| Opinion/The Review

Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Harming unit cohesion

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or

Daily Photo Galleries

Letter to the Editor
Wednesday, Feb. 6, 2013, 9:01 p.m.

The Obama administration's Pentagon has reversed policy on assigning women to land combat operations by taking incremental steps to implement the recommendations of the Military Leadership Diversity Commission.

The psychological aim of training men for combat is to develop in them a sense of the mission, of being part of a dedicated whole. The bonds fostered among men in combat may be seen, at their best, in the television series “Band of Brothers.”

This “unit cohesion” brings with it a sense of mutual trust, teamwork, individual sacrifice and determination to jointly complete the mission. It is a unique bond of male friendship; comrades-in-arms have an intergroup relationship that few other social units will ever know or enjoy. Just ask any veteran.

Now, what happens when we introduce young women into that mix? Immediately, new attachments arise — binary attachments between men and women who are at the same age developmentally, when such attachments represent a powerful drive. All the emotions so vividly displayed in soap operas are at work, writ large: love and sex, growing attachments, split allegiances, rivalries, jealousy, betrayal, rage and revenge, to name just a few. As binary attachments grow, unit cohesion is weakened; competing values bring inevitable conflict in small groups.

Placing healthy young men and women in their sexual prime together in close quarters has already had predictable results. The Pentagon's decision would be just another loss for common sense if it weren't so important.

Louis Chandler


Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.



Show commenting policy

Most-Read Letters

  1. Updated paving needed
  2. Data misrepresented
  3. ‘Normal’ pitfalls
  4. WQED beyond repair?
  5. Pipelines to the future
  6. Can’t believe ATI statements
  7. The pope & child abuse
  8. Good for seniors
  9. Pope & peace
  10. Honoring a brother
  11. Where’s the anger?