Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
Yes, and that sexual tension extends to females in the military in general and combat units specifically.

The problems are hidden or under reported on the pretext that everything is just fine and dandy with the introduction of females into the military. The truth is being hidden.

As much as the Canadians may claim "there is no problem" they have recently lost a brigadier-general and a colonel who couldn't keep their pants zipped. I'm sure if one dug a little deeper one would find more evidence that all is not as well as claimed. For example disciplinary 'charges have risen by as much as 62 per cent over an eight-year period' (of the Canadian deployments to Afghanistan) and that includes "sexual" offences.

OK so thats the naughty stuff. On the heterosexual consensual side we see them banging away like belt-fed mortars with the resulting problems to the services caused by pregnancies. See here and here and elsewhere.

So clearly the introduction of females into the military has brought a number of specific problems which go beyond my principle argument of the introduction of sexual tension.

The same will be the case when gays can openly serve in the military. More of the same.
Of course, the other interpretation would be:

1) The rules are being applied even to BGs and Colonels, rather than senior officers being allowed to get away with violations. Presumably that's a good thing.

2) The increased number of disciplinary charges could be a function of lower tolerance and tightened-up unit discipline in wartime.

Moreover, none of the links above address the human resource gains of enlarging the recruit pool beyond heterosexual males, nor for that matter the larger political and normative issues around discrimination.

In any case, it is a done deal and has been for years. Given the very strong support in both the Canadian Forces and Canadian society for the full inclusions of women, gays, and lesbians in the military, there is zero chance of the policies being changed (which would be unconstitutional in any event).