"Wars may be fought with weapons, but they are won by men. It is the spirit of the men
who follow and the man who leads that gains the victory."

George S. Patton, Jr.

Co-ed Combat:
New Evidence that Women Shouldn't Fight the Nation's Wars
By
Kingsley Browne


In his latest book, "CO-ED COMBAT: New Evidence that Women Shouldn't Fight the Nation's Wars." (Sentinel- November 2007 -$21.95), Wayne State University Law Professor Kingsley Browne
makes a striking and controversial argument against women in combat.

While many advocates of the growing trend toward women in combat view it as progress toward a better, "gender neutral" military, Browne's scholarly argument challenges and belies the assumptions of feminists that women in combat roles are a natural progression, and suggests they are indeed posing a substantial threat to our military effectiveness.

Women have served in combat aviation and on warships for over a decade, but now some are calling for the sexual integration of the ground-combat arms of infantry, armor, and artillery as well. "The goal of doing the right thing," says Browne, "has too often prevailed over the goal of doing the smart thing-forging the strongest military possible."

Since 2002 more than 170,000 female troops have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan and more than seventy of those women have died. While that is a small fraction of U.S. casualties, those deaths exceed the number of military women who died in Korea, Vietnam, and the Gulf War combined.

In CO-ED COMBAT Browne argues that based on research in anthropology, biology, history, psychology, sociology, and law, as well as the writings in military memoirs, the policy of women in combat will contribute to a marginally weakened military force and create a risk of disastrous consequences for our nation. And it will be paid for with the lives of our sons and daughters.

The push for sexual integration of combat forces rests on one of the central dogmas of twentieth century social science, that men and women are largely interchangeable and that any differences that do exist are primarily , if not exclusively, a result of socialization. A burgeoning body of scientific evidence now reveals there are fundamental differences between the sexes and brings into question feminist assumptions such as:

. Has warfare really changed so much as to reverse the almost unanimous history of all-male armed forces?
. Are men and women really equivalent in combat skills, even leaving aside physical strength?
. Do female troops respond to traditional types of motivations?
. Can the bonds of unit cohesion form in a co-ed military unit?
. Can an all-volunteer Army afford to reject women?

Whether you are a conservative or a liberal, CO-ED COMBAT is sure to elicit a passionate response.