FFS! You won't BELIEVE why these women are slamming John Kelly (or maybe you will)

Sarah D | 2:45 PM on October 24, 2017

Move over, Lauren Duca. This pair of WaPo opinion pieces on Gen. John Kelly’s sexism puts your take to shame.

First up, this offering from WaPo columnist Ruth Marcus:

No, John Kelly, women should not be seen as ‘sacred’ https://t.co/r2XDIKZ1WA by @RuthMarcus

— Washington Post ?pinions (@PostOpinions) October 21, 2017

Oh:

But, speaking for this woman at least, that is not what women want or need. To be put on a pedestal also risks being kept in a box. In the good old days that Kelly mourns, women were not so much elevated by gender as constrained by it. Imagine how Kelly’s remarks sound to the female service member struggling to prove herself in the male-dominated military culture.

If the upside of chivalry is the opened door, the cape spread upon the muddy ground, the downside is the presumption, perhaps subconscious, that feminine is the equivalent of weak; the impulse to treat women in the workplace differently from their male counterparts; and the consequent distortion — sometimes overt, more often subtle — of career choices and opportunities.

Forget sacred. I’ll take equal.

And then there’s this from Kate Germano, “advocate for gender equality in the military”:

Ah. https://t.co/CU4PLmzwXs pic.twitter.com/EuDNK7qjgc

— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) October 24, 2017

Oh:

No one can argue that with the death of his son, Kelly and his family suffered a great loss. Such deaths are tragic and should cause the nation to carefully consider when and how the military is employed as an element of national power. But Kelly’s expressed views about women are troublesome and should not be excused or ignored because of his military rank, service, and the loss of his son in combat.