Co-ed Combat and Cultural Cowardice

Posted By on January 26, 2013

Thank God for bold John Piper:

If I were the last man on the planet to think so, I would want the honor of saying no woman should go before me into combat to defend my country. A man who endorses women in combat is not pro-woman; he’s a wimp. He should be ashamed. For most of history, in most cultures, he would have been utterly scorned as a coward to promote such an idea. Part of the meaning of manhood as God created us is the sense of responsibility for the safety and welfare of our women.

Read the full piece HERE.

Have you found Beautiful Womanhood helpful? Please consider supporting our efforts. Any purchase made through our Affiliate Links, helps us continue operating. Or visit our donation page to find out how you can become an important part of preserving Beautiful Biblical Womanhood. 

About The Author

Jennie is the wife of Matthew and mother of ten children, all of whom keep the household bubbling with life, learning, and levity. Jennie co-founded LAF in 2002 with Lydia Sherman and has been delighted to hear from women all over the world who enjoy their femininity and love to cultivate womanly virtues.

Comments

36 Responses to “Co-ed Combat and Cultural Cowardice”

  1. Opal says:

    Thank you for this article! I could not agree more with Mr. Piper on this issue.

  2. mrsbartley says:

    http://www.tfp.org/tfp-home/fighting-for-our-culture/testimony-of-col-john-w-ripley-to-the-presidential-commission-on-the-assignment-of-women-in-the-armed-forces.html

    This is much better and written by a colonel. He gives a lot more reasons other than “men are not wired to follow women”

  3. Jenn84 says:

    “I had not yet been enlightened that competencies, not divine wiring, governed the roles we assume”

    Divine wiring enables women to do all sorts of things they before have not been allowed to do, and competence matters a great deal. God called Adam because Adam was created first and therefore knew more about the fruit than Eve, whom he failed to speak up to when the serpent tempted her. This doesn’t mean he was her authority or teacher like a father. On a whole, Piper’s right on.

  4. mrsbartley says:

    http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/article/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal- another great article by a female marine who once thought women could handle the rigors of combat. A great perspective from a strong female marine who knows women can’t handle long term combat.

  5. That link doesn’t work. Can you try finding that piece again? Thanks.

  6. mrsbartley says:

    sorry http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/article/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal
    I copy and pasted, not sure what went wrong, try googling “Get Over It! We Are Not All Created Equal” by Capt Katie Petronio. She ended up suffering from infertility caused by PCOS because of the chemical changes that happened to her body from the physical demands of combat. This woman was in incredible physical shape, ( she could bench 200lbs) yet her body deteriorated much more quickly than that of her male service members. She also describes what is really the motive behind all of this women in combat move. It’s hard to believe that they allowed this even after the testimony of Col. John W. Ripley. Most women in the military are not for women in combat.

  7. mrsbartley says:

    “As a combat-experienced Marine officer, and a female, I am here to tell you that we are not all created equal, and attempting to place females in the infantry will not improve the Marine Corps as the Nation’s force-in-readiness or improve our national security.” Capt Katie Petronio

    “I understand that there are female servicemembers who have proven themselves to be physically, mentally, and morally capable of leading and executing combat-type operations; as a result, some of these Marines may feel qualified for the chance of taking on the role of 0302. In the end, my main concern is not whether women are capable of conducting combat operations, as we have already proven that we can hold our own in some very difficult combat situations; instead, my main concern is a question of longevity. Can women endure the physical and physiological rigors of sustained combat operations, and are we willing to accept the attrition and medical issues that go along with integration?” Capt Katie Petronio

  8. mrsbartley says:

    We need strong Godly men in the military to speak up.

  9. J in VA says:

    Another concern I have: what will stop now women from being forced to register for Selective Service and be subject to the draft if it is ever re-instated?

  10. Independent says:

    John Piper is bold indeed but so out of touch with the modern world. John speaks of “Morals” and codes of conduct for men that were just fine fifty years ago. The world has changed and it doesn’t do any good to call men names because they do not adhere to a ultra-conservative world view.

    I know so many women applaud John’s take on the women in combat debate. Many men and women agree that men should “lay down their lives” for women. Those days are over unless these same people do more to roll back the double dipping culture of feminism.

    Men do not owe women anything in today’s world certainly not their lives. Equality has a long way to go and women should be doing more in combat as well as other aspects of life such as in the labor force. However if people want “all” men to be held accountable to a world of the pre-1950′s then it will need to hold “all” women accountable to that same pre-1950 world. Anything else is just telling men to be old fashion and die for women while the culture continues to toss men under a liberal bus.
    No thanks John, you can go die for a woman, I choose to protect myself against an increasingly misandrist society.

  11. Jenn84 says:

    Bottom line, Mrs. Bartley: I don’t believe women belong in the most gritty of army positions. There should be very few completely capable exceptions, because of simple physical strength. Fighter pilots and similar positions? Oh yes. They can lead and rule countries, as well as fight like h-e-double hockey sticks. But they’re not men, not as bodily strong, and therefore not the primary protectors and physical fighters.

  12. mrsbartley says:

    “Another concern I have: what will stop now women from being forced to register for Selective Service and be subject to the draft if it is ever re-instated?”

    It’s already being talked about. Hopefully strong smart men will continue to volunteer to serve our country so we don’t have to issue a draft.

  13. WileE says:

    Most likely, women will be required to register for Selective Service at some point in the future. It is sad to note that most people do not understand that requiring women to fight in combat can only be a logical consequence and follow up to allowing those same women to enter military service.
    Can women fight? Most certainly. Are we courageous? Most definitely.
    But for whom and for what has God given us courage and strength? Not to replace the duties of men.
    It must be noted that a nation which requires women to defend it and allows homosexuals to populate its military is a nation which has become a serious target to its enemies,.

  14. The problem with that position, Jenn, is it that it’s exactly what got us here (full-on women in combat, regardless of physical strength). The point isn’t that some women are amazons and should be therefore “allowed” to serve in the military. It’s that there’s simply nothing left to fight for if we are sending the nation’s mothers (and future mothers) into battle. You can read the original article I wrote about this ten years ago at http://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/women_in_the_military/when_mamma_wears_combat_boots.aspx.

  15. That’s a very pessimistic viewpoint. Read history. Piper is “in touch” with so many, many empires before us. History repeats itself when we refuse to learn from it. There have been cultures that mistreated women before, and there are cultures that mistreat them now. Our culture has swung into misandry, but the answer isn’t to tell women to stuff it. The answer is to return to the very morals and codes of conduct that make life good for both men and women.

  16. Jessie says:

    I am seriously grieved. On the verge of tears. I am trusting in the Lord but I know we have to continue here. I read an article on MSNBC last night about them talking drafting women also. I know I should not worry but I am so sad right now. To think that one day one or all of my daughters will be forced to fight in a war and others daughters. I can not find that article now of course. My question is what can we do now to stop this madness? I don’t want to sit back and just pray about it which seeking God’s face and power is THE most important thing we can do… But on the other hand as Isaiah said here I am Lord send me!!! I am REALLY seeing now that the role God has given me is THE best for His women!!! Where do we go from here….. How do we fight in this battle? Not to mention the abortion battle as well. It seems as if we are losing…. John Piper is so right.

  17. The real problem came in when we changed from Constitutional, defensive wars to undeclared conflicts where the US has no interests other than “nation-building.” George Washington predicted we’d get into entanglements when we stopped minding our own business. He was right. Now the military is seen as a “job” instead of as a necessary “evil” for the defense of our homes and firesides. This switch has been devastating.

  18. Jane says:

    I would do all I could to move out of this country, rather than let my daughter be drafted. But where to find a country that does not permit it? Somewhere in the UK? New Zealand? This is surreal, and I don’t even feel this is my country anymore.

  19. WileE says:

    So, Independent, what are you saying exactly?
    Women should be in combat because society hates men?

    Have you been in the military? Have you read the words of men who have been in battle? Have you even read or heard of Sen. John McCain’s tortures in Vietnam? And you want women to be “accountable”?

    Just what are you saying? It is an EVIL, and I repeat, EVIL thing to desire or require women to endure the grisly horrors of combat that men only have the strength to endure, and it is hard enough for men to do it.

    Combat is not, “Oh, I’m on the field assisting with this, or that.” Combat is a verb. And enemies take prisoners. And what is done to prisoners can
    be horrific.

    Here is a good movie to watch: “Objective Burma” with Errol Flynn. And they don’t even go into the half of it.

  20. Jenn84 says:

    Generally, my position differs hugely from that of liberals: I do NOT believe women should be allowed in regardless of physical strength. If the one in 30 exception was allowed, very few actual mothers or future moms would be acceptable.

  21. mrsbartley says:

    “Jenn84- “But they’re not men, not as bodily strong, and therefore not the primary protectors and physical fighters.”

    This female Captain says she was very strong, but she was NOT able to keep up with the men, she was NOT as strong as the men in the long haul, which is needed for combat. She is AGAINST women in combat.

    I do not understand your comment. Did you read the beginning of the article where she states her physical strengths, and then dismissed the rest of the article thinking she was FOR women in combat? You were mistaken.

  22. mrsbartley says:

    Independent- “Men do not owe women anything in today’s world certainly not their lives.”

    Men’s lives will be lost because of this. Piper has objections to women in combat based on biblical principles, however if you read articles from female veterans and retired military personnel who have nothing to lose by speaking out you will see that this is deadly for our men in the military.
    Read and you will see the devastating results of women in combat

    http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/27/some-advice-on-women-in-combat-from-a-female-veteran/ ” I can meet the male standard. I would love to have been in the infantry. And I still think it will be an unmitigated disaster to incorporate women into combat roles. I am not interested in risking men’s lives so I can live my selfish dream.”

    LAF- I would love for you to please read Colonel John W Ripleys testimony about women in combat. Please read it in it’s ENTIRETY and post it on here. It is so much more compelling than anything I’ve read thus far on the issue. Here is part of it
    http://www.tfp.org/tfp-home/fighting-for-our-culture/testimony-of-col-john-w-ripley-to-the-presidential-commission-on-the-assignment-of-women-in-the-armed-forces.html

    “As important as these issues are, I think they pale in the light of the protection of femininity, motherhood, and what we have come to appreciate in Western culture as the graceful conduct of women.

    We simply do not want our women to fight. We simply do not want them to be subjected to the indescribable, unless you have been there, the horrors of the battlefield……
    Now, I won’t tell you that women do not have courage. Every single mother has courage. I will not tell you that women do not have strength. Women have strength beyond description, and certainly strength of character. I will tell you, however, that this combination of strength, courage, and the suppression of emotion that is required on a daily, perhaps hourly, basis on the battlefield is rare indeed, rare in the species, and is not normally found in the female.

    Now, does that offend you? I’m sorry. This is simply an observation. Can women fight? Yes, they can. Can they fight in the conditions of the battlefield of which I am familiar, and the cohesiveness of the unit, and can they add to that cohesiveness? I don’t think so. Should they do this? Hell, no! Never.

    What is the purpose of it? Why should they? For the self aggrandizement of a few? Less than one-half of one percent who want to climb this ladder of promotion, is that a good reason, good enough to send our daughters, our sisters, our mothers off to the stinking filth of ground combat? And if you think so—and when I say “you,” I refer to the American public—if you think so, then you’re different from me. God knows, you’re different from me.

    If you think women have a so-to-speak right to grovel in this filth, to live in it just because someone above them, senior to them, wants to be promoted, then, my God, what has happened to the American character and the classical idea, western idea, of womanhood?”

    I don’t know how anyone can read that and still think women should be in combat.

  23. Jenn84 says:

    Wile E., I agree with most of your words, but you are incorrect to think that women as a whole can’t endure it.

  24. Jenn84 says:

    Or rather, that no woman can.

  25. Jenn84 says:

    No Bartley, I didn’t misunderstand anything, but thanks. Again I’ll say, women in infantry would be a terrible imbalance for many involved, but there are other positions where capability is key and femininity does not need protecting, nor does motherhood apply to them all.

  26. Maddie says:

    While I agree that most women are unsuited to the military I disagree that no women are suited to it. Piper leads us to history, saying that men will not follow women. What about Joan of Arc? Queen Elizabeth? Eleanor of Aquitaine? Yes, they are the exceptions, but Churchill and Edison were held up as examples of how quitting school can be a tool for success and these are also the exceptions. Some women are suited to battle and leadership. What do we do with them while supporting the majority at home?

  27. Maddie says:

    What about Deborah in the Bible, with her house-husband?

  28. Mekenna says:

    “Behold, your troops
    are women in your midst.
    The gates of your land
    are wide open to your enemies;
    fire has devoured your bars. ”
    (Nahum 3:13)

    The warriors of Babylon have ceased fighting;
    they remain in their strongholds;
    their strength has failed;
    they have become women;
    her dwellings are on fire;
    her bars are broken.
    (Jer. 51:30)

    Obviously, a nation that had women in battle was considered WEAK.

  29. Deborah didn’t have a house-husband–that’s nowhere in the text. She was a “mother in Israel” and a prophetess at a time when Israel “did evil in the sight of the Lord.” She sat beneath a tree (the “palm of Deborah”–implying that it was on her own property) where people would come to her for judgment. Men were such cowards in those days that they refused to go into battle even when God spoke through Deborah, guaranteeing their victory. This was an indictment of the men of the day–not an endorsement of women leading men into battle.

  30. Queen Elizabeth and Eleanor of Aquitaine (while both very intelligent and powerful women) never went onto the battlefield in the line of fire. We don’t extol Joan of Arc’s actions. They were a rebuke to the cowards of her day, but we don’t send young women or children into battle just because men are cowardly. If we turn exceptions into rules, then we negate the entire argument. You can’t have a military that says, “Okay, some exceptional women can lead us into war, but the rest of you can’t apply.” Once you’ve conceded that women can stand in the line of fire, you’ve given up the argument against putting women in harm’s way. What, exactly, are we defending when every single person (male or female) can go to war and take a bullet or lose limbs to a bomb? This truly stretches back to our shift from defensive war (where men go out to protect homes and families) to offensive, undeclared “actions” in nations that are not a direct threat to us. The “War on Terror” is not a real war–it is an excuse for the military-industrial complex to grow and send people into harm’s way. The results have been devastating to both men and women, and perhaps the deadliest result is our shrugging at women having limbs blown off and encouraging men to turn a blind eye instead of rising to defend women and children.

  31. Jenn84 says:

    I disagree-some military action was vital after 9/11, whether every action taken was right or not. I don’t believe women belong in battle nearly as often as men, but they are not children, i.e. mentally more innocent and altogether more precious than men. Joan of Arc was not a rebuke to men, and while other women in battle might be, Deborah’s position as a judge was not either. Men have and often will follow a woman-leader when she is where she needs to be, but war is not by any means a woman’s forte.

  32. Independent says:

    Great discussion and topic, to clarify for wileE and mrsbartley I have this to say.

    What I mean is that I am not going to risk my life for just any woman just because its a she. If she is family or a loved one, yeah.

    I volunteered to serve in the Navy when I was 18 years old. I joined the Navy gladly in the footsteps of three generations of men in my family. I love the Navy and the U.S., i left the navy with honors, and no regrets. I didn’t join the military because of “protecting just women”.

    I would honestly hate to see women die in a war but perhaps it is a sacrifice that needs to be made to turn this country around, wake people up and say enough is enough so they actually fight for change rather than just type for it.

    I think most of us here really want to see this country in better health, one that respects men and women. There is a lot more to fight for in this country than just Women by the way. It’s not the end of the country if women have to fight alongside men. Children matter far more than women or men and I don’t see much of a fight from men or women to stop the butcher of so many little ones over 40 years.

    I think this is a great website and it is refreshing to see men and women of faith hope and pray for a more Christian life and mate.

    I would like to add, if people are hoping for God to save America or for a more Christian America, don’t waste your time. I’m convinced Jesus doesn’t care about America, he just cares about you. We have to save America, men and women together.

  33. Jenn84 says:

    God cares about every country, Independent.

  34. Jenn84 says:

    Mekenna, those passages are speaking of men acting like the average woman, not troops that had actual WOMEN in them.

  35. a.woollends says:

    I’m a little late on this, but I came in here just looking around for some stuff regarding women in combat.

    Mrs. Chancey, if I may; there are examples of women killing others in the Bible; are these just historical references, or are they sanctions for women in combat? It seems unbelievably stupid to me to see liberal Christians raise their boys to not hit their little girls, and then send them off to kill others or be killed. Some kind of loopy logic and reasoning exists there.

    Nevertheless, I am curious about the theological argument. What do ya’ll have to say about this?

    ~Alex

  36. Well, if a man breaks into your house to attack your family and you are the only adult there, you definitely defend yourself and your children. The Bible doesn’t put a gender distinction on self-defense or on doing away with an enemy who comes into your house (like Jael did). But that’s a far cry from putting women on the front lines or training our men to kill women. The Scriptures are clear: those eligible for combat are males over the age of 20. Women don’t march into battle unless there are serious problems in a nation. Our nation kills innocents in the womb and now says women are fair targets in battle. I think that speaks for itself, sadly.

Leave a Reply

Please note: Comment moderation is currently enabled so there will be a delay between when you post your comment and when it shows up. Patience is a virtue; there is no need to re-submit your comment.

You must be logged in to post a comment.