First of all, some say women cannot bond with the men, but women are a perfect addition to all areas of the military, which includes the Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Marine Corps, and Navy. Inside these branches, women are often portrayed negatively. One example is shown when Levin writes, "A handful of women might be physically and psychologically suited for combat, but if their introduction into male units disrupts the intangible bonds that keep a unit effective, egalitarians will have to decide whether being defended by male boors is too high a price to pay for survival" (qtd. in Herbert par. 3) Of course, this quote shows that some women are just as capable at defending their country as men, but it also portrays a problem with women’s acceptance into a men’s alliance; women are suited for combat, but if they destroy the friendship between the men, then adding women into the program is not worth the risk. People who discourage females within the military address women joining a team of all men as an issue. Herbert claims that those opponents believe that females destroy the links that hold the soldiers together, or in other words, they decimate men’s friendship (par. 3). Also, opponents are implying that women and men cannot bond and that men can only get along with other men. In addition, there are people who view women as the cause of separating America. For example, Anna Quindlen, an American author, journalist, and opinion columnist for New York Times column, adds, “It's all women's fault. Equal opportunity, the wearing of slacks, women in the military and on the bench, feminism, even bobbed hair -- all have contributed to the disintegration of American society” (par. 1). Quindlen blatantly states her strong opinion of women in the military by claiming that they are the cause of America’s dissociation. However, this cannot be true because there are men and women who have inseparable bonds. The problem is not that men and women are not able to create bonds but that women are not given the chance. Women do not separate groups of men; nonetheless, men in the military are often unwelcoming to women. Therefore, women are a great addition to the military, even though some are not given the opportunity.
Ultimately, men and women’s relationships in the military raise concerns about the mission’s success and goal. An unsettling dispute is being held over the idea of men spending more time saving women than focusing on the purpose of the mission. David Horowitz, an American conservative writer, explains, “Another problem raised by William Lind is what happens when women troops are actually deployed. In combat situations, men will act instinctively to protect women, abandoning their tactical objectives in, the process” (par. 26). Men are described as protectors, but just because they cannot control their instincts does not mean female soldiers should have to suffer from inequality. Ultimately, these relationships and instincts raise concerns about the purpose of the mission, but that should not be a deciding factor of women’s inclusion in the military.
Ultimately, men and women’s relationships in the military raise concerns about the mission’s success and goal. An unsettling dispute is being held over the idea of men spending more time saving women than focusing on the purpose of the mission. David Horowitz, an American conservative writer, explains, “Another problem raised by William Lind is what happens when women troops are actually deployed. In combat situations, men will act instinctively to protect women, abandoning their tactical objectives in, the process” (par. 26). Men are described as protectors, but just because they cannot control their instincts does not mean female soldiers should have to suffer from inequality. Ultimately, these relationships and instincts raise concerns about the purpose of the mission, but that should not be a deciding factor of women’s inclusion in the military.