7 Reasons Women-in-Combat "Diversity" Will Degrade Tough Training Standards
"There are seven major reasons why the Obama Administration, including compliant members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, are being less than candid about the consequences of policies that lame-duck Defense Secretary Leon Panetta ordered on January 24," according to the Center for Military Readiness.
They are:
1. Pentagon Feminists Will Not Accept Men’s High Standards
2. “Critical Mass” Means Many Women, not the Exceptional Few
3. Group Rights, Not Individual Rights
4. Diversity Czar, Career Penalties Will Drive Standards Down
5. “Gender-Free” Training is Not the Same as “Gender-Fair” Training
6. Unannounced Lowered Standards will Be “Equal” But Not the Same
7. Compromised Standards Will Increase Resentment and Harassment Problems
"Under Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, members of Congress -- not the President, the Defense Secretary or even the Joint Chiefs of Staff -- have the responsibility to make policy for the military," says the Center for Military Readiness.
"Congress should fulfill this responsibility by exercising diligent oversight, to include a full and public review of all research data gathered in the past year."
Related
Women in Combat: Feminism vs. Science, Sex, Love, and War
Female Feminists Ought to Do Fine in Combat . . .
