Due to the move of the blog to Wordpress posts from Jan 2012 onward will have commenting disabled (when I remember to do it)
Cheers - AE

Wednesday, 27 May 2009

Girls with guns.

What's the problem? I'd have thought there's a whole DVD sub industry on the theme in the US. More seriously why waste time on periodic reviews of the issue because of EU diktats? The MoD should simply say that these are the physical and mental* criteria for each job in the armed forces and and absolutely anyone who meets the criteria, contents of underpants notwithstanding, can do that job. It's not a tricky decision. I know the feminazis will immediately get their ladycocks in a knot because the criteria will often discriminate against women. Yeah, true, but the criteria for being a beach lifeguard discriminates against me because I'm a shit swimmer, and you know what? I got over it. My wife can't get things of very high shelves as well as I can because I'm several inches taller, and you know what? She's over that too. Hardly a problem as she just gets me to do it or stands on a chair, but you get the picture - we all have physical and mental* differences that make us better at some things and worse at others. And in general men tend to be bigger and stronger than women, and to have more endurance to boot. There's a big overlap where women towards the bigger/stronger end of the scale are tougher than men at the smaller/weaker end of the scale. Also many women can no doubt train to a similar level of strength and endurance as many men, which will blur the differences even further. But for fuck's sake, the needs of the role are far more important than the abilities of some of the potential applicants, and it makes no sense to lower the bar so more of a certain sort of applicant can get in. If an Army tank mechanic has to pick up a certain weight quite often the criteria has to exclude everyone who can't, and unfortunately that will be more women than men.

It might perhaps help if the MoD changed the way it looked at applicants. Instead of recognizing two sexes, along with however many religions and ethnicities, perhaps they should begin by dividing all applicants into one of three categories: soldiers, sailors and air force. Whether a soldier, sailor or, for want of a gender neutral term, airman gets cranky for just a few days a month or most mornings is of far less importance than whether they aim a rifle accurately, drop bombs on target, know how the engine of a destroyer works, can fix a tank, fly a helicopter, set up a field kitchen, build a runway under fire, or do whatever it is that particular one of the thousands of different military jobs requires.

Of course I have no expertise and not a lot of knowledge here, and it could be that there are genuine reasons that I don't know about to rule women out from certain military jobs. Would they get reproductively fucked up by working closely on reactors in nuclear subs for example? I have absolutely no idea, but if it could be shown that medically there's an issue there I'd say sorry ladies but that's probably not for you, though even then if a woman really wanted to do it (and signed a waiver - probably a necessity in these litigious times) then what the hell. Up to her. So Defence Departments of the world, I have this to say. Don't change the job requirements for anything, but if the girls can do it then let them. I'm all for it personally as Mrs Exile looks goddamn sexy with a shotgun - the thought of her in an F/A18 .... ooo, I think I'm going to need a lie down.

* I emphasize "differences", not superiority/inferiority. According to a book on our shelf  there are physical difference between male and female brains. The bottom line is that the sexes tend, and yes that does mean it's a generalization again, tend to have variations in what mental skills they're good at. Men, it is claimed, do not multi task as well as women, and looking at the way so many women seem able to effortlessly organize... well, practically anything, personally I believe it. On the other hand women tend not to be quite so hot at the 3 dimensional spatial awareness stuff, which is apparently why some turn maps around when navigating for their bemused partners. Probably this means that women should be the generals and decide what needs to get blown up, but leave throwing the actual hand grenades to men. Unless it involves dropping bombs since flying and fighting is multi tasking again. That might also mean that whoever we had a war with we'd be friends with again by the time their children's birthdays came around. Or something.
Related Posts with Thumbnails