‘Gender Integration’ = FAIL

Posted on Comments

This is both hysterically funny and pathetically sad:

The Army colonel who wrote an internal email suggesting public affairs officers use photos of “average-looking women” when they need to illustrate stories about female soldiers has stepped down as the leader of an Army study on gender integration.
Army spokesman George Wright confirmed on Saturday that Col. Lynette Arnhart had agreed to step aside from the Training and Doctrine Command study she was leading.
In addition, Wright said, Col. Christian Kubik, a public affairs officer at TRADOC, was suspended for his involvement in the email chain.
“In order to protect the integrity of the ongoing work on gender integration in the Army, Col. Lynette Arnhart agreed to step down as the gender integration study director,” Wright said in a statement. “Concurrently, TRADOC suspended Col. Christian Kubik from his position as the public affairs officer pending the outcome of an investigation.”

I agree with Ann Althouse that this was a silly “scandal” — two military careers wrecked because of an internal e-mail — but the larger problem remains: MEN AND WOMEN ARE DIFFERENT.

Insofar as they are different, they are not equal, because equality implies fungibility — sameness, so that one may be substituted for the other — and therefore the attempt to equalize things which are not the same is foredoomed to failure. What inevitably occurs in these kinds of social-engineering experiments is a lot of official make-believe, in which people are required to pretend that the failing policy is actually a success. Telling the truth becomes a firing offense.

The people who are ramming these policies through the Pentagon in the name of “gender integration” should be ashamed of themselves for perpetrating such a fraud. It is a dishonest and dangerous policy that is harmful to America’s national security.

 


26 comments

  1. I also recommend using photos of male troops on the upper end of the body mass index so female and gay troops won’t objectify them either.

    (And it is a cheap slander that my C.O. once threatened to stencil a bumper number on my ass and bivouac me in the motor pool. Hardly any truth to that at all.)

  2. “Army spokesman George Wright confirmed on Saturday that Col. Lynette Arnhart had agreed to step aside…..”

    WTF is this “agreed to step aside” crap?

    Is this what our military has become?
    Are we to believe that instead of removing an incompetent officer from their leadership position, the Army asked if her if she agreed that it’s best that she step aside?
    Are we supposed to believe that the United States Army actually gave the Colonel a say in the decision to can her?
    As I read this phony press release I could help but wonder what would have happened if the good Colonel had disagreed with the suggestion and said that she was staying.
    Of course, we all know that there was no so-called agreement involved. She was told that she F_cked up, was unfit for duty and it was time to go.
    This silliness just serves to highlight how deeply entrenched political correctness has become in our military services. It is such that:
    1. A senior Army officer given the mission of accomplishing a study gets shit-canned for expressing an opinion that may or may not have proved to be absolutely correct because it might be perceived to be offensive to someone.
    2. Progressives have our military services balls in such a tight grip that they have to issue statements like this that make the military seem like a kinder and gentler place so as not to offend the permanent grievance establishment that lurk around every corner these days.
    3. Two career officers have just had their careers ruined for the sake of political correctness.

    It’s a travesty, it’s a shame and it sucks!
    ( yeah I know that’s not a very eloquent conclusion to my rant but shit like this gets my temper up :{ )

  3. Maybe the “pretty women” are perceived as being heterosexual and this could hurt thomebody’th feewingth…

  4. The Party stooges do have our military’s balls in a vise, wit the ultimate goal of turning the Army Rangers, the Marines, and the SEALs into a rainbow coaltion of dykes, faggots, and metrosexual “males.” the real purpose is to destroy the war fighting ability of our forces.

  5. If she had just worded it “average women” and left out the “-looking” part, she’d have been fine.

    The whole “lookism” thing diverts the attention of the Feministas from their true love, killing babies. Never interrupt them in the midst of their bloodlust.

  8. When I think of women in the military, the legendary “women of the IDF” come to mind…

    Lately, I’ve struggled through the video game “Battlefield 4” on ye olde Xbox — “Hannah” is a right proper squaddie through (most of) the campaign, but the brief cinematic encounter with the butch “Major Greenland” is a bit disturbing… I hope that character wasn’t intended to be typical or representative!

  9. One of my many concerns now is what will become of the Army’s First Sergeants’ saying: “Thars gone be a formation at 1730 hours. Ever’ swangin’ richard’s gone be thar.”

  10. Interesting that the military is being pushed into “gender integration” (nice bogus parallel with racial civil rights, there) while the NFL is not.

    Come to think of it, neither is the heavy construction industry, or the oil patch.

  14. That’s because the NFL, heavy construction et.al. operate in a reality based world and are not as easily pushed around by intellectually dishonest idealogues.

Comments are closed.