Ed Rasimus wrote:

[snipped for brevity]

There are clearly problems at the school, but I don't think it is
productive to seek simple solutions. Some of the problems are
unquestionably the result of failed oversight. Other factors are the
integration of women into a predominently male culture. There are
always going to be neanderthals who will resist the progress of
bringing women into a warrior ethic. It's taken twenty-five years to
bring women into pilot training in the USAF, then several more years
to get them eligible for combat crew positions, then more years to get
them accepted as meeting the standard for those jobs. Now, they've
performed adequately in combat roles in a couple of actual shooting
engagements and their acceptance is nearly complete.

All true, but not everyone who resists the progress of bringing women
in a warrior ethic are "neanderthals." I'm all for women being trained
to fly high tech equipment in combat...as long as they're also being
trained to fight alongside the men on the ground (as go-gettum
warriors -- not merely support personnel like Jessica Lynch). It takes
three times longer to train a SEAL or special forces operative as it
does a fighter pilot but we don't see any women SEALS, Rangers,
Delta Force, etc. The only reason the USAF and USN are training
women to fly airplanes is simply because flying an F-18 or A-10
doesn't require the physical attributes required to be an effective
warrior on the ground. They can't legislate physical strength (they
can only bitch to God for creating men and women unequal in the
strength department) but for political purposes they CAN train women
as pilots.

-Mike Marron