Its all pretty hypocritical really...

I am told that in the US this is the standard to be used:

... This they do by means of an ethos that stresses discipline, morale, good order and unit cohesion. Anything that threatens the nonsexual bonding that lies at the heart of unit cohesion adversely affects morale, disciple and good order, generating friction and undermining this ethos.
Does the introduction of females into combat units and the military in general comply with the above?

Sorry... forgot to say that that quote relates to gays in the military.

So I ask again... does the introduction of females into combat units and the military in general comply with the above?

Surely there needs a look into this following situation?

Pregnancy during Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom

Hang on a minute with 75% became pregnant after arrival in theater what ever happened to this nonsexual bonding ?

Then we have this one:

Serving U.S troops could face prison if they fall pregnant while active

And then we look at this:

US military sex attack reports up

Among the report's findings:

* There were 2,923 reported sexual assaults in the 2008 fiscal year, up from 2,688 in 2007

* There 251 incidents in combat areas, including 141 in Iraq and 22 in Afghanistan

* Investigations took place in 2,763 cases. In 832 cases, action was taken, including 317 courts-martial, a rise of 38%

* Of the 6.8% of women and 1.8% of men who indicated they had experienced unwanted sexual contact, the majority - 79% of women and 78% of men - chose not to report it.
Perhaps the following website /book will provide a point of departure for this discussion?