General Laches would have put it she was “…willing to remain in the ranks and
ward off the enemies and not run…” (Plato2 100), per se.
Non-Combat Examples of Courage
There are many situations that could be spoken about to display non-combative
examples of courage. For example, many women become pregnant without the
resources material and or psychological means to cope with such an event and yet
courageously trod through the experience. Women who abort as a result of their
immediate circumstances experience much pressure yet do so with an overabundance
of courage. Both experience fear that is not attributable to phobias. The
single mother faces the persecution of church groups, peers, and the
disappointment of the parents. She can be perceived as not living up to the
expectations that have been set upon her by society. A young woman that chooses
to abort the fetus does so knowing that there will be protesters, religious
zealots, and possibly a health risk, keeping in mind that any procedure is
capable of going wrong. Fear is further coddled because of the huge moral
debate, which must increase trauma, as well as the taxation that the procedure
has on the body. It is hugely stressful physically and psychologically.
Surely, courage is needed to make decisions in circumstances such as these. The
act of giving birth is also one that requires great courage. Historically, this
ordeal was extremely risky because of crude medical technology as Hinman
recognizes (341-342).
Women also partake in military roles traditionally exclusive to men. The Red
Army contained female regiments, as did the Vietnamese army. Female fighter
pilots are a valuable part of some modern Air and Naval Forces, amongst others,
all of which employ woman with in their ranks. Our Air Force now allows female
combat bomber pilots to fly in wartime situations. Most police forces and fire
departments have women assigned to front-line duty. Courage is now equally
available to women, in consideration of this, even if the Aristotelian
definition of such is adhered to. Perhaps women, because of the sex roles they
historically held, require another facet to be added to the definition of
courage. This addition may make the acts of courage exhibited by woman more
obvious.
Courage and Sex-role Stereotypes
The implications of how to act in order to display the virtue of courage appear
to lean toward male sex role stereotypes. Men who have been socialized
accordingly have displayed the stereotypes over centuries. In the early 21st
century, in order to attain gender equality, it seems as if females have to
display courageous behaviors according to how men have defined them, rather than
modifying how one should act in order to manifest such. Historically, it
appears that Hinman’s definition of courage is applicable to how men have been
defining and displaying courage. It may be argued that the traditional role of
woman in the family and society is one that has been directed by men resulting
in the suppression of real female freedom and ability, and thus female
oppression.
MacIntyre proposes that virtues are based on sources, gathered through
historical perspectives, allowing society to retrospect and then endeavor to
find standards of excellence based on such. These standards encourage
individuals to behave according to moral perspectives found in areas such as in
popular culture. Thus, different genders could have very different thoughts
about what is an issue of courage and, also have different perspectives on how
to deal with such issues (Csongradi).
Plurality Ethics
The discussion above highlights the relevance of Hinman’s plurality ethics. He
bases his pluralism on four principles. First is a principal of understanding
through a sincere desire to comprehend variance; we must embrace different
expressions of virtues regarding how such are defined by cultures and
sub-cultures. Second, by acceptance of the validity of different manifestations
of courage as a virtue in different sexes, diversity in such can be recognized
and Hinman’s principal of tolerance will be accommodated. Although, tolerance
appears to have a slightly negative connotation in that it implies an attitude
of putting up with something. Here, a principle of acknowledgement is possibly
more appropriate. Third, acceptance of multiplicity in the expression of courage
endorses its non-gender specific nature. Because courage is a virtue,
validating diversity in the expression of such will likely reinforce its
proliferation and, will apply to the principal of standing up against evil, and
perhaps help extinguish the vice of cowardice. Fourth, Hinman’s principle of
fallibility is relevant because, it has been the implication that a traditional
male conception of the dangerousness aspect in courage may be subtly lacking in
points of emotion and responsibility. Importantly, the realization of this
emotional facet in perception of danger will validate not only difference
feminism, but also related experiences faced by men. Today, although perhaps to
a decreasing extent, we live in a society wherein emotionality as a part of how
men experience fear and danger, and thus display courage, is inclined to be
discounted.
Conclusion
It is apparent that courage is not a gender-specific virtue. In all aspects, for
courage to be expressed, males and females appear to be equally equipped. Both
sexes experience fear and are capable of assessing dangerous situations,
accurately or erroneously. Both sexes are involved in roles, which regularly
necessitate courage. When Plato wrote Republic he was not far off base as to
how the future would turn out. His ideas of a society that would share the
duties of the society with all of the members, not differentiating between men
and women, have been realized, for the most part, here in the United States. As
he suggested “Both men and women have the same natural ability for guarding a
community, and it’s just that women are innately weaker than men” (Plato1 168).
Nevertheless, Mariner maintains that there is a problem in not letting women
serve in combat situations based on loose notions of virtue and myths. She
sustains the belief that the only reason women are still segregated from the
military is because “…war is that of the warrior-protector: men protect
women, women don’t protect men” (Mariner 56). She concludes by saying, “A
person’s sex is irrelevant” (Mariner 61); and it certainly is in the matter of
courage and virtue.
Works Cited
Agonito, Rosemary. History of Ideas on Woman. New York; Capricorn Books.
1977.
Ahealthyme.com. Sleep Aids During Pregnancy.
18 Nov. 2001.
Aitkenson, R. L. et al. Introduction to Psychology (8th Ed.). San Diego;
Harcourt, 1983.
Csongradi, Carolyn. Factors Influencing The Way In Which Decisions Are Made:
Why Teach
Bioethics in the Classroom?.
. 15 Nov.
2001. 18 Nov. 2001.
Gardner, Paul. ed. New International Encyclopedia of Bible Characters: The
complete
Who’s Who in the Bible. Grand Rapids; Zondervan. 1995.
Hinman, Lawerence. Ethics: A Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory (2nd Ed.).
San
Diego; Harcourt Brace College Publishers. 1998.
New Revised Standard Version: Study Bible. San Francisco; Harper Collins.
1989.
Mariner, Rosemary. A soldier is a soldier. JFQ. Winter 1993-1994.
20 Nov. 2001.
Plato1. Republic. Trans. Robin Waterfield. New York; Barnes and Nobles Books.
1993.
Plato2. Laches: On Manly Courage; A Study of Plato’s Laches. Trans. Walter
T.
Schmid. Carbondale; Southern Illinois University Press. 1992.