| Author | Subject: Re: Welcome |
| IcantbelieveIpaythismuchforashittyeducation@american.edu | Posted At 02:04:55 11/25/2002
First of All, I boycott this and all other books by authors who write on subjects they know nothing about the subjects they profess to be so knowledgable about. How many days did you spend in the military yourself Mr. Goldstein? Or in an elite combat unit at that! "Intelectuals" who study the topic often cite research that states the biological or psychological capabilities of women in strenuous environments. If this is true equal opportunity should mean full integration of women into all positions in the armed forces - right? WRONG!!! The key failures of such research is the lack of evidence that these traits - posessed by some females - are proof that women in combat roles is appropriate. Quite the contrary....the opposite is true. Women in combat roles - especially in elite units - erodes unit cohesion (and amazingly, combat effectiveness). But what do you know about this Mr. Goldstein? Have you bothered to do any substantive research on these units? Hanging out in the Gender Studies Department trying to win favor with the "femmes" does not make you an expert on the role of women in the military, nor does your book or any of your other works make any accurate statements on how full integration of women would affect the U.S. Military (you may speak of Militaries in general, but we all know what you have your sights set on). The fact is, women would destroy U.S. military effectivness if integration occured. "Brotherhood" may be a dirty word to a femenist, but its the glue that keeps the best military units in the world together. You might say "so what" if integration meant over %80 of the current force quitting rather than being "equal-opportunitied" into a second-rate unit, but frankly Mr. Goldstein, I don't want to lose the protection of the greatest military force in history. http://www.cmrlink.org/WomenInCombat.asp |