Why are today’s women in the military in some countries, unlike in the past? Were previous generations less licentious?
I suspect it’s because today’s wars are frequently for sport or other purposes. If the goal is defense, however, women are counterproductive.
Repeating the obvious (excerpt from an LRC article):
The camaraderie and esprit de corps in a military unit or a police unit is heavily dependent on shared risk. When women are exposed to the same degree of risk of life and death, this disrupts the military-protective function, which is unquestionably masculine. In this sense, the military is different from the free market, in which shared risk is economic. In the corporate world, men have no sense of obligation to protect women. They may be quite happy to put rival women out of business.
Second, women in general are not as strong physically as men are. A soldier in the field cannot rely on a woman with the same degree of confidence that he can rely on a man.
Third, society imposes on men a protective impulse with regard to women. A soldier in the field will tend to disobey orders in order to defend a woman in the ranks, when he would not be equally ready to disobey an order to protect another male. This threatens to disrupt the chain of command. This is a reason why homosexuality in the military has been universally condemned in the West and in most non-Western armies. A combatant may abandon a buddy to his fate when the battle plan requires it, but he may not abandon a sexual partner. Homosexuality reduces the predictability of battle plans.
Fourth, women are required to obey orders on threat of court martial, just as men are. This creates opportunities for men of higher rank to misuse their rank for sexual exploitation.
Fifth, there is another factor that is rarely discussed in public: female homosexuality. The primary characteristics of success in combat are masculine. This subsidizes the careers of those women who possess masculine characteristics. It rewards certain features of female homosexuality. The creation of same-sex sexual relationships within a military chain of command leads to exploitation by rank and also leads to problems of protective impulses under combat conditions, and to hierarchical favoritism in peacetime, both of which undermine military discipline.