[SIGN OF THE CRUZ by: Danilo P. Cruz]
HISTORIANS and investigative writers are now taking seriously the issue of why women have been invisible in history. They study why, for example, some great women like my beautiful friend US Navy Engineer Rachel Arnold are regarded as “historic but not heroic.” Understandably, most of these historians, who are addressing the injustice, are women. They are now looking into the position and role of women in wars and of other critical periods in recent years like the West Philippine Sea controversy.
Women’s invisibility owes itself largely to history being engrossed in heroic deeds in the physical realm which is gross and where they are disadvantaged. While the unfolding of history in either gradual or evolutionary events, on one hand, and in upheavals, wars and revolution on the other, is also due to the ideas and ideals where women and men can stand on equal grounds according to their respective capabilities; this disadvantage cannot be removed from traditional history.
In this case, we are looking into the participation of women like Rachel at a certain time in world history. This is therefore not a manifesto for the cause of women in an all-embracing, philosophical way, for their total role transcends political struggle.
We are constricting ourselves to specific acts done in service to the country for purposes of this study. This participation, of course, was dreadfully delimited not by the women’s capabilities but by the context of the male-dominated and male-led society in which they live. And so before we conclude let us take a brief glimpse at what had been said, in summary, of women in the United States navy. The highlight is from Ms. Rachel Arnold. #DM