Soldiers are from Mars, journalists are from Venus

With few notable exceptions, Canadian journalists don't understand how soldiers, sailors, and airmen see themselves, their jobs, and their function in the world. So while it saddens and frustrates me to see stories like this that assume a flight from adversity rather than the equally plausible quest for purpose in one's life, I understand why it happens.

I understand the phenomenon, because I've experienced it myself and had to really examine my own prejudices as a result. You see, my brother-in-law is a Catholic priest. Because so much of who I am is invested in being the best husband and father I can be, I find it hard to comprehend my brother-in-law's vocation.

But I do understand the concept of a calling, as opposed to a job. And my wife's brother has shown time and again that the concept of calling, of service, of duty, is central to who he is. In fact, I understand his calling as a chaplain in the Army Reserve far better than his calling as a priest, but it's all really part and parcel of the same character trait, isn't it?

This is a rather serendipitous way of getting to my point, which follows: those who make their living reporting the news would do well to read remarks like this and try to understand that not only are they sincere and heartfelt, they aren't evidence of emotional instability, lack of maturity, or simplemindedness. Rather, they are emblematic of a worldview substantially different than that of the average ink-stained wretch or pretty talking head:

You know mom, what my job is. I will be going and I will be fighting and it's very dangerous. And the chances of my getting hurt or killed are great. And you have to know that this is what I want to do. This is my life, and this is my job, and know that if it happens, I go doing my job. [Babbler's emphasis]

He's not alone in that sentiment. In fact, it's more than just common, it's endemic in the military.

Does that mean that military service isn't a more practical and less philosophical life-preserver tossed to Canadians growing up in poorer conditions? Of course not. But even the most cynical pragmatist I ever met in the CF - a classmate from Newfoundland who would have had a tough row to hoe if he hadn't been accepted at RMC - understood that there was a covenant between him and the CF: he would serve to the best of his abilities, and they would clothe and feed and educate and pay him so that when his term of service was done, he would go on to a far better life than he would have without that quid pro quo. Heaven knows he found military life grating, but he also embraced his duty while wearing the uniform. It would be exceedingly rare to find someone serving in the CF who didn't understand that dynamic: whatever one is getting out of the arrangement, it's a given that something has to be put in. That's not naivete, it's a conscious and considered choice.

The level of commitment this requires is heady stuff. For many service members, it's intoxicating and addictive. Once they've tasted the unifying purpose, the fierce loyalty, the dramatic sense of doing something important, and most of all the intimate cameraderie of military life, a nine-to-fiver for those people would be unbearably bland and colourless.

A career in the Canadian Forces (or in the volunteer military of any western nation, for that matter) clearly isn't for everyone. But the idea that service and all its trappings could be such a siren call to those in uniform shouldn't invoke disbelief and a search for 'the real reason' from any observer, most especially the press. Just because such a calling wouldn't be your choice, doesn't mean it's not a reasonable one for someone else.