A young officer who has gauged the political winds and decided that career advancement prospects are enhanced when a think-piece he writes is in tune with what the puzzle palace leaders want to promote?
Nahhh, it could never happen.
Maybe the guy is a straight shooter and is calling it as he sees it. It’s entirely possible that his perception of what’s going on is entirely in tune with what’s being pushed, and what’s being pushed is a good thing.
My guess is that if a serving officer penned a screed arguing against the current trend of “breaking down barriers”, he wouldn’t be doing his career any good.
I am not saying the guy is Massengale, I don't know hime, but that was the image that appeared to me. It looked to me like he stuck his finger in the air and saw which way the wind was blowing.
Woe to the officer or man who does not roll with the tide on this, because the battle is lost.
And in the next 5-10 years, you will see pieces in the media talking about how wrong the naysayers were (as footage of women humping gear and walking through tall grass with ready weapons is shown in the background) and that the force being shown is so much the better for having added women.
And you won't hear otherwise, except the ripping sound of purging taking place for the people who didn't stick their fingers in the air, and didn't go with the flow.
And when we meet an enemy in battle who isn't as foolish as we are, the people who advocated for this "improvement" will be either long gone (as politicians usually are when things go bad) or they will be squealing the loudest, looking for scapegoats and wondering as liberals often do, why nobody had seen problems (and the problem SURELY will NOT be mixed gender combat units).
But that battle is over. The advancement path will be open because the combat "experience" is available, and nobody will be able to say "They are an equal opportunity pick for advancement".
This has already been going on for a while in the US Navy and Air Force.
Army is next.
Marines will be the last.
But they will all be degraded by this approach. Just my opinion.
I will also clarify my stance on this: It is not that I think that individual women cannot pass the physical test. matching the physical ability curves of men and women, there are ALWAYS going to be some women at the high end of the curve (assuming the same standards are used to create the curve) whose section will overlap the lower end of the curve on the men’s side. And this has nothing to do with the mental acumen of females. I have no problem following the commands of a capable woman. I respect a capable woman as much as any capable man. But that is not the issue. I am against mixed gender combat units.
Point 1: The men’s physical strength side of the curve will ALWAYS be higher. Always. This is NOT disputable, no matter how hard someone wants to disagree, it is indisputable. And this is what we should draw on for combat troops.
Point 2: I disagree vehemently with the concept of mixing young men and women together. This is not an office, regardless of what the people pushing to transform our military want us all to have it as. This is a battlefield, where an enemy with a small advantage can win. To sacrifice any capability (even that much) on the altar of liberalism and feminism is criminal. These people are going to be far from home, in dangerous situations, and you take groups of 18-30 year old men and women and mix them in together, what on earth is going to happen? WE will never hear about it, because all the judicial actions and punishments will be carried out in private, including the ones where officers will be canned for sleeping with their troops, because even with those, only people who read a small blurb will find out about it.
Point 3: Even the smallest hit on logistics or accommodations should be reason enough. That difference can be the deciding one in a critical situation.
But, as I said, this battle is over.