The following is adapted from a speech given at Tennesee’s Eagle Forum conference, October 7, 2017.

If you’re like me, you’re grateful Obama is no longer president and that Hillary didn’t follow. But his eight years of social engineering policies have wreaked havoc on our military and the destruction did not end when he left office. We are seeing the consequences of making Diversity the military’s top priority instead of combat readiness. We are less ready than ever to confront a diversity of enemies.

Our military aircraft are floundering at a mere 30% readiness and our ships are in a similar state. In recent years we’ve seen a half dozen fatal plane and helo crashes because of reduced training hours. In the crash in Hawaii that killed 12 Marines, they were getting less than 15 hours per month – that’s not even minimum. When the commander of that unit voiced their lack of readiness, he was then relieved of his command. Telling the truth that could have saved lives got him the axe under Obama.

Money that should be going to training, weapons and materiel is instead being wasted. It’s going into things like mobile indoctrination units to disabuse infantrymen of their “unconscious bias.” It’s going toward more female recruiters to get the 25% female representation demanded by Ray Mabus. It’s going to more Sexual Assault Prevention and Response positions in anticipation of more cases in the newly integrated combat arms. Male ROTC cadets are parading in red high heels in a clownish effort to “identify” with rape victims. Male soldiers do an exercise of training wearing pregnancy simulators in a clownish effort to identify with pregnant soldiers. West Pointers do multiculturalism training – as if the many races, religions and demographics that have been represented in service for decades aren’t diverse enough. Hell, they’re actively commissioning Communists! The result of demanding a military that reflects the civilian society it protects has been a predictable disaster.

Obama repealed the law barring gays from serving openly. Now same-sex sexual assault is on the rise and Congress weighs decisions like granting parental leave to dual-military same-sex couples who decide to adopt babies. That is an option Tammy Duckworth, D-IL tried to add to the 2017 NDAA. The measure failed, but we’re sure to see more such attempts in the future. Obama repealed women’s combat exemption despite mountains of evidence that it will harm both combat effectiveness and active-duty women. Now the services are focused on getting numbers of women instead of training the most capable force, and all young American women are now subject to registering for Selective Service. John McCain has tried twice to include women in the draft. Both attempts failed, but we’re sure to see more attempts in the future. And as he left office, Obama mandated that transgendered troops be allowed to serve openly and, moreover, that they should be recruited, their medical procedures covered by taxpayer dollars. Trump issued the common-sense directive to return to the old policy, and, of course, the Left lost their collective minds. The shrieking is yet to diminish. We are in the midst of lawsuits and other efforts to re-repeal the transgender ban.

Biology itself has been framed as sexist and discriminatory. All these issues are cast as ones of civil and equal rights – even human rights. Which, of course, they are not. There is no human right to join an all-voluntary military force. No one owes anyone else a career, least of all the military. It is not an equal opportunity employer because it can’t afford to be. It protects our rights, but individuals serving are governed by different rules or it won’t work. The military’s job is to win wars quickly with the fewest casualties possible. While the Left harps on fairness and justice, the truth is that, for the military, what’s unfair is anything that hinders the mission. What’s unjust is anything that adds needless danger and risk to our fighters in the theater of battle.

All this social engineering has been pushed on smoke and mirrors. When it comes to women in combat, we’re told you’re either for it or you want women barefoot in the kitchen. Any data showing it’s a provably bad idea is labeled biased. If you think putting women in the most violence possible against savages who behead, cattle-prod, burn alive and otherwise torture their victims, you’re a chauvinist misogynist, toxically masculinist promoting rape culture. You’re a hate-filled bigot if you oppose funding sex changes and enabling a serious mental disorder. Same with open homosexuality.

There is one purpose for framing the issues this way: to shut down debate. Leftists like Obama and democrats in the House and Senate, and special interest pressure groups like SWAN (Service Women’s Action Network), DACOWITS, RAND corp. and others force their agenda through by blocking discussion of the real issues. It’s a bully tactic, and Congress has allowed it to prevail. These issues should be openly debated and, most importantly, voted on by members accountable to their constituents. Congress has proved itself weak, inept and unwilling to stand up for sound military priorities. Their spinelessness is already costing lives.

A note on RAND. RAND is a left-wing body that gets paid for reports that undermine valid concerns and military experience. It would be just as useful to have Ronald MacDonald advising on military policy.

Let’s look at each of these policies, starting with the least destructive of the three.

Gays Serving Openly

There are no functional differences between gay and straight men regarding physical ability to maintain standards and do military jobs. But allowing open homosexuality removed the neutrality that once existed among the sexes separately. Now what was once neutral ground in sleeping quarters, open bay barracks and bathrooms is potentially sexually charged. Sexual dynamics can now degrade combat readiness and distract from training and mission success just like when the sexes are mixed – flirtation, favoritism, jealousies, affairs, rape and the time and money spent prosecuting it.

Now same-sex sexual assault is on the rise in the military. One reason for this may be that, before, many were afraid to report incidents. But with rabid political correctness, many also now fear reporting unwanted same-sex advances or worse lest they be labeled anti-gay bigots.

A major problem with assessing the results of repealing this policy is that the Pentagon won’t ask. They don’t want to know if Obama’s social engineering push is having ill effects. So the Left simply says everything is hunky dory.

Women in Combat Units

Many support the idea of female fighters because they support women in general. In fact, the idea of women warriors is a male sexual fantasy dating back to the ancient Greeks. If it were reality, there would be little or no assault against women, sexual or otherwise. We’re told this policy is just the next step towards greater women’s empowerment and equal rights. But the infantry and frontline combat are anything but equal opportunities for women and do anything but strengthen our readiness.

Today we have the most advanced training and nutrition money can buy. Yet the performance gap between the sexes is still wide. When tested on combat tasks women are slower, weaker, less accurate and fatigue faster. Where battles are often won on the margins, putting them in units we depend on for the fiercest fighting will add weakness, not strength. Women’s injury rates are two to ten times higher than men’s, before we’re even talking about men’s or infantry standards. Adding them to units with the highest physical demand will add weakness, not strength. Sexual dynamics create a spectrum of destructive results, not the least of which is potentially pregnancy, a readiness killer. Adding these problems known to coed support units to smaller, more demanding units adds weakness, not strength. Women are higher-value targets for capture, torture and propaganda to our blood-thirsty enemies. Adding them to the teams that go hunting the enemy puts everyone at greater risk. That adds weakness, not strength.

Infantry demands will cut women’s athletic talents short. Their already high injury rates will skyrocket further in the units with the greatest physical demand. The turnover will be higher, creating more of a burden on peers who will be left to pick up the slack. They will be less likely to serve for an enlistment, let alone a career. They will face greater risk of brutality especially from our enemies. It’s not an equal opportunity for women because they don’t have an equal opportunity to survive.

Yet activists pushing for it ignore the destructiveness, even to women themselves. They say the wide performance and injury gap will close if men stop being so sexist. They say nutrition can solve it. They claim integration will stop sexual assault, possibly the stupidest allegation to date. If it were true, military sexual assault would have plummeted since more women are serving than ever. Yet sexual assault rates keep rising.

It defies logic to suggest that sexual assault will cease by putting women where they are at the greatest risk: in elite fighting units with the highest ratio of alpha males under the greatest possible stress, in the most uncivilized reaches of the planet with little to no supervision, no privacy and a job that puts them at highest risk of capture, rape and torture by the enemy. Talk about misogyny!

As usual feminists want us to believe opposite things: that women are as strong as men but still victims of men. That women are ready to conquer in the most violent activity known to man yet helpless to defend themselves against assault by their peers.

Many people shrug and say “hey, if women can make the standards, let them do it.” This ignores two massive problems.

First, the military’s track record is to lower standards every time jobs are opened to women. Otherwise they can’t get the numbers feminists want. Women are very capable in our own right, but even with advanced training and nutrition we’re not proving interchangeability with men. If we were, we’d have long since seen men and women competing against each other in the Olympics and professional sports. We don’t because we want our teams to win. “Gender-normed” standards ALWAYS means lower. The Army doesn’t even have separate standards for their infantry units. They’re currently using the annual fitness test which is, of course, a test of general fitness, not fitness for more physically demanding infantry. In the 2013 announcement of repeal of women’s combat exemption, Gen. Dempsey said standards would be “re-evaluated.” That means lowered. If women could do anything men can do, there would be no need to “re-evaluate” standards.

Second, making standards doesn’t address other major issues like women’s much higher injury rates, sexual dynamics, sexual assault, pregnancy and the fact that women are higher-value targets for the enemy.

The Left also wants us to believe opposite ideas in another sense: on one hand that women can do anything infantrymen can do, and on the other hand that we’re so technologically advanced women won’t have to. They can’t have it both ways, and neither one is true. We’re still waiting for the “push-button” war that leftists have been telling us we’re on the verge of since Vietnam. Technology has certainly advanced, but it hasn’t alleviated the need for “boots on the ground.” Our frontline units in Iraq and Afghanistan are still going on foot house to house and cave to cave. They’re still killing at point blank range, with their bare hands if they have to.

Women are at a stark disadvantage in this kind of fighting. I know firsthand from ten years of martial arts training. I joined the Marines as a black belt and continued in their martial arts program for three of their five levels. I routinely paired up with men who were bigger, stronger and faster than me. At the height of her winning streak, 7-time UFC Bantam-weight champion fighter Rhonda Rousey was asked if she would fight a man. She said absolutely not because it wouldn’t be a fair fight for her. Transgenderism hit the UFC before high school track teams with Fallon Fox. Fox is a professional fighter who was born a man but had a sex change at age 30. Tamikka Brents, who fought Fox said, “I’ve fought a lot of women and have never felt the strength that I felt in a fight as I did that night…I’ve never felt so overpowered ever in my life and I am an abnormally strong female in my own right.”

And these fighters are playing within the confines of rules and regulations and not to the death.

Leftists not only want us to ignore decades of data from military experience and sports medicine. They want us to ignore the experience of women in combat sports who validate the point that hand-to-hand fighting is not an equal opportunity for women.

Combat is not gender neutral and neither is being captured. The prospect of enemy capture was one of the top concerns of thousands of female Marines surveyed on women in combat policy in 2012. In June 2005, just a few months before I stood checkpoint duty in Fallujah, a convoy of females returning to base from that same duty was attacked. “American intelligence said that a suicide bomber was planning an attack that would specifically target military women.” Three women and three men were killed and 11 more suffered horrendous injuries. Friends of mine in Special Operations tell me that when women are on the teams, they are targeted first.

Feminists want our society to see female casualties and POWs like any old thing. We’re scolded for wanting to spare women capture and torture by the likes ISIS. Of course it’s horrible when a man is captured. It’s worse for everyone when the POW is a woman, especially, it should go without saying, the woman herself. Her torture is worse than that inflicted on a man and our enemies know it. Career “opportunity” for women turns into the opportunity to be treated savagely.

What is so tragic about this policy is that it sets women up for failure while claiming to benefit them. First by lying to them, telling them they’re men’s physical equals and that it’s men’s attitudes stopping them from performing the same. Then leaving them with a lifetime of injuries and disabilities that are more in number, worse in degree, and longer-lasting than those men face. I think this policy will result in fewer women staying in the military and fewer women joining – presumably the opposite of what feminists intend.

But the feminists pushing this won’t have to live through the hardship, nor will they be paying the medical bills. Those who will are just their stepping stones to political power. They won’t be accountable for the destruction and, as always, will insist men are to blame for any problems.

Transgender Service

Gender dysphoria is a mental disorder, but again we’re told if those who suffer from it can make the physical standards, they should be allowed to serve openly. But there’s no good reason to do this. We don’t allow anyone with mental disorders in the military for all sorts of good reasons. It perfectly fits the conditions for disqualification according to Army policy as it “would require excessive time lost from duty for necessary treatment or hospitalization.”

Contrary to what activists claim, there is a high cost – $1.3billion over ten years for surgeries alone. That number doesn’t include hormone therapy, mental health services, or costs if there are surgical complications. Leftists also want to extend this cost coverage to military families, including minor children. After surgical transition they are non-deployable for up to two years and the medical treatment can have serious ongoing side-effects. They require ongoing medicines and treatment. Moreover, studies show that these treatments don’t make the sufferers any happier and at least 40% regret going through them.

After hammering the military on women’s rights, now women are supposed to forego their right to privacy to accommodate men sleeping and showering with them, even men who’ve undergone no changes.

Frank Camp at the Daily Wire suggests we should treat it like we do other dysphoric disorders. Those with Anorexia think they are overweight and will over-exercise and starve themselves even if it kills them. We don’t go along with them and tell them to “live their truth.” We get them therapy and other forms of help.

Help, most of all, is what those suffering from this disorder need. They are 40% more suicidal and usually have several other issues like depression, anxiety and substance abuse.

The military discriminates on far less than huge mental disorders like one where you think you should be the opposite sex. It discriminates based on height, weight, eye-sight, flat feet, intelligence, gang affiliation, criminal background, personal debt and much more. If you can run a six-minute mile but are diabetic, you don’t qualify. If you can knock out twenty pullups but you’re seven feet tall, you don’t qualify. If you can scale an eight-foot wall with a 150lb pack but are bipolar, you don’t qualify.

It’s right and fair to treat gender dysphoria like the serious and expensive condition it is. Obama was reckless in changing the policy. Doing so had nothing to do with improving the military and our ability to fight our enemies. It was all about pushing social engineering on a group that cannot refuse because it is required to obey orders.

There is no social justice in warfare. ISIS, al Queda, the Taliban, Iran, North Korea, Russia – they don’t care that we made our diversity metrics. They’re not just laughing at us. They’re licking their chops waiting to exploit our self-imposed weakness.

What Next?

Trump has indicated he wants to strengthen the military, adding aircraft, ships, and weaponry. Secretary James Mattis has indicated he wants to terminate training that doesn’t have to do with combat. He’s recommended ending continuing resolutions and sequestration. These are hints in the right direction, but Trump’s White House remains, to say the least, chaotic. It’s unclear what direction he will take the military.

He has done the right thing restoring the transgender policy. He should repeal the other destructive Obama-era military policies. Women in combat units should be carefully monitored to keep account of losses due to injury and pregnancy. We also should track the number that actually stay both in the infantry or the military in general. And as soon as possible, we need to replace John McCain. This traitor heading the Senate Armed Services Committee is responsible for the fake Russia Dossier among many other corruptions. Chuck Schumer’s brother from another mother is blocking Trumps appointees. That he is still in office is an embarrassment to Arizona and a detriment to the military and the country.

The military’s purpose is not to mimic civilian society and its politically correct office settings. It is to be the best enemy-killing machine our taxpayer dollars can buy to be ready for all kinds of warfare against all kinds of enemies. If we want to be successful against them, we should shun destructive policies. We should use our limited resources to strengthen our fighting forces, not weaken our lethality through needless social experimentation.