The recently passed defense authorization bill did not include the controversial draft provision requiring women to sign up for the Selective Service. As a result, a writer for the Federalist lays out a convincing case why that may be a good thing: in short, science itself dictates, from a physical perspective, women are relatively bad at war.
It’s been a bone of contention for more than 30 years, the notion that women can, and indeed should, serve in combat roles. During his tenure, President Barack Obama made women eligible for all combat positions. And even though women have tried and failed to pass some of the most rigorous combat training courses, it remains a feminist battle cry that women should have the right to fight.
Travis Scott, a writer for The Federalist, takes that argument and turns it on its head using what the left side of the political spectrum says they love — science:
The differences between the sexes affect all kinds of major and minor components about our bodies. Men have stronger bones than women, as well as stronger tendons and ligaments. Males have more muscle fibers, and because of this have greater muscle mass. Men have about 40 percent more muscle mass than women. Things like calorie intake also affects the sexes differently: men tend to convert extra calories into muscle and energy reserves. Females tend to convert them into fat deposits…
Because of their weaker bone structures, women are more prone to injury then men are. Many women in sports and other physical activities experience injury rates at levels that have been described as “epidemic” by some medical experts. Young women are more vulnerable to these injuries, many of which often lead to osteoporosis, even shortly after proper recovery.
And that’s just a small part of his exhaustive case against women in combat using the one thing that women can’t shed themselves of, no matter how hard they try: their sex.
Who is driving this agenda? I am not personally hearing female Marines, enlisted or officer, pounding on the doors of Congress claiming that their inability to serve in the infantry violates their right to equality. Shockingly, this isn’t even a congressional agenda. This issue is being pushed by several groups, one of which is a small committee of civilians…it’s very surprising to see that none of the committee members are on active duty or have any recent combat or relevant operational experience relating to the issue they are attempting to change….
The entire thing is worth a read. Perhaps we shouldn’t be asking our women to fight like men unless and until, God forbid, it becomes absolutely necessary.