You will not believe this.
Ok, given today’s circumstances, you might not be surprised at all.
Actually, considering the Army referenced Xena the Warrior Princess and comic book characters to justify calls for female infantry and the Navy proudly boasted that its sailors were painting their fingernails pink last year, you’ve probably been expecting this to drop any day.
So here goes: the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) now has official doctrine that requires pilots to consider feminism and feminist theory before going to war.
But wait, there’s more: the Australian Defence Force (ADF) now has 135 qualified ‘Gender Advisors’ and they are being deployed on operations.
Gender in Air Operations was published by the RAAF’s Air Power Development Centre in June 2018 and contains this helpful information in the foreword by Air Commodore Stephen Edgeley:
Chief of Air Force is committed to incorporating and mainstreaming a gender perspective and the UNSCR1325 and related resolutions (UNSCR1325+) agenda across Air Force. I intend to enhance Air Force’s operational capability through integrating a gender perspective into Air Force’s doctrine to inform individual and collective training and the planning and conduct of operations.
And so now the cat is out of the bag: our military’s insane pursuit of politically-correct feminist agendas is being driven by the United Nations.
But, to be fair to the UN, not even UNSCR1325 demands that nations like Australia plunge head first off the idiot cliff. We’re choosing to do that all by ourselves.
The key section of UNSCR 1325 states:
And from these 29 words feminist activists in Australia have basically revolutionised the entire ADF to the point that women are now preferred over men when it comes to recruitment, retention, promotion and postings as I detail in this exclusive series of articles.
They’ve also radically distorted our warfighting doctrine to the point that we are basically not interested in winning wars anymore. This is straight out of Gender in Air Operations:
For example, if the military target is a bridge in a community that is being used as a main route by the enemy to transport weapons, this same bridge may also provide the only route for the local population to gather supplies such as water and firewood. Although destroying this target may provide a military advantage against the enemy, the second order effect may mean that, due to the gendered social roles, women need to travel further afield, on unfamiliar and less secure, well-known or well-lit routes to gather water and firewood.
Who knew that the RAAF could best help vulnerable women by not bombing the bad guys?
The madness in this document is so profound that pilots must now navigate feminism and feminist theory before taking off. Apparently, it is also important that they understand the difference between sex and gender before they engage in aerial combat.
These graphics are taken straight out of Gender in Air Operations:
It’s only a matter of time before military planners must designate transgender ‘safe spaces’ on their battle maps. But I’m fairly certain that the enemy will then roll their tanks right through them.
Hey, we might not win the war but at least we’ll be remembered fondly by Bruce, the confused woman.
It would be bad enough if the ADF was tokenistically throwing a bone to the feminists with the odd press release and International Women’s Day photo op. But it’s gone far beyond some Canberra PR stunt and has infected our operational capabilities.
‘Gender Advisors’ are now being sent off to war.
I have no idea what Gender Advisors do. And I bet they don’t either. In fact, they even say they don’t know. This is what Captain Stacey Porter, Royal Australian Navy, recently wrote for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute:
The course teaches participants that gender analysis is the linchpin of the gender adviser’s modus operandi, but I think we still haven’t cracked what gender analysis can provide for us operationally. How do we make gender analysis more operationally relevant, particularly to mission commanders and planners and in intelligence analysis?
Here’s a hint: you can’t make gender analysis operationally relevant.
And here’s another hint: a week-long gender advisor course will never provide anything of any military use. But it might start World War Three as transgender feminists and lesbians duke it out over what it means to be a lady.
The entire purpose of this course has nothing to do with winning wars and everything to do with creating politically-correct operational postings for women. And that means that this course doesn’t help. It hurts.
In fact, these artificially created roles only distract from real issues by creating pretend ones.
Hence we should not be surprised at all the Captain Porter is also banging the climate change drum:
Gender analysis is still maturing at HQJOC, where I’m responsible for mainstreaming the gender perspective right across the headquarters as the senior gender adviser. In my view, and drawing on my experience as a deployed gender adviser in Afghanistan in 2016 and 2017, we need to assess each mission from a civilian-centric, theatre-of-operations perspective that includes examining the relationships between armed conflict, the roles of women and men, and factors that we’ve traditionally overlooked, such as climate change.
Thanks to gender advisors we now know that the problems in the Middle East and Afghanistan are due to the weather.
Heaven help us all – especially if our nation is threatened over the next decade. Because that is probably how long it will take for the ADF to refocus on warfighting even if this insanity is scrapped today…
This information was also published in today’s Daily Telegraph which has an audience far beyond the reach of this website.
I would like to thank you for your support since 2013, especially those Defence members who risk their jobs to speak with me.
Without your support and this courage, this story and many others would never have reached the mainstream media. I believe that we are having an impact, building public awareness and creating pressure that will eventually see this politically-correct madness end.