Sex inevitable when men, women serve together

With the recent news of sex scandals in the military and the indication of a wide demoralization in the ranks, it has finally come to light that allowing the integration of women into all areas of the military is a bad idea.

Combat roles and integrated barracks seem to be more harmful than productive for the health of our armed forces. In the Jan. 20 issue of the Weekly Standard, a conservative publication, former Navy Secretary James Webb forcefully described the ways in which sexual integration undermines military cohesiveness.

He indicated that the United States is the only nation in the world attempting full training integration. Last month in the New Republic, a liberal publication, Stephanie Guttman described at length the available evidence of demoralization and confusion caused by the militaryÕs pursuit of gender integration.

It is becoming very apparent that a completely gender-neutral military incorporating basic training, barracks and combat, denies basic realities. One of which is the physical differences between men and women.

Congress is concerned with the damage being done to the morale and efficacy of the armed services. It is now possible to state that a military program will not work when it is driven by a political agenda. Most of the reported problems regarding the integration of women in all aspects of the military, are based around sexual harassment or the perception of sexual harassment.

Although there have been real evidence that suggests foul play, men have been the focus of the blame. What has been virtually unreported in the press, is that both men and women in the military acknowledge (albeit privately) that consensual sexual fraternization is not only common but prevalent throughout the sex-integrated services.

The public, however, is more likely to believe that women are the sole victims. Sexual jealousies and rivalries are corrosive in most settings, but nowhere more than where unit cohesion and trust of oneÕs colleagues can mean the difference between life and death.

Asking men and women to ignore sexual attraction in conditions where they live, work, eat and even sleep in the same quarters together, is unnatural. Reports from female soldiers suggest women are at fault along with men at initiating sexual conduct in these settings.

Still the military brass, urged on by a political agenda, turned a blind eye. For years, they have ignored the degradation of physical standards female integration has forced on the military. They have looked the other way as pregnancy rates among female personnel climb Ñ especially among single women. Only now, because women themselves are complaining, are they taking a closer look at the breakdown in military discipline to which sex integration may have contributed.

There is a place for women in the military, as there has been through much of our modern history. Women now account for 14 percent of the Armed Forces, a historic high. Now more than ever, we need serious examination and debate about whether womenÕs roles should expand. A program of integration specifically pointed toward the goal of success for women, rather than the good of the armed services as a whole, could have negative consequences.

There was a time when it was understood that the prime purpose of the military was to fight wars. It is time that we once again focus our attention toward that goal and stop tampering with the military as if it were a social playground.

Ed Menezes speech communication major.