“A man who endorses women in combat is not pro-woman; he’s a wimp.” John Piper is correct in calling into question a guy’s manhood if he is willing to support women in combat. But it is interesting that this man-shaming (finally a correct outlet for that term) is coming to surface in light of women’s conscription (i.e. the draft) and “combat roles” being opened to women.
Chelsen Vicari wrote an article pleading to the leaders in the Christian community to defend the sanctity of a woman’s role. While I mostly agree with Chelsen, I would like to add to the argument a vital yet missing side of the coin.
While women soldiers in the Iraq/Afghanistan wars were never in combat MOS’ (military occupation specialty), approximately 208 women died. If these women were not in combat, how did they die?
As regulars to this blog know me, I was in the military and police force. Being a Christian, I was staunch in the view that women (to include myself) should not occupy a combat MOS (like infantry). So, I became an analyst, sitting at a desk. I signed my life away for eight years at the needs (i.e. whims) of the Army. I soon was headed out to…wait for it… B.C.T.
Basic. Combat. Training.
While there, we learned how to function within a military unit. We learned hand to hand combat, we physically trained, we learned how to shoot rifles, and guys wrestled girls. We went through a gas chamber, slept out in the field, learned infantry tactics, ruck marched, got yelled at, did more pushups and sit-ups. So much for a non-combat job.
In my naivete, I never put two and two together.
Chelsen, like the majority of Christians in the U.S., makes the following plea to be against women being drafted: It is forcing women to go to war. Chelsen writes, “Women have important roles to fill in the military, but women also play vital roles in the home. Forcing young mothers, daughters, and our sisters to register for Selective Service would be a tragic mistake.” Why would it be a tragic mistake to force young mothers from the home? Wouldn’t it be as tragic for men to be forced to leave their families as well?*
Moving on in Chelsen’s article she adds, “We support and thank them (women) for their sacrifices.” Chelsen goes on to say that women fill a vital role in military — but the fact is, they don’t. I am not going to be politically correct. The military survived just fine without women serving side by side with the men. In the process, manhood has been undermined and the lines have been blurred on what it means to be men and women.
I am thankful Chelsen brings up the key reason why women shouldn’t be drafted. Men and women have unique and special roles in home. I would also add that men and women have a unique role in the church as well as society.
Our culture will verbally abuse men for being masculine, for protecting women, for sacrificing for them, and for treating women with honor and dignity. But I am thankful because I know that most of them, in spite of the putrid speech downplaying men, will instinctively and gallantly stand up for their women. They are men, uniquely gifted (or hardwired as John Piper says) by God to lead, provide, and protect. Men fulfill their responsibility and women love them for it.
It is, and has been, time for men (and Christian men especially) to draw a line in the sand and say no more. “We will not allow our women to be drafted. We will not allow our women to take our place as protectors of society. We will not allow them to take the burden of our responsibility and join the military. Period.”
I was naiee. I didn’t truly understand how the military worked. Deep down though, I didn’t want to see it. I wanted to have my cake and eat it too (sinfully so). And now, my daughter will reap the consequences.
*The liberals are spot on. President Obama said, “I think it will help to send a message to my two daughters that they’ve got obligations to this great country as well as boys do.” Since society has bent the gender roles to the point of (seemingly) no return, it would be unfair to have men be registered and not women. Women want the opportunity but not the responsibility. Sounds a lot like the sexual revolution–wanting the opportunity of having sex without the responsibility of the results.
For Further Discussion:
Al Mohler with A Quiet Circumvention of Morality-Women in Combat
The Reformed Conservative aims to reunite gentlemanly virtues with scholarly conversation. Standing in the great Reformed and conservative heritage of thinkers like Edmund Burke and Abraham Kuyper, we humbly seek to inject civility into an informed conversation, one article at a time, bringing clarity out of chaos.