Jack E. Kemp
There is a great article in American Thinker called "Women in Combat: Battling Nature, Battering Reality."
Here's a quote from the piece:
When I worked with children years ago, one of my students, an 11-year-old boy, guessed that the women's world record for the mile would be faster than the men's when a question about the matter was put to him. In the same vein, a respondent to one of my articles mentioned a young man she knew who opined that women and men should compete together in sports. When she informed him that this would eliminate athletic opportunities for women - boys' American high school records surpass women's world records - he was surprised that the gap between the sexes was so great. You may be surprised at a knowledge gap so great.
For a few decades now, children have been raised seeing women in combat. Movies and television shows have long featured masculinized female characters who talk, act, and fight like men - except when they're shown fighting even better and vanquishing men. If a show features a male hero, he almost invariably has to be balanced with a tough(er?) heroine.
Professional wrestling will now occasionally even show women grappling with men (yes, it's fake, but not to a seven-year-old). Kids also have equality dogma drummed into them; equality this and equality that, and the only departure from it is when they're exposed to entertainment that makes men appear weak or to specious science indicating female superiority. It is another example of how the left presents the young with a distorted picture of reality.
It's thus no surprise that people make poor decisions on policy affecting the sexes. We better understand the different roles of horses and dogs because we perceive their characteristic strengths and weaknesses; likewise, how can we understand what roles are suggested by the sexes' characteristic qualities if we blind ourselves to them?
END OF QUOTE
I wrote this comment of anecdotal evidence under the article:
A while ago I took an evening writing course with several NY liberals. One was a woman who had an advanced degree from a well known Ivy League college (not Columbia). In a private conversation, I asked her about the then-new story of the boy who thought he was a girl in the wrong body and his mother who wanted to place him in a Girl Scout troop, complete with overnight camping trips. The national Girl Scouts were in favor of this, but the local Den Mothers dissolved their Girl Scout troop when ordered to admit the XY chromosome "girl." This Ivy League "sophisticate" showed no upset about the idea of allowing this sexually confused boy into a Girl Scout troop. I then asked her if she herself had a daughter. Hitting a raw nerve, she bristled back at me, "No, do you?!" I replied that I didn't but would want to protect the young girls of the troop (as a general social virtue). The Ivy League "intellectual" looked at me as if I were some type of caveman or hillbilly who wandered into NY on his way to the NASCAR Cafe on 55th Street. This was the "triumph" of feminism - or its self-defeat: a woman who wouldn't even stand up to protect the modesty of young girls on overnight trips to the woods.
END OF COMMENT
There is a second fine article written by a lady called Marion DS Dreyfus, called "Girls Just Wanna Have Guns."
In it, Marion points out many skills, including target shooting, that women excell at often better than men, but she also doesn't advocate women in combat for many obvious reasons, written from her female perspective.
Here is what I wrote to Marion (via the editor) in a (not now) private email:
Marion, after reading your Amer. Thinker article, "Girls Just Wanna Have Guns," I want to give you some background information on Leon Panetta who you correctly claim is a willing pawn or tool of those above him as Panetta made the decision to allow women in combat.
Last May I attended the New York premiere of "The Invisible War," a documentary film about rape in the U.S. military that won the NY Human Rights Film Festival's 2012 Human Rights Watch Film Festival’s Nestor Almendros Award for Courage in Filmmaking and the Audience Award at the 2012 Sundance Film Festival. I attended both premiere screenings and personally talked face to face with one of the main interviewees in the film, rape victim and Naval Academy grad and ex-Marine officer Ariana Klay and her husband, also an ex-Marine officer who also appeared in the film.
That movie was perhaps not as timely a topic as it is today. Ironically, after a private showing last spring, Sec. of Defense Leon Panetta immediately changed the Dept. of Defense rules so that complaints of rape now get reported to a level above that of the alleged victim's immediate commanding officer - and that is included in the film itself, towards the end. The Invisible War can now be bought or rented for instant viewing on Amazon.com. Most of the sexual violence is against lower income, less sophisticated women who don't know how to fight back via lawfare, powerful friends, etc. Although the filmmakers stated at the premiere that there are many women who served with no problems in the military, the film specifically states that a military investigator (who was, I believe, raped herself) says on camera that in order to make quotas, military recruiters have accepted new male recruits who have stated in writing that they have raped women in civilian life. My original review of The Invisible War was posted at Tim Birdnow's website and can be read here: