Since the three female American soldiers initially fell into enemy hands in Iraq, the media have worked hard to quell any backlash against women being deployed in combat. Consequently, a full exploration of the implications involved has been scrupulously avoided.

In an April 17 PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer piece entitled “Women Warriors,” Air Force A-10 pilot Capt. “Killer Chick” was profiled along with her comrades as being exemplars of female toughness and competence, having recently performed successful combat missions over Iraq. Additionally, Lory Manning (Capt. USN-ret) of the Women in the Military Project pointed out that when a terrorist bomb gashed the hull of the USS Cole in 2000, female sailors aboard performed admirably in the ensuing crisis, some even working to save their male buddies.

Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum consequently suggests that the “argument about women in combat is over.” Incongruously, she also insists that the military make accommodations to motherhood; allowing them to take maternity leave and be put out of “harm’s way” if deployed. How? Perhaps the Pentagon should consider constructing special ‘don’t bomb us, we’re women’ bunkers on the battlefield or installing titanium escape capsules on every warship!

In this post Sept. 11 world, any US military asset anywhere in the world can find itself being pressed into action with little or no notice. How can those deemed to be vulnerable be expeditiously removed under such circumstances?

Applebaum’s position demonstrates a complete disregard for concerns of military readiness and minimizing losses. This is no accident. There is a significant overlap of those advocating women being drafted and/or included in combat units and those who ‘loathe the military’ a la Bill Clinton. One objective is to curb military action at the prospect of large numbers of our daughters fighting (and dying) alongside our sons. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) has admitted as much when discussing his January sponsorship of a co-ed military conscription bill.

Center for Military Readiness President Elaine Donnelly says the American people have not been getting the “full truth” about this issue, adding that female soldiers do not have an “equal opportunity to survive” as combatants. Syndicated columnist Mona Charen has referred to a woman’s “inherent delicacy” in being subject to sexual abuse if captured.

In answer, the media have latched on to former Desert Storm POW Army Maj. [now Colonel] Rhonda Cornum. Soon after her 1992 release, she told Newsweek that given that such victimization does not prevent escape, threaten life and limb and is not “excruciating… then it isn’t important.” In her numerous recent interviews, Col. Cornum has repeatedly stressed that sexual assault is ‘just another thing they can do to you’ in captivity and that men are at similar risk.

What is glossed over is the fact that what is the exception with respect to men is the rule for women. No male Coalition POWs captured by Saddam’s troops were subject to sexual abuse. In contrast, Col. Cornum and the other female Desert Storm POW, Army Spec. Melissa Rathbun-Nealy were indeed singled out for such treatment. That’s a zero percent vs. a one hundred percent ratio. A similar proportion exists for the risk of pregnancy consequent to rape. A woman who finds herself carrying a rapist’s child faces an agonizing decision, especially if abortion is a deep moral issue.

Initial accounts relate that Jessica Lynch kept shooting until she was out of ammo. She reportedly didn’t want to be taken alive. Why? Perhaps if male soldiers were at the same risk of the treatment Lynch was probably contemplating, they would be more likely to do the same.

Preparing women for combat can be appropriate, but only for Homeland Defense. In this Age of Terrorism, police officers of both sexes should receive robust training and be properly equipped for major urban warfare. The State National Guard units should also be similarly prepared. It is most appropriate that the Coast Guard has females amongst their crews. If a large-scale conflict erupts, the men deployed abroad could take comfort in knowing that the women left behind are capable of defending hearth and home rather than sitting there helpless.

Despite the way the debate is being framed in the Media, most of us who object to women serving in combat do not do so because of any doubts of their resilience, competence and/or bravery. As the details become known of Army Pfc. Jessica Lynch’s gallantry in the face of the enemy, many will have their confidence in women’s courage and capabilities only reinforced.

It is unfortunate to have to articulate this, but women are inherently different than men. They are part of what soldiers should be fighting to protect. Males are biologically expendable in comparison to females. Land can be recovered if lost, buildings can be reconstructed if destroyed – mothers (and future mothers) cannot.

Army Spec. Shoshana Johnson’s kids will get their mom back, Pfc. Lori Piestewa’s toddlers will not. For those at home, the loss of a mother is exponentially more significant (especially to a child) than that of a father. This fact is universally and viscerally understood by all but the most stubborn of Utopians.

For questions or comments, please contact aimintern@yahoo.com