You're viewing a single thread.
I really don't know if equal access to the front line is the kind of social progress we should be aiming for. It smells faintly like it, I'll admit.
Access to the means to project force is necessary for equality. Without it equality only lasts as long as those able to project force allow it. War is terrible, but when the Iranian revolution occurred a womens’ army would have likely been far more effective than the mass protests were.
True equality is equal access to all areas, for better and worse.
Well, most military jobs are support regardless, I met plenty of weak men in the army while I was in. Women make great soldiers if you understand what the functionality of being a soldier is.
It’s not all spec ops and crazy missions, the majority of the military is planning and execution. No matter the make up of the platoon.
I'm sure it's highly context-dependent. I've just never viewed the "equal access to exploitation" school of gender equality as quite the social victory others seem to.
To frame it another way - we've historically sent men to war partly because their relative disposability is understood. The strength to swing a sword and the strength to bear a child are not necessarily fungible.
I remain conflicted on the issue.
I would reckon that for a volunteer force, it's on the individual's perception of valid goals. Of course not withholding anyone coerced into the volunteer force.