Twisted feminism is foolish. It puts civilization in harm’s way.
It is foolish to believe that a woman can have freedom only if her child is aborted. It is foolish to believe that men and women are the same. It is foolish to fantasize women warriors.
“The ancient tradition against the use of women in combat embodies the deepest wisdom of the human race. It expresses the most basic imperatives of group survival: a nation or tribe that allows the loss of large numbers of its young women runs the risk of becoming permanently depopulated,” writes George Gilder in Men and Marriage.
“Beyond this general imperative is the related need of every society to insure that male physical strength and aggressiveness are not directed against women . . . All civilized societies train their men to protect and defend women. When these restraints break down . . . the group tends to disintegrate completely and even to become extinct.”
What about the so-called successful use of women in today’s military? It, writes Gilder, “depends on men overcoming their natural impulse to treat women differently and more considerately. The consequence of this latest demand for equality would be nothing more or less than a move toward barbarism.”
I like George Gilder. Again and again I return to “Men and Marriage” because, from a purely sociological and economic perspective, Gilder explains how the foolishness of women competing with men ravages family and destroys harmony. If my sources are correct, Gilder became a Christian later in life. (What God has created is naturally revealed unless our eyes are shut and minds are closed.)
“Women in combat” is one of the “hot button issues” discussed during a Titus 2 Retreat. The topic stirs mixed feelings. Some believe women don’t belong in combat because they don’t have the physical capacity to endure the rigorous standards of training or the hardships of war. Some believe it’s a woman’s “right” to defend her country and that she can do so as well as a man. Others note that “modern” warfare is more technological than “front-line.”
Generally speaking, there is significant difference between male and female bone and muscle structure. This reality has undermined the rigors of basic training and is why Stephanie Gutmann titled her book A Kinder, Gentler Military. Of course, the physical strength argument can be countered with examples of women who have developed body strength and can keep up with men.
There is also sexual attraction between men and women. Putting men and women together for training and in combat creates an environment in which each are vulnerable to sexual misconduct and abuse. But, this argument can be countered with the practice of self-control.
So, for me, the question isn’t, “Can women be in combat?” The question is, “Should women be in combat?” I enter this discussion from my vocation or role of “helper” (Hebrew: ezer). That’s what God created woman to be. I am a helper for man and, therefore, for all that man is called by God to do. Will I help for good, or for harm? Away from temptation, or into? With focus on others, or self? Nurture life, or put it at risk?
I pause to let you ponder. But, there’s much more to consider… in another post.
Ezerwoman's Blog 
Women should not be in combat because they can not be effective. In a sane society this would be common sense.
“Women are not physically and psychologically made for this work,”. —Nicole Grant, a combat medical specialist who has served eight years in the U.S. Army, including a year in Iraq, speaking of HER experiences there.
From the report of the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces (report date November 15, 1992, published in book form by Brassey’s in 1993):
-The average female Army recruit is 4.8 inches shorter, 31.7 pounds lighter, has 37.4 fewer pounds of muscle, and 5.7 more pounds of fat than the average male recruit. She has only 55 percent of the upper-body strength and 72 percent of the lower-body strength.
-An Army study of 124 men and 186 women done in 1988 found that women are more than twice as likely to suffer leg injuries and nearly five times as likely to suffer [stress] fractures as men.
-Women’s aerobic capacity is significantly lower, meaning they cannot carry as much as far as fast as men, and they are more susceptible to fatigue.
-In terms of physical capability, the upper five percent of women are at the level of the male median. The average 20-to-30 year-old woman has the same aerobic capacity as a 50 year-old man.
-From the same report: “Lt Col. William Gregor, United States Army, testified before the Commission regarding a survey he conducted at an Army ROTC Advanced Summer Camp on 623 women and 3540 men. …Evidence Gregor presented to the Commission includes:
-Using the standard Army Physical Fitness Test, he found that the upper quintile of women at West point achieved scores on the test equivalent to the bottom quintile of men.
-Only 21 women out of the initial 623 (3.4%) achieved a score equal to the male mean score of 260.
-On the push-up test, only seven percent of women can meet a score of 60, while 78 percent of men exceed it.
-Adopting a male standard of fitness at West Point would mean 70 percent of the women he studied would be separated as failures at the end of their junior year, only three percent would be eligible for the Recondo badge, and not one would receive the Army Physical Fitness badge.
-Women (10.4%) twice as likely as men (5%) to have PTSD at some point in their lives.
It should be added that men have much higher level of testosterone than women. It’s testosterone that’s responsible for recovery and allows the building of muscle size and strength. Steroid use is the rule, not the exception, among female olympic athletes who compete in games where size and strength matter. It’s also very common in the military with women who want to compete with men physically.
Even in law enforcement the presence of women causes problems. John Lott determined that each 1 percent increase in the number of white female officers in a police force increases the number of shootings of civilians by 2.7 percent. and increasing the number of female officers by 1 percentage point appears to increase the number of assaults on police by 15 percent to 19 percent. Criminals are not afraid of women and female officers are not capable of defending themselves without resorting to a weapon.