Thursday, February 18, 2010

The Empire's War on the American Mother

"Sending fathers into military combat has been a tragedy for as long as war has existed," reads the Arts & Letters Daily blurb introducing Mary Eberstadt's article; "Sending mothers along with them makes life unimaginably worse" — Mothers in Combat Boots. Ms. Eberstadt is more pointed:
    With the obvious assent of the American people, as well as most of our political and military and other leaders, the United States military now routinely recruits mothers or soon-to-be mothers of babies and young children — and often puts them in harm’s way more or less as it does every other soldier. This is a practice so morally questionable, and in virtue of that fact so fraught with policy difficulties, that both its persistence and its apparent lack of controversy fairly beg for explanation. It is past time to ask the question: Why?
She observes, "The armed forces have apparently adopted lock, stock, and barrel the longings of yesteryear’s feminists." Noting that "American laws like most others delineate what kind of civilization ours is," she continues, "And currently, ours is one in which military and political and cultural leaders appear to believe that there is nothing intrinsically wrong about deploying mothers away from their children and into the wars."

(In Korea's recent vassal state deployment's augmenting the Empire's wars, only unmarried volunteers were considered.)

Remember Bill Kauffman's observation that "the first casualty of the militarized U.S. state is the family" — George Bush, the Anti-Family President.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share

4 Comments:

Anonymous Dano said...

A friend at a military school suggests to me that nearly everybody in the armed services recognizes what a disaster it has been to have women in uniform. The problem is that getting oneself promoted is an extremely political activity, and voicing opposition to the military's embrace of feminism is a really good way to spend the rest of one's career filing paperwork at Fort Greely, Alaska.

4:28 AM  
Blogger Kevin Jones said...

Does Eberstadt think the feminism now predominant can be kept "in a box"? Putting mothers in combat is its logical outgrowth.

She also repeats a false report about the Ft. Hood shooter being taken down by Sergeant Kimberly Munley. In fact, Sergeant Mark Todd did the heroic deed. That fact was buried by a week of misreporting, as was the fact that fourteen died in the crime - one victim was pregnant.

6:54 AM  
Blogger sapper05 said...

Dano - unless you're a senior general officer working on policy, a military person cannot change what Congress has directed. Does your military friend really think "almost everyone" recognizes that females in uniform is a disaster? Hard to believe. I am not positive, but I believe the services are composed of almost 20% females today! A disaster?

I don't believe Ms. Eberstadt proposes any viable options to correct her perceptions of wrongs to military mothers. Do we go back to the WAC days and only have females in administrative duties? Only serve in CONUS?

The cook she references violated military regulations by not having a valid Family Care Plan. She knew the requirements...she's a volunteer...she willing became a mother...she is getting paid like the volunteers next to her to serve where needed. No sympathy from me.

2:46 PM  
Blogger Enbrethiliel said...

+JMJ+

Sympathy is hardly the point. She shouldn't have been allowed to volunteer or to continue volunteering after she became a mother.

Women make great secretaries. Having them in mostly administrative roles will certainly play to their strengths.

12:29 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Omnes Sancti et Sanctæ Coreæ, orate pro nobis.