More evidence from M that the US military is stepping down as a military superpower, after surrendering to feminists – here. The US military is increasingly becoming an enormous job creation scheme for women.
A few excerpts from the article, starting with one about the US Air Force:
Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said last fall during a stop at Pearl Harbor that the Air Force is made up of about 20 percent women but said she wanted to increase that number, possibly to 30 percent.
Admiral Michelle Howard:
Howard said women make up about 46 percent of the civilian workforce, and studies by the Department of Labor have found that an organization achieves optimal performance when its workforce maintains at least 25 percent of whatever the minority sex might be.
‘Studies’ show that, do they? If anyone could direct me towards them, I’d be very grateful. My hunch is the ‘studies’ will relate to role modelling exercises carried out by ideologically-driven social psychologists. The idea that any conclusions could be applied to the military (or business, or any other field of activity) is patently ridiculous.
Admiral Michelle Howard:
Because the Navy is globally distributed, a higher percentage of women is needed overall if they are to be represented in greater numbers in ships around the world, she said.
“We’re going back and looking at the ships — all of them — and what percentage of women are on the ships. Over time we’ll modernize them to make sure we get to about 25 percent on each ship.”
Who’ll be paying the bulk of the huge bill for ‘modernizing’ the ships, increasing the female crew members at the cost of male crew members? American male taxpayers, of course.
Admiral Michelle Howard:
Historically, women in the service have filled more positions in particular occupations than others, she said.
“So, for example, if you look at the nurse corps officer community, it’s the men who are a minority in that community,” she said.
“What we want to do is make sure women are aware that there’s more out there than traditional jobs. There’s growth and opportunity across all the communities.
“We need women leadership just as we need male leadership in some of these communities.”
Hmm, Admiral Howard seems not to believe the Navy ‘needs’ more men in the nurse corps officer community. An oversight, I’m sure. She was then asked about women possibly entering the elite organisation Naval Special Warfare (NSW), including the SEALS.
Asked about overcoming a belief among some men that women aren’t physically up to the task of filling these elite combat positions, Howard said, “I can’t speak to the male perspective. I’m not a guy.”
‘I can’t speak to the male perspective. I’m not a guy.’ It’s worrying that the US Navy is promoting such ideologically-driven idiots to the rank of Admiral. The Russian and Chinese military staffs must be delighted.
It’s long been known that when a major conflict looms, pregnancy rates among women serving in the military rises sharply. And doubtless there will be many immaculate conceptions on board the ships. The ships will have to have midwives, maternity wards, creches… and when ships are hit by torpedoes or shells and are sinking, we can be sure the old cry will ring out:
Women and children first!
This lunacy is not, of course, confined to the US. British nuclear submarines are being modified at a cost of over £5 million apiece (£3.6 million paid by male taxpayers) to accommodate female sailors. Presumably when some of them become pregnant, they’ll be dropped off at a port at enormous cost and inconvenience to the military operation, flown back to the UK…
The supporter who pointed me to the US Navy story has long been very agitated about the problems which result from chivalry and gentlemanly behaviour, as well he might be. As we all should be. On this particular story, he comments:
Since apparently we assume that women’s peformance in the military is equal to men, why are they not aiming for 50% then? Why then doesn’t David Cameron make a target of 50% women in the military? If the government really believes in equality, it should aim for 50% across the board.
The problem is they all know it is baloney and they know such a Navy could not fight effectively, so they come up with cowardly percentages, where this will only put more stress on the 75% of male servicemen.
I am sick to my stomach of the gentlemanly perks extended to females in professional life.
The gentleman is unwittingly sinking the entire West with his confusion about what it means to be a gentleman. Men need to be told that a gentleman should treat women exceptionally, but only in private life, not in the workplace, because a workplace or the armed forces need fully capable individuals, not half baked losers who need a lesser burden, and then wait for the real workers to pick up the pieces for them. That is not what the word ”gentleman” means. That is what the word ”fool” means.
Good points, well made…
