The Titanic was sure to sink. There were not enough lifeboats to accommodate all the passengers, so the crew and the male passengers agreed that the women and children should go first into the life boats. A few terrified and cowardly men tried to get into the life boats, but were restrained by other men.
This is my vision of a civilized society. We save our women and children.
Another version, this time under the moral rules of the liberal democrats of today.
The Titanic was sure to sink. There were not enough lifeboats to accommodate all the passengers, so the crew and the male passengers, being stronger than others aboard, rushed for the life boats, trampling women and children as they went. There was, after all, an equality of the sexes, no obligation of one to protect or respect the other. As for the children, they were irrelevant.
This is the dilemma of war in a civilized world:
The war was a vicious one. Henry lay in the protection of his fox hole, watching the road ahead for enemy movements. A woman and her child walked toward him. He froze. Could the woman be carrying a hand grenade or a pistol? Most likely not, he concluded, because she had a child with her. Henry held his fire.
The liberal, “women are no different from men” version a few years later:
The war was a vicious one. Henry lay in the protection of his fox hole, watching the road ahead for enemy movements. A woman and her child walked toward him. The U.S. forces had long since trained women as combatants. Enemy forces had done the same. This strange woman was most likely an enemy combatant as well. Henry had a fleeting thought of his Mother, his sister, his wife and his daughters. He hated to do it, but this was, after all, a savage war. Henry flicked the selector to automatic, pulled the trigger and killed the woman and child.
This was my training while growing up:
You are a boy feeling rowdy. You’re told sternly, “Boys DO NOT EVER hit a girl.” The girls skip rope.
This is the liberal, “no difference between the sexes” instruction:
Hey, you are a boy. Boys are the same as girls but need to be changed. Shame on you for even thinking of hitting someone. An older boy comes over and smashes you in the chops. You cry and do nothing. Two girls in your class engage in a hair-pulling, fist punching match.
Women in combat via liberal social engineering:
Sally gets pregnant and has a child. Her neame is Cynthia. Child care is hard work and it’s doubly hard to find a job that will let her take care of Cynthia while working. Sally moves in with here grandmother. She decides to join the army to get an education and some income. The army assigns Sally to a combat position as an ammunition truck driver. She is distracted one day by menstrual cramps. Her truck runs over a mine and Sally is killed instantly. Sally has not only become a casualty of war, but she has created an orphan, named Cynthia, to be cared for by a grandmother.
As a young man I was taught a few simple courtesies:
When walking with a woman, take the road side of the sidewalk. When entering a building hold the door for a woman and take off your hat when you enter. On a bus or train, yield your seat to a standing female passenger. These were how a man shows respect and admiration for women, any woman. Now why would we do that? We do that because we rely on women to bear and rear our children. We do that because, in a civilized world we believe that women have a special, high value. Without the unique qualities of our women we’d be a savage society.
So does the liberal ideology that there’s no difference betweeen the sexes make sense? Does adding women to combat make our military more effective? Does stripping women of their special courtesies and legal considerations make us more civilized? What does this all do to our children? Should we want to pair military casualties with the creation of orphans? This is a descent into savagery any way you cut it.