITARY in order to attract females to positions (armory, mechanical, as well as desk jobs and cooking) in order to allow men who were in those spots the ability to serve as infantry/airmen.

WOMEN WERE KILLED AT PEARL HARBOR IN SERVICE ALONGSIDE THE MALE COUNTERPARTS. Just because she didn't sink with the ships doesn't mean she didn't die when they bombed the hospitals where they were serving as Navy Corpsmen and Nurses.

And that's just a few examples. My platoon mate- Sgt. J. Winters (USMC) was THE FIRST WOMAN KILLED in Afghanistan in Jan 2002.

Glamour Magazine printed an article about several female Marines who not only suffered a roadside bombing on their way BACK FROM PATROL (where they were inspecting cars for bombs and potential threats). These brave women not only recovered their wounded and dead, but held off the enemy as they opened fire on them until help arrived. With burned hands, faces, and bodies- the instinct of these FEMALE Marines was to pick up the weapon and eliminate the threat.

But this article takes completely away from all the sacrifice, the courage, the loss, and the hardships that women in every branch faces. We had a slogan in the Marines for females that we used to keep ourselves motivated. "We work twice as hard for half the respect." I've never had an instance that it wasn't true. If you wanted to be taken seriously, you had to fight for it. Always, every where you went.

So yes, some parts of this article ring true: some women are on their own agendas, some women might be looking for a way out, or for a mate. But MOST women are proud to be there, and without a second thought will lay her life down for her 'brother/sister in arms'.

The person who wrote this clearly never served, and should be damned ashamed of themselves for perpetuating the negitive stereotype that every single hard working and motivated young female soldier, Marine, airmen, or seaman has fought so long and hard to break down.

Feminists aren't to blame for any supposed weakness. Idiots are.

I served on a Navy ship for 6 months out to sea after those towers came down, and I was met face to face with the ugly reality that no, we are not all created equal in accordance to the stripes we wear. I was a Sgt- and had 40 MEN beneath me, but I just happened to be unlucky enough to wind up on one of those ships where the Captian did not appreciate the 'female invasion' into his boys club. I felt the reprocussions first hand, as did all 20 female Marines aboard that ship.

Did you get that?

There was 20 of us. 20 female Marines on board a ship of 5000 male Marines and countless sailors. NOT ONE OF THE FEMALE MARINES ENDED UP PREGNANT nor did she leave the ship because of it. We all went to war with the men, and were glad to do so. When there was talk that my guys might be going into combat with out me, I said "no way." I was going, so help me God. If they were going to die for their country- then give me the chance to lay my life down with them. We are ALL Marines.

So all in all, all this does is promote the primitive way of thinking. It offers a scapegoat to blame when something happens like pregnancy. Did they take into account the number of MARRIED women in the service PLANNING on getting pregnant to have a family? Or did they get lumped into the same group as all the other women on an "agenda"?

If this person knew anything, they'd realize that you get promoted based on scores- various tests, fitness and academic and that someone OUTSIDE OF YOUR COMMAND sees only the number and a last name and the score. They don't know male from female. So how could laying on your back achieve you a higher rank? It seems unlikely to me. Maybe not impossible, but unlikely.

And the physical strength comment? Two women can lift a piece of gear that weighs 100+ pounds just like two men could. And they do, at least in my platoon. No one went easy on any one else- regardless of gender. Suck it up Marine, some one had to pick it up- might as well be you.

Women in the service have to live a double life- one of soft and approachable because that is what society wants to see, and one of hardened, without a second-thought killer because that is what they are trained to be. Men don't have to live by that double standard.

All in all, these women are proud, and this person better think twice about trying to take that away from them. At the end of the day, women are trained to kill with their bare hands- JUST LIKE THE MEN.

Thank you for listening.
Sgt. Bowker
USMC Veteran

Sgt Bowker: Oorah Sister! Nicely put. I didn't join until late 2003, but have just started my second enlistment and am constantly fighting to prevent the spread of such stereotypes. The only way to fight this sort of thing is to do what we're doing -spread the real word about women in the military. We are still pioneers, and it is not easy, but we continually persist and prove ourselves as great warriors. Check out the book Band of Sisters by Kirsten Holmstedt if you haven't already to read about some of the female heros of America's most recent conflicts.
Semper Fi.
Sgt Navarro
USMC