Based on the CMJ’s editorial and the Chief of CPCC’s article I am going to assume that this edition and the overall tone has at least some tacit support from the CAF as an institution and the CPCC.
Assuming that’s true my opinion is the CAFs desire for culture change is going to either fail in the short term resulting in nothing changing or it will result in failure in war. They are allowing culture change to be defined by the application of critical race theory,3rd/4th Wave feminism both backed by neo Marxism. I cannot see culture change based on those items succeeding in any way that is acceptable.
Let’s look at one of the articles,
Supporting Military Families: Challenging or Reinforcing Patriarchy?
Leigh Spanner focuses on the CAFs efforts to modernize the MFRC, something I think is likely a useful effort. However she approaches it from a belief that the CAF via the MFRC supports a patriarchal family and she applies a feminist perspective to its possible issues and constantly references MFRC programs as being neo liberal.
Why a feminist perspective? Why not an operational readiness perspective? In the article she appears to take a dim view of the fact that perhaps operational readiness is of core interest to the military and that child care and family wellbeing may well be considered by the CAF as primarily a means of increasing operational readiness vs something else.
There is a consistent underling theme in the article of overall hostility to the idea of personal and family responsibility to ensure that the family can sustain itself in terms of child care etc. Expecting personal responsibility and effort seem to be looked at as hostile. To some degree I think that that may be reasonable, posting a family across the country and way from extended family support networks does but the responsibility on the institution to a degree, previously that was handled informally by the extended unit families but that has fallen apart to a large degree perhaps requiring that the MFRC now fill that role. She offers no suggestions to that aside from stating that requiring family care plans is hostile and a way to download child care to women.
She is hostile to emergency child care programs, family care plans, MFRC programing, and does not suggest how to improve the MRFC in order to improve readiness. She briefly in one sentence touches upon the long wait lists for day care and after school care slots but doesn’t investigate how to improve this or why we would want to. Instead she just critics them for focusing their efforts on their largest demographic client which is women at 84%.
Bottom line to me is that improving the MFRC services and supports could support recruitment and retention efforts and operational readiness which is ultimately what our culture change efforts are about aside from just wanting to be good human beings but this article and all the others are not helpful in that aim as they are authored by persons blinded by their ideological leanings.
Edited for grammar.
