Yer’ in the Army Now, Baby

Women in CombatFollowing my previous post, I see that the first two females have graduated from the rigorous U.S. Army Rangers program, which has the reputation for the toughest training regimen out there.  Well, we may presume that it just got a little less tough, for I have difficulty believing that the women can do everything the men can do, at least at the elite level.  One need only ponder the sex-distinction still prevalent in the Olympics and professional sports, to say nothing of college and high school sports; there is no chance anytime in the near future that women will compete with men.  Can the same not be said of the Rangers, the primary virtues of whose regimen we may presume are physical?


The curious irony is that these militaristic feminists have also adopted male characteristics: shaved heads, muscles, aggression and, most ironic of all for a feminism that sought freedom from patriarchy, a strict hierarchy and unquestioning obedience to orders, almost always from men.  The strange thing I have heard is that these new female Rangers, although graduates of the training (whether attenuated or not), will not be allowed to act officially as Rangers, whatever it is that Rangers do for a living beyond regular Army duties.


But there are far deeper philosophical questions that go beyond just letting these two women complete basic Ranger training, and why almost every civilized  country in the world restricted combat roles to men.


There were, and still are, reasons for this restriction.  No serious group of warriors in real combat wants a woman along; any man in a candid moment will admit this.  For every man in that unit will act to protect the woman, or women, even subconsciously. They may even act to impress her, but at the very least, they will feel the natural male-protective bond.  This will especially apply if capture by the enemy, especially the sadistic rapists who inhabit ISIS, is imminent.  For such evil men can do to women what they cannot do to men, namely, make them sexual slaves, confine them to harems, to repeated rape and even pregnancy, forced to raise modern-day Janissaries.


Speaking of which, how do we know that female soldiers are not pregnant when they go into combat, thus exposing an unborn child to grave harm or death?  Are they all celibate or sterilized?


Whatever one says about the danger to which men are exposed in combat, they cannot be nor get pregnant, and, if captured, they cannot really be ‘raped’.  For sodomy is not sex, but a species of violence, pure and simple.  Have you wondered why they made Liam Neeson’s daughter and not son who was captured in the visceral revenge fantasy Taken?  Would his palpable tension, and our own vicarious outrage, have been anywhere near the same if a young man were the one confined?  You would expect the guy to save himself.


But any man worth his salt, Neeson, Ranger, or whatever, will do his utmost to spare a woman that indignity.


As much as they try to make themselves so, women are not made for combat, except in the most extreme conditions, like when the enemy is streaming over the walls.  When I say ‘made’, this is not just, or even primarily, physical, especially in our age of technological and arms-length warfare, which requires little or no physical strength and agility.


No, the problem with putting women in harm’s way to defend others is primarily spiritual: Are they fulfilling their role and being perfected as women, in accord with their feminine genius?  I will repeat what I said in a previous blog, that it is a great dishonour to a country to have its women defend and kill for its men, while the men lounge on couches playing World of Warcraft.  You go girl!  I’ll be here warming up the pizza pops…


Just recently, a Conservative politician in Quebec was vilified for a blog he had written about women (people are digging up all sorts of old postings nowadays, and perhaps even this obscure blog may be found by someone at some point, but I don’t plan to run for office anytime soon).  Anyway, he wrote innocuously, and rather obviously one would think, that women, especially when pregnant, need to be protected by men.  He was trying to nuance the notion of men having a natural authority over women, which he explained was more a sense of such protection.


Nothing controversial, and I would even go further, saying that there is indeed a natural authority of men over women, or, at least, that there is something slightly unnatural about a woman having authority over a grown man (which is why the French always maintained Salic law, restricting their monarchy to males, or kings).  Of course, our culture has adopted female authority over men as natural, par for the course, ho-hum, and I am not sure how far even my own patriarchal principles would go to the wall for this, but still…


Yes, still, even to hint at such notions nowadays, even to refuse to use ‘inclusive’ language, ensures that one is instantly banished to social pariah status.  I just hope the politico has the cojones to stick to his guns, but most people will be cowed by the threat of the worst banishment that can befall a public figure, media vilification.


The problem is that we can hold fake opinions because we live in a rather fake world, far removed from reality.  Everything from modern military training to academia and politics is so fraught with political correctness and media bias that I am not sure how they would stand up to reality, should reality be thrust upon them.  If and when things go south, and there is real combat, and I mean when we are all truly threatened by the enemy at the gates and are actually defending our hearth and homes, we will see what happens.


Although I fear we men will no longer be up to the task, having been whittled away in our leveling, marshmallow world, our love of comfort and ease, history has taught us that necessity and adversity can bring great things out of even the most unexpected and least likely people.  There are signs of hope, like the vacationing American soldiers on that high speed train in France, subduing a heavily-armed would-be terrorist.


In the meantime, do what you can to follow the advice of Monsignor Escriva, Esto Vir!  Be a man!  Train for that day when you may indeed be called to task, for we know neither the day nor the hour when such a call may arrive…