CIA, feminized

Espionage and intelligence collection ain’t what it used to be – just like any other organizations, public or private, CIA is not immune from relentless onslaught by litigation-happy gender-feminists. America’s battle against terrorism and other threats just got a little more complicated with adventure-seeking trail-brazing women types who see career advancement in the world’s foremost intelligence organizations as a part of their self-fulfillment and self-actualization. And when they are done with bean-counting of men and women at the rank and file and investigating subtle gender discrimination and hostile working environment, which they do when they are not doing their jobs as case offices or intelligence analysts, they are ready to launch a sexual discrimination lawsuit so that, the intelligence agency could proud itself as being at least gender-sensitive even when they are not winning its battle against terrorism and other threats.

MI5 calls for more woman applicants

Feminists are eager to cry discrimination and call for immediate remedies as soon as the women’s gender ratio in British intelligence agency drops to 44 %, - which wouldn’t be such a lopsided figure in the first place, but maybe quite a decrease from “more than half” that they were enjoying in the 1990s. Wait, let’s say that the “more than half” were, say, 55 or 56 percent, consequently men’s ratio would have been 45 or 44 percent respectively – that is same as the current percentage of women! Were there any outcry and remedial measures to correct the “gender imbalance”? Of course not! Gender-balance discussion is always only one-way street – how to increase ratio of women.

By the way, I think 44 percent, or above 40 percent is a range of gender balance that even Swedish feminists, who are in no way less militant than their British counterparts, view as acceptable, but evidently not British feminists.

Is there any correlation between the large percentage of women in the agency and the its recent intelligence failures, such as the London bombing? I know, it’s a question no one could ask without being held criminally responsible for bigotry and misogyny. If the intelligence agency’s central focus is on recruiting a kind of people who are most attracted by such socialism perks as two full year of maternity leave, then the prospect for winning the fight against terrorism and crimes are not really bright. It will only make the agency look more like a postal office or other sleepy bureaucratic office. And what if significant portion of its employees (don’t forget that women in their 40’s and 50’s get pregnant these days) take up to 2 years of consecutive leave – it will undoubtedly cripple the organization.

We absolutely need that 0.08% of people who play support roles

Uhhh, yes, and exactly how Indian army would not be able to do without females? 918 females in 1.1 million strong army is like what・0.08percent!! Is proportion like 0.08 percent absolutely indispensable, or would less than one-tenth of one percent, or less than one in one thousand would bring the rest of 99.92 percent to a grinding halt? And the roles carried out by women currently also cannot be taken over by men? Women were begun to be incorporated in the army in the early 1990's, meaning for more than 40 years of its existence since the country's independence after the Second World War, Indian army has done without the services of females. But all of a sudden, Indian army is also barraged with Western-States like political withchunt and the top brass there are forced to pay lip service to irate gender feminists. Is this a curse of western-style modernization?


Anger at Indian general's gender slur
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gender/story/0,,1801148,00.html
Maseeh Rahman in New Delhi
Monday June 19, 2006

Tragedy or discrimination???

Tragedy or discrimination???

Not so many male Marines or male soldiers in other services who had perished tragically in the Iraq war have a chance to have their stories told in such a detail several months after the incident on the front page of a major newspaper, but of course, women are different.

In an article titled “A Mission That Ended in Inferno for 3 Women” on New York Times on 20 November, the author tried to see the evidence of subtle discrimination against women soldiers in combat in Iraq. He asks whether the protection of the cargo trucks that carried women were adequate, why old cargo trucks and not Humvee, why mistake in the tactic in dealing with a strange car, why women had to commute to a checkpost while men didn’t need to, and concludes that protection measures for the women were all inadequate, and blame the Marine for it.

Never mind that Humvees were in short supply and not everyone get the best equipment, never mind that there are confusion among military brass about assigning women to combat roles, those advocate for women’s rights and women’s role in combat will never be happy until women soldiers get the best protection and best equipment available in the field which may or may not be available to male soldiers or even commanders, and be given the priority and best opportunity for conducting mission and gain visibility for their actions, so that women soldiers could succeed in their career, replace males in the commanding positions perhaps.

Thus, advocates routinely pull up advocacy pieces like this and put on a cover page, and put pressure on the Generals and military planners in the Pentagon and on the ground to accommodate and give special consideration to women soldiers. This puts unnecessary burden on the military planners and forces them to take into consideration politically correct, gender sensitive considerations in military planning and thus compromise the overall mission effectiveness.
Iraq war is getting increasingly complicated – complicated not only by the actual security situation on the ground, but also by political situation at home, which includes not only assaults by Democrats on President Bush’s war efforts but media with gender agenda starting to investigate and publish in-depths stories of the incident each and every time when casualties of the incidents happen to be women. Oh, I almost forgot that there were also three men who were killed during this attack (surprisingly, same number of men and women were killed but the former were mentioned so scarcely in the article)