A wee bit down the page, the discussion returned to women's studies professors vis-a-vis attitude toward the war effort, such as it is right now. (We envision ourselves nationally as being a replay of the Home Front in WWII. 'Tis to laugh. Wait two years and let's talk then.)

The following is pure opinion.

The military and its supporters have no one to blame but themselves that there are not more representatives of feminist support for the military. The military, as a social group, have treated women alternately as fragile blossoms to be defended in their castle keeps and vessels of pleasure to be exploited at boys' weekend off-base (unofficially, of course). Those feminists who have accepted, encouraged and pursued the logical outcome of the struggle for equal rights, that is, women in combat in what was formerly a men's club, have had to argue, cajole, threaten and sue to get treated seriously.

Even then, there was a great deal of kicking and screaming about the destabilizing influence of women in combat, and about how weak and frail we are. This in spite of the fact that, though men have more upper-body strength than women, women have far greater endurance than men, as any student of marathon running will tell you, as well as greater fine-motor skills. Women, with their attention to detail, are also excellent shots.

We have women in the regular military now. The debate over combat status goes on, even as non-combat personnel are exposed to the hazards of war anyway.

It doesn't surprise me that very few feminist academics have stepped up to defend the military and war as an instrument of foreign policy. Those feminists who appreciate the military's promise for women, and women's ability to contribute to the military, have been spending time in court and Congressional hearings, etc., trying to get a foot in the door. To their anti-military academic colleagues, they are ineffective, a joke.

The military was laughing too. See the funny girls! Why aren't the women's auxiliaries good enough for them? Can't they understand we need nurses? But they're not laughing now.

If a sizable proportion of the military were female, the military could expect that the opinions of some female academics would be influenced by this experience. This is the true value of diversity: we can make common cause because we see common participation.

There would still be nuts. But how different it would be to see present and former female combat soldiers, knowledgeable and strong professionals, face off against professors who are in the ivory towers of their castle keeps not because they were kept there, but because they don't want to come down.

Regards--
Mary Anne