For the record, I don't for a minute think that racism and sexism necessarily spring from the same roots or raise the same issues. But parts of Jonah Goldberg's recent essay on this topic have a bad smell. It's full of tired, old arguments that just don't cut it any more. Like this one about women serving in the military.Yes, white soldiers had problems with the idea of serving with black soldiers. And yes, male soldiers have problems with the idea of serving with female (or gay) soldiers. But that doesn't mean the problems are the same. Most soldiers would have problems with the idea of serving in combat with one-armed midgets too. That doesn't mean one-armed little people should man the parapets, does it?
[May I inject an incredulous "huh???"]The biggest problem with women in combat isn't that they won't be able to cut it. I'm sure there's some tiny minority of women who are physically capable and psychologically willing to spend months on end in foxholes and the like. The chief dilemma in my mind — and confirmed by conversations with career military men — is that men behave differently around women.
That's what we usually call a circular argument. But only if we're being extremely polite. Yes, men and women are intrinsically biologically different, but that doesn't necessarily lead to any of the conclusions that Goldberg says it does. And after wrestling with this issue for many years, Israel is finally heading in the right direction. Maybe we could take a cue.
UPDATE: And maybe we already have. Haggai alerted me to this article from The Washington Monthly. It describes the quiet increase in women's combat roles in the U.S. armed services. And it directly addresses the arguments mentioned above.
