B.P. Terpstra
In Australia, a “debate” is raging. Should women fight alongside manly men on the frontlines?
The left-leaning APP reports: “Prime Minister Julia Gillard has voiced strong support for women taking on military combat roles to allow them to fight and if necessary die for their country.”
As well, the APP uncritically reports: “Australia lagged behind Canada and perhaps New Zealand.”
But that’s a Labor talking point – not a fact. Who fears Canada? Who fears New Zealand? In military terms, these allegedly progressive countries can’t even defend themselves.
Also, in recent token-related history the Air Force Times (U.S.) reports: “Air Force women made history two weeks ago when they flew the first all-female combat sortie in Afghanistan.”
Still: “Some airmen cried foul, calling it a stunt by the Air Force to flaunt its progressiveness during Women’s History Month. Others praised the milestone, pointing out the service has had female fighter pilots for nearly 20 years.”
Let’s just say they were helped along.
Late last year too, the Guardian, UK, reported that mixed-gender teams in close combat roles carry “far reaching and grave consequences.” After the history-making Ministry of Defence review: “Officials made clear that the concern was male soldiers paying more – perhaps too much – attention to a wounded female soldier than others at a risk to his own life.”
And, if a Labor-friendly paper concludes that male soldiers don’t pay more attention to wounded female soldiers? I’ll hang it on my toilet paper roller, for sure.
Israel’s myth
Again, no dictator seriously fears New Zealand. But what about role model Israel – often cited by antiwar feminists of all people?
At first, I assumed that Israel was an exception to the rule, an example of a tough-as-nails military where combat-fighting women happily integrated.
No more.
Indeed, this romantic idea can’t be sustained, when one critically examines the impolite evidence.
Take the Israel Defense Forces’ Chief Rabbi, Brig.-Gen. Avichai Ronsky. “The idea of girls going into tanks or into paratrooper battalions is an impracticable one in my opinion and could hurt the combat array,” he argued in 2007. So, curiously therefore, debates are still raging, in a role model nation, of all places?
Moreover, the hard science of biology has been sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. Queerly, “every single study which shows a clear difference of 20% to 40% in stamina, carrying of loads, oxygen consumption and other parameters which are necessary for prolonged warfare has disappeared or been made to disappear from public view” noted Dr. Gabi Avital.
Reports about women marching 13 kilometers sound impressive, until you hear of men marching 60 kilometers. And what about the combat ladies who “scale” a climbing wall with the support of a bench, unlike the men folk? Or buried instances of women carrying less bullets?
The military historian Martin Van Crevelt also understands that many Israeli “combat women” are kept out of combat situations, as the Second Lebanon War (aka real life) demonstrated.
Alas, PM Julia Gillard believes.
Alas, PM Julia Gillard believes.
Lowering standards
Lowering standards to make women feel “equal” isn’t equality. But this is what happens when the affirmative action police and their romantic enablers interfere.
Unlike the upper middleclass feminist Eva Cox, real men are trying to get on with the job of defending Australia, and shouldn’t have to carry extra bullets, provide benches to help combat ladies “scale” climbing walls, or walk extra kilometers, while their female colleagues recover from sit-ups.
Hiding biological facts to make women feel “equal” isn’t equality either – but an example of denial. What are the chances of men (a) being raped and (b) falling pregnant on the battlefield too?
As Bob Ellis, a supporter of the Australian Labor Party put it, “So women, it seems, are tough enough for service on any battlefront but not tough enough to be peeked at in the shower. For the latter they need compassionate leave, counselling in depth, back pay and five parliamentary enquiries.”
The true dinosaurs here are feminists, with little to no knowledge of medical realities. Eva Cox. Julia Gillard. Guess what? Men don’t have periods outside the Oprah show.
Nor should we play pretend peacemakers. Sweden’s military is also a joke. Or as The Local explained, “The bras issued to Swedish female military conscripts easily catch fire and are prone to coming undone, making them inappropriate for the battlefield, claims a conscripts’ rights group.”
Now they’re campaigning for “suitable apparel for women” (an impossible task).
To date, no manly men have made bra-related complaints.