Max Boot believes Republicans "are fighting a losing battle" over DADT:

To my mind, the most powerful argument in favor of repeal is that pretty much all of the arguments made against admitting openly gay service personnel were made against admitting women. Indeed, admitting women was probably more of a cultural shift than admitting gays because gays already serve. Given that the vast majority of people are heterosexual, it stands to reason that only in a small minority of cases will there be issues related to homosexual love and attraction. Putting a small number of women into a hitherto all-male community created many more possibilities for social tensions, with the added problem of pregnancy to boot. (At least gays and lesbians don’t get pregnant accidentally.)

John Vecchione objects:

First, women make up less than 15% of the armed forces.  This is after 25 years of endless ideologically driven support for their inclusion. 

They are still barred from ten percent of military positions that are combat driven.  Boot makes a bad logical error when he states that we are now at our highest readiness.  That may be or may not be true, but did women hurt or help getting there and, more importantly, would we be at a higher peak of readiness otherwise?  I will never forget the Supreme Court’s forcing VMI and the Citadel to accept females even though it was acknowledged by all sides and litigants that their inclusion would require lowering physical standards and other incidents of service.  From the ordeal of  Jessica Lynch, to a single mother’s being deployed, there are a host of negatives to the role of women in the military that the public has not had to either digest or confront.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.