But my Latin isn't as good as Jayb or Foxy. :~

Canem Malum, it is refreshing to read some home truths for a change.
It has been suggested that there is no evidence or articles of any derogatory comments about females in the armed forces.
CM I would hope you can see why, even if others choose not to.
Because no-one wants to be singled out and be seen as Politically Incorrect, and I think the hierarchy would punish anyone who even raised the topic let alone have it on the record.
PC is censoring far beyond it's purview.
This is a clear example of what I have been attempting to get across to some of the commentors.
Just because there is no evidence of something does not mean it is not so.
PC is a very dangerous tool in today's world.
We are not privy to the truth any more because of it.
Articles and publications, even research material cannot be trusted any more because of PC.

Dear ALTRAV,
It can be hard living in a PC world.
Read Robert Whitacker -Why Johnny Can’t Think: America’s Professor-Priesthood.

There are differences between Men and Women - the question is relevence in the situation - I'm not an expert but PC can make it difficult to collect data.
Men and women's brains are physically different apparently due to the amounts of testosterone in the womb (famous failure story here). They have a different chromosome (47) - its been said that 50% of our genes are the same as a pumpkin. There is different conditioning - some believe that this can or should be changed (a subtle point). Nature or nurture. Some environmental factors are so close to nature even though most would consider them nurture - such as the cultural meaning of gender. We have brilliance such as with CRISPR gene tech but as Jennifer Doudna admits in her TED talk there are wide gaps in our knowledge. Language must seem to older people as a foreign thing due to political correctness, this reframing seems designed to abuse certain segments of our community. A rose is no longer a rose - if it smells, looks, acts like a rose - it's still not a rose. Common sense is no longer sense.

In the army part of the training is to get everyone to act the same so that they can be commanded in a battle array. They dress the same, march the same, they are generally the same sex - they can be commanded. There are men that are unable to conform to this regimented standard - but part of the training uses subtle and strong means to force recruits into the mold. At the end they are expected to do as they are told and not to think.

General ordering a map location expect them there (see Sun Tzu also female army). The general wants simplicity for battle. The "cognitively loaded" general with respect to the enemy general - all other things equal - will lose. The general commands a million soldiers like they were their own limbs. Having both sexes in the army brings into the army the wonderful complexity of the community. Being sexual beings creates issues but military campaigns are supposed to be short - a calculated risk. Generals probably believed that sexuality not of the army but of civilian life. Modern armies have vestiges of Rome. There is talk of the professionalization of the army - it seems that going back to Rome an expansionist culture there was always a core of professionals in the army - even if enlistment swelled in wartime. During the middle ages perhaps there was a smaller proportion of professional soldiers.

Some of us would like to see more support for families in the ADF - this could be a way of smoothing out the behavior of personnel. Machiavelli in The Prince talked about the unsettling rotation of soldiers families. The ADF have a mixed success with families. Perhaps if ADF experience could be dovetailed with the public service it could attract better behavior.

Another view is the ones pushing sexual equality in the military don't want an effective army, or the nation to survive - their phoenix rises to rule the ashes (see Marx, Trotsky).

It can be hard and unfair when I feel excluded from certain parts of society. Sometimes we have to realise as evolutionary biological beings with many millions of years of conditioning - improving on nature is a difficult task. Analytical rather than holistic methods are often bad for optimal solutions. Improvements in scientific understanding and technology help.

Novel things are not always desirable. Unintended consequences of good intentions...

Arthur C Clarke talked about levels of impossibility, Aristotle about empirical knowledge, we have a lot to learn.

Hope this was informative.
Thanks for the feedback ALTRAV
Canem Malem

Hi Foxy,

The way to prevent extremism in society is to ensure that we live in a fair and just society to begin with.

"Although we debate the meaning of the 'good life', it is impossible without shared ideas about justice and civic virtues"
Michael J. Sandel (political philosophy professor at Harvard University.)

By my way of thinking, being conservative in itself can be extreme. That sounds like a paradox, how can one be conservative and extreme at the same time. When a society suffers a multitude of injustices and one chooses to do nothing about those injustices, simply wanting to maintain the status quo, then one is fueling extremism.

What Australia has is many moderate progressives that agitate for incremental changes in society. This is a good thing, it prevents conservative stagnation which will ultimately lead to an unjust society, and the rise of extremism.

Call a dog a bad name ...

Canem Malum,
Yeah & the mongrel calls in all the other bad dogs ?