"Women in the Senate Confront the Military on Sex Assaults." That was a headline on the front page of the New York Times. I got this second hand, because I don’t read media that I don’t trust.
I’m going to quote from an article by the great Thomas Sowell, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute, one of my favorite “thinkers”, and a prolific writer.
In a recent article Sowell responded to that Times article by saying, “In a triumphalist article showcasing the growing numbers of women on the Senate Armed Services Committee, ‘one of the Senate's most testosterone-driven panels,’ the story line presents female Senators attacking male military officials over charges of sexual assaults against women in the armed forces.
“For thousands of years, people around the world had the common sense to realize that putting young men and young women together in military operations was asking for trouble, not only for these young people of both sexes, but for the effectiveness of military forces entrusted with the fate of nations.
“Yet, in these politically correct times, civilian leaders who increasingly have no experience whatever in the armed forces are far more willing to try to micro-manage the military than back in the days when most members of Congress and most Presidents had served in the military.”
Sowell adds, “There seems to be something liberating about ignorance and inexperience.” Ain’t that the truth…!
Women served in the army back when I was in basic training at Fort Ord. They were called WACs, a remnant program of WWII, terminated in 1978, but they had no contact with us. We could see them marching while being berated by foul-mouthed female drill sergeants, but they didn’t share foxholes, barracks, and communal latrines with us. The scary part was that even the female sergeants began to look good to us after a few weeks of incarceration.
Hormones are raging in young soldiers. Hookers may have come on base during payday weekend, but most of us were like cloistered monks with pictures of our girlfriends and highly anticipated letters that were always “sniffed” before opening. The perfume aromas would be proudly shared with our buddies. But sharing your tent with a woman introduces a dynamic that destroys the military paradigm. Military men with combat experience should make these decisions - not women and quasi-male politicians.
When I was in basic training, protective mothers (not mine) pressured our base Commander to allow their little angels to get proper sleep, so the rule changed to disallow lights on in barracks until 5 a.m. Prior to that, lights came on at 3 a.m. or so and cleaning began. Thanks to those mother hens, the lights didn’t come on until 5 a.m., but now we had to scrub the floors at 3 a.m. in the dark and polish our boots in the latrine, where lights were always on. The military hadn’t been castrated yet.
We have women in political leadership positions along with men who never served, and a “Commander-in-Chief,” who claims to know nothing about anything, when it comes to his endless scandals. But his distain for the military is clear. With people like this using military policy for social change, can our government be serious about the strength and morale of the military?
We are feminizing our country with government usurping the care and protection of women that men in previous generations provided. Consequently, the notion of self-reliance, responsibility, and the male protection of women has been replaced by government, making men expendable and irrelevant appendages.
I think most men in my generation escaped this trend, because we still have an inbred sense of responsibility, including the protective instinct. In past generations, men could be men and women could be strong, but genuinely feminine at the same time. That’s one reason most members of the Tea Party and its sympathizers seem to be well past puberty.
That’s also why old dudes will deck you for an offense against their wives, while a young metro-sexual will just giggle.