Sunday, January 27, 2013

acceptable

I swirl the wine in my glass and clear my throat and say to my father, "the Secretary of Defense lifted the ban on women serving in combat" and I regretfully hear that stupid 80's song in my head, 'I am woman, hear me roar, gag, roar.'  I am seriously devoid of any hint at how my father will respond and then his face twists into a pained expression, "I cannot agree with this."


But then he doesn't agree with gay marriage either, "I don't mind if they live together though," jeesh.  Fifty years from now and probably less the citizens will say, what were the bunglers thinking, crucifying those non-choosing folks who baby, they were born that way.  I forgive my father a lot of transgressions. He comes from a slower-paced yet reflective generation. Rules were decided and carved in stone, walls were constructed and questions were never voiced, end of story.

"Why do you disagree," I ask, "do you think women in the field will prove a distraction?" He looks surprised, I can tell this hadn't occurred to him. In my own head I say that's a problem for those Rambo randy men, deal with it, get your nose out of your crotch and on with the killing already, quit wasting taxpayers' time.

"It just isn't right. In my time women needed to be protected and were" and this is starting to bore me. We don't want to be protected, Sonny, I'm whining. There is honor and nobility in maintaining and securing one's own existence. Dependency breeds weakness and false beliefs about the nature of things.

"What about physical requirements?" he continues."We had to be able to carry a soldier out on our backs like firemen do. Can women do that?"
I listened to public radio earlier in the day and just such a discussion was going on. The male broadcaster was telling the female Marine that 35 push-ups were the requirement for recruits going into combat and he was doubtful women could do that. Her voice stayed steady as she replied, "for me 70 push-ups is a bad day, 90 a good day." Don't you just love it?

We all know women who would make excellent soldiers. Some of them were nuns who taught me in grade school. Sister Alphonse could stop a charging rhino at twenty feet with her withering glance.

The Associated Press article in the paper says, "in addition to questions of strength and performance there also have been suggestions that the American public would not tolerate large numbers of women being killed in war." Evidently, large numbers of men being killed is acceptable.

4 comments:

MrDaveyGie said...

That a boy, papa....

dawn marie giegerich said...

youz guys . . .

Arizaphale said...

Carry a soldier on my back? I carried 180kg of pre-mix cement down our back stairs last week, albeit in 30kg bags. Perhaps I could chop the soldier up into manageable chunks. Oh no sorry, the enemy already did that for me...
Look, there are people who shouldn't be in combat and people who should. I probably shouldn't.Not sure 'nads have every(any)thing to do with it though.

BrightenedBoy said...

If our soldiers were engaged in regular hand-to-hand combat I could understand the restriction, seeing as most women are smaller and physically weaker than men.

But how strong do you need to be to handle a rifle? If they can execute the practical requirements of the job as well as men then they should be allowed to do so.

As for the gay rights thing, that one is just a matter of time.