She didn't need his protection...

Women putting on combat makeup

This just in. When women are killed in combat, the men who are responsible for their well-being and protection feel guilty.

He realized that his anguish was different: He felt guilty.

"I wonder sometimes if that's the depth of my grief because I always felt like I should be there to protect her, you know, as a father," Gordon says.

Of course, Spc. Brittany Gordon, with her body armor and rifle, didn't need his protection. And he was proud that she pushed limits for what women are doing in the military.

Still, he feels like he should have been able to do something to save her.

He could have, and he should have. He was fooled into thinking that "pushing limits" is always good. And so she died.

But he's not alone in believing this lie. Many in the church are unwilling to give his guilt the dignity it deserves, claiming that we have nothing to say to such men and women.

(With thanks to Clint.) Image credit: Israel Defense Forces

Joseph and his wife, Heidi, have two children, Tate and Eliza Jane. Joseph graduated from Vanderbilt University and Clearnote Pastors College. Joseph serves as pastor of Clearnote Church in Indianapolis, Indiana.

Tags: 

Comments

Worth repeating. JB quote: "He could have, and he should have. He was fooled into thinking that "pushing limits" is always good. And so she died."

This happens when men are killed, too. It is called Survivor Guilt.

Have you ever been in the armed forces?

I am a currently serving officer in the armed forces, and a prior enlisted soldier as well.  My periods of service have spanned a range of over 20 years in both conventional and unconventional warfighting units.  The push for women in combat roles has been purely agenda driven.  Everyone knows that they can't survive in sustained combat operations, but they haven't been put to that test yet, so the administration gets away with believing that a whole bunch of GI Janes will suddenly materialize and make good their hopes. 

The reality is that those FETs are not the ODA members leading the assault, they are a nearby follow on force.  She might get a thrill having bullets fly by, and might attempt to pull off a shot or two, but she's in no way leading a stack into a compound at night, or killing Taliban in hand to hand combat.  In fact, I've been on the ground when two very good and experienced men were killed because of a cherry female LT who wanted to be in an assault element.  She tripped a small IED, because she wasn't paying attention, getting two very fine Operators killed who had tried to come to her rescue when she was wounded.  All three were killed when they set off the pressure plates on the bridge that her lightweight body was unable to activate. 

I've also seen women working in the special operations community get put up against our Operators in combatives tournaments (for the sake of "equality") in the basement of the JFK Special Warfare Center and School, and every single time they get used as a mop.  I don't care how much crossfit she does or how many marathons she runs, she'll get destroyed every time.  It's embarrassing to her and everyone else watching a guy trying to go easy on her and she's still not even close to being a match.  God did not make men and women the same, and turning a blind eye to that will not change the reality.

It's a sin against our women (yes, I know this possessive way of stating the matter offends feminists everywhere), it's a failure of our culture, and it's the agenda of our adminstration.  But as one Operator I know said in discussion with me about this very issue, "They think they can handle it now, because we're going against unsophisticated fighters with weak frames.  Just wait 'til we're on the ground against an entity like Iran or North Korea with seriously trained ground forces who don't play around.  Somebody is going to experience a very unpleasant wakeup."

So, M. Karin, I can tell you (having been on three combat rotations myself) that survivor's guilt is just a side issue in this debate, and the least of our worries.  This decision will only cause unnecessary deaths and mission failures, and will continue to weaken the effectiveness and morale of an already demoralized military (not the least of which is also due the DADT/DOMA issues, also continuing to be pushed by this administration).

 

That's exactly right.  We're not paying the full price for the folly of women in operational positions because we've been playing the C team and where we've had complete air superiority. 

M. Karin, the point about survivors' guilt is well taken, but in the case of women dying in ordinary combat (as opposed to the suicide vest case here), the guilt should be worse for a very simple reason; we have no proof that women have shown they can make it as infantrymen.  In other words, the women put in combat so far have no more business there than I do on the offensive line of the Baltimore Ravens, or at the post for the Lakers.  Just as I would be completely overmatched physically....

Survivor's guilt is not a father feeling guilty for letting his daughter die to protect him. It is "a mental condition that occurs when a person perceives themselves to have done wrong by surviving a traumatic event when others did not." It is mostly irrational. 

This is not irrational at all. He (and we to a lesser degree) should have prevented it. 

Add new comment