Arms And The Enlisted Woman

Introduction

Introduction This book is about America's most unknown soldiers-enlisted women in the Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines. It is also about the making of policies concerning enlisted women. Above all, it is an effort to explain why those policies so often appear to fly in the face of both logic and evidence. I hope that those who are serving and who have served as enlisted women will like this book-that they will find it fair, authentic, and meaningful. I know some readers will not like it. Some of my feminist friends will find it militaristic, flawed by a "me tooism" that insists upon women's being allowed to do the forbidden without reflecting upon what the forbidden is. (In this case, of course, it is consenting and preparing to kill people.) Some of my military friends will not like it either. They will deplore what they see as my valuing of equity over effectiveness; they will find my disregard of experience reckless; and they will believe that my assumption that women can contribute to the nation's defense in the same ways as men misplaces the burden of proof. Anticipating these responses, I should like to be explicit about why I have written this book, what it contains, and why I believe its implications are profound. WHY I HAVE WRITTEN THIS BOOK Why do some people sacrifice their lives for others? Why do some people feel justified in taking the lives of others? I have previously explored these questions by examining the thinking of both participants in organizations committed to nonviolence and U.S. military officers. As a political theorist, I do this by immersing myself in what has been said and written. I attempt to uncover unstated assumptions and to grasp the internal coherence of my subjects' views, with particular attention to apparent illogic and to departures from evidence. I try to understand the meaning of beliefs and statements in their context. Having done this, I ask myself, "Of what is this an instance?" or, "What is the meaning of these beliefs and statements in general?" - 1 Copyrighted Material 2 - Introduction My work is not grounded in a particular political, sociological, or psychological theory. It does not follow a prescribed methodology. It draws upon and uses personal narratives, field interviews, historical exposition , analyses of others' data, and the reading of minutes and memos. I have used this approach in two other volumes, Nonviolent Power and Bring Me Men and Women: Mandated Change at the U.S. Air Force Academy. I wrote Nonviolent Power energized by the events of the late 1950s and early 1960s and by a touch of pride in ancestors who had participated in the Underground Railroad. In it I sought to outline several theories of nonviolence underpinning the rhetoric and work of leaders and organizations in the U.S. civil rights and antiwar movements. Nonviolent Power was addressed; though, to the vast majority of Americans who will never practice or punish nonviolent resistance, but whose judgment in the form of "public opinion" will almost certainly determine the winner of any nonviolent struggle. I noted with particular interest the uneasy shift of public opinion when Martin Luther King, Jr., first suggested that nonviolent action might be appropriate in the northern and urban parts of the United States, and, later, when he indicated that it might be well to consider U.S. participation in the world arena (especially in Vietnam) in light of the principles so applauded when directed against rural, southern sheriffs. American ambivalence about King's Nobel Peace Prize forced me to recognize that few Americans are serious about nonviolence. Some deem it an admirable way for the weak to protest against domestic injustice, but the powerful tend not to protest but simply to write (or rewrite) the law. Thus, in the domestic arena the powerful do not resort to "naked" violence , but to the "legitimate" violence known as law and its enforcement. Further, in the international context "security" tends to be sufficient justification for any violent act (legal or illegal) authorized by the President or Congress. The contrast between women's energetic participation in the civil rights and antiwar movements and their near exclusion from both law enforcement and the military led me to reflect that men in our culture are trained to expect private and governmental, legal and illegal violence , and that they consider violence an appropriate counter to violence. American women, on the other hand, are likely to abhor...